deadin
Member
I owned lots of "weapons" when I was on active duty. I still wasn't allowed to keep them in the barracks.
Full Auto?
- Thread starter Clint C
- Start date
- Status
I owned lots of "weapons" when I was on active duty. I still wasn't allowed to keep them in the barracks.
How can anybody really beleive that FA fire is potentially more dangerous in the hands of a criminal than a semi auto? Personally I would rather have the BG dump his mag in 3 seconds with most of the rounds going into the air, rather than having him take his time to precisely aim at each target.
Wow, I had no idea the number of THR's that were truly anti-gun rights.
wake up folks, we need everyones support!
Wow, I had no idea the number of THR's that were truly anti-gun rights.
wake up folks, we need everyones support!
deadin
Member
If not caring for FA's makes you anti-gun, does buying a foreign product make you anti-American?
Shung
Member
stupid is as stupid does (and says), that's for sure 
Many years ago when I worked for an SOT, I spent a week with an ATF Inspector for an audit. We were discussing gun ownership in general and he told me (paraphrasing here) "I'm not into guns and don't own any myself, but if my neighbor wants to have 20 machine guns in his basement; as long as he isn't hurting anyone with them then I don't see why I am supposed to care."
Too bad we are not all this enlightened.
Too bad we are not all this enlightened.
Man, threads like this make me realize just how doomed our cause is. Look how many anti's are lurking around our own gun forum. Even the Mods are anti Full auto. The cost of a legal pre-86 full auto can't compare with the cost of a current production semi auto. The reason is that you aren't just paying for the parts and labor of the gun (which is what you pay for with semi autos) but you're also paying for the hyped up demand and dwindling lack of supply of the "approved" full autos for civilian ownership. To say that $16,000 for a full auto is reasonable when other countries' citizens can buy the same gun legally for a fraction of that cost is a lie. It means that only the very affluent can afford to buy one. That's not only eletist but it's exactly the same mode of thinking that anti gun world governments have towards civilian ownership of firearms. Sad really...... We'll all be reduced to pea shooters and single shots in a few decades because "we don't need such big calibers or so many rounds in a magazine..." I thought the only anti's we had to worry about were the ones in DC and at the Brady center, never thought they'd be here chatting with us.
I thought the only anti's we had to worry about were the ones in DC and at the Brady center, never thought they'd be here chatting with us.Gunnerpalace
Member
I cant be gone for 1 day can I?
WUT? Kids before 1934 could buy Maxim's and such a thing never happened.
Do you support ownership? Yes or No.
WUT? Kids before 1934 could buy Maxim's and such a thing never happened.
Ah yes the Perazzi shotgun owners (no offence to owners who actually support gun right it's just the wide spectrum of high end shotgun owners tend to be fudds and think the 2nd is about hunting, and how us EBR owners are terrorist's of some sort.)
TexasRifleman
Moderator Emeritus
I love this gem of ignorance here.
Semi auto belt feds are sold all the time.
I don't remember seeing any of them used in a crime lately.
Kinda hard to sneak a Ma Deuce to school in a backpack yes?
Where do some of you people get this crap?
Justin
Moderator Emeritus
You're reading comprehension doesn't appear to be so hot. In reviewing the posts in this thread made by other staff members I don't see one at all that could be characterized as being "anti Full auto."
The closest any of them come is one admonishment regarding illegal full-auto conversions, and a couple of posts clarifying that the law (bad as it is) doesn't prohibit ownership of full-auto firearms.
HGUNHTR, I agree which is why I dont advocate restricting M-16, etc. but with belt fed weapons you can have hundreds of rounds, and these can be abused, example if cho bought a SAW instead of a glock, there could have been a lot more life lost, the ability to have sustanied fire would be difficult to stop even if the students had ccw(as opposed to an ak-47)
However, if he had to go through a backgrd check, pay the stamp, wait. I doubt he would have, he might of bought an ak-47 and gone FA but he might have been even less effective due to climb, etc.
And for all those who claim I'd bew more afraid of a proff. with a j-frame- I agree, but proff. don't go to the local mall and spray. nuts do, and they are more dangerous with FA
IndianaBoy
Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2005
- Messages
- 1,551
I bought a CMMG 22 conversion for my AR last night.
Took it out to the range early this morning before work. Put almost a brick of Federal thru it with one solitary stoppage.
This setup + drop in auto sear = definition of fun.
The needless infringement of our rights is reasonless.
It doesn't prevent crime. It doesn't have anything to do with school shootings.
If I want an M16, it is my right as an American to own one. A market distortion has been introduced. A DIAS should cost about 40 bucks.
What a shame we will NEVER get there because some of you just won't stand with us.
Took it out to the range early this morning before work. Put almost a brick of Federal thru it with one solitary stoppage.
This setup + drop in auto sear = definition of fun.
The needless infringement of our rights is reasonless.
It doesn't prevent crime. It doesn't have anything to do with school shootings.
If I want an M16, it is my right as an American to own one. A market distortion has been introduced. A DIAS should cost about 40 bucks.
What a shame we will NEVER get there because some of you just won't stand with us.
Shung
Member
If Cho had a SAW instead of a glock he could have been spotted and arrested before even reaching VT...
did you try to conceal a saw yet ?
IndianaBoy
Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2005
- Messages
- 1,551
Yeah. The SAW is lethal. That's why our soldiers carry one when they clear houses in Iraq. They are so light and easy to handle indoors.
What are you guys smoking? Can you find me a single solitary instance of a crime involving a belt-fed? There should be lots of them from the '50s when our soldiers had MG-42s they brought back from Germany.
IndianaBoy
Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2005
- Messages
- 1,551
I want you guys talking about going to the mall and 'spraying' to compare your talking points to those used by Feinstein, Sarah Brady, and all the other anti-gunners out there.
What the heck guys? You are speaking to baseless emotion, not fact.
What the heck guys? You are speaking to baseless emotion, not fact.
Just to cap the absurdity of this statement -
SAW info
Length: 40.87 inches (103.81 centimeters)
Unloaded Weight:15.16 pounds (6.88 kilograms)
200-round box magazine: 6.92 pounds (3.14 kilograms)
Not exactly the sort of thing you tote around under your raincoat.
Please, if your going to play, try harder than foolishness like this.
TexasRifleman
Moderator Emeritus
LOL Yeah, cause them big bastards are so easy to conceal
I keep a Ma Deuce in my sock as a Backup Gun.
Seriously, run that through your internal BS filter and see what comes out.
That's just so utterly unrealistic.
And again, these kinds of belt fed things are sold in semi auto form all the time, and never used in crimes.
Cyborg
Member
I think RKBA includes fully automatic weapons. My understanding of 2A is that we are SUPPOSED to be able to be as well equipped as we can be. I personally do not see the utility of FA for most civilian or even military uses these days but neither do I see the utility in a lot of the cars I see people driving. I don't see where having FA capability would be an advantage defending your home (or compound ) from badguys in body armor, black BDUs and baclava. I can see where one of Ronnie Barrett's little magazine-fed .50BMG-firing jewels would be useful from the windmill or water tower but I don't see a whole lot of use for a full-blown Ma-Deuce using the same ammo.
NOTE: While I am questioning the need for such devices, I am only doing so in the utilitarian sense. As long as he keeps it in his yard I could not possibly be less interested in what my neighbor ownes or does. He wants to have enough hardware to equip a Mechanized Infantry Division and has the bread to pay for it what is that to me - so long as he stays the frack outta my yard.
Indulge me a sec. Did I not read earlier in this thread that a FA version of a Colt AR-15 runs $10K? If so, why are they so expensive? Can't be supply and demand.
Cy
) from badguys in body armor, black BDUs and baclava. I can see where one of Ronnie Barrett's little magazine-fed .50BMG-firing jewels would be useful from the windmill or water tower but I don't see a whole lot of use for a full-blown Ma-Deuce using the same ammo.NOTE: While I am questioning the need for such devices, I am only doing so in the utilitarian sense. As long as he keeps it in his yard I could not possibly be less interested in what my neighbor ownes or does. He wants to have enough hardware to equip a Mechanized Infantry Division and has the bread to pay for it what is that to me - so long as he stays the frack outta my yard.
Indulge me a sec. Did I not read earlier in this thread that a FA version of a Colt AR-15 runs $10K? If so, why are they so expensive? Can't be supply and demand.
Cy
woodybrighton
member
my only reservation would be for machine pistols and the like on the grounds they can bite the shooter and people near by accident and really should'nt be owned by new shooters.
theres a few uk special forces soldiers who have lost thumbs to HK mp5s and cut down g3s and there not exactly new to the world of guns
theres a few uk special forces soldiers who have lost thumbs to HK mp5s and cut down g3s and there not exactly new to the world of guns
I'm also trying to figure out how he'd likely have paid for one, with mil-scale large contract going well over 4k per unit.
That's the running joke of 'everyone will get a belt fed' when anything more expensive than a SKS gets flame threads across the internet for being a 'rich man's gun'
Gord
Member
Cyborg said:
It is.
There is a tiny number of registered full-autos in relation to the number of people who would like to own one.
Imagine if only cars titled before May 1986 could be owned legally.
High demand (internet promotion of the availability of NFA toys) plus fixed, extremely limited supply: the stupid prices of machineguns.
The American domestic market seems to do just fine with the 51s and MP5ks - ironically, I own both, so I do have an idea of what I'm talking about here.
Neither is particularly challenging to use, the 51 being a loud obnoxious monster mostly.
Ironically, domestic 51s seem to work better than the cut-down G3s as well - can't quite figure that one out, wonder what they did wrong.
But I'll end this particular thread drift.
- Status
