Weapons of war
I don’t know that we’ve ever used semi auto AR-15s in wars. Maybe some high end sniper version.
10 Responses to “Weapons of war”
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
December 8th, 2015 at 8:37 pm
A thankfully a former sheriff of Bradley County, TN wrote an opinion piece that used the “weapons of war” and “extremely high capacity buzz phrases.
He also says the government is us and we shouldn’t fear the government. Of course, one might be skeptical of that since he armed his deputies with these “weapons of war” and extremely high capacity magazines to go forth and use against the good citizens of Bradley county.
Logic is not a DemProg strong point.
December 8th, 2015 at 9:00 pm
Semi-auto AR platforms have been used throughout the branches as factory semi-auto or modified M16s which blocked the full auto position.
Here is our most used semi-auto AR today: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M110_Semi-Automatic_Sniper_System
December 8th, 2015 at 11:57 pm
It’s just a matter of swapping out the lower receiver. Chris Kyle wrote that he mated an accurized, suppressed upper from semi-auto AR-15 sniper to a standard issue M-4 lower for a selective fire scouting rifle.
December 9th, 2015 at 1:42 am
Doesn’t matter. For the security of a free state, citizens are to have access to all the weapons of war. The decision in U.S. v Miller centered around whether a short shotgun had any militia purpose. They got it wrong, not realizing that short shotguns had in fact been employed in the trenches during W.W. I. If they’d realized that, they’d have found for Miller. It was a completely flubbed case, but you’d best read it to discover their rationalizations. If Miller has been charged with having an unregistered BAR, the NFA would have essentially been rendered null and void because the BAR clearly had uses In the militia.
December 9th, 2015 at 11:29 am
Way back in the day, the US Army and NG put a small aluminum spacer with a wing under the pistol grip. It blocked the soldier from rotating the selector lever back to Auto position. Two soldiers in the fire team fired on semi. One soldier in the fire team was equipped with a clip-on bipod and fired on auto. He was the designated AR.
The M249 SAW and 3 Round Burst M16A2 replaced that system in the late 1980s.
December 9th, 2015 at 6:51 pm
Re: Miller. If you read the exact words the court wrote, the court cannot take notice that a short barreled shotgun is a weapon of war…and therefore _cannot say_ the shotgun is protected under the 2nd amendment. It’s almost as if they were saying we really want to rule on this as be lawful but we can’t because nobody presented evidence to point out a short barreled shotgun is a great weapon for trench, urban, and other forms/venues of warfare.
December 9th, 2015 at 6:54 pm
Crud, sorry to repost. The actual words are even more powerful and to the point than I remembered, “In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a “shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length” at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. ” Note the “in the absence”.
December 9th, 2015 at 7:03 pm
My point was my M1 Garand, M1 Carbine, 1917, No. 4 Mk I*, No. 5 Mk I and P14 were all purchased by governments for their armed forces, put in government armories, issued to government troops, and (in the case of the Garand, Carbine and No. 5 by manufacture date) possibly used in armed conflict – by definition, “weapons of war.”
My three AR-15’s are all commercial products purchased new from retailers: ergo not “weapons of war.”
December 10th, 2015 at 10:08 am
“Weapons of war” is a tautology (that means you’re saying the same thing twice). If it’s a weapon, whether it’s being used in a “war” is a question of how many combatants are in it (vs. duel, skirmish, battle etc.). The entrenching tool which was used in close combat in WWI and to take out sentries quietly in other times is a weapon of war. So is a rock you just picked up off the ground.
December 10th, 2015 at 10:18 am
Were the multiple rifles pointed at the White House fence jumper I saw reported on TV a couple of weeks ago “weapons of war”? The President said “they belong only on the battlefield” and “no one needs them” . I wonder if they were full-auto capable fit for the military offensive tactic, “assault”, or were they semi-auto self defense rifles owned by millions of citizens?