For AR and/or AK guys....

[Megawatt maker]

Garand
M1 Carbine
Ares SCR
Maybe M1A, but I’ve heard sketchy things about it.
SKS

if I’m limited to 10 rounds or less.

What sketchy things have you heard about the M1A?

I'll start by saying..I own 2. One a brand new production match Springfield, the other a much older one put together by Springfield when GI parts were still to be had.

Both are 100% drop dead, no bones reliable. I have not had a single jamb or malfunction with the new one yet..out of close to 1k rounds out of it so far. The old one...that I've owned for dang near 40 years now..has chocked up one time that I recall, and that was because I was shooter the cheapest most horribad surplus ammo from Pakistan. I mean the stuff was just crap.

Now far as accuracy goes..its very true, bedding is everything with these rifles. The old one isn't bedded, has been in and out of the stock about a gazillion times..there is actually slop you can feel with the action in the stock, even lock in. It ain't a tack driver needless to say..but even in its present state..it will do 3 MOA all day long with dang near any decent ammo.

The new "match" grade...tack driver...all day long...BUT..its very temperate sensitive. It always groups, but the zero does move with ambient temperates. Not a big deal..if I take it out in the cold..it only takes 3 shots to see where its grouping and adjust, but still...its not 100% stable.

Outside of that...I don't have an experience with the M1A being sketchy..

 

[Speedo66]

What sketchy things have you heard about the M1A?

I'll start by saying..I own 2. One a brand new production match Springfield, the other a much older one put together by Springfield when GI parts were still to be had.

Both are 100% drop dead, no bones reliable. I have not had a single jamb or malfunction with the new one yet..out of close to 1k rounds out of it so far. The old one...that I've owned for dang near 40 years now..has chocked up one time that I recall, and that was because I was shooter the cheapest most horribad surplus ammo from Pakistan. I mean the stuff was just crap.

Now far as accuracy goes..its very true, bedding is everything with these rifles. The old one isn't bedded, has been in and out of the stock about a gazillion times..there is actually slop you can feel with the action in the stock, even lock in. It ain't a tack driver needless to say..but even in its present state..it will do 3 MOA all day long with dang near any decent ammo.

The new "match" grade...tack driver...all day long...BUT..its very temperate sensitive. It always groups, but the zero does move with ambient temperates. Not a big deal..if I take it out in the cold..it only takes 3 shots to see where its grouping and adjust, but still...its not 100% stable.

Outside of that...I don't have an experience with the M1A being sketchy..

The fort I took basic in, Ft. Ord, had their ranges on the beach in the Monterey CA area. Dropped M-14's, if you could pick them up before the range NCO saw you, were put back to firing immediately. No chance to clear the sand from them.

They still fired with no problem. Since they were the basis for M-1A's, reliability probably shouldn't be a problem.

 

[Bazoo]

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.

No one is advocating they want an awb. Or giving up without a fight. That fight though, voting, rallies, trying to change public opinion, and being an NRA member, doesn't mean much if they do pass another awb.

And while gun laws are unconstitutional, what option do we have but to adhere to them?

 

[Megawatt maker]

No one is advocating they want an awb. Or giving up without a fight. That fight though, voting, rallies, trying to change public opinion, and being an NRA member, doesn't mean much if they do pass another awb.

And while gun laws are unconstitutional, what option do we have but to adhere to them?

I, for one, WILL NOT COMPLY!

When tyranny becomes law, resistance becomes duty.

 

[AlexanderA]

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?

Not simple at all. Opinions vary as to what the words of the Constitution really mean, and we also have to take into account 200+ years of jurisprudence. You can't look at the four corners of the document and think that it solves all situations.

The "sola scriptura" view of the Constitution and Amendments is never going to work. You're always going to have court interpretations.

Example on point: In the 2nd Amendment, are the words regarding the "militia" relevant, or not? If they're not relevant, you're already disregarding the four corners of the document.

 

[AlexanderA]

I, for one, WILL NOT COMPLY!

When tyranny becomes law, resistance becomes duty.

Complying, or not, is your choice. Just be prepared to suffer the consequences.

Whatever you do, I suggest being quiet about it. Confrontational, yet passive, resistance (in the Gandhi mold) is kind of an oxymoron when it comes to guns. Confrontational and active resistance will get you killed.

 

[Bazoo]

I, for one, WILL NOT COMPLY!

When tyranny becomes law, resistance becomes duty.

I hope no one complies.

I wouldn't comply either, but my gun would go underground never to see the light of day again, as it was put. So having a banned gun, but deep hidden, might as well be in compliance. I certainly wouldn't take it out for a range trip.

 

[Megawatt maker]

I hope no one complies.

I wouldn't comply either, but my gun would go underground never to see the light of day again, as it was put. So having a banned gun, but deep hidden, might as well be in compliance. I certainly wouldn't take it out for a range trip.

I don't have any guns...I guess I forgot to mention that tragic boat accident that happened to me a while back....

 

[trackskippy]

Not simple at all. Opinions vary as to what the words of the Constitution really mean, and we also have to take into account 200+ years of jurisprudence. You can't look at the four corners of the document and think that it solves all situations.

The "sola scriptura" view of the Constitution and Amendments is never going to work. You're always going to have court interpretations.

Example on point: In the 2nd Amendment, are the words regarding the "militia" relevant, or not? If they're not relevant, you're already disregarding the four corners of the document.

So what you're saying is, we have rights, or at least the illusion of them, right up until someone tells us we dont, and that's always in flux, based on who and how they interpret things. That about sum it up?

 

[Megawatt maker]

Complying, or not, is your choice. Just be prepared to suffer the consequences.

Whatever you do, I suggest being quiet about it. Confrontational, yet passive, resistance (in the Gandhi mold) is kind of an oxymoron when it comes to guns. Confrontational and active resistance will get you killed.

If active resistance comes to pass...it will be the end of all things....for everyone.

I admire Ghandi, but we don't live in that kind of world. He was dealing with the British..while they were far from perfect..they were nothing like what we are dealing with...
We are dealing with Communists, they are not even human.

 

[Bazoo]

I seen mention made correlating a gun ban to prohibition. That's a flawed comparison. Here's why.

First, during prohibition, everyone was affected, cops, civilians, g men. So there was a lot of cops and government that were sympathizers.

But with a gun ban, it will only affect civilians. Cops and government agencies wont give up their ar15s.

Second, prohibition banned all alcohol, whereas an awb will only ban a section of the guns. It would be equivelant to a ban on whiskey but not beer or wine.

Now if we had a full gun ban, that would be cw2, and like prohibition, it would be repealed. But just a ban on certain types of guns, I don't see it ending in repeal. We already have the nfa that bans (I know they aren't technically banned, just heavily restricted ) machineguns and short barreled rifles among other things. How many here have an illegal silencer or machinegun? How many comply with the NFA and grumble about how it's unconstitutional?

Don't get me wrong I'm totally against a ban of any type of weapon and against the nfa. But while against the nfa, I have no choice but to comply with it.

Live to fight another day, raise my kid in a pro gun home. Without the next generation being brought up in it, all will be lost eventually.

 

[AlexanderA]

I wouldn't comply either, but my gun would go underground never to see the light of day again, as it was put. So having a banned gun, but deep hidden, might as well be in compliance. I certainly wouldn't take it out for a range trip.

Plus you would have to swear your family to secrecy. This becomes a problem when it comes to young children, who tend to blab.

Better not to have to deal with bans in the first place.

 

[AlexanderA]

So what you're saying is, we have rights, or at least the illusion of them, right up until someone tells us we dont, and that's always in flux, based on who and how they interpret things. That about sum it up?

What I'm saying is that rights require eternal vigilance. Just because something is written in the Constitution, it's no guarantee. The problem I have with reliance on the "plain language" of, say, the 2nd Amendment, is that it gives a false sense of security. One adverse court decision can take it all away.

 

[AlexanderA]

We are dealing with Communists, they are not even human.

The antigunners are not Communists. They're your well-meaning, but naive, "soccer mom" neighbors.

 

[trackskippy]

The problem is, lawyers and politicians, who want to tell you there are many definitions for the word "is".

I think the "plain language" of the Constitution was intentional and was done to KISS. Unfortunately, we have too many lawyers and politicians who dont want to allow that.

 

[AlexanderA]

But with a gun ban, it will only affect civilians. Cops and government agencies wont give up their ar15s.

Rank-and-file police and government types are like everybody else. In fact I would say that the percentage of pro-gun people among the police is greater than in the general population. And having an AR in a patrol car or at the police station is not the same as private ownership. A lot of police are actually allies for gun rights.

 

[AlexanderA]

The problem is, lawyers and politicians, who want to tell you there are many definitions for the word "is".

I think the "plain language" of the Constitution was intentional and was done to KISS. Unfortunately, we have too many lawyers and politicians who dont want to allow that.

A high percentage of the Founders were lawyers, and all of them, by definition, were politicians. They knew that they could not cover every single potential problem in the Constitution. That's why they provided for courts, separation of powers, and the amendment process. They didn't expect everything to stay the same forever.

 

[Bazoo]

Rank-and-file police and government types are like everybody else. In fact I would say that the percentage of pro-gun people among the police is greater than in the general population. And having an AR in a patrol car or at the police station is not the same as private ownership. A lot of police are actually allies for gun rights.

I don't disagree there are some pro gun cops. There are also those that think we shouldn't be allowed to own ars. I dont know what breakdown.

My thinking and point is, if a ban removed ar15s from police hands they would say we need these guns so we aren't outgunned by the bad guys. And there would be an outcry from that community against the ban. Maybe it would just be support for a police exemption?

While there is a lot of pro gun cops, there aren't any I've ever heard of that will look the other way when they find an unregistered machinegun, since the nfa forbids them. There probably was back in the 30s, but not now.

And thats how it'll be with a ban on ar15s. Maybe there will be some cops that look the other way immediately after the ban. But as they retire and the next gen comes in, there will just be enforcement of the "law".

Sadly, the nfa is a model for gun control in our country and it has worked well to regulate machineguns.

 

[Megawatt maker]

The antigunners are not Communists. They're your well-meaning, but naive, "soccer mom" neighbors.

No...the soccer moms are the "useful idiots" that wouldn't have a thought either way about gun rights if not for the leftist commie media filling their empty heads with trash and propaganda.

The drivers...the wizards behind the curtain are the commies...and they are indeed not real people

 

[JTHunter]

As I already possess a PCC and revolver in .357, I would miss my AK but not feel "undergunned". I also have 2 shotguns, both 12 ga., one a pump, the other a SxS w/double triggers.
Then there is the 10/22 with 50 rd. magazines and a Keltec PMR-30 (.22 Mag).

And those are jusat the ones I have bothered to mention.

 

[Mauser lover]

What sketchy things have you heard about the M1A?

Accuracy issues are mainly what I’ve heard about, but I’ve also heard of receivers cracking and general reliability problems in dirty circumstances. I’ve never had or shot one, which is why I only mentioned that I’ve “heard” these things. It is pretty high on my list of things I’d use if the AR had never existed, I just have questions.

 

[AlexanderA]

The drivers...the wizards behind the curtain are the commies...and they are indeed not real people

Whoa. I see the word "Communist" being tossed around rather loosely these days. I know actual Communists, and I can tell you that they are a far cry from American "leftists," even people like Bernie Sanders and AOC. For example, Sanders and AOC, to my knowledge, have never advocated government ownership of all means of production. By European standards, "Democratic Socialists" or, more exactly, "Social Democrats" like Sanders or AOC would be considered center-left, about on a par with the German SPD or the British Labour Party.

On the other hand, Karl Marx, the archetypal Communist, wrote that "the workers under no circumstances should allow themselves to be disarmed."

Even though we might not like the leaders of the antigun movement, they are not Communists. (Calling a plutocrat like Michael Bloomberg a "Communist" is laughable.)

Calling someone a "Communist" (or "commie") has become an all-purpose pejorative. We need to be more precise in our language.

 

[trackskippy]

Accuracy issues are mainly what I’ve heard about, but I’ve also heard of receivers cracking and general reliability problems in dirty circumstances. I’ve never had or shot one, which is why I only mentioned that I’ve “heard” these things. It is pretty high on my list of things I’d use if the AR had never existed, I just have questions.

Ive owned and pretty extensively shot 4 M1A's. Three early rifles and one later, a SOCOM.

Accuracy with any of them was never an issue. All shot well, but you need to know your clicks for each barrel length. They are all different and the shorter you go, the more yuore going to be off.

The only problem I had actually breaking anything, was with a heavily shot and dry fired standard grade rifle I shot in military type matches. Broke the tip off a GI firing pin.

If I were to buy another, Id look for one of the 80's, early 90's "standard" guns. The further past that, is when Springfield started running out of GI parts and their quality went downhill. The SOCOM was pretty much the last thing Springfield I bought, and I dont plan on buying anything else from them, rifle or handgun.

The quality of the SOCOM was nothing like the earlier guns, and while it shot OK, it had some fit and function issues. It wouldn't come apart without some sort of tool, and it didn't like to function reliably in real cold weather.

Ive heard of some later guns having some issues with bolts shearing lugs, but I never saw it in person.

The SOCOM and Bush/Scout models look cool, but really arent all that different from the rifles, other than being a tad shorter, and in some cases, dont use standard parts. They all weigh about the same.

Chopping a couple of inches off the barrel doesn't lighten things up much, and with the iron sights, just messes with your sight settings, and by a lot. If you have the SOCOM and shoot around others, you wont be very popular either. The brake can be very annoying.

The rail on my SOCOM wasnt Picatinny and it was also made of steel, and got very hot, very quickly, and held the heat. None of my mil spec lever mounts would stay tight on it, and my La Rue mounts wouldn't go on it at all. I also worried about the heat affecting the electronics of my Aimpoints.


Since the fantasy here seems to be no autos, then something like the Spanish FR8, K98, or any of the other straight bolt, stripper fed, military bolt guns would be my choice. An 03 would do too. The "new/current" bolt guns seem to have gone down the wrong path since about the late 60's early 70's and arent something I think would fit the bill.

Most of the lever guns, while cool and handy, are better from a practical shooter/user standpoint, but I think they are pretty fragile and limiting.

 

[entropy]

Calling someone a "Communist" (or "commie") has become an all-purpose pejorative. We need to be more precise in our language.

Global Eilite Oligarch sums it up well.

 

[Megawatt maker]

Whoa. I see the word "Communist" being tossed around rather loosely these days. I know actual Communists, and I can tell you that they are a far cry from American "leftists," even people like Bernie Sanders and AOC. For example, Sanders and AOC, to my knowledge, have never advocated government ownership of all means of production. By European standards, "Democratic Socialists" or, more exactly, "Social Democrats" like Sanders or AOC would be considered center-left, about on a par with the German SPD or the British Labour Party.

On the other hand, Karl Marx, the archetypal Communist, wrote that "the workers under no circumstances should allow themselves to be disarmed."

Even though we might not like the leaders of the antigun movement, they are not Communists. (Calling a plutocrat like Michael Bloomberg a "Communist" is laughable.)

Calling someone a "Communist" (or "commie") has become an all-purpose pejorative. We need to be more precise in our language.

No...they are COMMUNISTS!. Nothing you say will twist that truth. Bernie...AOC...blah blah blah...they are antiAmerican POS and need not just removed from office...but dragged out!

You are not paying attention...or in denial...or you're one of them.