The army wanted a weapon which could be used against an enemy which hides behind protective walls, sandbags, etc. A weapon was developed. It did what the army wanted it to do. There were problems with its safety. Those problems were fixed. So why isn't it being used more often?
Well, according to the story, the soldier assigned to use what is called the "Punisher," (officially the XM-25) is issued that weapon instead of the M4A1 carbine that soldiers have found to be extremely effective, especially in close combat.
Another problem is cost. An M4A1 costs about $3000 tops. With the new user safety improvements, the XM-25 cost has skyrocketed from $41,000 to $93,000! In addition, the XM-25 with a basic load of 36 rounds of ammunition, weighs 35 pounds, about double the weight of the M4A1 with a full complement of ammunition.
Keep in mind, the Punisher is not meant to replace the M4A1. It was presumed that within each fighting squad, one of the infantrymen would be issued the Punisher in lieu of an M4A1. The problem is that, in many squads, no soldier wants to give up his reliable M4A1!
Again, I do not want to repeat the entire article. Here's the link: http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a22792/xm-25-punisher-u...
Mikey, I would really appreciate your opinion about this issue. I do respect your perspective on all things military.