National Gun Forum banner
21 - 40 of 90 Posts

· Premium Member
Joined
·
14,424 Posts
BP757 said:
I agree with you 100%, unless Military or Police issued. A Full Auto Rifle, Machine Pistol or even a Silencer really has only 1 purpose. And it's not to Carry Concealed! Sure, they might be fun to play with for a Day if you were never in the Service, where you were trained with them and now don't care. But to go out and buy an Assault Weapon, I see no need for Joe Average that gets a Pistol for Protection to go and Buy an AK47! You cannot Hunt with it, You cannot even take it to a Range! In your Home you are better off with a Pistol that is easier to move quickly with. Even when in the Service they kept the Auto-Fireing down, as it gets expensive! So what is left?
To Kill a Person, Period! There is no other practical use, Unless I forgot something? Silencers are even more Dangerous! The only answers I ever got at "Another Non-Competitive Site" was 1- to get a Silencer so you need not wear a Headset!! 2- So you don't bother the Neighbors!! 1st- I wear a simple pair of Shooting Glasses, and 2nd- If bothering the Neighbors, Why the Hell are you Shooting anything so near?? **Really Weak Answers, and Sorry, I just don't buy it!!
Spoken just as a representative from any gun-grabbing organization would. I don't really care whether the so-called "assault weapon" (which, I hope you know, is not really an "assault weapon" by definition"), I know that I have the right to own it. Perhaps if restrictions were put on the other rights granted by the Constitution were regulated and controlled it would be a liitle more clear.

Let's start with the First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Well, I think that's ridiculous! I mean, REALLY -- do you think that oh, let's say Scientology is a "real" religion? And SPEECH? You don't really want to hear Lou Dobbs every night, do you? How about that horrible Rush Limbaugh? Assembly? OK, I think that anytime 10 or more people gather, it can mean nothing but trouble. OR WORSE!

So let's talk about how the Second Amendment should be restricted in scope. You don't like AK-47 (which, I'm sure you know, are not REALLY AK-47s, right?), well, I don't like _______ (fill in the blank).

We can debate the practicality or necessity of full autos or silencers or anything else you want, but the Second Amendment is NOT about DUCK HUNTING, my friend. Never Was. Never Will Be. Thomas Jefferson said, "The strongest reason fo rpeople to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #22 ·
whompuss said:
I have shot a full automatic rifle and think it's a waste of good ammo. After the first few rounds, unless you're shooting a mounted weapon, you just spray lead in the general direction of the target.
I don't have a problem with someone owning one, if that turns them on. They aren't inherently dangerous. The danger of any gun is zero, it's the person on the operating end that can be dangerous.

Have to admit though that I run the Ponderosa Gun site every few days to see and hear the sound of that 50 BMG mounted on the flat bed truck. That rocks! :D

I kinda have to agree with you!
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
14,424 Posts
FWIW, I agree about F/A being a great way to waste perfectly good ammo. I'm not even sure about wide-spread ownership of F/A or other NFA items. My point in my last post is that the term "assault weapon" is bandied about as if everyone actually knew what it meant. The MSM did this to us back before the 1994 "Anti-Crime Act" and the "Brady Act" came about. Once again, they used a term to mean what THEY wanted it to mean, because it just sounded evil. Just like the "Cop-Killer Bullets" that some of you will remember from the 80s. It was an invention of the media -- so much so that NBC was caught faking data from rigged "tests" on said projectiles. Does anyone remember the "plastic gun" scare that MSM started in the 80s, concerning Glock pistols and the "fact" that they could make it past airport security?

As gunowners and advocates of the Second Amendment, it's incumbent on us to know the correct terminology and to call others on it when they misuse terms that the MSM and other Antis want us to misuse.
 

· Pro Gun Advocate
Joined
·
10,940 Posts
Assault Weapon:


Defensive Weapon:



Depends on what you do with it.
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #25 ·
America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards.
Good to see another Claire Wolfe fan on this forum.

Personally I can agree that "civilians" have no practical use for a full auto weapon but America is, and should be a nation of riflemen (and women). The Swiss are allowed and even required to own a fully operating class 3 assult rifle in their homes. Do they have a practical use for it? Yes, Switzerland has a mandatory draft. But at the same time there has never been an invasion of Switzerland or a government sponsered tyranny.

Class 3s are unethical to hunt with, impractical to target shoot with, and were built with one purpose in mind: to kill large numbers of human beings and provide covering fire, but they make a damn good tool for freedom fighters to throw off the yolk of oppression with.

I can see them being regulated like they are but I disagree with not allowing any more to be imported. I think that they should at least be in a more reasonable price range.
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #26 ·
"Well, I think that's ridiculous! I mean, REALLY -- do you think that oh, let's say Scientology is a "real" religion? And SPEECH? You don't really want to hear Lou Dobbs every night, do you? How about that horrible Rush Limbaugh? Assembly? OK, I think that anytime 10 or more people gather, it can mean nothing but trouble. OR WORSE!"

Well Gunrunr, when you put things that way I must agree!
But I shouldn't have picked out any particular Weapon when I wrote. My main objection is not to any Gun, but any F/A Gun. I just feel if they were never available or convertable to the General Public, then many innocent people may not have been hurt. I just see no useful reason to own a F/A Weapon, unless you intend on doing something out of the norm with it.
The average guy, even if he had a place to shoot it, would find it hard keeping it in Ammo! Again as stated in my last Post, if you have never used an F/A Weapon, than sure, we would all love to try one for a while. But I feel after about 1 Day of that, you would then start considering the cost factor. Then what use do you have for it, that a Handgun would not be just as useful for, plus much easier? I just feel any gun made for Mass Killing alone, should not be permitted. But that is only my opinion, and I am not trying to force it upon others, nor fight against F/A even if I was wanted to. I would never fight to lose any Right. I am only saying how I feel, having had a good (Totally innocent) friend killed in a Driveby using F/A AK's while waiting for a Bus!
I once asked 1 guy for a good reason to own a Silencer, other than for Killing. Well, He had 2 very weak replies. #1 - So he would not need ear protection, (*Which is actually better than the next!!) **Reason #2 really got me! He said, " So he would not bother the Neighbors" **Bother the Neighbors?? *WHAT?? If that close to bother people, why are you shooting any Gun for any reason other than Defense? Now that is only common sense, but I guess he had to say something. Personally if that was all I could think of, I would either agree, or not reply at all! LOL
But, that was his opinion, just as I have my own!
What I was trying to bring across, is nobody should be made to feel personally stupid for the way they may feel about any subject in a Forum. We all have differring and varying levels of opinions. Those are all we should state, leaving out the personal wise remarks they include at that other Gun Site.
Thanks!
 

· Drunk Supernova
Joined
·
6,002 Posts
BP757 said:
I agree with you 100%, unless Military or Police issued. A Full Auto Rifle, Machine Pistol or even a Silencer really has only 1 purpose. And it's not to Carry Concealed! Sure, they might be fun to play with for a Day if you were never in the Service, where you were trained with them and now don't care. But to go out and buy an Assault Weapon, I see no need for Joe Average that gets a Pistol for Protection to go and Buy an AK47! You cannot Hunt with it, You cannot even take it to a Range! In your Home you are better off with a Pistol that is easier to move quickly with. Even when in the Service they kept the Auto-Fireing down, as it gets expensive! So what is left?
To Kill a Person, Period! There is no other practical use, Unless I forgot something? Silencers are even more Dangerous! The only answers I ever got at "Another Non-Competitive Site" was 1- to get a Silencer so you need not wear a Headset!! 2- So you don't bother the Neighbors!! 1st- I wear a simple pair of Shooting Glasses, and 2nd- If bothering the Neighbors, Why the Hell are you Shooting anything so near?? **Really Weak Answers, and Sorry, I just don't buy it!!
I 100% disagree with your statement. And this is the exact argument that the gun grabbers use.

1: My firearms are not used to kill people. They are used to defend my family, myself, my property, and my rights. The purpose of the weapons that I use in the Corps is not to kill people, the purpose is to defend my Marines, myself, and my country. That is their primary use. May this result in some idiots death? Yes. Dying is a choice he makes.
2: Full can be easily controlled with proper training, and very useful in the unlikely event that they are needed. You do burn more ammo, and I have yet to fire a standard issue rifle on full or burst while deployed (other than on the range while training people). But there are times when it is needed, and could be used in some civilian applications for defense.

3: Suppressors can (CAN) reduce recoil, reduce muzzle flash, and make it so you do not blow out your ears while firing in your enclosed areas. As such are perfect for home defense weapons. Easier follow on shots because reduced recoil and reduced muzzle flash, and you can hear what is going on around you in the unlikely event there are more than one bad guy in the home. Unless you are running a round that is subsonic then it is still pretty loud. We are talking about between 20 and 30 Db reduction depending on the type of suppressor (both the MFG and wet or dry) and the type and caliber of round fired.

4: Both Suppressors and FA weapons are only tools, therefore they are not dangerous. The only thing that could be dangerous is the intent of the user.

5: There is no such thing as an “Assault weapon” This is a buzz word that was made up. Please stop using it.

Now please, tell me why you think they are dangerous. Or did you run off?
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
14,424 Posts
BP757 said:
What I was trying to bring across, is nobody should be made to feel personally stupid for the way they may feel about any subject in a Forum. We all have differring and varying levels of opinions. Those are all we should state, leaving out the personal wise remarks they include at that other Gun Site.
Thanks!
My intention was not to make anyone feel stupid but rather to explain how words mean things. We are in a pitched battle to retain the rights that we have fought for and earned over many years. Rights which, once lost, are seldom regained. This is not personal. This is survival. If you think that is an exaggeration, think again. Then look at the agenda of those who would curtail and eventually eliminate your rights. Any rights. The examples I used were intentional and real. We have a movement in this country to illegalize politically incorrect thought. It takes the form of legislation against "Hate Speech" and for the "Fairness Doctrine". If you think those efforts are anything less than an attempt to obfuscate the First Amendment, you are naive. And this is meant personally. Not to make anyone feel bad, but to make everyone think.

If you think that the successful effort to indoctrinate the populace into thinking that any black gun is an "Assault Weapon" is accidental and doesn't threaten our overall Second Amendment rights, you are naive. And uninformed. And this is meant personally.

If you think that every right we have is absolute and does not need to be defended domestically as well as internationally, you have learned nothing from history. ...and yes, that's personal, too.

If you think that a smooth-talking, charismatic “leader” cannot change an educated, law-abiding, hard-working country into a pariah-state that imprisons and murders its own citizens after making a certain class of its countrymen into a boogeyman, you have never heard of Adolph Hitler, Benito Mussolini, Josef Stalin, Pol Pot, or Mao Zedong. These are not my opinions. And this is not just about full-auto firearms.
 

· Drunk Supernova
Joined
·
6,002 Posts
BP757 said:
"Well, I think that's ridiculous! I mean, REALLY -- do you think that oh, let's say Scientology is a "real" religion? And SPEECH? You don't really want to hear Lou Dobbs every night, do you? How about that horrible Rush Limbaugh? Assembly? OK, I think that anytime 10 or more people gather, it can mean nothing but trouble. OR WORSE!"
The thing that goes along with free speech is free will. You have free will to turn the channel. You have the right to pursue happiness. This does not mean you have the right to happiness.


But I shouldn't have picked out any particular Weapon when I wrote. My main objection is not to any Gun, but any F/A Gun. I just feel if they were never available or convertable to the General Public, then many innocent people may not have been hurt. I just see no useful reason to own a F/A Weapon, unless you intend on doing something out of the norm with it.
It is not the general public that is hurting these people. If you do not see a useful reason to own one, it is only because you are uninformed as to its capabilities and limitations.

The average guy, even if he had a place to shoot it, would find it hard keeping it in Ammo! Again as stated in my last Post, if you have never used an F/A Weapon, than sure, we would all love to try one for a while. But I feel after about 1 Day of that, you would then start considering the cost factor.
Then he would have it if needed. He can always fire it on single, and flip the selector to full now and again to train with it.

Then what use do you have for it, that a Handgun would not be just as useful for, plus much easier?
How is it easier?

I just feel any gun made for Mass Killing alone, should not be permitted. But that is only my opinion,
And it is that line of thinking that has brought us to the current view of gun control.

and I am not trying to force it upon others, nor fight against F/A even if I was wanted to. I would never fight to lose any Right.
But simply by saying it, you are giving ammo to the anti gun loby.

I am only saying how I feel, having had a good (Totally innocent) friend killed in a Driveby using F/A AK's while waiting for a Bus!
I am very sorry for your loss. This wouldn't have been an illegally purchased AK would it?

What I was trying to bring across, is nobody should be made to feel personally stupid for the way they may feel about any subject in a Forum. We all have differring and varying levels of opinions. Those are all we should state, leaving out the personal wise remarks they include at that other Gun Site.
People would not be made to felt stupid if they were not ignorant to the facts of the issue.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
14,424 Posts
TALK ABOUT GOOD TIMING...

With the continuation of our discussion and the fact that our daughter just happened by to pick up our grandson and we got to talking about WHY we continue to beat the drum for Freedom, I thought it was extremely good timing that I found the following message from Gun Owners of America in my email, after she left.

After all the times they've been caught violating people's civil rights, after all of the ridicule they've taken (including much from other LEAs) for their methods and practices, to come up with such a hare-brained sales campaign as this:

Rep. Bill Sali To Government Agency:
"Always Think Freedom"

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://www.gunowners.org


Friday, June 6, 2008


Representative Bill Sali is introducing a bill to send a message to
the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives
(BATFE) that freedom still means something in this country.

As part of its Asset Forfeiture training program for agents, the
BATFE ordered 2,000 Leatherman tools inscribed with the words
"Always Think Forfeiture." The program urges agents to focus
on seizing private property.

Rep Sali believes the agency should be thinking 'Freedom,' not
'Forfeiture.' The Idaho Republican complained about the program
and recieved a letter from Acting ATF Director Michael Sullivan,
who apologized for the "confusion" over the issue.

While Rep. Sali appreciated the apology, he said that, "My
constituents deserve to know the truth about this marketing program,
which has been interpreted by many Idahoans as anti-gun and
anti-private property."

The agency halted distribution of the tools in the face of public
outcry, but "[t]he fact remains that the ATF thought it was OK to
think 'Always Think Forfeiture' instead of focusing on
protecting our constitutional rights," Sali said.

In a letter to his fellow Congressmen, Sali noted that "the inscription
raises serious concerns to law-abiding citizens as to the intent of an
ATF agent who is performing investigations, particularly with
respect to law-abiding gun owners."

Rep. Sali plans to introduce the 'Always Think Freedom' bill
sometime next week. The bill will prohibit the agency from
making purchases of tool kits "on which any reminder of
forfeiture appears."

Action: Please urge your Representative to become an original
cosponsor of the "Always Think Freedom Act."

You can visit the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at
http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your Rep. the
pre-written e-mail message below.


----- Pre-written letter -----

Dear Representative:

I urge you to become an original co-sponsor of Rep. Bill Sali's
"Always Think Freedom" bill, which will be introduced shortly.

As part of its Asset Forfeiture training program for agents, the
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives
ordered 2,000 Leatherman tools inscribed with the words
"Always Think Forfeiture." The program urges agents to focus
on seizing private property.

The agency, which has been the frequent subject of
congressional inquiry into its heavy-handed law enforcement
tactics, should focus on protecting our Constitutional rights.

Rep. Sali's bill will simply prohibit the agency from making
purchases of tool kits "on which any reminder of forfeiture
appears."

Please support this bill by signing on as an original
cosponsor.

Sincerely,
 

· Drunk Supernova
Joined
·
6,002 Posts
Wow, just wow.

Drafting a letter to my people on the subject.

Thank god for the all hands option on the global distro list for outlook. Will head in to work tomorrow to send it.

Will get an arse chewing fer sending it out. But what are they going to do, fire me?
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #33 ·
BP757 said:
whompuss said:
But to go out and buy an Assault Weapon, I see no need for Joe Average that gets a Pistol for Protection to go and Buy an AK47!
What in the world?!?!?! You sound like a gun-grabber. I am 15 years old and I know the definition of an "assault weapon". An Ak-47 that an Average Joe can buy is NOT an "assault weapon" it is a gun that is fun to shoot and is fairly accurate and isn't too bad with recoil. If AKs are so bad maybe you need to run for the House this Nov.!!! :D :D :D
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
14,424 Posts
tiger2561 said:
What in the world?!?!?! You sound like a gun-grabber. I am 15 years old and I know the definition of an "assault weapon". An Ak-47 that an Average Joe can buy is NOT an "assault weapon" it is a gun that is fun to shoot and is fairly accurate and isn't too bad with recoil. If AKs are so bad maybe you need to run for the House this Nov.!!! :D :D :D
Out of the mouths of babes...
A fifteen-year-old 'gets it' and millions of antis don't. Your parents raised you well, Mr. Tiger. Again, Welcome to the Forum.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
568 Posts
I personally dont think its worth owning a full auto, but i also dont think they should be banned. If your a crimminal, your still going to get it and use it. Just another law to break eh? If you plan on using it criminally, well whats a ban going to do? It may make it harder, but come on...

I dont even think there is a use of full auto in police forces...Your not going to need them, and even then, the police wont be trained well enough to use it properly. Police should only have semiaut AR15's. MP5's are pushing it. Sure swat...but still...

Military has little use for full auto outside of CQB Sub's, and Suppressive fire from SAW's or M2 or M240 mounted's. Sure burst or full auto would be nice in a retreat, but its to easy to burn ammo that way.

As i said, unless there is a need, its pointless, but i still wouldnt pass up time on the trigger if you know what i mean. For me, theres no use, so thats that.



And sound suppressors...personally...they do only have one use, and its usually to make the shooter harder to find, thus good for a criminal. BUT. They reduce noise and muzel flash, and velocity. So...honestly, for ranges...they could be very good. Then again, like the DC "sniper" who was that kid with an AR with a scope and a silencer, they can be used for the wrong reasons (like every other item in the world. EX: cars, knifes, fists, words ect...)
 

· Drunk Supernova
Joined
·
6,002 Posts
Only intergral suppressors reduce velocity. Normal ones do not. If anything they slightly increase it
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #38 ·
I need Full Auto to protect

Originally Posted by @Jon-Anvil_Arms (1’st pg, para 3)
That said, the civilian "need" for F/A is pretty much non-existent. You would have quite a hard time convincing me, (much less the liberal media and most "sheepeople") of the fact that you "need" a F/A for personal protection or much of anything else for that matter. Even most LEOs have no "need" for F/A. S/A patrol carbine, yes, without question, but not F/A.

Need for F/A is when U faces much worthy opponents in a dense jungle.
Theoretical example. In a TommyLeeJones movie: there’s this specialForce_Guy, using only knife kill 2Civilian, arm with hunting rifle at (guest where) a jungle.

I think its well known at Vietnam War (it’s a jungle) M16 rifle is famous because it can be controlled in a snapshot F/A (when enemy suddenly appears from nearby bush) better then other rifle.

Remember: U’r life is more valuable then (let’s say) 6 (30 rounds) magazine.

Originally Posted by @BP757 (3rd pg para 2)
But I shouldn't have picked out any particular Weapon when I wrote. My main objection is not to any Gun, but any F/A Gun. I just feel if they were never available or convertable to the General Public, then many innocent people may not have been hurt.

Man can kill innocent people using whatever he got.
It’s not the F/A, it’s the ammo. If U uses soft metal ammo (lead), limited penetration capability is achieved.

Originally Posted by @BP757 (3rd pg para 2)
I once asked 1 guy for a good reason to own a Silencer, other than for Killing. Well, He had 2 very weak replies. #1 - So he would not need ear protection, (*Which is actually better than the next!!) **Reason #2 really got me! He said, " So he would not bother the Neighbors" **Bother the Neighbors??

My opinion:
#1 No need ear protection
#2 not bothers Neighbors
#3 kills a person quietly
#4 originally Posted by C-D-P (3rd pg para 3)
Suppressors can (CAN) reduce recoil, reduce muzzle flash, and make it so you do not blow out your ears while firing in your enclosed areas. As such are perfect for home defense weapons. Easier follow on shots because reduced recoil and reduced muzzle flash, and you can hear what is going on around you in the unlikely event there are more than one bad guy in the home. Unless you are running a round that is subsonic then it is still pretty loud. We are talking about between 20 and 30 Db reduction depending on the type of suppressor (both the MFG and wet or dry) and the type and caliber of round fired.
U might disable 1 guy with loud weapon, but the others might KILL U & U’r family. (& U’r neighbors)

A quiet weapon has a limited penetration capability because the projectile speed is subsonic. (This is a kinetic weapon, less FeetPerSecond meaning less lethal. A supersonic projectile makes sound while traveling)
Therefore my neighbor can sleep at night safely in their own house.

With new generation of SubMachineGun & rifle that use a ‘bullpup’ configuration it’s more easily to control in F/A. Ex: Austria’s Steyr Aug.
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #39 ·
I need Full Auto to protect

Silencer is also used for sniper rifle. The sniper rifle is still making a noise; because the silencer is purposely built to silence the sound without subtract the projectile velocity.
In some sniper rifle (AK) the silencer is built in. (its design to always stay on the rifle)

My opinion: Every submachinegun & rifle should use this 'middle' type silencer.
Ex: smg H&K MP5 SD5
 

· Drunk Supernova
Joined
·
6,002 Posts
WTF over?
 
21 - 40 of 90 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top