In this episode of What the Fuck America, a retired army kernel goes head to head with a lifelong fed. Colonel Tucker declares before the court that…

spoiler

…NATO 5.56 and/or (?) 0.223 caliber ammo can decapitate or split the upper body from the lower in a single shot. To support this claim, he makes up a story about a marine and then describes the Iraqi children he saw torn in half.

Did this hero just self report? It also turns out that your average lifelong war criminal doesn’t really even need to know how guns work lmao

    • the_post_of_tom_joad [any, any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      9 months ago

      Can you explain what you mean by “tumbling myth”? Is it about .5.56 rounds tumbling in flight vs tumbling after the round hit the target? Wouldn’t rounds still tumble or yaw outside of the effective range of the weapon?

      I’m actually asking, i looked into it a bit and still don’t know the score

      • nat_turner_overdrive [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        ·
        9 months ago

        Yeah, once a round isn’t spinning enough to properly stabilize itself it’ll tumble in the air and lose any accuracy. The tumbling myth I’m talking about is the myth that the 5.56 does more internal damage that some larger calibers because once it enters the body it tumbles. This is similar to the .22LR myth that once they enter the body they get “deflected” by bones and zip around inside doing a lot of damage. Both of these things sort of fall under the umbrella of fudd lore.

        • SacredExcrement [any, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Right…5.56/.223 are very fast rifle rounds relative to other similar calibers, which is probably part of how this sort of myth gets started

          IIRC, it typically has the opposite problem to what colonel Tarantino is lying out his ass about in the above testimony; it easily over penetrates because of the high velocity (and it will not rip people in half with one shot)

          • keepcarrot [she/her]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            16
            ·
            9 months ago

            Gun myths are fun, I think mythbusters did this one specifically.

            I remember soldiers swearing up and down that .50 bmg could kill you if it passed near you.

      • showmustgo [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.netOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        9 months ago

        the colonel who wrote the sur-rebuttal where I cropped the image from believes that the rifling in a gun’s barrel is designed to make the bullet tumble upon impact. Below is from his initial ‘expert report’:

        the ballistics expert Fed who wrote the rebuttal asserts the below and may answer your question:

        • TechnoUnionTypeBeat [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          ·
          9 months ago

          What’s weird is this is opposite from the myth I usually see, that 5.56 and other intermediate cartridges are designed to wound and not kill, because allegedly wounding takes 3 soldiers off the battlefield (the wounded and two comrades to get him to safety) whereas killing only takes away 1

          • Grownbravy [they/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            20
            ·
            9 months ago

            I’ve heard that 5.56 was chosen over 7.62 NATO cause it was about as effective with the added benefit of being small and therefore lighter to carry. I think this accounted for the tumbling myth, but i dont have any background in ballistics to know or believe otherwise.

            • keepcarrot [she/her]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              25
              ·
              9 months ago

              This is likely the reason (50% more bullets per weight or whatever), but there were a lot of propaganda attempts to get soldiers to like the M16 over the AK47 especially after soldiers had felt like they’d been done dirty.

              Increased bullet tumbling, the wounding argument, and hydrostatic shock advantages all feel like variations of this to me, and verifying gun myths was a lot harder back then. Also soldiers tend not the be the brightest bulbs. Such myths would have spread like wildfire as soldiers compared their standard issue to their trophy AKs.

              • Grownbravy [they/them]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                16
                ·
                9 months ago

                Yeah the M16s initial reliability issues were also the fault of procurement, as I’ve heard they were firing rounds with the wrong powder it was designed for, causing jams or something.

                In that position who wouldnt lie to their soldiers to get them to use the weapons they paid so much money to have?

            • LENINSGHOSTFACEKILLA [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              24
              ·
              9 months ago

              I’ve heard that 5.56 was chosen over 7.62 NATO cause it was about as effective with the added benefit of being small and therefore lighter to carry.

              This is almost always the answer. Logistics is what wins wars. If you can carry more ammo and stack more in a truck than your enemy, you’re in a good spot.

                • Tunnelvision [they/them]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  9 months ago

                  The standard issue length of barrel is going to be 13inches with that thing which makes it worse lmfao it’s the f-35 of rifles.

                  Edit: it also comes stock with a suppressor which also makes it worse.

    • ashinadash [she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      9 months ago

      Didn’t the US military pull scaremongering shit like this about 5.45x39? Screeching about how 5.45 is DESIGNED TO BE BRUTAL and CAUSE MORE DAMAGE in the 1970s?

    • Tunnelvision [they/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      9 months ago

      The tumbling thing isn’t a myth, but it’s not the round itself that does that it’s a combination of the round along with velocity and terminal ballistics. 5.56 was made to be shot out of a 20” barrel in order to reach terminal ballistics and that’s where the yawing (tumbling) effect takes place. This makes some sense since he mentioned falluja because the marines were still being issued M16s and not m4s (m4s have a shorter barrel and therefore do not reach the required velocity with regular 5.56)

  • Dolores [love/loves]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    9 months ago

    are you leaving out the bit where the claim is that a single 556 bullet would cut somebody in half? this is gross but i don’t think they’re actually claiming that.

  • Alaskaball [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    9 months ago

    coincidentally speaking of bullets doing decapitations and marines being cited for examples of such, I’ve had a marine tell me about how he saw one of his squadmates get his arm blown off by an AK-47 round impacting the bone.

  • umbrella
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    “oh yea this thing does such damage to kindergardeners”

    sounds like a great person

  • Holy iguana shit in a tin can Batman, this dude’s dumb as fuck! Like, how can you be an officer and go on record to just spew out urban legends from the barracks where they keep the grunts that actually do eat crayons (it was a bet bro, funniest shit I’ve ever seen bro!).

    Then to be like “yeah, I’d know… Mowed down a few grade school classrooms in my day, cut a few of the lil’ bastards clean in half Itellyouwhut”. Immediately send him to the wall, doesn’t matter if it’s bullshit, test out the tumbling effect on him.

    Also, wtf does he think terminal velocity means? 🤣