Other Automatic *Rifle at Wallmart? WTH

But it is not so hard to get fertilizer and diesel fuel which are the majority of the car bombs that have been made in the U.S.

a 777 Howitzer is a piece of Artillery and requires a Class III weapons permit to own it can not be used for any other purpose than killing people. Where guns no matter the capacity single shot or semi automatic can be used for hunting or competitive shooting (which that is what the majority of people use them for), I would love to have one to keep up on my marksman ship skills as the Army does not provide enough time on the range to keep my skills or anyones proficient.

Point 2 is you can get off 3 well aimed shots with a bolt action Enfield rifle in less than 8 seconds why do you think they were in service so long in the British Army? Combat proven and effective, I will give you the point that a semi auto is a bit faster but at distances not as effective due to the barrel length and training required. At close range they can be devastating. If you read my earlier post you would see that I am in favor of stricter rules for buying guns but that does not mean that they should not be available.

Please look at my avatar apparently we do need automatic weapons to protect our rights. ( yes i know that was taken a little out of context). But we did earn those rights, and I still for one protect them every day of my life serving in the U.S. Military.

 

So they family next door should have access to the same weapons as it takes to defend a country so that he can defend his house? I see the logic there

 

There is a bit of difference, the last part was a joke, but I have no issues with people having semi auto weapons as long as they have been through a proper background check and file the right paperwork and go through the proper training to correctly handle the weapons. I have several semi auto pistols, a few bolt action rifles, and a few shot guns. I love to shoot (at a proper range or in the woods hunting) and I love to shoot competitively, I am not like the every day person though I have a lot of weapons training from 40 mm down to .22 cal so I see no issues with the weapons I own and I have completed a background check and filed the proper paperwork for all the weapons that I have bought.

 

The truth is your're all a bunch of trigger happy with a gun as extension of their Pe*** lolll You want to be man ? Purchase a JAG.

 

Honestly I have not read through this entire thread. My understanding is that Walmart is the largest gun retailer in the nation. Go figure.

 

I do have issues with that statement as I am not trigger happy nor do i have Pe*** issues, I happen to have grown up around fire arms and I love to shoot, and hunt, I have been hunting since age 7. If you do not like fire arms I respect that but do not infringe on my rights to own one. I have no aspirations to buy a JAG as they are crap since Ford bought them out. I would much rather have a 1968 or 69 Camero, 63 Corvette, 70 Chevelle or something in the GM range as the parts are nice and interchangeable.

 

Jaaaaaaaagg you say...

 

JLR haven't been owned by ford for almost 5 years. They are making an incredible turnaround.

 

OK, it's morning (actually 2:30 in the afternoon, but meh, close enough) and I'm ready to explain the heart of this thorny issue.

The reason gun control legislation isn't going to get traction in the US any time soon has to do with a disconnect between what is and what people feel.

The theory behind gun control is that if there are fewer guns on the streets then we will be safer.

I'll explain why that's in bold in a second, for now just remember it.

Experience has shown over and over again that if someone wants a gun to commit an act of violence then they will be able to obtain one through either legal or illegal means. The mass shooters in recent history have been roughly divided between those who purchased their weapons legally and those who stole them from someone else. This is why laws restricting sales are largely ineffective. So long as there are guns in the community they will be accessible to people intending to use them for nefarious purposes. The concept of licensing fails for the same reason.

OK, coming back to that bold part...

The problem with that theory is not that it's incorrect, but that while it may make people safer in reality, it doesn't make them feel safer, and that's what matters.

If you're someone who fears being attacked or robbed or killed (and that's not a baseless fear these days) then knowing that the person attacking you doesn't have a gun isn't going to make you feel better. What does make you feel better is knowing that you have a gun and can do something to defend yourself or your family or your precious stuff. Many people feel safer when they are carrying or have access to a firearm.

Of course statistics show that you are most likely to be shot with your own gun, either accidentally or by an attacker who gets to it first or takes it away from you. Statistics also show that you are more likely to be killed while carrying a gun than if you're not. The problem is, when it comes down to a choice between cold statistics and the warm safe feeling that comes from a loaded weapon, the statistics are always going to lose.

Gun control forces people to choose between being safer because there are fewer guns in the community and feeling safer because they have one.

To put it in a more relatable case, consider texting while driving. Statistics show that it's very dangerous and that doing so dramatically increases your likelihood of getting into an accident. on the other hand, it feels good to be connected and to have something to think about aside from the boring task of driving. you also know that while it's relatively more dangerous, odds are you can get away with it because that's how odds work. Sure it's more dangerous, but it feels good and that's why statistics show that most of us do it at least once in a while.

When faced with a horrible tragedy such as this, the response of many people is to seek more of what makes them feel personally safe and so it's off to the gun store.

The reason that mass shootings don't cause any real movement in public opinion is also grounded in perceptions rather than reality. The response that many people have is not "we should get rid of guns to be safer", but rather "if only I had been there I could have used my gun to stop him".

It's normal for all of us to fantasize about situations where we could use our skills to do something heroic. These fantasies feel good and help us pass the time. They also prepare us to respond in a certain way should that situation arise.

There are a couple of other ancillary issues at play here, including the very valid sporting use of firearms, their utility for those living in rural areas, etc etc, but they're just that, ancillary.

Making real progress on gun control in the US is going to require convincing people to believe in the more abstract safety of fewer guns in the community versus the personal feeling of safety they get from owning one. Until you accomplish that, the rest of the discussion is pretty academic.

 

Cthippo you're forgetting a major point (actually THE major point).

Money.

As long as Colt, Sigarms, Glock, the NRA and co keep selling guns, they have money, they also have well funded and vocal lobbyists at just about every level of government.

As long as the idiots buy guns, the men in the halls of power will make sure that any move against their sponsors fails. No matter public opinion, or massacres,or any number of dead children, as long as there is profit in selling guns to idiots, the idiots will be able to buy guns.

 

Remove guns industry from the USA and the country will be in an economical crysis.

 

You mean that it is possible to own a fully functioning 777, that settles it I am moving.

But regardless you cannot judge on what a tool could be used for, I am sure some people would love to shoot 777's for sport at a shooting range, but that does not make it okay for civilians to own one.

If you can get that many shots off then what do you need a semi auto for

But again shootings rarely happen at 500+ meters where a bolt action has its advantage and there is really no practical way for anyone to carry as much ammo when using a 5 round magazine or clip so again there is really no good arguments for needing a semi auto M4 or any semi auto with a large magazine capacity for that matter. And sure you can empty a bolt action quite fast, haven't tested (yet) but I am fairly sure I can empty my six rounds in my rifle in not much more than over ten seconds but that still leaves a lot of people alive compared to a thirty round magazine.

Hope the next shooting happens with a rifle like mine where you have to load the rounds one by one (Winchester model 70)

I do agree that much stricter rules should apply regardless in the US, it took me about five minutes to get a hunting license in Wall Mart and they seemed to have no problem with selling me a shotgun right then and there, which is unsettling as I was only there on a student visa.

 

Automatic weapons are fine in the Military that is there place.

In a Civilian population they should not be for sale. You should not be able to walk into your local gunstore and buy a m16 carbine ( yes not all states they are legal but it is in las vagas at least)

Semi Automatic weapons i could say are for self defence.

But answer me 1 question

What does a Civilian need with an automatic rifle ( or any type of automatic), If they hold down the trigger the shots are going to be missing the target and hitting others instead.

you can empty a clip of most Auto rifles in less than 1 second.

 

In general, civilians cannot posses fully automatic weapons. The exception is those who hold a federal class 3 license, and there are relatively few of them. As far as I know, no mass shooter has ever used a fully automatic weapon, though there were a few used by drug dealers.

The M16s you're seeing in the gun stores are built from the ground up as semi-autos and sold as such. It's possible, but not legal, to convert them to fire full auto.

This is where things get messy is that unless you're into guns a civilian semi-auto M16 looks exactly like a military full auto M16. One of the more popular guns on the market now looks almost exactly like a Heckler and Koch MP5SD silenced sub-machinegun, but is in fact a semi-auto firing .22LR rounds. There are also weapons that looks just like a M16, but fire .22 as well.* These are popular because they are fun to shoot, but aren't as expensive to feed.

Part of the reason the Assault weapons ban in the 90s ended up being something of a joke is that it defined "assault weapons" based on what they looked like more than how they functioned.


*Useless trivia. The military M16 and pretty much all NATO rifles fire a .223 caliber bullet, which is basically the same as a .22 long rifle bullet being pushed by more powder.

 

Automatic firearms are controlled by federal law, not state law. Going to another state will not allow you legally buy automatic rifles any easier.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives asks the same question when reviewing application for a Class III weapons permit, they're very careful of who gets them. A legal owner of an automatic firearm has to be a dedicated and patient person, with a good bit of cash to spend as well.

An extention of that: the trigger groups of these semi-autos are often designed to specifically not be compatible with parts from the trigger groups of their automatic counterparts to prevent simple part swaps. Many "convertions" are really messing around with the sears to cause them to no longer function properly and create "automatic" fire. Not only illegal but dangerous, such damage may make it keep firing even if you let go of the trigger.

 

WOW now your calling all people that buy guns IDIOTS? Seems pretty childish to me and I think you will find that there are many intelligent people that own guns. P.S. The NRA does not sell, modify or manufacture firearms.

Well not exactly. While the .22 and the .223 are almost the same diameter the weight and length of the projectile are extremely different along with the trajectory and the distance they can be considered accurate and effective. Also all .223 rounds have a copper jacket.

 

In this case, I don't think that the industry plays as big a role as you say. The gun manufacturers aren't driving the pushback against gun control laws, their customers are.

Keep in mind that the people you describe as "idiots" are also citizens who vote in an imperfect democracy and who elect representatives who share their views. As it stands now, I think the American people are willing to accept these kinds of tragedies as the cost of the right to bear arms. Certainly there is a significant segment of the population that disagrees, but from what I can see they don't constitute a critical mass.

I live in one of the most liberal parts of the US and even here I don't see any groundswell for meaningful legislation. I see some people voicing their opinion that we should "do something", but I don't think many people are really interested on taking on this issue. In another week this will fade from the news everywhere but Connecticut and life will go on. The people who are passionate about gun control will continue to be so and everyone else will forget about it until the next tragedy. I don't know what it would take to change people's minds about guns in this country. I'm not even certain that it's possible at this point.

As a whole, the people like their guns and until that changes nothing else will.

 

Again with the useless trivia...

Most military bolt action rifles of the 20th century used chargers or stripper clips to load the rifles. With the rifle empty you opened the bolt and pushed in a clip of 5-8 rounds. In some you then pulled out the charger leaving the rounds in the rifle while in others (including the semi-auto M1 Garand) the clip stayed with the rifle until it was empty and was then ejected. Reloading with this system took about the same amount of time as with a modern box magazine, though with lower capacity.

This video demonstrated charger loading with a Lee-Enfield

 

That looks about right I didn't know that it had a stripper clip that went in but you can also remove the mag and replace it. A very nice weapon to use at that!

 

Slightly OT but the guy in the FPS Russia videos would have a class 3 fire arms licence? Would where he shoots be classed as a private range?