It's worse with the full sentence.: > However, INSAS was a field weapon and its 5.56mm ammo (designed to injure, not kill) was not suited for CQB, very much li

It's worse with the full sentence.: > However, INSAS was a field weapon and its 5.56mm ammo (designed to injure, not kill) was not suited for CQB, very much like the any 5.56mm weapon with NATO ( e.g. M16) ,is not suited for CQB The author doesn't seem to understand their weapons nor rounds very well.