US army's new XM25 rifle.

Post » Sun Dec 05, 2010 7:34 am

Nothing wrong with guns at all. The problem are the people that use them, the ones that use them for the wrong reasons. Murder, war, blackmail(as in someone pulls out a gun to someone and makes forces them to do something), etc. I love my shotgun, I just use it for shooting clay-birds and when I get my hunting license in the future. There is nothing wrong with guns.


This gun is definitely for military purposes. :laugh:
User avatar
AnDres MeZa
 
Posts: 3349
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 1:39 pm

Post » Sun Dec 05, 2010 5:04 am

One step closer before the almighty bolter gun has been created!
User avatar
Jeff Turner
 
Posts: 3458
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 5:35 pm

Post » Sun Dec 05, 2010 6:20 am

Neat toy. Wasn't it rolled out as

But $35k can buy quite a few LAW's or M203's (and rounds) and training, which near as I can tell, does pretty much the same job. :shrug:

Lehner said the Army plans to purchase at least 12,500 XM25 systems beginning next year -- enough for one system in each infantry squad and Special Forces team.

The military isn't overly concerned that the weapon might be captured by the enemy, because they would be unable to obtain its highly specialized ammunition, batteries and other components. Lehner said he expects other nations will try to copy its technology, but it will be very cost-prohibitive.
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/11/24/armys-revolutionary-rifle-use-afghanistan/?test=faces

12,500 x 35,000...plus training....:rolleyes:
And I love their security prcedure...I wonder who the author considers enemies? With that expense, will it be a sensitive item with associated recovery missions?

Specialized ammo in my mind means scarce ammo. Special batteries...erm same principle.

Dunno, there are those with much more expertise and experience saying this is a waste.

But it looks cool!
User avatar
Zach Hunter
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 3:26 pm

Post » Sun Dec 05, 2010 3:07 pm

This gun is definitely for military purposes. :laugh:


I know. But you said all guns. Not all guns should go away, in my opinion we shouldn't get rid of firearms. We should however get rid of every nuclear weapon on the planet. Because those are way more dangerous. Especially with some not-so-nice countries developing their nuclear capabilities.
User avatar
Jessica Stokes
 
Posts: 3315
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2006 11:01 am

Post » Sun Dec 05, 2010 10:06 am

Self defense technologies, firearms and WMD are big $$$$ I should get into it
User avatar
Eric Hayes
 
Posts: 3392
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2007 1:57 am

Post » Sun Dec 05, 2010 11:34 am

And it wouldn't be handed to a few people. More like a few companies.

That's a few people. Plus a few people. Plus a few people... :P
User avatar
Nancy RIP
 
Posts: 3519
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 5:42 am

Post » Sun Dec 05, 2010 2:49 pm

I know. But you said all guns. Not all guns should go away, in my opinion we shouldn't get rid of firearms. We should however get rid of every nuclear weapon on the planet. Because those are way more dangerous. Especially with some not-so-nice countries developing their nuclear capabilities.


Funnily enough we own two rifles. Haven't been used in over 15 years. My step dad used to go hunting, but now is against bird hunting. Go figure.
User avatar
Stryke Force
 
Posts: 3393
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2007 6:20 am

Post » Sun Dec 05, 2010 6:52 am

That's a few people. Plus a few people. Plus a few people... :P


That is an awesome way to put it! :D

Funnily enough we own two rifles. Haven't been used in over 15 years. My step dad used to go hunting, but now is against bird hunting. Go figure.


:P
User avatar
Tina Tupou
 
Posts: 3487
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2007 4:37 pm

Post » Sun Dec 05, 2010 4:17 pm

I don't see how this is a good thing at all. Wish all guns would just melt.

Then people would just use melted guns as clubs...
User avatar
Jennifer Rose
 
Posts: 3432
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 2:54 pm

Post » Sun Dec 05, 2010 1:24 pm

When do I get to use it? Yea it's a grenade launcher, I still stick with my M4.

Also there's a difference between cover and concealment in terms of fighting.
User avatar
Ana Torrecilla Cabeza
 
Posts: 3427
Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 6:15 pm

Post » Sun Dec 05, 2010 10:13 am

I don't smoke or have a large beard and wear oversized dresses.

You wear capri's though.

Very girly ones.
User avatar
ZANEY82
 
Posts: 3314
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 3:10 am

Post » Sun Dec 05, 2010 10:24 am

Cover never did exist on the battlefield. It's called .50 FMJ. :P


^ This

Course I would be more partial to the .50 Tungsten Carbide tipped version myself. :gun:

Only thing the XM25 rifle does is add in more ways to waste money #1 and #2 a better way to splatter the brains of your enemies.
User avatar
darnell waddington
 
Posts: 3448
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:43 pm

Post » Sun Dec 05, 2010 9:15 am

This too, and for home defense from a robber or some other criminal. Automatic guns should remain illegal to the public, that is for sure.


Home invasion and robbery doesn't carry the death sentence. By all means protect yourself and your family, but you'd probably find that it's safer for everyone to have a dog and an alarm system over a gun.

Anyone seen the headline "Man saves family by shooting someone"? It probably has happened more than once, but even a few dozen times would make the times a gun has saved a civilians life statistically insignificant.

Edit: Did the OP get confused between radar activated exploding bullets? Or did he/she actually mean radio controlled?
User avatar
Bryanna Vacchiano
 
Posts: 3425
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 9:54 pm

Post » Sun Dec 05, 2010 10:24 am

I don't see how this is a good thing at all. Wish all guns would just melt.

Then we'll just go back to swords and arrows
User avatar
Theodore Walling
 
Posts: 3420
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2007 12:48 pm

Post » Sun Dec 05, 2010 9:11 am

A man breaks into your house, you dont have a gun... HOW are you going to shoot him?

-Dale Dribbel
User avatar
Amanda Leis
 
Posts: 3518
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 1:57 am

Post » Sun Dec 05, 2010 9:13 am

Home invasion and robbery doesn't carry the death sentence. By all means protect yourself and your family, but you'd probably find that it's safer for everyone to have a dog and an alarm system over a gun.

Anyone seen the headline "Man saves family by shooting someone"? It probably has happened more than once, but even a few dozen times would make the times a gun has saved a civilians life statistically insignificant.

Edit: Did the OP get confused between radar activated exploding bullets? Or did he/she actually mean radio controlled?


A little up the page, I restated myself and said to scare off. Not necessarily go for the kill. :P More of a warning shot or something.
User avatar
butterfly
 
Posts: 3467
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 8:20 pm

Post » Sun Dec 05, 2010 5:51 am

A little up the page, I restated myself and said to scare off. Not necessarily go for the kill. :P More of a warning shot or something.

If someone is trying to hurt me or my family(when I get one)there is not going to be a warning shot just two to the chest followed by two more if they don't go down immediately, warning shot would probably just let them have time to shoot
User avatar
IM NOT EASY
 
Posts: 3419
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 10:48 pm

Post » Sun Dec 05, 2010 2:43 am

Remote control triggered grenade.
Distance detecting laser.
Microchip.

Strap on to a grenade launcher, and done.

The military isn't overly concerned that the weapon might be captured by the enemy, because they would be unable to obtain its highly specialized ammunition, batteries and other components.

They'll be sold to the 'enemy' soon enough if the field tests are acceptable.
User avatar
Catherine Harte
 
Posts: 3379
Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 12:58 pm

Post » Sun Dec 05, 2010 11:46 am

They'll be sold to the 'creditors' soon enough if the field tests are acceptable.


Fixed that.

And anyone who can afford these type of weapons aren't likely to be picking fights with the US in the near future.
User avatar
Poetic Vice
 
Posts: 3440
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 8:19 pm

Post » Sun Dec 05, 2010 3:22 am

Meh, that's kinda like http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrYv1XAUTv0.

And yes, that is pretty much a bolter from the warhammer 40K universe.

Not really, the AA-12's Grenades are impact detonated and not as large of an explosion. The XM25's rounds are highly tweakable.
User avatar
Tikarma Vodicka-McPherson
 
Posts: 3426
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 9:15 am

Post » Sun Dec 05, 2010 6:08 am

Hahahah it's a glorified flak cannon. I just realized this.
User avatar
Everardo Montano
 
Posts: 3373
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 4:23 am

Post » Sun Dec 05, 2010 7:02 am

gonna catch flak for this, but anyone else checking out the deals on the government liquidator website? They're selling some pretty interesting night vision scopes 1 of which is going for around $700. Heck I even saw one of those huge diesel trucks for 56k. Too bad you have to be in the area to pick it up or I swear I would get it.
User avatar
joeK
 
Posts: 3370
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2007 10:22 am

Post » Sun Dec 05, 2010 1:24 am

Ok, we have gone from discussing a specific gun and bullet used in a war (political maybe? maybe not.) to discussing home invasion and then debate about gun ownership and home defense which on an international board is without a doubt political. We don't often allow gun threads outside of game discussion for this very reason. ;)
User avatar
Red Bevinz
 
Posts: 3318
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 7:25 am

Previous

Return to Othor Games