M16 not powerful enough & Violent Games banned

[glasseye]

no. im guessing you're not a simpsons fan.

[Firefoxa]

We must not forget that the G-3 or AG-3 as it's called here in Norway is now the most powerfol personal fully automatic handgun that NATO soldiers is equiped with. The weapon is not very accurate though and not a nice gun to use either (too much reecoil and noice). These weapons will eventually go away from the armed forces I think since there are new weapons comming out and even Norway is changing their AG-3's out since they are to old.

I think it's fun though tha the G-3 is choosen out to be the unlock weapon for the assault task in the game.

[BlackwaterUSA.com]

M16 in real life is a POS, so is the M4.

LMAO...yeh okay guy. I've fired both and i can assure you that they are not POS. What exactly did you base this opinion on? What you've seen in movies...lmao...lame.

[ninjaturtle]

No wonder America is such a ****ed up country when so many normal citizens have fired assault weapons. Not to mention hand guns.

Most of them were in the military. The others live in Texas.

[[R-Mod]Scoggs]

LMAO...yeh okay guy. I've fired both and i can assure you that they are not POS. What exactly did you base this opinion on? What you've seen in movies...lmao...lame.

haha you blinked!

[BigBadBob]

i would prefer an M60 over a M249.

Larger caliber, more damage done.

[CrashTestDumee]

Well then understandably so, youv never fired either of teh weopons. The m60 requires two men to be used effectively and is belt fed, belt fed alone makes it a living hell to use. It has much recoil and absolutely in no way shape or form can be shot while standing up, try it. The SAW however is light weight, one man operated and has a 80,100,120 or 200 roundbox clip. It can be fired while standing which is nice for those spur of the moment situations. Now back to the original topic.

The m16 isnt underpowered.

In reality we never fired m16s on anything above single shot(served in oeration amigo and operation Desert Storm), the enemies half the time were around 800 meters away anyway so you HAD to shoot on single shot. The AKs may be more powerful but because of the blowback action, the stub of a round(big in diameter but very short) and the fact that they are just in general flimsy makes them very innacurate and generally useless. In reality theres no such thing as close fire fights, you advance so carefully and slowly thatr youl never be in the situation for that close in firfight. They might as well rip off the selector switch on all assualt rifles and just leave the freekin single only. Ohh and by teh way, the t.v may tell you the 7.63 the AK uses is more powerful than the M16 5.56 STANDARD but there about the same. The AK round is bigger but way shorter giving it less accuracy and velocity. The 5.56 standard(not NATO, standard) is long and skinny giving it more accuracy and velocity making it just as powerful on human flesh. Now when shooting at non human stuff thats a different story.

[Habloc]

Well then understandably so, youv never fired either of teh weopons. The m60 requires two men to be used effectively and is belt fed, belt fed alone makes it a living hell to use. It has much recoil and absolutely in no way shape or form can be shot while standing up, try it. The SAW however is light weight, one man operated and has a 80,100,120 or 200 roundbox clip. It can be fired while standing which is nice for those spur of the moment situations. Now back to the original topic.

But Rambo don't need any help with that... He hits everything holding that thinkg with one hand...

[imported_Ares]

the M16 doesnt seems so weak when you put it in single shot, but in burst it is very inaffective.

[TheSmisker]

I've fired both teh AK (different variants) and teh M16A2 in the military (Swedish marines) and I must say that the AK did not feel superior in any way at all!
The only positive I can say about teh AK is that it seemed able to take any kind of abuse or lack of care, a non-problem for most serving people but probably good if you lack training and discipline

Must say that I prefered the Swedish weapon, the FNC in a local variant known as AK5. The folding butt, the simplicity of the weapon (almost as few parts as the ak), full auto capacity (good in urban enviroment) and natural pointability clearly ofset the fact that it weights more than the M16 in my opinion.

A question to ppl who have served w the M16A2, is it fiddly to maintain in the field?
I couldnt belive the amount of parts it contained! So many of them, remember I thought to myself "wouldn't wanna break this sucker open if it gets stuck in a firefight"

[kosmiq]

All I know is that the AK series are much much more reliable in the field as the M16 can jam whenever it gets some dust into it.
Or how about the old version of M16 that couldn't handle full mags without jamming? Or maybe the fact that 5.56mm ammo won't get through most protective gear. A 7.62mm round will do a lot more damage against protective wests and stuff. Also the AK is pretty accurate (more than the M16). Also if you go check out madogre's website (gotta find that link again someday) you will get very interesting reading about why the M16/M4 design sucks so bad.
Anyway the AK-5 is a very reliable and good weapon. The swedish army tried out the M16 for a while but it couldn't handle the climate any good and they thought it pretty much sucked. I wonder why they decided to use the AK-5 instead of the M16...

[TheSmisker]

ROFLMAO mate, are you on non-prescription drugs? This can become a flamefest but I'll just state my opinion:

-The AK is a far less accurate weapon compared to the M16. In the field, no doubt would I choose the M16 over the AK. When taken care of, the rifle will perform.
-The 5.56 is notorious for penetrating due to its high speed and steel core, albeit the smaller and more lightweight bullet probably wouldnt do as much damage after penetration as a heavier 7.62, but for that you have a range of other weapons in a platoon (most armies send in more than 1 man).
-A rifle will primarily take out or supress enemy infantry, and the M16 construction has been tweaked to perfection by the US army for almost 40 years now. I can assure you that it is a good tool for the job.
-Listen to the men who have actually served with weapon(s), their opinion is probably closer to the facts of things.

All I know is that the AK series are much much more reliable in the field as the M16 can jam whenever it gets some dust into it.
Or how about the old version of M16 that couldn't handle full mags without jamming? Or maybe the fact that 5.56mm ammo won't get through most protective gear. A 7.62mm round will do a lot more damage against protective wests and stuff. Also the AK is pretty accurate (more than the M16). Also if you go check out madogre's website (gotta find that link again someday) you will get very interesting reading about why the M16/M4 design sucks so bad.
Anyway the AK-5 is a very reliable and good weapon. The swedish army tried out the M16 for a while but it couldn't handle the climate any good and they thought it pretty much sucked. I wonder why they decided to use the AK-5 instead of the M16...