Sheriff gets APC with 50 cal machine gun...

..just take it when they're in getting donuts.

I may not know the truth, but I know when I'm being lied to...

Do not engage the target. Instead setup a recon to figure out where they park that thing and when it is park take it out. If sheriff small is terrorizing the local hood with this thing do not take it head on. Take it out while its asleep. What are you morons? One APC in a town. ONE! Sabatoge the thing over a direct confrontation not only saves lives but free's up anyone not caught from engagement to do other things. Shaka you so crazy.

Who said " war is a wonderful idea to those who have never experience it"
Any way on that note why note run for the office that controls the sheriff. Then you can control the APC.

The M113 went into production in 1960 with a gasoline engine. This was disastrous. The gas tank was on the bottom with almost no armor and just about any explosive down there would set the vehicle on fire. In 1964 they came out with a diesel engine (six cylinder, water-cooled, 212 bhp @ 2800rpm), which was a big improvement. The M113 can be holed with a 12.7 mm (.50 BMG), which is a pea-shooter on a modern battlefield, though somewhat rare in 1964 Vietnam. Expedient ANFO box bombs will flip the vehicle over.

The M113 has a crew of two (commander/gunner and driver) and can carry eleven soldiers. Its only weapon is the Ma Deuce (12.7 mm MG) mounted on top. It carries 2000 rounds of ammunition. In an urban environment where shots can come from any direction, the gunner has almost no protection from snipers. There is a rectangular hatch behind him and the gun itself provides some protection from the front. But, realistically, that’s the vehicle commander and, if he has any sense, he’s going to focus on getting his eleven passengers to their destination rather than on actually shooting anybody himself.

Quite frankly, putting a Ma Deuce on top of an M113 is a bit like putting lipstick on a gorilla. The ammunition is bulky (2000 rounds isn’t much) for use against people and it is ineffective for use against anything but civilian vehicles. No modern military except Norway uses the M113 as a fighting vehicle and the Norwegians don’t arm them with 12.7 mm MGs. Their NM135 has a small turret with a 20mm cannon and a 7.62 mm MG. Their NM142 has two TOW missiles. FYI: Wire-guided missiles like the TOW are ineffective against motorcycles because they are not impact-detonated. They fly over the top of the target and a magnet signals a shaped charge to detonate downwards, but there is not enough iron in a motorcycle to trip the magnet.

The M113 is widely used in support roles where it is not expected to come in direct contact with the enemy. There are many variants: the M106 has a 107mm mortar, the M125 has an 81mm mortar, the M163 has a 20mm Vulcan air defense system, the M548 is a cargo carrier, the M577 is a command post with a higher roof, etc. By 1999 there were over 76,000 M113s and its variants in service and they continue to be built (mostly in Italy) and maintained today. Most are in banana republics, though a few can be found in American sheriff’s departments, where they are used for propaganda purposes. The M113 can be fitted with a dozer blade and used for ramming houses – it is not powerful enough to actually level a house, but a couple of bumps is often enough to convince the residents that it is time to call it quits.

Flat-top, turret-less vehicles were originally designed during WWI for trench warfare. They carried a wooden bridge on top and, when they encountered a trench, the soldiers dismounted, bodily threw their bridge over the trench, drove their vehicle across, tossed the bridge back on top, re-mounted and continued on their merry way. In actual practice, you could probably count on one hand the number of trenches that were breached in this manner. More trenches were breached by the simple expedient of driving into it so one’s comrades could drive over the top of one’s vehicle – also, on could push disabled vehicles into the trench and drive over them.

In my opinion, WWI was the last time that armored personnel carriers were really a good idea. If they had had reliable engines that were powerful enough to consistently propel the vehicles through mud, breaching trenches would have worked. In those days, all soldier’s rifles as well as heavy machine guns like the Maxim were .30-caliber, which could not penetrate steel armor, though they sometimes drove a bolt into the interior of a vehicle. Large, single-shot rifles like the .55 Boys were developed but, with more powerful engines, it was soon possible to carry enough armor to stop any weapon of the time that was capable of engaging a moving vehicle. If the M113 had been available during WWI, it would have turned the tide, even without its Ma Deuce.

But modern battlefields have been littered with the wreckages of APCs. Really, they’re deathtraps. Even if, as civilians, you do not have the means to destroy the vehicles, motorcycle-mounted snipers can run circles around them. If you encounter an M113, just shoot the commander when he sticks his head out of the hatch. The real danger is not the Ma Deuce but the eleven guys inside; so fire from far enough away that you are out of range of the SAW that they will have when they dismount. But beware: The M106 with its 107mm mortar or the M125 with its 81mm mortar are quite dangerous in urban combat. Escaping from shelling is one reason why I recommend motorcycles.

In conclusion, don’t panic because your local sheriff has an M113 with a Ma Deuce on top. When he acquires the variant with a mortar tube, then it’s time to think about panicking.

it is now obsolete. If you don't think they read your web site your stupid. Any idea that would work against an army this advanced would never be written down on the internet. Well eccept by someone who never intends to use it and if you did intend to use it well its been nice knowing you I give you about 10 sec and that being generous. walk away from this topic people this is a waist of your time.