Tom and Presumed,<br><br><br>I agree with both of you. I disagree with both of you. I find fault, not with the weapons themselves (the M16A3, and ESPECIALLY the newer M-4 variant are excellent weapons; the Hockeystick..er, Beretta M-9 is good also), but with the currently issued ammuntion. Which is to say that the Geneva Convention(s) is screwing things up, as always. The M-16, with current ammo, is adequate---barely. The M-9, with current ammo, is not.<br><br>With appropriate ammuntion both weapons would not only be more effective, but would keep more with the spirit (although certainly not the letter) of the Geneva Convention(s). Think about it, standard .223 varmint ammo in the M16 would be both more accurate and more likely to stop a target. Note the word "stop;" for a long time now the goal has been to remove, rather than just kill, effectives from the battlefield. A wounded soldier generally requires help to evacuate the battlefield, thus removing more effectives from the frontline. Studies have shown that, encounter for encounter, FMJ ammo is more likely to kill than expanding; less likely to provide the one-shot stop that people like, but more likely to kill. The logic is this, if a FMJ round requires 2 or 3 or more rounds to provide a stop, there are that many more holes in him leaking blood, to be repaired. This generally leads to a greater chance of death than a one shot, one hole stop. The same applies to the 9mm round, only more so.<br><br>On the other hand, if the Geneva Convention(s) can't be ignored or somehow cicumvented, then I agree with you, our troops (myself included) need different weapons. Many think, as Tom does, that a 6-7mm round would be ideal and could provide the added benefit of ammo commonality between the service rifle and GPMG (General Purpose Machine Gun). I myself would be happy to return to the .308. I used the M-14 briefly in the Navy, and it took a long time to both get used to and trust the M-16 when we changed over. And I 100% agree with Tom that we need better training, not better gadgets. The OIWS (Objective Individual Weapon System) is supercool, but weighs a reported 21lbs and is dependent on batteries. Please, it was 5-10lbs extra (in batteries) per man in my squad just keep the radios, GPS, night vision and other gadgets working on lengthy missions.<br><br>As for civilian use...well that's another post.<br><br>That's my 2 cents.<br><br>Andy