Yeah.

I’m only but one person.

It is called the Takings Clause by the Supreme Court, Cornell Law, and pretty much anyone else who talks about it. Expect the word “take” in a discussion about it.

The clause itself uses the word “take”. Taking with compensation is still taking.

It is called the Takings Clause by

They talked about just compensation, but the change and precedent provided by the Kelo case was in the lowering of the standard for taking. The case also set the precedent that the government could take private land not just for public use, but to transfer that land to another private party. Thus the focus on that. Compensation or not, the land was taken against the owner’s will for the purpose of enriching a corporation.

A flashhider of some type would be seen on most variants sold by Armalite in the era.

Rather than guess from memory, I looked it up.

The rifles were made on contract for KLM, and had a combination of features specific to that run. No one feature was too crazy, but this particular contract run of rifles was a small batch, and thus rare. 16 inch barrels with no muzzle device, semi-auto only, takedown pins on a chain.

If I recall correctly, those are a quite rare AR-10 variant with single digit amounts still surviving. The featureless muzzle in this picture always catches my eye.

The actual ICRC statement on customary practice is that rounds under that size which are designed to explode on contact with people are considered a problem.

I don’t think the OICW program was ever afraid of legal consequences. The combination weapon concept was simply impractical. Once it was split into two programs, the size of the grenades went up for practical reasons.

Furthermore, lighter grenades and exploding anti-materiel bullets have been introduced since. These developments have occurred without any objection. The military manuals or statements of several States consider only the anti-personnel use of such projectiles to be prohibited or only if they are designed to explode upon impact with the human body. - ICRC

I see where you are reading on the international legality, but the US and other nations looking at smart rounds weren’t terribly concerned on the legal front. The OICW was canceled because a combo rifle and smart launcher weapon was simply too awkward to be practical. That’s why it was split into two different weapons. Once the launcher was stand alone there was no reason not to increase the yield.

Yes but the skub potential.

You’re talking to somebody who thinks the M72 or the MK153 is the problem solver needed when a dumbfire 40mm doesn’t work. Personally I am also biased against 25mm smart launchers.

I’m not even going to read this edit war nonsense. I just wanted to say, Benedict Cumberbatch should have played Gary Mitchell. That would have made a fantastic movie.

Unfortunately JJ Abrams seems incapable of interacting with anything except the most surface level and broadly recognizable aspects of fictional universes that he touches.

Oh honey.

The OICW was split into two projects, a rifle and a grenade launcher. The grenade launcher half evolved into the XM25 which kept the smart feature but enlarged from 20mm to 25mm.

The downside was that it was a rifle sized weapon. Therefore it entirely replaced the rifle of whoever carried it.

The M320 fires the larger conventional 40mm HEDP rounds, but it is able to in theory fire larger smart munitions like the Pike missile. I speculate that the increased versatility, the simplistic design of the base weapon, the fact that it doesn’t entirely replace a rifle, and the ability to fire the larger dumb munitions made it more attractive.

Even more anecdotally, if a 40mm doesn’t do the job, a 66mm disposable dumb fire M72 LAW is the perfect way to deal with the kind of moderate cover that an XM25 is supposed to deal with.

My argument was observed while everyone in the room was wearing sneakers/low cut boots and half of them were wearing non spec pants. Literally nobody involved could actually blouse boots to regulation. It was one of those arguments borne entirely out of somebody wanting to start an argument.

I think I was wearing Czech combat pants at the time.

XM25 actually saw combat trials. The reported results were mixed, with reportedly conventional units appreciating it and Army Rangers looking at it as a burden. I’m personally skeptical to treat any of these public releases as entirely truthful, but it shows the XM25s were certainly issued in select numbers.

It was canceled for some arguably inane safety reasons, and speculatively because of a combat draw down and because the M320 opened up possibles of smart munitions which further tightened the XM25’s niche.

It could be worse. You could be trapped in a room with people vigorously debating how many eyelets should be visible on a bloused boot and then asked to pick a side.

Guns?

GUNS?!

I didn’t know this was a piece of artillery. This is a rifle!

t.some sergeant who got promoted because he could run fast good.