For AR and/or AK guys....

[Tinker-S]

Having a disconnector mean it can't be slamfired. I wouldn't do it anyway, it's hard on the gun, and not very accurate. (At least the one time I tried it with a beat up 97.)

It would not be accurate, but just imagine the other guy at the wrong end of the gun!

 

[DustyGmt]

Having a disconnector mean it can't be slamfired. I wouldn't do it anyway, it's hard on the gun, and not very accurate. (At least the one time I tried it with a beat up 97.)

Having a shotgun capable of slamfire doesn't really appeal to me in the least. I can pretty much imagine exactly how it would feel and handle and I don't think it would make me any more lethal, accurate or faster. I am just fine with using a trigger to crack off a shot and can't imagine I'd be very good in "slam fire" mode....

Trigger = accuracy, control.
Slamfire= Inaccurate faster

 

[Ignition Override]

Tinker-S: Only 110 rounds used so far in my "nib" PTR-91. Zero issues, and plenty of the guys on the 'crusty' AKfiles trust the PTRs produced in the last several years. Their comments were a serious factor in my decision to buy one.

Having read for several hours about the roller-delayed blowback concept, plus watching two computerized graphic videos on the PTR-91, what Amazes me is how it works, and this system is known to be reliable (with bolt gap within the safe range; yes, I'm quite familiar, using new Feeler gauges and Several videos).

The repeated stresses on the narrow Locking Device (inside the bolt) plus on the small rollers... when protruding outwards into the shoulders, or being pushed inwards etc.. must be significant?

 

[Bazoo]

I had a 37 police with no disconnect. I fired it that way a time or two. It was fun. But not that much better than a disconnected gun. I prefer an 870.

 

[Pew-Pew]

My 870 or maybe my Mav 88 turned into a bullpup.
Definitely my Hellcat or XD40SC for a sidearm.
No AR -15 or any AR? If another variation, I would go with my AR9 pistol. .308 rifle is too big & heavy

 

[amd6547]

I think you guys are fooling yourselves if you think you’ll be “allowed” to own any repeating weapon…or even a single shot. Even air guns.

 

[BreechFace]

In what way does a bolt action rifle allow fire from behind cover that a leveraction doesn't? You don't have to stand to fire a lever action.

I like levers but shooting prone with one is much more difficult than a bolt action. Other than that levers are great.

 

[Old Dog]

My (current) state has a bill in the state legislature to ban ALL SEMI-AUTO long guns (yes, even the Ruger 10-22) that take detachable magazines. Alongside a bill to ban all handgun and rifle magazines that accept more than 17 rounds. Supposedly, whatever one has before the law is effective will be grandfathered. Yet the list of where and when you can take and use your now-banned guns and magazines is, shall we say, quite short, but most restrictive.

Needless to say, I'm outta here as soon as the ink is dry on my retirement papers. Until then (should these laws pass), I'll be practicing a lot with a Marlin 336 in .30-30 and an 1894 in .38/.357.

Back to the future.

 

[Bazoo]

It's true they want them all. I think instead of a ban, I have always thought they would add assault rifles to the nfa. Basically make them registered with the registry closed likely.

 

[Speedo66]

90% of the "banned" guns would simply go underground. Could not see the light of day, but would be there nonetheless. After that, it would be a matter of attrition, as the owners died off and their heirs turned them in.

The point being, any gun ban would not be instantaneous. It would take generations, and by that time circumstances could change completely.

That’s already happened in some states, very low turn in or registration rate.

Problem is, unless you have your own range, where can you shoot them? If black rifles or all semi autos are banned, you can’t just show up at a public range with one.

 

[Ignition Override]

Don't forget the Saiga semi-auto shotguns in .410, 12 or 20 gauge which were banned- yes, along with Saiga rifles- from further imports (years ago) by the perfumed princeling.

I have no idea whether some other semi-auto shotgun brands hold at least 10 rounds or similar.

 

[drobs]

I know semi-autos rule the realm in terms of defensive rifles and for good reason, but I do know of some older folks who don't really care for anything semi-auto and I'm just curious why there isn't more bolt action rifles with iron sights on them, more specifically iron sighted bolt action rifles that shoot intermediate cartridges like .223, 7.62x39, .300BO, .458, .450, etc... I would think they would be pretty popular, the Ruger American series of rifles kind of fulfill that role nicely but they are lacking because they are not equipped with irons. I would honestly be very much interested in a bolt gun chambered for 5.56 if it had a nice quality aperture irons and a detachable box mag.

NoDakSpud (aka NDS) who was just acquired by Palmetto State Armory (PSA), sold Iron Sights for the Ruger American Rifle. NDS is moving to SC and nothing is listed on their website.


The iron sights can be seen in this article:
https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2021/04/21/iron-sights-ruger-american-ranch-nodak-spud/

RE the topic at hand. I'd go with my Mini-14 and Springfield M1A. The M1A is heavy son of gun so the Mini-14 would be my primary. Removing mag fed Semi-Autos - I'd go with my Savage Scout.

While it's always good to have shotguns around, I want a rifle in a rifle caliber for longer range, penetration, and accuracy.

Another way to look at this topic is what rifle would you own if you needed / wanted a 50 state legal rifle that is not a semi-auto or mag fed semi-auto.

 

[trackskippy]

Whats pretty amazing here is, so many seem so willing to just give up and comply with what is obviously unconstitutional edicts and mandates. Why would you even consider just agreeing and giving up your rights?

Its one thing if the guns didn't exist and to do the mental masturbation of what you might want, but to even consider and accept that they might be "banned" and you would give them up and choose something "less scary" (for the moment), is very telling, especially to those who might want to ban them. No wonder we just keep going downhill with this sort of stuff.

All you're doing is encouraging them to do so by telling them you dont have a problem with it and will comply, and you can be damn sure they are watching, reading, and paying attention to this kind of stuff. This really isnt a hypothetical thing here, people really are paying attention.

Kind of funny this comes up too as the current administration starts ramping up the antigun rhetoric.

 

[drobs]

Whats pretty amazing here is, so many seem so willing to just give up and comply with what is obviously unconstitutional edicts and mandates. Why would you even consider just agreeing and giving up your rights?

Its one thing if the guns didn't exist and to do the mental masturbation of what you might want, but to even consider and accept that they might be "banned" and you would give them up and choose something "less scary" (for the moment), is very telling, especially to those who might want to ban them. No wonder we just keep going downhill with this sort of stuff.

All you're doing is encouraging them to do so by telling them you dont have a problem with it and will comply, and you can be damn sure they are watching, reading, and paying attention to this kind of stuff. This really isnt a hypothetical thing here, people really are paying attention.

Kind of funny this comes up too as the current administration starts ramping up the antigun rhetoric.

And that is why the topic is better discussed as a 50 state legal rifle. We can all hide our mag fed semi-autos, refuse to turn them in, & / or start CW2. It still makes sense to have some "kosher" rifles for times when you need to visit restricted areas / states / countries.

 

[AlexanderA]

Problem is, unless you have your own range, where can you shoot them? If black rifles or all semi autos are banned, you can’t just show up at a public range with one.

Farmers (owners of acreage) would suddenly have an expanded circle of friends. And (illegal) suppressors would become very popular, to keep the noise down.

There would be a lot of dry-fire practice at home.

Remember that during alcohol Prohibition, there was still a lot of drinking going on.

Gun bans would eventually meet the same fate as Prohibition, and for the same reasons: (1) they don't work to further their announced purpose, and (2) they actually make the problems worse.

 

[trackskippy]

And that is why the topic is better discussed as a 50 state legal rifle. We can all hide our mag fed semi-autos, refuse to turn them in, & / or start CW2. It still makes sense to have some "kosher" rifles for times when you need to visit restricted areas / states / countries.

Why should you have to have something like that anywhere?

 

[trackskippy]

Whats wrong here is, instead of passing laws that are unconstitutional, and then having to fight them later, those passing the laws, should have to verify the constitutionality of the law they want to pass, "before" they are allowed to be passed.

We always seem to be the ones on the wrong side of things here, and never recover.

 

[drobs]

Why should you have to have something like that anywhere?

You don't have to have anything. I like all types of guns and own all types of guns.

 

[trackskippy]

You don't have to have anything. I like all types of guns and own all types of guns.

I do too.

My point was having to have "something" for places you're not allowed to have something else.

 

[drobs]

I do too.

My point was having to have "something" for places you're not allowed to have something else.

I'm not following you. Can we have a gun discussion without having to get into gun rights / politics?

 

[trackskippy]

Sure, but it was brought up here basically due to politics and gun rights. Hence the whole discussion.

By all means, pick and use what you want. All Im saying is, dont let someone tell you, "you have" to.

 

[AlexanderA]

Whats wrong here is, instead of passing laws that are unconstitutional, and then having to fight them later, those passing the laws, should have to verify the constitutionality of the law they want to pass, "before" they are allowed to be passed.

The Supreme Court doesn't issue advisory opinions. There has to be a "case or controversy" that is "ripe" for adjudication.

So, there is no way to verify the constitutionality of anything ahead of time. Instead, there's a presumption that duly passed laws are valid until they're declared invalid by the courts.

 

[bannockburn]

Semi-Auto-1) PTR91, HK91, FAL, M1 Carbine, Mini 14, Mini 30, SKS Carbine, HK SL7.

Non-Semi-Auto-2) Rossi M92 .45 Colt, CZ 527 Carbine (.223/7.62x39), Ruger American Ranch (.223/7.62x39).

Shotgun-3) Mossberg 590A1 Retrograde, Mossberg 930 SLX, Benelli M2, Benelli M4.

 

[trackskippy]

The Supreme Court doesn't issue advisory opinions. There has to be a "case or controversy" that is "ripe" for adjudication.

So, there is no way to verify the constitutionality of anything ahead of time. Instead, there's a presumption that duly passed laws are valid until they're declared invalid by the courts.

Seems pretty simple to me.... is there anything in the proposed law that might violate the Constitution and BOR as written? And if so, it needs to be addressed prior to passing it.

How hard is that?

 

[Rexster]

Scenario A: Benelli M2 and/or M4.

Scenario B: Benelli M2 and/or M4.

My Real Life: Benelli M2, Benelli M2, and thinking seriously about adding a Benelli M4. For some occasions, Browning BLR, .308 Winchester. When long guns are not practicable, well, longer-barreled revolvers can help me hit farther-out than I can with my 3” to 4” carry revolvers.

We have several AR15/M4 weapons, but they do not fit the “go to” category. The safety/selector lever is on “Fire” when The Dingus Is Down, which clashes with other weapon, that are more familiar to me. I am capable of using an AR15.M4, but must be fully awake and alert, first, which rules out the “go to” role.