S
SuperLuigi
Guest
The media couldn’t tell the trigger from the barrel.
- Status
V
Vonsalza
Guest
Of course there’s a difference.
But it’s a minor one. A marksman selecting a target fires in semi-auto. Accurate fire in full auto isn’t really possible unless firing a mounted weapon. And then the accuracy is still best given as a bracket rather than a point.
Just try firing these things in full auto. Knob Creek near Ft. Knox has a machine gun shoot twice a year where you can do just this for some heavy cash. A few rounds of burst at a time is the most the supervisor will let you do as they’re fairly difficult to control.
And again, keep in mind that these are usually ran with 20-30 rd mags. At full auto, you’re reloading just a few seconds after pressing the trigger.
B
Brendan
Guest
I too have been shooting guns since that age, and I too was trained by the US Army, I too earned my marksmanship badges on the M-16 ( and M-60, M2 and even the M10, as I was in ARMOR)
I too took that same oath.
Currently, I am a Range Safety Officer, Rifle, Pistol and Shotgun Instructor.
But I have no problem with having semi-automatic firearms in the hands of the American Public. That was one of the rights that I promised to defend when I took that Oath.
And because of that training, I know that an AR-15 and it’s clones are not a weapons of war, the M-16 and M-4 are. As you well know, no Infantryman would carry an AR into battle, they would carry an M4 instead. The AR and M4 are markedly different firearms with very important differences in capabilities.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
I don’t understand the cited article. Virtually every dangerous instrument was or is a “weapon of war”, from a bow and arrow to a pointed stick to Winchester 76 to an atomic bomb. Soldiers still use knives and pointed steel instruments (bayonets) which pretty much converts the rifle to a spear.
The distinction makes no sense.
The distinction makes no sense.
C
commenter
Guest
Aside from the politics and the issue, Thank You to the veterans on this thread for your service.Spyridon:
I too have been shooting guns since that age, and I too was trained by the US Army, I too earned my marksmanship badges on the M-16 ( and M-60, M2 and even the M10, as I was in ARMOR)
I too took that same oath.
Currently, I am a Range Safety Officer, Rifle, Pistol and Shotgun Instructor.
But I have no problem with having semi-automatic firearms in the hands of the American Public. That was one of the rights that I promised to defend when I took that Oath.
And because of that training, I know that an AR-15 and it’s clones are not a weapons of war, the M-16 and M-4 are. As you well know, no Infantryman would carry an AR into battle, they would carry an M4 instead. The AR and M4 are markedly different firearms with very important differences in capabilities.
E
edwest211
Guest
OK. So I can’t fire a bullet with it but it’s a firearm. That makes no sense. Like owning an engine block means that legally, I have a car.
E
exnihilo
Guest
That’s our government and gun laws. They make no sense.
V
Vonsalza
Guest
It was a necessary legal thing to define.
You’d start with a complete rifle and remove one screw. Is it still a firearm? Probably.
Or remove the front and rear sight posts. Is it still a firearm? Probably.
Or remove the barrel or the stock. Still a firearm? Probably.
What’s the one part of a rifle you can remove and it absolutely cannot function? The receiver.
Blame the lawyers, not the “gubmint”.
V
Vonsalza
Guest
I’ll bite.
My Colt LE6920 is 100% milspec except for the lower receiver (no switch). Heck, a lot of the older ones are also stamped “M4 Carbine” due to the identical nature of the rifles (call my bluff on this, look a few up
).So how are they “markedly different” compared to what would be handed to a generic 11B or 11X infantryman?
I wasn’t a range master, but I’ve been around 'em my entire life too. Feel free to use any technical jargon you want; I’ll follow.
Last edited:
E
exnihilo
Guest
The tigger control group is different.
Is the M4 or AR-15 markedly different from this gun? This is chambered in .223 Remington.
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Is the M4 or AR-15 markedly different from this gun? This is chambered in .223 Remington.
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
V
Vonsalza
Guest
Nice heavy-barrel bolt-gun you have there.
Be mighty hard to shoot 500 people at a Vegas concert with that. I say let bolt-guns be about as unregulated as you want - particularly if they’ve got an attached 5rd magwell.
E
exnihilo
Guest
You’d agree it is substantially different because of the loading mechanism and speed with which you can fire another shot, just like the M4 is very different from the AR-15.
Speaking of barrels, it is mighty hard to shoot 500 people with an AR-15 or M4. If you fire it constantly for very long it will catastrophically fail. You need several AR-15s or M4s to shoot 500 people.
Speaking of barrels, it is mighty hard to shoot 500 people with an AR-15 or M4. If you fire it constantly for very long it will catastrophically fail. You need several AR-15s or M4s to shoot 500 people.
V
Vonsalza
Guest
But the purpose becomes different. An automatic weapon is not a markman’s weapon, its a cover weapon. The goal isn’t necessarily to actually hit with cover fire, its just to get their heads down so you can maneuver. And it’s a job better done with a crew-serve weapon that’s belt-fed so it can engage in automatic fire for more than 3 seconds.
Like I said earlier, if you’re specifically trying to punch paper or skulls, the switch is on semi auto. Maybe burst if it has it.
I seem to recall the marine corps putting a momentary kibosh on full autos because they were such an ammo waste after Vietnam.
I actually know this one off the top of my head.
About 400 is the field-tested number for milspec M4 barrels for total failure, at max cycle rate. So pretty close.
But I wouldn’t want to be behind one after 200. The handguard would be smoking.
B
Brendan
Guest
You should know as well as I, the 11X’s can leverage selective fire, your Colt cannot. That would be a marked difference, would you not agree? The ability to select full auto is the hallmark of an actual modern infantry weapon (a weapon of war)Brendan:
I’ll bite.
My Colt LE6920 is 100% milspec except for the lower receiver (no switch). Heck, a lot of the older ones are also stamped “M4 Carbine” due to the identical nature of the rifles (call my bluff on this, look a few up
So how are they “markedly different” compared to what would be handed to a generic 11B or 11X infantryman?
I wasn’t a range master, but I’ve been around 'em my entire life too. Feel free to use any technical jargon you want; I’ll follow.
What MOS’s are issued your model of Colt? Or any AR for that matter?
And if not, why not?
And I did notice that you hit the nail on the head, the lower receiver, the actual ‘gun’ is not milspec, it is civilian. Great…, it has the same barrel, upper and stock, and you can mount many of the same accessories, but the FIREARM is not milspec.
And as far as stampings, those are meaningless. It could be stamped 'United Federation of Planets", but it would not make it a phaser…
Last edited:
S
Spyridon
Guest
Most of the time when the Military uses the M16 or M4 style rifles, they keep them on semi auto. You can be a much more effective and methodological marksman, especially with a good scope, if you leave your M4 on semi auto.
Plus the Military is cheap - Military serviceman are usually instructed to conserve ammo and use semi auto as much as possible for fiscal reasons.
They only flick over to auto or burst when trying to lay down suppressive fire or just shoot lead downrange.
Plus the Military is cheap - Military serviceman are usually instructed to conserve ammo and use semi auto as much as possible for fiscal reasons.
They only flick over to auto or burst when trying to lay down suppressive fire or just shoot lead downrange.
Last edited:
S
Spyridon
Guest
No its really not my friend.
I could kill a restaurant full of 50 unarmed people with an AR-15 just as easily as I could with an M-16 on auto, given the weapons are set up the same, and using the same round type and magazine size. In fact, even if I was using the M-16 to commit my massacre, I’d leave it on semi auto or maybe burst - I wouldn’t waste ammo or degrade accuracy using automatic, at least not in a close quarters assault against unarmed targets.
I could kill a restaurant full of 50 unarmed people with an AR-15 just as easily as I could with an M-16 on auto, given the weapons are set up the same, and using the same round type and magazine size. In fact, even if I was using the M-16 to commit my massacre, I’d leave it on semi auto or maybe burst - I wouldn’t waste ammo or degrade accuracy using automatic, at least not in a close quarters assault against unarmed targets.
Last edited:
E
edwest211
Guest
As in the case of Las Vegas, you have to fire a lot more rounds than 600 to hit 500+ people, even in a ‘target-rich’ environment. The max. effective range of the weapon allegedly used bothers me. I think it was something else or a set of of something else.
Last edited:
M
Maximilian75
Guest
thank you for enlightening me, then.
S
Spyridon
Guest
If you’re not being sarcastic, your welcome.
Its good to be open to correction and changing or updating your views upon incorporating new knowledge. It is the mark of a wise mind. It is a sign of ignorance when someone is unwilling to change their view even if proven the view is defective, wrong, or has been superseded.
Its good to be open to correction and changing or updating your views upon incorporating new knowledge. It is the mark of a wise mind. It is a sign of ignorance when someone is unwilling to change their view even if proven the view is defective, wrong, or has been superseded.
M
Maximilian75
Guest
I am not being sarcastic
although shooting full auto is on my bucket list haha
although shooting full auto is on my bucket list haha
- Status