ingram
Member
An Ingram and an MG-42 first and foremost
Plus anything else I could possibly afford.
Plus anything else I could possibly afford.
If Full-Auto Were Legal..Would You?
- Thread starter amprecon
- Start date
- Status
sacp81170a
Member
HK MP40. .40 cal., controllable, and fun! I wasn't a "zoomie", I was a "skycop", and full auto fire with the M-16 was part of our quarterly qualification (this was back in the days of SAC, and we were nuclear security). Also carried the old M-60, M-203, and we were using the MK19 and M2 for convoy security when I was deployed with GLCM in Europe. Basically, we were light infantry. Then again, SAC was almost like a different service.
"To err is human, to forgive is not SAC policy."
"Peace is our profession, war is just a hobby."
"The first one's there in 30 minutes or less or the second one's free."
"To err is human, to forgive is not SAC policy."
"Peace is our profession, war is just a hobby."
"The first one's there in 30 minutes or less or the second one's free."
Kalashnikov
Member
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2005
- Messages
- 399
Absolutly. I plan on it when I'm older anyways
As for the list of what I want, personally I wouldnt mind.....oh......everything.
Semper Fi
As for the list of what I want, personally I wouldnt mind.....oh......everything.Semper Fi
Sheldon
Member
I doubt I couls afford any machinegun even if they were still legal.....even if I wasn't in California. But if I could I would look into an MP5-SD and one of them Tippmann .22 lr miniature belt feds. Those look like a lot of fun....and cheap to shoot.
M2 Carbine
member
I've had the M2 Carbine for many years.
If FA was as available as SA I can think of at least a dozen MGs I'd have.
And there's a couple FA that I'd like to build.
As far as feeding one, reload, reload and reload.
My M2 wouldn't have been shot nearly as much if I had to buy store bought ammo.
The same with a friend's Mac 10, UZI and MP40.
If FA was as available as SA I can think of at least a dozen MGs I'd have.
And there's a couple FA that I'd like to build.
As far as feeding one, reload, reload and reload.
My M2 wouldn't have been shot nearly as much if I had to buy store bought ammo.
The same with a friend's Mac 10, UZI and MP40.
Owning one is the only responsible thing to do
because WHEN the SHTF and Tyranny strikes, "we the people" are gonna loose way to many lives with our piddly bolt actions and semi-auto's. I've said it before... and I'll say it again... the longer the 68 GOA carries it's unconstitutional power, the greater the threat of force gap between the people and the Governmental Powers becomes... as that gap increases, our control decreases.
While full-auto is legal (at least in my State), the cost is prohibitive. Even most semi-autos are out of the majority of peoples budget. We are basically relegated to fighting tyranny with the lowley SKS.... and now a shortage of cheap 7.62x39... hmmm... something smells fishy to me.
because WHEN the SHTF and Tyranny strikes, "we the people" are gonna loose way to many lives with our piddly bolt actions and semi-auto's. I've said it before... and I'll say it again... the longer the 68 GOA carries it's unconstitutional power, the greater the threat of force gap between the people and the Governmental Powers becomes... as that gap increases, our control decreases.
While full-auto is legal (at least in my State), the cost is prohibitive. Even most semi-autos are out of the majority of peoples budget. We are basically relegated to fighting tyranny with the lowley SKS.... and now a shortage of cheap 7.62x39... hmmm... something smells fishy to me.
Last edited:
JamisJockey
member
+1 Cheap serious fun
also
A UMP .45 cal, suppressed preferably.
Also, a Thompson
Maybe an AK
That's about it.
CleverNickname
Member
I currently own three machineguns, and my dream is that 922(o) would be repealed so I could buy more.
BigFatKen
Member
AR-180
I had a AR-180. It could fire a 177 shot mag of .22LR in seconds. It was a lot of fun. The one I had was a little worn, so it was not a reliable defense gun as it jamed some.
Is the definition of a "gun" a weapon you pull the trigger rather than squeeze it?
I had a AR-180. It could fire a 177 shot mag of .22LR in seconds. It was a lot of fun. The one I had was a little worn, so it was not a reliable defense gun as it jamed some.
Is the definition of a "gun" a weapon you pull the trigger rather than squeeze it?
ID_shooting
Member
If NFA were to be removed, I would have an AK kit put together so fast it would make your eyes spin
Omni04
Member
of course! One for each arm, Contra style!
it is true that it isn't the most practical item, but it would be a fun gun for at the range if i could afford the ammunition. I would also like to have a Thompson and a Kalashnikov along with an m-16, just for collections sake.
it is true that it isn't the most practical item, but it would be a fun gun for at the range if i could afford the ammunition. I would also like to have a Thompson and a Kalashnikov along with an m-16, just for collections sake.
White Horseradish
Member
Full-auto fire is the sound of your wallet emptying. These things use ammo FAST. I blew through 100 rounds of 9mm out of a rented Uzi in about two minutes. That was range ammo, $11 a box.
That said, I might look into the .22LR beltfeds if the cost was lower, or maybe a STEN to tear up the sandpit once in a while. At the ranges and in the circumstances I am likely to need to defend myself FA anything wouldn't do me much good and possibly create more problems. Every bullet you shoot has a lawyer attached to it and letting loose 30 of them in a short period of time sounds like a recipe for civil liability to me, since I live in the city.
If the regulation did go away I think we would primarily see a huge drop in prices on AK's because they would not need to be remade. That would be the only other FA arm I would consider, but for the reasons of cost rather than FA capability.
That said, I might look into the .22LR beltfeds if the cost was lower, or maybe a STEN to tear up the sandpit once in a while. At the ranges and in the circumstances I am likely to need to defend myself FA anything wouldn't do me much good and possibly create more problems. Every bullet you shoot has a lawyer attached to it and letting loose 30 of them in a short period of time sounds like a recipe for civil liability to me, since I live in the city.
If the regulation did go away I think we would primarily see a huge drop in prices on AK's because they would not need to be remade. That would be the only other FA arm I would consider, but for the reasons of cost rather than FA capability.
I would have a browning M2 machine gun built onto my blazer... And I would have some loopholes built into my house and mount some there in case of invasion....
I would be after and AKM and an AK-103, FN FAL (carbine), AK 74, MAC 10, the grease gun (i don't remember it's designation).
The number ONE FA that I would want to own is the SA 80, the one the brit military uses. That would be a super smooth gun to have even in a semi only version.... I wonder why they don't make them?
While I was thinking about shooting the M2 (.50 cal) it occured to me why governments are pretty much the only ones that can own these... Those rounds have to be close to $1.00 per round or more... and on full auto... 400 rpm....
I would be so broke, my wife would use it on me...
I would be after and AKM and an AK-103, FN FAL (carbine), AK 74, MAC 10, the grease gun (i don't remember it's designation).
The number ONE FA that I would want to own is the SA 80, the one the brit military uses. That would be a super smooth gun to have even in a semi only version.... I wonder why they don't make them?
While I was thinking about shooting the M2 (.50 cal) it occured to me why governments are pretty much the only ones that can own these... Those rounds have to be close to $1.00 per round or more... and on full auto... 400 rpm....
I would be so broke, my wife would use it on me...SMLE
Member
Where I live they're legal just not affordable.
If I had the money, I'd have at least the following FAs
1918A1 BAR
1928A1 Thompson
1917 Browning water cooled MG
Vickers MG
Lanchester SMG(just 'cause it takes a 1907 SMLE bayonet!
)
If I had the money, I'd have at least the following FAs
1918A1 BAR
1928A1 Thompson
1917 Browning water cooled MG
Vickers MG
Lanchester SMG(just 'cause it takes a 1907 SMLE bayonet!
)
CAS700850
Member
You bet, and MP-5SD just because it is a ton of fun to shoot.
I do.
I've said it before, a reliable, ergonomic, lightweight, large capacity .22LR with a mid-range cyclic rate (800-900rpm) and limited to 2-5 round burst would be a wonderful defensive weapon for people uncomfortable with the recoil of a shotgun. You could afford to practice with it, it would be fun to shoot and dumping a few squirts of .22LR into an attacker will ruin their day in a hurry. Easy to suppress so you don't have to worry about your hearing. Limited overpenetration issues too.
For the maximum reliability, a version might actually utilize two distinct actions controlled by one fire group. If one happened to jam for whatever reason, the other would keep rocking and rolling.
For me, .22LR and maybe 9mm and .223 would be the only calibers I'd want full auto in. But I would love to have full auto in those calibers.
ACP230
Member
Why waltz when you could rock and roll?
TallPine
Member
Why not? *
One isn't required to shoot FA, but you might as well have that capability - better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.
* Yes, I know they are "legal" but with the tax and limited availability (high prices) they might as well be not legal. "Legal" in my terms would be that you can buy a full auto AK (for instance) at the same price as a SA AK with no additional hassles. Actually, it seems a FA AK would be cheaper since millions of them are/have been made for sale around the world. Not to mention suppressors, short barreled shotguns, etc ....
One isn't required to shoot FA, but you might as well have that capability - better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.
* Yes, I know they are "legal" but with the tax and limited availability (high prices) they might as well be not legal. "Legal" in my terms would be that you can buy a full auto AK (for instance) at the same price as a SA AK with no additional hassles. Actually, it seems a FA AK would be cheaper since millions of them are/have been made for sale around the world. Not to mention suppressors, short barreled shotguns, etc ....
CleverNickname
Member
grizz5675 said:
The state of Minnesota doesn't get any of the $200 transfer tax. It all goes to the feds.
- Status