Active shooter at Mandalay Bay in Las Vegas...

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • AmmoManAaron

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    37   0   0
    Feb 20, 2015
    3,334
    83
    I-get-around
    Heck, I've used REAL full-auto rifles and did not like them. Subguns and belt fed, I get. Rifles, waste of ammo.

    Which rifles did you use?

    My experiences:
    M16A3 - I liked, easily controlled. Could be useful.
    M2 Carbine - pretty much same as above
    M14 (standard stock, not the E2 stock) - 2-3 shots bursts and it was all I could do to keep on a car-sized target, anything longer and the climb was just too much. Not practical. No experience with the E2 stocked gun - probably better, but still not good.
    FAL with standard fixed stock - proper stance and really leaning into it, I could do 20 round mag dumps into a car out to 100 yards. It was a lot of fun doing that even though it took effort on my part. Still wouldn't be practical in a realistic setting.
    G3/HK-91 - no experience, probably not practical
    HK-93 - no experience, but probably practical
    BAR - I liked, heavy, accurate, and easily controlled on the lower ROF setting. Could be useful.
    AK-47 variants - Controllability varied widely depending on the gun. Over-gassed guns weren't fun and recoil was substantial. As a lefty, the ones equipped with slant brakes sucked. Guns that didn't have a slant brake and weren't over-gassed ran smooth and were nearly as controllable as an M-16A3.
    VZ-58 - ROF similar to AK-47, but the gun was so much lighter that it seemed to jump around a lot. Recoil and climb weren't bad, but a good AK variant would be preferred. On semi it was a fine rifle.

    I am shocked at the number of Veteran's who come in here and tell me they kept their M4 on "semi auto" most of the time they were overseas....They said they would often switch to 3 shot burst when providing cover fire....Not all of course but enough told me that that it made me think a little.....

    Quick and accurate aimed fire is the most effective response in almost all circumstances and doesn't waste ammo (a precious resource if you are far from resupply). My opinion is that full auto has it's place in the following relatively uncommon circumstances:
    1.) repelling human wave attacks (happened in Korea, Vietnam, and occasionally in A-stan)
    2.) mag dumps into suicide car bombers. Stopping them on their approach as quickly as possible means everyone dumps everything into the vehicle as quickly as possible. You may or may not have the time and presence of mind to flip the switch, but if you are already at a checkpoint your selector setting (if applicable) may not be an issue.
    3.) counter sniper fire - think of it as a quick response to fire from a building window...you saw the flash, but because of lighting you can't see to aim specifically at the person firing. Dump a burst into the window and surrounding walls, seek cover, reassess.
    4.) breaking contact and relocating in a firefight/ambush when you can identify the source of enemy fire (i.e. - not just a panic response, which is pretty useless and a waste of ammo)

    Experiences can and will differ. If you ever did any reading on lightfighter, you know how quickly tactics and scenarios can evolve.
     

    GodFearinGunTotin

    Super Moderator
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Mar 22, 2011
    51,092
    113
    Mitchell
    The trading stuff, that's just fantasy talk. Hypotheticals are dumb.

    Regarding the accessory - I'd prefer no action be taken, but we need to be realistic.

    A guy legally bought guns and legally bought an accessory that achieved a similar effect to a much harder to obtain firearm.

    When people take advantage of the system-in-place, whether you like that system or not, we can't be surprised when the method of getting around the law gets the hammer. I know bumpfire and auto aren't 100% the same... but to the lay person, it's close enough to see someone broke the rules without necessarily breaking any laws to achieve it.

    Not saying I don't care because I don't have one... just saying we don't have a valid argument if they choose to come after them.

    We have grown comfortable in our (effectively) non-full-auto world.
     

    Hohn

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jul 5, 2012
    4,444
    63
    USA
    I am shocked at the number of Veteran's who come in here and tell me they kept their M4 on "semi auto" most of the time they were overseas....They said they would often switch to 3 shot burst when providing cover fire....Not all of course but enough told me that that it made me think a little.....

    Packing around an extra 20-30lb of ammo sucks. Packing 50lb sucks more. Waste ammo, carry more.

    Fire as fast as you can aim, and not more. For 90% of combat duty, a semi auto is arguably preferable IMO. There are places for FA-- covering/suppressing fire like for fire team support and movement and such. Repelling a wave attack, for example. But that's why you have a SAW and the poor shlep stuck carrying it and its ammo.
     

    bwframe

    Loneranger
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    94   0   0
    Feb 11, 2008
    38,184
    113
    Btown Rural
    Or they are offering it up for review, knowing it will likely be upheld. Meanwhile they look like the good guys for "doing something".

    All the "news organizations" :rolleyes: are putting their own spin on the NRA release. Shame on us, if we fall for it.

    All they really did was not defend bump stocks and state that their use was subject to regulation. Oh and take a firm stand against GUN control and banning GUNS.
     
    Last edited:

    SheepDog4Life

    Natural Gray Man
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    May 14, 2016
    5,320
    113
    SW IN
    All I am seeing is "I don't really know what one of them there bump stocks are, but they convert a gun into a machine gun". Might need to show them you can bump fire without a slide fire stock. Let's hope they don't hear about binary triggers.

    Ultimately setting a precedent that we can ban accessories that have already been approved by the ATF is a bad thing for gun owners and leads to a slippery slope even if you don't care about bumpfire stocks.

    I'm shocked by the drift I'm seeing that amounts to "I don't have one" or "I don't like them" and so, I'm ok with doing yet another one-way "compromise" to appease the barking hounds demanding common sense solutions in a number of gun people.

    This is another Lucy and Charlie Brown episode of Charlie trying to kick the football...if we seriously believe there'll be any good faith trading here is delusional.

    Over the years I've made "converts" to our side, the pro-2A side, by showing non-gun (or a shotgun only bird hunter) how the lefties have lied to them... used a .357 mag to blow up a watermelon because an AK, which they were vilifying, just poked clean holes in it. How they've misled about semi-auto versus full auto.

    If we are the ones who start telling the people in the "middle" that a bump/slide-stock doesn't make an AR fire like a machine gun... they will believe their ears from the Las Vegas shooting instead of us... we will be the ones viewed as liars... we will lose credibility with and votes from those independents... we will lose elections... and that means full sporting rifle bans.

    No thank you... it's not worth it. Time for a little tactical retreat.

    NRA believe that bump stocks should have "additional regulations." A bill (GOP-led) may be coming today.

    Kut (may fall over dead)

    Not that I want Kut to fall over, lol, but pretty much the proof of the pudding.

    I never thought I'd be right of the NRA.

    Nor would I have thought you to be to the right of me!!! :):
     

    SheepDog4Life

    Natural Gray Man
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    May 14, 2016
    5,320
    113
    SW IN

    Hohn

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jul 5, 2012
    4,444
    63
    USA
    Exactly right. ^^ Defending bump stocks is the wrong battle, imo.

    I estimate I could dump a 100rd surefire in about 45-50 seconds with my Geissele SD-3G. So I can clear 150rpm or so in SA if necessary and if I'm willing to destroy an otherwise good barrel with sustained ammo wasting.

    I'm not willing to give up binary triggers, however.
     

    T.Lex

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    15   0   0
    Mar 30, 2011
    25,859
    113
    Over the years I've made "converts" to our side, the pro-2A side, by showing non-gun (or a shotgun only bird hunter) how the lefties have lied to them... used a .357 mag to blow up a watermelon because an AK, which they were vilifying, just poked clean holes in it. How they've misled about semi-auto versus full auto.

    If we are the ones who start telling the people in the "middle" that a bump/slide-stock doesn't make an AR fire like a machine gun... they will believe their ears from the Las Vegas shooting instead of us... we will be the ones viewed as liars... we will lose credibility with and votes from those independents... we will lose elections... and that means full sporting rifle bans.

    No thank you... it's not worth it. Time for a little tactical retreat.



    Not that I want Kut to fall over, lol, but pretty much the proof of the pudding.



    Nor would I have thought you to be to the right of me!!! :):
    First, I don't really disagree.

    Second, though, one area that has worked well for me is explaining that the mechanical parts of "assault weapons" really don't differ in technology than any other semi-auto rifle. (Bolt, obviously, are different - but, can actually help explain how semi-auto rifles developed.)

    That mechanical part can integrate the discussion of bump stocks. They help the finger work faster, but someone with fast fingers can achieve the same result. (The dual-action triggers are best left for another day.) And, as noted, non-mass-produced methods exist to achieve the same effect.

    However, given the gravity of what happened, I'm not sure it completely helps. My concern is that it puts all semi-auto on the table emotionally.
     

    Denny347

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    21   0   0
    Mar 18, 2008
    13,458
    149
    Napganistan
    Which rifles did you use?
    Not nearly as many as you. M4, M14, UMP45, MP5. While the M4 was not bad but it eats through mags is seconds. I had my 15yr old shooting an M4 and he did well with short 3-4rd bursts. But that was 7yrds or so. M14...useless in FA. UMP was downright nice in FA, same with MP5. Not hard to keep tight groups in FA. I just finished reading "The Operator" by SEAL Team 6 member Robert Oneill. He was in a battle with the Taliban for 6 hours. In that time, he only used a mag and a half of ammo...45 rounds. For rifle work, aimed fire will always be King, FA has a very limited usefulness, even on our SWAT Team. The high demand for FA is only because we can't have it (most of us cannot afford it). I don't really care if all law abiding gun owners have a FA, but the attraction is related to the scarcity.
     

    ATM

    will argue for sammiches.
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    30   0   0
    Jul 29, 2008
    21,019
    83
    Crawfordsville
    The trading stuff, that's just fantasy talk. Hypotheticals are dumb.

    Regarding the accessory - I'd prefer no action be taken, but we need to be realistic.

    A guy legally bought guns and legally bought an accessory that achieved a similar effect to a much harder to obtain firearm.

    When people take advantage of the system-in-place, whether you like that system or not, we can't be surprised when the method of getting around the law gets the hammer. I know bumpfire and auto aren't 100% the same... but to the lay person, it's close enough to see someone broke the rules without necessarily breaking any laws to achieve it.

    Not saying I don't care because I don't have one... just saying we don't have a valid argument if they choose to come after them.

    That you cannot fathom what that argument might entail does not diminish its existence or validity.
     
    Top Bottom