American weapon's laws

PlawsWorth · 10-06-2002, 04:50 PM

Just read on a weapons dealer's website that they had started to sell a rifle that looked exactly as the M4 but in 4 parts. So by selling it in parts so the buyer has to put the rifle together himself and the gun was semi-auto it didn't violate the californian weapon law. So in the end you get a fully working M4 rifle with semi-auto function that can quite easly be made in to full auto. So all you guys from the states, I know the laws are various in diffrent states, but is it true that there are a few ways to actually get your hands on rifles?

mfpmax · 10-06-2002, 05:59 PM

Umm..

Well, considering a doctor about an hours drive away had a SNIPER rifle that only Spec Op Seals, Secret Service, and other high class military can get their hands on...then yes. Oh yeah, this doctor was sent to jail because he was plotting an attack I believe on an church.

Oh yeah, on the North Eastern side of the US, there is a militia group that only...and I mean ONLY has these same type of rifles.

Why does a non-military person require a 50 cal sniper rifle is beyond me...

PlawsWorth · 10-06-2002, 06:07 PM

Some people are just crazy or very over protective. I watched a program about diffrent militia groups in the middle and north west usa that all believed that the us goverment had an big conspiracy and stuff. pretty crazy people if you ask me. It's quite fun to see how normal it is for people to have a gun in the usa, where you even can apply for the right to wear a hidden weapon. In sweden, the only place you are allowed to have a firearm is at the shooting range/in the woods while hunting/ or in a safe locker.

DarkEdge · 10-06-2002, 06:33 PM

You should see the weapons I have and my brother. Where I live in Texas the laws are more reasonable. When my brother moved to california he had to leave several behind, not to mention in california now there is a 5 cent bullet tax on every round sold there now. I obtained his full auto sks off him.

The sks isn't suppose to be auto, and when we bought it the guy said it was semi. It got us kicked off the range the first time we shot it. ****ing 6 rounds went off and we just stood there in awww. So we let rip another 15. We went through 4-5 mags before they stopped us. Not to mention in california now there is a 5 cent bullet tax on every round sold there now.

You can buy full autos to I believe. Generally the license is available to law enforcement, and individuals who get the certifacation. Pretty much anyone can get the conversion kits, but in my opinion...they generally suck.

What troubles me though is the looneys that get ahold of these weapons. Theres a sniper currently in the states whos killed 5 people already. No real concrete leads because of the distance hes killing people from and the randomness of it all. FBI are trying to profile him now.

People owning guns doesn't bother me. Its the crazy ****ers that own them.

godsdice · 10-06-2002, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DarkEdge

You can buy full autos to I believe. Generally the license is available to law enforcement, and individuals who get the certifacation. Pretty much anyone can get the conversion kits, but in my opinion...they generally suck.

Fully automatic weapons are illegal, illegal, illegal, illegal. It is a federal law. You cannot manufacture, buy, sell, import, or use them as a civilian, period. Including conversion from semi to full.

This is what David Koresh and the Branch Dividians did in Waco, Texas if you recall. They had stockpiled hundreds of them.

I am also 95% sure than law enforcement, short of maybe federal, can posess fully-automatic weapons. Besides, SWAT teams don't rely on heavier firepower alone to do what they do.

bigben2k · 10-07-2002, 11:26 AM

I concur. Automatics are illegal, wether they're whole or in pieces, or a mod kit.

I was reading one of those pro gun rights mags at the doctor's office last week, and let me tell you: these people are heavily biased! They point out that since all guns were outlawed in the UK and Australia, the crime rate doubled. What they don't say is that the problem has always been around, and it has nothing to do with wether the guns are outlawed or not. The issue is simply in the spotlight now, that's all.

Being from Canada, where laws are far stricter, I'm all for registration of guns. I don't see anything wrong with it, as long as that's where it stops. Yes, there is a constitutional amendment that specifically states that every citizen has the right to have a gun, but I don't believe that registration is in any way an infringement on that right.

Requiring some training probably wouldn't hurt either.

Of course I might be biased, since one of my friends was killed at the Montreal University shooting, about 15 years back, so for what it's worth...

Don't let the pro-rights-to-gun people sway you: separate every issue, and judge them on their merit. All the issues brought up are indeed separate, and there is no link from one to the other.
-registration
-mandatory training
-restricted areas of use
-carrying permit
etc...

iceheart · 10-07-2002, 11:58 AM

Well actually you are allowed to carry a concealed weapon in Sweden as well if you can prove that your life is at risk if you don't

.

Malchira · 10-07-2002, 12:53 PM

DarkEdge is correct; godsdice and bigben2k are wrong. Civilians in the U.S. can indeed own fully automatic weapons. You need to qualify for and obtain a Class III license, which is controlled/granted by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (BATF) and requires the endorsement of the senior law enforcement official in your area (I think; can't check from work). Only weapons manufactured before 1985 are eligible for civilian ownership, and are subject to a federal transfer tax when purchased.

Class III license holders can also own suppressors, subject to state law. I don't recall whether those must be pre-1985 or not. They are also subject to the transfer tax.

The original poster's story strikes me as bullshit. Normally the portion of the weapon considered to actually be "the gun" is the receiver (long gun) or frame (pistol). This is why you can buy other components, like barrels, slides, etc., without any red tape. It's the main body that's regulated by law, and if sold must be shipped to an FFL (Federal Firearms License) holder (normally only possessed by part- or full-time gun dealers, due to the costs involved). If it's illegal to own a particular type of weapon in California, then it would be illegal to own parts, or at least the main functional component, as well.

Besides the fact that this statement: "can quite easly be made in to full auto" reeks of media hype. The only people who could "easily" do such a thing are skilled machinists, and they could also build the entire thing from scratch if they so chose. You certainly can't do it "easily" in your living room with a file. The firearms manufacturers aren't as stupid as you seem to think.

mfpmax · 10-07-2002, 01:05 PM

That still don't mean full autos are "legal" ...as you have to jump through more hoops to get the required paper work done, and even then, you can still be turned down.

Either way, do you need Full Auto to kill a deer?

Malchira · 10-07-2002, 01:16 PM

Of course that's what it means. It means they're legal if you're licensed to own one.

By the definition you imply, driving a car is illegal because you have to have a driver's license to do it.

And of course you don't need a fully-automatic weapon to hunt with. Most full-autos are collector's items, like stamps or old cars. Because of their rarity, they're fairly expensive.

DarkEdge · 10-07-2002, 01:23 PM

No one uses autos to go gunting. Lol To say full autos are illegal is teh wrong way to phrase it. After all, if you say that, then its illegal to own any firearm. You have to have a permit to do anything with a weapon, atleast in Texas.

I don't know to much about the diffrent classes of licenses, except for the basics, but I do know you can't go over more then 3 county lines a still carry your firearm legally. My brother was a district manager of Wal-Mart at the time and he travled from San Antonio to the valley all the time. He always had his HK45 with him. He was pulled over a couple of times and given some trouble about carrying it. Never arrested. Ticketed for speeding though. lol

As for myself, I do not have a permit. I plan to get one but I just havn't goteen around to it. Every weapon I have obtained has been through my brother.

Genrally I support people owning guns. Crime will always be around, atleast in our life time. Guns may contribute, but you can't stop crime or killings from happening and people know that. Atleast with me owning a gun, I can kill the person and not be sued. If someone attemps to rob me and I simply beat the shit out of him, that persons still around to sue. Its happend before to people and the crook has actually won. ****ed up world.

mfpmax · 10-07-2002, 01:26 PM

problem is, collectors aren't the only ones that get Full Auto weapons...

Even though there is a weapons collectors liscense I believe...legal full autos still get into the hands of non-collectors.

Which brings to the point, when there are gun collectors...and people stocking up on weapons for some precieved apocolyptic event.

The guys up north with the 50 cal Sniper Rifles have no real need to own them, but they do, and they aren't owning them for collectors vaule either. They made that clear on TV several times.

Malchira · 10-07-2002, 01:38 PM

What you're terming "sniper" rifles are used commonly in long-range precision rifle shooting. The .50BMG is popular in that competition.

I fail to see your concern with this. You'd be just as dead if you were shot with a .308 instead of a .50, and in case you hadn't noticed, there isn't a lot of extreme-range criminal sniping assassinations going on.

And before some wiseass mentions it, the current difficulties in Maryland do not involve extreme range, and do involve a .223, which is on the opposite end of the power/range spectrum from the .50.

Oh, and make sure you believe everything you watch on television, because it's never wrong or biased.

DarkEdge · 10-07-2002, 01:41 PM

No shit. Normal weapons get into the hands of 14 years olds. People can get weapons without backgrounds checks and permits. The fact that a weapon is full auto makes it no worse then a semi. They can still kill, and very few automatice weapons can be used with any accuracy over a 3-shot burst. Armor piercing rounds are more dangerous if you ask me.

The only, and I mean only way to get rid of firearms, would be to erase the technology and history behind them. Take a page from prohibition. We/They tried to do away with aclohol, and it led to people manufacturing it themselves. A weapon is more difficult, but with funding, anythings possible. You can't eliminate something of this magnitude when its a part of the worlds history.

bigben2k · 10-07-2002, 01:49 PM

I'm glad to see this thread grow!

There is a difference between auto and semi auto, and for the nenefit of those would might hesitate about jumping in here, here's a description:

A semi-automatic gun/pistol/rifle will automatically reload itself, so that one is ready to fire the next round. Each pull of the trigger lets one round go off.

A fully automatic will not only reload itself, it will keep firing for as long as yone holds the trigger.

In marksmanship/hunting, it's quite useless, specifically, an automatic is considered "unsportsmanlike", since there is little to no skill involved in using an automatic weapon, for hunting. As a result, it is logical to conclude that a fully automatic weapon has but a few purpose, and it is not unreasonable that one of those purposes involves shooting people.

I'm glad you corrected me, Malchira. I just assumed that it was the same here, as it was in Canada. Back there, fully automatic weapons are illegal (right?), regardless of what license you have.

Malchira · 10-07-2002, 02:00 PM

I'm unfortunately not familiar with Canada's firearms laws. Though I consider Canada the 51st state, we apparently haven't switched them over to the new legal system yet.

There's no question that automatic weaponry was designed to increase lethality. These are weapons of war that we're referring to. However, that is not in any way normally the case with civilian-owned automatics. Last I checked, there have been very few incidents in which people have been murdered with fully-automatic weapons, or, for that matter, their semi-automatic counterparts (the guns called "assault weapons" by a media which doesn't care enough to know better). Statistically, the vast majority of criminals prefer pistols over rifles, due to their increased concealability, lower cost, and greater availability. Contrary to Hollywood's interpretation, your common armed criminal doesn't need, want, or use an assault weapon.

g.l.amour · 10-07-2002, 02:14 PM

well, to me guns just suck.

i once read that owning a gun gives more opportunity for an accident to happen (your kid killing the neighbour, him/herself,...), than u ever getting the chance to kill a burglar.

my dad always had a gun (minority in belgium) and as a young child it worked like magnetism on me. i loved walking around with it in the house or garden feeling way too cool (without my dad knowing of course, he'd kick my arse). i even fired a couple of rounds to some imaginary targets in the garden. i think the chance of killing someone at those instances was alot higher than my dad ever killing a mug.

one day i came home late from the pub, snuk upstairs to my room. my dad must have thought he heard a burglar, because sure enough 5 secs later he stoud there waving his rifle in my face.

for the record, my parental house was once broken into. where the burglar got noticed the moment he was fleeing away. he must have gotten scared, for he fleed before steeling anything. my dad ran after the burglar, shooting away. i am happy he didn't get the burglar. wouldn't have been a problem with our police, they would even change evidence so that it wouldn't seem as if u shot the burglar in the back.

different opinions, but i am glad that in belgium you don't have to fear too much that alot of ppl on the street are armed. because accidents do happen, and crazy ppl exist in large quantities , no need to make it too easy.

mfpmax · 10-07-2002, 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Malchira
What you're terming "sniper" rifles are used commonly in long-range precision rifle shooting. The .50BMG is popular in that competition.

I fail to see your concern with this. You'd be just as dead if you were shot with a .308 instead of a .50, and in case you hadn't noticed, there isn't a lot of extreme-range criminal sniping assassinations going on.

And before some wiseass mentions it, the current difficulties in Maryland do not involve extreme range, and do involve a .223, which is on the opposite end of the power/range spectrum from the .50.

Oh, and make sure you believe everything you watch on television, because it's never wrong or biased.

The Malitia group up north doesn't use the rifle for competition...

And why would I not believe the news when they show the police walking out of a guys house with a small aresnal of weapons? I mean the cop had to two hand that son of a gun rifle(the popular 50 call in question).

And my dad was in the air force...he's heard these rifles fire out of the country, I also have somewhat of a bit of knowledge cause i've got a friend thats a gun freak...you can hear the thing go off from miles away! Thats a lot of power in the hands of someone that isn't collecting them for the heck of it nor using it for competition.

And I'm more afraid of a bullet that will go through my house and kill me instead of a round that will only go into my wall and lodge itself there.

There is a certain level of weaponary that would "seem" okay in the hands of the general public...
9mm, 38s, Berttas, Revolvers...maybe even the 45.

But not Sniper class weapons or anything that the government uses for what they call "peace enforcment".

Oh yeah, and I live in a bad part of town, where they fire guns on constant occasions, i'm not to worried about them for some reason...but I do know that these idiots in my neighborhood do not have access to 50 cals and AKs...
Shotguns and 9mms are however in their possesion. I've got the shell casing of a 38 on a shelf in my room from outside of my house.

g.l.amour · 10-07-2002, 02:34 PM

damnit mfpmax, move out of there, it can't be good for your health. let some more heroic ppl live with the gunshots.

mfpmax · 10-07-2002, 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by g.l.amour
damnit mpfmax, move out of there, it can't be good for your health. let some more heroic ppl live with the gunshots.

Send money

i've got a nice workshop here, as long as they stay across the street and in jail...i'm okay

bigben2k · 10-07-2002, 02:51 PM

You know... some assault weapons, like the AK47 have a (strangely called) range, where a bullet will go through anything within say, a mile (concrete wall included). It's way too much power for a civilian, and I don't care what your intended purpose is.

That's a good point, Malchira: assault weapons are not the first choice of armed criminals.

g.l.amour · 10-07-2002, 02:54 PM

lol mfpmax, as long as they stay across the street: u r prolly one of the lucky ones in your street that doesn't have a pedestrian crossing.

mfpmax · 10-07-2002, 03:15 PM

bigben2k, sure they aren't the first choice of armed criminals, but they aren't the only ones that commit crimes(that sounds weird).

I don't want to be sitting in church and all of the sudden fall dead while reading a bible...but I wouldn't be in church anyway , but thats beside the point

Quote:

Originally posted by g.l.amour
lol mfpmax, as long as they stay across the street: u r prolly one of the lucky ones in your street that doesn't have a pedestrian crossing.

Yes

PlawsWorth · 10-07-2002, 04:23 PM

Recieved an email from Sweden correlate to the USA's FBI and according to them you are only allowed to wear a weapon on non-shooting ranges if you are an security guard from a guard company that has a special license or a bodyguard for a vip with the license which need to be motivated. It's quite hard laws, but they keep 18years old criminal kids from the ghetto's and crazy farmers from killing people whenever they get mad or drunk.

PlawsWorth · 10-07-2002, 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by PlawsWorth
Recieved an email from Sweden correlate to the USA's FBI and according to them you are only allowed to wear a weapon on non-shooting ranges if you are an security guard from a guard company that has a special license or a bodyguard for a vip with the license which need to be motivated. It's quite hard laws, but they keep 18years old criminal kids from the ghetto's and crazy farmers from killing people whenever they get mad or drunk.

Well I just read through 10 pages of text that explains the laws about firearms (Swedish laws). Found out that a very small group of people, can at extreme danger for their life get a license to wear a firearm for protection. Found another thing that you are if your a memeber of the national guard allowed to have a full automatic weapon at home and for shooting ranges. Though you need to be an elite shooter and the top of your group. And the law about using firearm for protection does not refer to the usage of fully automatic rifles such as the swedish modified gun AK-5 (our type of M16/4).

10-06-2002, 04:50 PM	#1
PlawsWorth Cooling Savant Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Sweden Posts: 248	American weapon's laws Just read on a weapons dealer's website that they had started to sell a rifle that looked exactly as the M4 but in 4 parts. So by selling it in parts so the buyer has to put the rifle together himself and the gun was semi-auto it didn't violate the californian weapon law. So in the end you get a fully working M4 rifle with semi-auto function that can quite easly be made in to full auto. So all you guys from the states, I know the laws are various in diffrent states, but is it true that there are a few ways to actually get your hands on rifles? __________________ cocaine addict

10-06-2002, 05:59 PM	#2
mfpmax Cooling Savant Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Rockledge,FL,US Posts: 731	Umm.. Well, considering a doctor about an hours drive away had a SNIPER rifle that only Spec Op Seals, Secret Service, and other high class military can get their hands on...then yes. Oh yeah, this doctor was sent to jail because he was plotting an attack I believe on an church. Oh yeah, on the North Eastern side of the US, there is a militia group that only...and I mean ONLY has these same type of rifles. Why does a non-military person require a 50 cal sniper rifle is beyond me... __________________ My old and retired watercooling setup. Watercooled K6-2 450 at 600 Also Retired - Watercooling an XP1800@1782MHz

10-06-2002, 06:07 PM	#3
PlawsWorth Cooling Savant Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Sweden Posts: 248	Some people are just crazy or very over protective. I watched a program about diffrent militia groups in the middle and north west usa that all believed that the us goverment had an big conspiracy and stuff. pretty crazy people if you ask me. It's quite fun to see how normal it is for people to have a gun in the usa, where you even can apply for the right to wear a hidden weapon. In sweden, the only place you are allowed to have a firearm is at the shooting range/in the woods while hunting/ or in a safe locker. __________________ cocaine addict

10-07-2002, 11:26 AM	#6
bigben2k Responsible for 2% of all the posts here. Join Date: May 2002 Location: Texas, U.S.A. Posts: 8,302	I concur. Automatics are illegal, wether they're whole or in pieces, or a mod kit. I was reading one of those pro gun rights mags at the doctor's office last week, and let me tell you: these people are heavily biased! They point out that since all guns were outlawed in the UK and Australia, the crime rate doubled. What they don't say is that the problem has always been around, and it has nothing to do with wether the guns are outlawed or not. The issue is simply in the spotlight now, that's all. Being from Canada, where laws are far stricter, I'm all for registration of guns. I don't see anything wrong with it, as long as that's where it stops. Yes, there is a constitutional amendment that specifically states that every citizen has the right to have a gun, but I don't believe that registration is in any way an infringement on that right. Requiring some training probably wouldn't hurt either. Of course I might be biased, since one of my friends was killed at the Montreal University shooting, about 15 years back, so for what it's worth... Don't let the pro-rights-to-gun people sway you: separate every issue, and judge them on their merit. All the issues brought up are indeed separate, and there is no link from one to the other. -registration -mandatory training -restricted areas of use -carrying permit etc... __________________ WBTA (Water Block Testing Alliance) Nordic Hardware WC 101

10-07-2002, 11:58 AM	#7
iceheart Cooling Savant Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Yonder Posts: 318	Well actually you are allowed to carry a concealed weapon in Sweden as well if you can prove that your life is at risk if you don't . __________________ "If the majority is smarter than you, does that make everyone else a geek, or does it make you retarded?" - pHaestus

10-06-2002, 06:33 PM	#4
DarkEdge Cooling Savant Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Sugar Land, Tx Posts: 176	You should see the weapons I have and my brother. Where I live in Texas the laws are more reasonable. When my brother moved to california he had to leave several behind, not to mention in california now there is a 5 cent bullet tax on every round sold there now. I obtained his full auto sks off him. The sks isn't suppose to be auto, and when we bought it the guy said it was semi. It got us kicked off the range the first time we shot it. **ing 6 rounds went off and we just stood there in awww. So we let rip another 15. We went through 4-5 mags before they stopped us. Not to mention in california now there is a 5 cent bullet tax on every round sold there now. You can buy full autos to I believe. Generally the license is available to law enforcement, and individuals who get the certifacation. Pretty much anyone can get the conversion kits, but in my opinion...they generally suck. What troubles me though is the looneys that get ahold of these weapons. Theres a sniper currently in the states whos killed 5 people already. No real concrete leads because of the distance hes killing people from and the randomness of it all. FBI are trying to profile him now. People owning guns doesn't bother me. Its the crazy **ers that own them.

10-07-2002, 12:53 PM	#8
Malchira Cooling Neophyte Join Date: Jun 2001 Posts: 19	DarkEdge is correct; godsdice and bigben2k are wrong. Civilians in the U.S. can indeed own fully automatic weapons. You need to qualify for and obtain a Class III license, which is controlled/granted by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (BATF) and requires the endorsement of the senior law enforcement official in your area (I think; can't check from work). Only weapons manufactured before 1985 are eligible for civilian ownership, and are subject to a federal transfer tax when purchased. Class III license holders can also own suppressors, subject to state law. I don't recall whether those must be pre-1985 or not. They are also subject to the transfer tax. The original poster's story strikes me as bullshit. Normally the portion of the weapon considered to actually be "the gun" is the receiver (long gun) or frame (pistol). This is why you can buy other components, like barrels, slides, etc., without any red tape. It's the main body that's regulated by law, and if sold must be shipped to an FFL (Federal Firearms License) holder (normally only possessed by part- or full-time gun dealers, due to the costs involved). If it's illegal to own a particular type of weapon in California, then it would be illegal to own parts, or at least the main functional component, as well. Besides the fact that this statement: "can quite easly be made in to full auto" reeks of media hype. The only people who could "easily" do such a thing are skilled machinists, and they could also build the entire thing from scratch if they so chose. You certainly can't do it "easily" in your living room with a file. The firearms manufacturers aren't as stupid as you seem to think.

10-07-2002, 01:05 PM	#9
mfpmax Cooling Savant Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Rockledge,FL,US Posts: 731	That still don't mean full autos are "legal" ...as you have to jump through more hoops to get the required paper work done, and even then, you can still be turned down. Either way, do you need Full Auto to kill a deer? __________________ My old and retired watercooling setup. Watercooled K6-2 450 at 600 Also Retired - Watercooling an XP1800@1782MHz

10-07-2002, 01:16 PM	#10
Malchira Cooling Neophyte Join Date: Jun 2001 Posts: 19	Of course that's what it means. It means they're legal if you're licensed to own one. By the definition you imply, driving a car is illegal because you have to have a driver's license to do it. And of course you don't need a fully-automatic weapon to hunt with. Most full-autos are collector's items, like stamps or old cars. Because of their rarity, they're fairly expensive.

10-07-2002, 01:23 PM	#11
DarkEdge Cooling Savant Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Sugar Land, Tx Posts: 176	No one uses autos to go gunting. Lol To say full autos are illegal is teh wrong way to phrase it. After all, if you say that, then its illegal to own any firearm. You have to have a permit to do anything with a weapon, atleast in Texas. I don't know to much about the diffrent classes of licenses, except for the basics, but I do know you can't go over more then 3 county lines a still carry your firearm legally. My brother was a district manager of Wal-Mart at the time and he travled from San Antonio to the valley all the time. He always had his HK45 with him. He was pulled over a couple of times and given some trouble about carrying it. Never arrested. Ticketed for speeding though. lol As for myself, I do not have a permit. I plan to get one but I just havn't goteen around to it. Every weapon I have obtained has been through my brother. Genrally I support people owning guns. Crime will always be around, atleast in our life time. Guns may contribute, but you can't stop crime or killings from happening and people know that. Atleast with me owning a gun, I can kill the person and not be sued. If someone attemps to rob me and I simply beat the shit out of him, that persons still around to sue. Its happend before to people and the crook has actually won. ****ed up world.

10-07-2002, 01:26 PM	#12
mfpmax Cooling Savant Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Rockledge,FL,US Posts: 731	problem is, collectors aren't the only ones that get Full Auto weapons... Even though there is a weapons collectors liscense I believe...legal full autos still get into the hands of non-collectors. Which brings to the point, when there are gun collectors...and people stocking up on weapons for some precieved apocolyptic event. The guys up north with the 50 cal Sniper Rifles have no real need to own them, but they do, and they aren't owning them for collectors vaule either. They made that clear on TV several times. __________________ My old and retired watercooling setup. Watercooled K6-2 450 at 600 Also Retired - Watercooling an XP1800@1782MHz

10-07-2002, 01:38 PM	#13
Malchira Cooling Neophyte Join Date: Jun 2001 Posts: 19	What you're terming "sniper" rifles are used commonly in long-range precision rifle shooting. The .50BMG is popular in that competition. I fail to see your concern with this. You'd be just as dead if you were shot with a .308 instead of a .50, and in case you hadn't noticed, there isn't a lot of extreme-range criminal sniping assassinations going on. And before some wiseass mentions it, the current difficulties in Maryland do not involve extreme range, and do involve a .223, which is on the opposite end of the power/range spectrum from the .50. Oh, and make sure you believe everything you watch on television, because it's never wrong or biased.

10-07-2002, 01:41 PM	#14
DarkEdge Cooling Savant Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Sugar Land, Tx Posts: 176	No shit. Normal weapons get into the hands of 14 years olds. People can get weapons without backgrounds checks and permits. The fact that a weapon is full auto makes it no worse then a semi. They can still kill, and very few automatice weapons can be used with any accuracy over a 3-shot burst. Armor piercing rounds are more dangerous if you ask me. The only, and I mean only way to get rid of firearms, would be to erase the technology and history behind them. Take a page from prohibition. We/They tried to do away with aclohol, and it led to people manufacturing it themselves. A weapon is more difficult, but with funding, anythings possible. You can't eliminate something of this magnitude when its a part of the worlds history.

10-07-2002, 01:49 PM	#15
bigben2k Responsible for 2% of all the posts here. Join Date: May 2002 Location: Texas, U.S.A. Posts: 8,302	I'm glad to see this thread grow! There is a difference between auto and semi auto, and for the nenefit of those would might hesitate about jumping in here, here's a description: A semi-automatic gun/pistol/rifle will automatically reload itself, so that one is ready to fire the next round. Each pull of the trigger lets one round go off. A fully automatic will not only reload itself, it will keep firing for as long as yone holds the trigger. In marksmanship/hunting, it's quite useless, specifically, an automatic is considered "unsportsmanlike", since there is little to no skill involved in using an automatic weapon, for hunting. As a result, it is logical to conclude that a fully automatic weapon has but a few purpose, and it is not unreasonable that one of those purposes involves shooting people. I'm glad you corrected me, Malchira. I just assumed that it was the same here, as it was in Canada. Back there, fully automatic weapons are illegal (right?), regardless of what license you have. __________________ WBTA (Water Block Testing Alliance) Nordic Hardware WC 101

10-07-2002, 02:00 PM	#16
Malchira Cooling Neophyte Join Date: Jun 2001 Posts: 19	I'm unfortunately not familiar with Canada's firearms laws. Though I consider Canada the 51st state, we apparently haven't switched them over to the new legal system yet. There's no question that automatic weaponry was designed to increase lethality. These are weapons of war that we're referring to. However, that is not in any way normally the case with civilian-owned automatics. Last I checked, there have been very few incidents in which people have been murdered with fully-automatic weapons, or, for that matter, their semi-automatic counterparts (the guns called "assault weapons" by a media which doesn't care enough to know better). Statistically, the vast majority of criminals prefer pistols over rifles, due to their increased concealability, lower cost, and greater availability. Contrary to Hollywood's interpretation, your common armed criminal doesn't need, want, or use an assault weapon.

10-07-2002, 02:14 PM	#17
g.l.amour Cooling Savant Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: on da case Posts: 933	well, to me guns just suck. i once read that owning a gun gives more opportunity for an accident to happen (your kid killing the neighbour, him/herself,...), than u ever getting the chance to kill a burglar. my dad always had a gun (minority in belgium) and as a young child it worked like magnetism on me. i loved walking around with it in the house or garden feeling way too cool (without my dad knowing of course, he'd kick my arse). i even fired a couple of rounds to some imaginary targets in the garden. i think the chance of killing someone at those instances was alot higher than my dad ever killing a mug. one day i came home late from the pub, snuk upstairs to my room. my dad must have thought he heard a burglar, because sure enough 5 secs later he stoud there waving his rifle in my face. for the record, my parental house was once broken into. where the burglar got noticed the moment he was fleeing away. he must have gotten scared, for he fleed before steeling anything. my dad ran after the burglar, shooting away. i am happy he didn't get the burglar. wouldn't have been a problem with our police, they would even change evidence so that it wouldn't seem as if u shot the burglar in the back. different opinions, but i am glad that in belgium you don't have to fear too much that alot of ppl on the street are armed. because accidents do happen, and crazy ppl exist in large quantities , no need to make it too easy.

10-07-2002, 02:34 PM	#19
g.l.amour Cooling Savant Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: on da case Posts: 933	damnit mfpmax, move out of there, it can't be good for your health. let some more heroic ppl live with the gunshots. Last edited by g.l.amour; 10-07-2002 at 02:42 PM.

10-07-2002, 02:51 PM	#21
bigben2k Responsible for 2% of all the posts here. Join Date: May 2002 Location: Texas, U.S.A. Posts: 8,302	You know... some assault weapons, like the AK47 have a (strangely called) range, where a bullet will go through anything within say, a mile (concrete wall included). It's way too much power for a civilian, and I don't care what your intended purpose is. That's a good point, Malchira: assault weapons are not the first choice of armed criminals. __________________ WBTA (Water Block Testing Alliance) Nordic Hardware WC 101

10-07-2002, 02:54 PM	#22
g.l.amour Cooling Savant Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: on da case Posts: 933	lol mfpmax, as long as they stay across the street: u r prolly one of the lucky ones in your street that doesn't have a pedestrian crossing.

10-07-2002, 04:23 PM	#24
PlawsWorth Cooling Savant Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Sweden Posts: 248	Recieved an email from Sweden correlate to the USA's FBI and according to them you are only allowed to wear a weapon on non-shooting ranges if you are an security guard from a guard company that has a special license or a bodyguard for a vip with the license which need to be motivated. It's quite hard laws, but they keep 18years old criminal kids from the ghetto's and crazy farmers from killing people whenever they get mad or drunk. __________________ cocaine addict

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)