The 1:12 twist and 55 gr bullets are my preference in ARs, but since I'm not in it for the competition, the stainless bull barrel is a bit much for me - too much weight to carry over hill and dale. I carried a Remington 700 with a bull barrel and a 20x scope for a while that I could pop a head sized target at 600 meters with first thing in the morning before my coffee cleared my eyes, and it was a beast. Damned thing weighed about 15 pounds in the morning, and somewhere north of 1000 pounds by evening after toting it all day.
The sweetest AR I think I ever carried was a CAR-15. Looked an awful lot like the current M-4s, but with just a regular weight barrel, and without the stepdown notch for an M203 grenade launcher, and of course being on an A1 upper, it didn't have that detachable handle or all the Weaver rail geegaws, which was fine by me. For close-in stuff, like house-to-house and thick jungle, it was the cat's meow as far as I was concerned, and it only weighed a tad over 6 pounds, loaded for bear. It wasn't a sniper rifle by any stretch of the imagination, but for quick pointing and flipping around on a dime, it couldn't be beat.
At this point I guess I had better call ENDEX. My time of playing devil’s advocate are done with this issue. Many have pointed out lawful arguments and common sense approaches. Most, if not all I actually agree with.
I have taken reasonable arguments and debates that I have heard over the years and regurgitated them here for your entertainment and education as I am sure that you will hear them again.
It’s the reasonable arguments that we must fear in my opinion, though the rabid anti-gunners also play a role as well on the emotional front. They too must be nullified though I am at a loss as how to accomplish that one because after all, they're rabid about their beliefs and cannot see reason.
I am an avid firearms owner and see myself as a responsible one as well. I have owned many weapons over the years but as I aged and became more physically broken, I started to get rid of the “Run and Gun” or “tactical” firearms as I just couldn't do that anymore. While cleaning my shotgun and thinking over the past, this DA thread occurred to me as I thought about all the weapons I have owned and realized, the only semi-auto I now have is a 10/22. Everything else is manually operated. I based this thread upon this realization. So at least, to a degree, there is an element of truth to what I have posted. I had to be honest with myself in order to be the DA and not totally lose it mentally. What's that saying? "It's easier to keep track of the truth rather than to constantly lie." Or something along those lines. LOL
I have seen over time too many irresponsible people who own firearms bring dishonor upon the responsible law abiding citizens and realized that it really irritated me. Oh they may be law abiding citizens, but they treat their weapons as if it were a status symbol. Like that big ass 4x4 in their driveway that they only take to the grocery store. (Don’t ask these folks to help move a fridge, you might scratch the bed).
I am all about the 2nd amendment but beg, plead and if that fails, at times beat about the head and shoulders for people to really think about their rights and the responsibilities that it brings about. It is all interconnected with the First and Second Amendments being the rock upon which it is all built. Without those two, the rest will fall like a house of cards.
The counter argument of, “If weapons were outlawed, only outlaws would have weapons.” has gotten stale and pretty much closes minds in my opinion. Statistically it is a valid argument, but as a standalone…it down right sucks against someone who is for banning firearms. They've heard it before and immediately discount it.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Millions of words and hours in court have been spent that argue against those 27 words in our constitution. How ridiculous is that I ask?! And for the most part, they keep losing. But the opposition doesn't quit, and neither should any one that values our Constitution in defending it. It really is a simple document, short, sweet and to the point. But lawyers have convoluted it to the point that there are literally tons of laws, regulations and rules that circumvent it.
Just as a reminder. In common parlance, a devil's advocate is someone who, given a certain argument, takes a position they do not necessarily agree with (or simply an alternative position from the accepted norm), for the sake of debate or to explore the thought further. In taking this position, the individual taking on the devil's advocate role seeks to engage others in an argumentative discussion process. The purpose of such a process is typically to test the quality of the original argument and identify weaknesses in its structure, and to use such information to either improve or abandon the original, opposing position. It can also refer to someone who takes a stance that is seen as unpopular or unconventional, but is actually another way of arguing a much more conventional stance.
I found that being a Devils advocate in the written word to be harder than I expected. It's easier in a face to face setting. I seriously doubt that such a debate could be had at any other site without it being turned into a flamefest within the first page.
I'd like to thank everybody for their participation in this mental exercise and for the way they presented themselves. It was to me anyways, a valuable learning experience.
So I guess my first question is, “Why does someone need more than 10 rounds?” Hell, when hunting in most States, the law limits you to 3-5 rounds. Which leads to my next question…”Are you really that piss poor of a shooter that you need a full magazine of 20-30 rounds”? I would hate to clean any game you shot.
I used to kill feral pigs for some farmers in my area. My AR-15 had a night scope and suppressor. I also carried a 1911 45 ACP as a back up.
Usually, I carried 3 loaded mags for the pistol and 3- 30 round mags for the AR. Very seldom did I even use one mag full of ammo during a hunt; pigs do not like gun shots. But.. The rounds were secured in their magazines and readily available without noise if a mag dumb/change was required. Even though I had a speed loader for the AR mags and AK-47 mags ...loading was a pain and best done at home and in the light.
There have been times when arriving in a new area you would come across 20 plus pigs tearing the crap out of a farmer's field. At long range and a silenced weapon you were lucky to kill 8 before they scattered and were unseen. If smart you worked on the outriders and then worked your way into the main group; if lucky, less will spook and provide you with more targets.. Myself and a doctor friend killed 42 pigs one night which was an all time record for us. Without the silencers (actual name is suppressors) and night vision that would have been impossible.
I tried some 40 round mags for various ARs but they seem to have problems with FTF (failure to feed) so I just stayed with the 30 rounders.. Better to have to much than not enough IMO.
The hunting was something that provided a service..(the farmers were no match for the pigs or someone who had the right equipment to get the job done).
The hunting finally became unnecessary after a Mountain lion (Puma, cougar) moved into the area... She was awesome for there were no pigs in our area for the next two years or until I moved.. Never once did I want her killed even though at first I would see her tracts stalking on some game trails.. If she would have started killing kids, dogs or live stock then I might have changed my mind.
My wife enjoyed shooting the .22 cal ARs (25 round magazines) but the 5.56 was more than she liked to mess with even suppressed due to weight.
As far as I am concerned anytime the Government or BTAF gets involved with their convoluted thinking and lawyerese all they do is make law abiding people criminals. Fast and Furious is nothing compared to some of the shenanigans BTAF and the government both past and present have shown to be capable of.
As far as I am concerned the gun owners of America have given up enough already to well meaning pacifist who are one mugging away from getting a concealed hand gun permit and arming themselves while in their home with a little more standoffish power..
If a SHTF or the rule of law is totally broken in some mad max scenario long guns with many rounds and convenient carry will be much more highly regarded... Hopefully not in my life time will the need arise..
I used to kill feral pigs for some farmers in my area. My AR-15 had a night scope and suppressor. I also carried a 1911 45 ACP as a back up.
Suppressors are great! We had a "suppressor day" at a local range a few years ago when a buddy of mine brought all manner of suppressed weapons to the show. Some of the more interesting were a Stemple suppressed SMG in .45, an M9 pistol with a CIA built suppressor (only 6 of that model made, as I understand it), and a Ruger 10/22 with an integral suppressor built in to it. The CIA suppressor was unique in my experience - it never needed the end wipes replaced. The Ruger 10/22 was the awesomest. that thing made no more sound than an air gun. The loudest part was the bolt slap when it cycled. As a matter of fact, I have an air rifle now, built in China, that makes more noise when it fires than that 10/22 did.
In Europe, suppressors are legal. They are recognized as having a function apart from assassinations, in that they keep things quiet, don't disturb the neighbors, and don't spook the game. I think in the US Hollywood has taken over, and everyone thinks that the only use for them is assassinations, because that's all they're ever used for in movies, and most Americans have never thought far enough to find the other uses. Philistines!
I tried some 40 round mags for various ARs but they seem to have problems with FTF (failure to feed) so I just stayed with the 30 rounders.. Better to have to much than not enough IMO.
That 45 round mag I made for my AK was great. never a single failure to feed. In Afghanistan, whenever the Muj captured an AK-74, they held onto it for dear life. Couldn't pry one away for love or money. If you had a '74, then the next thing you looked for was an RPK-74 gunner, to get those 45 round mags issued with it, because they were interchangeable with the AK-74 mags. The Muj said they shot "poison bullets", because if a guy got hit with one, he rarely ever made it out to aid.
I used mine for an "ambush mag", so I only had the one. It gave me 15 shots more to find cover, and sometimes, 15 shots can make all the difference when you don't want to be distracted by a mag change while you're trying to get your one and only ass behind that rock way over there. It's not so much a matter of popping the bad guy right then as it is making sure his head is down far enough that he can't shoot back while you're on the move.
I had a 40 round mag for the CAR-15, for the same reason. I never had a failure to feed with it, but I traded it to another guy, and he had a couple. I dunno what the difference was, unless he maybe dropped it at some point and dinged up one of the feed lips a little bit. That's the only reason I could think for it.
As far as I am concerned anytime the Government or BTAF gets involved with their convoluted thinking and lawyerese all they do is make law abiding people criminals. Fast and Furious is nothing compared to some of the shenanigans BTAF and the government both past and present have shown to be capable of.
The BATF can be tricky with all that legalese. When I made that 45 rounder, of course I made it here, because there weren't any available locally at anything even resembling a reasonable price. I got two East German bakelite 30 rd mags (for 3 bucks apiece) and cut then down and rejoined them in the extended configuration with JB Weld. I was a little leary of that, but it worked flawlessly, and I think the joint might have even been stronger than the original bakelite.
I had an authorization letter from the BATF for it, because I built it in the middle of the assault rifle ban, which also banned new hi-cap mags. The letter was all legalese, but translated to "it's ok, because no new hi-cap mag is being produced, and one old one is being destroyed". I was still a little wary of it, because legalese being what it is, the next guy might just choose to interpret it differently.
Last Edit: Apr 14, 2015 10:06:02 GMT -6 by Deleted