Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Atlantic Wire)   Not one, but two anti-tank rocket launchers were turned into the LAPD during their gun buyback program this week, which must have made keeping the "no questions asked" part of the deal awfully hard for officers   ( theatlanticwire.com) divider line
    More: Scary, LAPD, gun buyback program, police officers, Los Angeles, CBS Los Angeles  
•       •       •

11904 clicks; posted to Main » on 28 Dec 2012 at 9:37 AM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



196 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2012-12-28 01:52:17 PM  
*Insert "Die Hard" reference here*
 
2012-12-28 01:52:51 PM  

bump: Like it or not, it is part of our 2nd amendment rights. Don't like it? ... be prepared to re-right the constitution.


whats not part of the second amendment?
Bill of Rights
Amendment II - 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.

If we are talking about having the ability to stage a revolution against the government (for excessive taxation maybe) then tanks and rocket launchers probably fall within the guise of the Second Amendment, considering our current military.
/glad my neighbors don't have tanks and hope they don't have rocket launchers.
 
2012-12-28 01:57:07 PM  

Snaps: mbillips: Snaps: mbillips: Snaps: mbillips: Snaps: mbillips: Snaps: mbillips: factoryconnection: Launch Code: If a thug/tard/jilted lover bashes in someone's skull with a baseball bat, that makes the bat an assault weapon. I blame Americas favorite pastime. All bats should be wiffel, lets get the teachers out there protesting MLB.

Now just to confuse everyone a little more...

[cdn2.armslist.com image 640x240]
Semi Auto Rifle - Legal

[world.guns.ru image 650x142]
Oogey-Boogey scary assault rifle (it really is) NFA item, highly restricted.

M-14 is misclassified as an assault rifle. It's a select-fire battle rifle, because of the conventional stock and the full-size cartridge.

I don't know anyone who ever fired an M-14 on full-auto. Considering how much it kicks normally, I'd hate to try it.

So how would you classify a MK16 MOD 0?  Fires the same 7.62x54r but it has a pistol grip?  As far as I'm concerned select fire = "assault rifle" for most people.


The original Sturmgewehr had a number of unique characteristics that every assault rifle since has had. Smaller cartridge, barrel in line with the stock (which makes the pistol grip mandatory), select-fire. An assault rifle combines the function of both an infantry rifle and a submachine gun by compromising on the cartridge.

When you go back up to a full-size rifle cartridge, the full auto becomes a lot less useful, because the recoil makes it too hard to control at full auto. Thus not really an assault rifle. A SAW based on the AR receiver isn't an assault rifle, either, even though it shoots the same cartridge as an M-4.
 
2012-12-28 01:58:17 PM  

Arkanaut: $200 sounds a bit low for a launcher -- but I guess these were probably useless without the actual missiles / rounds. Probably discards somebody found / stole after a military exercise.


I played GTA San Andres. Not only are there rocket launchers around the Jefferson part of Los Santos but $200 is about right for the trade in value.
 
2012-12-28 02:05:34 PM  

RickN99: FTA: 75 assault weapons and two anti-tank rocket launchers were traded in for supermarket gift cards

Since those 75 assault weapons were probably all media-defined "assault weapons" and not actual "assault weapons", I'm assuming these rocket launchers were something less than actual rocket launchers.


Yup, they were empty rocket launchers. And the Assault Weapons were California Defined Assault Weapons, meaning they had pistol grips and flash hiders/comps. No Bullet Button would make them illegal California Assault Weapons, but that was not stated in the article.
 
2012-12-28 02:06:02 PM  

jaybeezey: El Freak: Launch Code: [i1253.photobucket.com image 300x193]
If a thug/tard/jilted lover bashes in someone's skull with a baseball bat, that makes the bat an assault weapon. I blame Americas favorite pastime. All bats should be wiffel, lets get the teachers out there protesting MLB.

Guns are built specifically to kill things. That's all they're for. Cars and baseball bats aren't.

I'm honestly on the fence about this issue, but this "HURR DURR OTHER THINGS KILL PEOPLE TOO!! LET'S BAN THEM HURR" talking point is unbelievably retarded.

You're wrong. Guns are made to transfer energy. I use my gun once or twice a month and it has never killed anyone or anything. Maybe mine is broke.


Huh. My guns (I own three) are used specifically for personal protection. They have never killed a person. Not. Once. I do take them to the range because I strongly believe that if an individual owns a gun, then that individual is required to be able to hit what s/he is aiming at and only what s/he is aiming at (and I also believe that no gun should ever be drawn without the unshakable intent of obliterating whatever it is aimed at, therefore, drawing that weapon must be the very last resort available when every other option has been utterly exhausted because my life or the life of another is in absolute mortal peril and there is no other solution).

How interesting that people say that their intent is murder when, more correctly, guns - like any inanimate object - have no intent. The object is, in fact, subject to the intent of the individual wielding it.

You cite (not the individual I quoted, but someone they quoted) cars and baseball bats and say that they are not designed specifically to kill, but that it is the intent of the wielder that makes them instruments of murder. Why, then, do you not grant the same to guns, to swords, to knives? All are defensive as well as offensive, depending on the intent of the wielder. If a "thug" with a gun appears at your home, would you not wish for a similarly armed policeman to appear at your home and use his gun to defend you? I would never use my gun to murder, but I will most certainly use it in defense of anyone whose life is in imminent danger. Does that make me a "thug" with an instrument of murder... or does that make me a responsible individual who uses an inanimate object with the intent to protect and not to do harm?

It is not the object that is harmful or that has evil intent (objects are incapable of being evil or good - they just are). Those who intend evil will do evil, whether they have firearms or not. Before the invention of guns, I assure you, there were murders and evils aplenty. Pick up a history book and read for yourself.
 
2012-12-28 02:12:36 PM  
The guns don't have to work or actually be guns apparently, just have some gunish parts. So you could just take a few handgun parts put a pipe in for the barrel and cut a stock from plywood make it into an assault rifle looking thing for less than $100 and maybe an hours worth of work. Then get $200.
 
2012-12-28 02:37:21 PM  
Jokes on them, what they bought are nothing but useless metal tubes.  Those are disposable launchers, once the preloaded projectile has been fired they're useless.
 
2012-12-28 02:49:00 PM  
well a bit more modern than what I thought upon reading the headline. my Initial thought was they were Vietnam era LAW tubes brought back by someone's father or grandfather. not sure how old they are but the are newer than vietnam era.
 
2012-12-28 03:01:33 PM  
Meanwhile, delectable gun sales are going crazy right now! Take 100 of them off the street while thousands more are being purchased every week!!! More and more guns being sold every day, and there's nothing the whiny libs can do to stop it...though they feel better with gnashing of their teeth nom nom.
 
2012-12-28 03:02:46 PM  
What the fark is with people saying "Oh that's a rocketless launcher it's completely useless as a dangerous weapon."?

You wouldn't say that about an unloaded assault rifle. It's still a deadly weapon.
 
2012-12-28 03:03:36 PM  
Why has no one noticed, or have you just accepted, that the term "buy back" implies that the PD owned the guns in the first place?
 
2012-12-28 03:06:08 PM  

Asphyxium: What the fark is with people saying "Oh that's a rocketless launcher it's completely useless as a dangerous weapon."?

You wouldn't say that about an unloaded assault rifle. It's still a deadly weapon.


Actually an unloaded gun is either a paper weight or a club, but you can load it up and turn it into a weapon again. Not so much with these "launchers".

They write "zomg rocket launcher!!!" instead of "empty pvc pipe that used to actually hold a rocket". Its not like anybody could pop on down to the corner store and buy a new rocket to go along with the (single use) launcher.
 
2012-12-28 03:06:36 PM  

mbillips: M-14 is misclassified as an assault rifle. It's a select-fire battle rifle, because of the conventional stock and the full-size cartridge.

I don't know anyone who ever fired an M-14 on full-auto. Considering how much it kicks normally, I'd hate to try it.


I did once. Legal weapon in Nevada at a garbage dump. I had had quite of bit experience at the time as an instructor with lighter selective fire weapons. I was also big and strong. The target was a refrigerator door. 50 yards. First shot on target. Second shot at the top of the door (+30"). Third shot into outer space. Its basically unusable full auto and that's why the military had full auto as a armorer installed option and not in general use. The 7.62 Nato cartridge that the M14 uses  has basically the same recoil as the very successful .30 M1 BAR but with less than half the weight. Heating and the lack of an open bolt were other technical issues that made the M14 a poor full auto rife.

bigwf2007: Doesn't any media outlet in the nation have anyone on staff who served in the military or who even attends gun shows? It would save them from embarrassing themselves like this.


They are not normal humans and as such can not be embarrassed. They are not "journalists ". They are vultures and jackals that sell blood and fear. They have no conscience and there are no consequences for not getting it "right". Also, they do as they are told. If they contradict the official LAPD position they are denied access in the future.

Does anyone know the name of the grocery chain that donated the gift cards? Every article that I've read omits their name. I'd like to give them the publicity that they so richly deserve.
 
2012-12-28 03:22:55 PM  

Asphyxium: What the fark is with people saying "Oh that's a rocketless launcher it's completely useless as a dangerous weapon."?

You wouldn't say that about an unloaded assault rifle. It's still a deadly weapon.


They are useless after being fired. You just toss the launcher afterwards...there is no reloading them.
 
2012-12-28 03:24:19 PM  

smells_like_meat: Does anyone know the name of the grocery chain that donated the gift cards? Every article that I've read omits their name. I'd like to give them the publicity that they so richly deserve.


It's "Ralph's"...and my guess would be that they weren't donated but rather bought (or at least mostly-bought?) by L.A.
 
2012-12-28 03:26:11 PM  
From an LA newspaper article:

Weapons can be turned in; no questions asked. Handguns, rifles and shotguns can be exchanged for $100 Ralphs grocery store gift cards; assault weapons earn a $200 card.

So the store is Ralphs.
 
2012-12-28 03:30:36 PM  

stevarooni: It's "Ralph's"...and my guess would be that they weren't donated but rather bought (or at least mostly-bought?) by L.A.


From the same article.

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa said the program has been such a success that they may run out of the gift cards they are giving away. City leaders are now trying to raise more funds to keep the gun buyback going. About $130,000 was donated for Wednesday's events.

So its unclear. But I'd guess Ralphs since they were mentioned.
 
2012-12-28 03:36:39 PM  
Sounds like a great opportunity for an entrepreneurial gun dealer to sell his useless, broken gun junk at $50 as a "gun buyback special".
 
2012-12-28 03:37:05 PM  
The weapon shown in the pic is an M136 AT4 rocket launcher, but the yellow band indicates that it's an inert handling trainer. That tube never was loaded with a projectile, nor ever could be.
 
2012-12-28 03:38:13 PM  

Badafuco: piratetech: Notice they never show you a good picture of the front and back of the "rocket launcher". Maybe because then you would see that there is no rocket in them and what you have is the discarded metal tube that is not reusable to fire rockets out of and NOT a live ready to fire rocket

We're talking about the retards in LAPD, they don't know their ass from a hole in the ground.


Well, TFA pretty much admitted to this, so I think the article is more 'why the fark does someone have a  rocket launcher, even as a tube', a question they answered.

For modern journalism, this is a damn good article.
 
2012-12-28 03:40:17 PM  

kob_zilla: The weapon shown in the pic is an M136 AT4 rocket launcher, but the yellow band indicates that it's an inert handling trainer. That tube never was loaded with a projectile, nor ever could be.


Shut up and stop interrupting the fear mongering...
 
2012-12-28 03:46:30 PM  

netcentric: They paid $200 for non-reusable discarded fiberglass tubes ... ?


LAPD.............suckers!


And we have a winner.....

As has been mentioned.. LAW rocket tubes aren't made to be rearmed. They are one use and commonly sold at surplus stores as paperweightsuseless junk painted olive drab.

Now this on the other hand might be worth picking up......
cdn.paladin-press.com
http://www.paladin-press.com/product/Bazooka
 
2012-12-28 04:23:15 PM  

kendelrio: mbillips: kendelrio: mbillips:

This is illegal under California law:
This is legal:

One is an evil, Russian-made Saiga based on the oogah boogah AK-47 mechanism, listed by name on the ban list. The other is a true-blue, patriotic Ruger Mini-14, which is not on the ban list, and lacks the features that would cause it to be banned without being listed (pistol grip, flash suppressor, bayonet lug, etc.). They're ballistically and mechanically almost identical in terms of function.

To be fair, the Ruger can't be sold with that 20-round mag in California, but you can sell it with a 10-round mag, as on the Saiga.

Ah! Plain as the nose on my face!


I feel the need to simplify this further.
1. the name is illegal in CA
2. the muzzle is illegal in CA unless you restrict the actuation of the magazine with a "bullet button"
a Bullet Button is a locking device that makes operation of the magazine latch impossible to actuate unless a tool, such as the tip of a bullet, is employed.
3. no firearm in CA may hold more than 10 rounds (unless you are one of the few who had a normal capacity magazine before they were banned.
 
2012-12-28 04:27:47 PM  
oops I was wrong about the name. Here, we have a flow chart...
www.riflegear.com
 
2012-12-28 05:12:43 PM  

Headso: Didn't it come out that the anti tank one was just a trainer model that fires a 9mm tracer round?


Wait! It's plastic and fires 9mm rounds? So, obviously they got another Glock off the street.
 
2012-12-28 06:17:52 PM  

ReapTheChaos: Jokes on them, what they bought are nothing but useless metal tubes.  Those are disposable launchers, once the preloaded projectile has been fired they're useless.


But it makes the pants-wetting hoplophobes feel safer that scary looking inert metal tubes are off the street.
 
2012-12-28 06:32:15 PM  

drewogatory: I'm not sure how this idea of all gun owners being hoarders (not that 10 is anywhere near a hoard) came from. I'd be willing to bet 90-something percent of folks that own handguns either only own one, or own one plus a .22 . And of the guys who do own a bunch, most of those guys are either serious collectors and only care about rare,unusual, antique, historically significant etc. guns, or some type of competition shooter who competes in different classes and runs their guns hard enough to break them.


Not really.

It's easy to pick up a decent collection of handguns without being a serious collector or a competitor, especially if you've got multiple shooters in the household or inherit weapons from family members.
 
2012-12-28 08:36:43 PM  

dittybopper: chasd00: You know, I'm no fan of gun control at all (own several, including an omgscary AR-15) but if folks were really serious about it they'd ban ammunition sales to anyone except people licensed to purchase ammunition. Then make the license impossibly expensive and complicated to get.

/justsaying

Except then people would make their own.

How much does a Lee Loader cost these days?


Useless without bullets, shell casings, gun powder, and primers.
 
2012-12-28 08:43:16 PM  

chevydeuce: I can drive 10 - 15 minutes from my house to an active military bombing/firing range and find any number of spent LAW's and rocket launchers....hell, I can pick up LIVE bombs, rockets and grenades as well....can I take those to be turned in "no questions asked"?


You would have to be a real idiot to even attempt to enter a bombing range.
 
2012-12-28 08:50:45 PM  

liam76: Antimatter: Ah, your image doesn't make sense. Car's are controlled. You need a license, pass several tests, registration, inspection, yearly taxes/fees, and insurance.

If you want to apply car style regulation and controls to guns, I don't think you'll get any complaints form liberals

Only if you are driving them on public roads.

mbillips: Giltric: MythDragon: so I can go buy a cheap hi point .380, for $130, make a stock out of scrap wood and bailing wire, and trade it in as an 'assault weapon' for $70 profit?

No you would wind up creating a short barelled rifle. A highly regulated NFA item. And would be arrested for tax evasion for not having a tax stamp.

Yerp. Like my broomhandle Mauser with the holster stock. Disassembled, it's a pistol and a bulky wooden holster. Assembled, it's a felony.

/If you really wanted to do something about "assault weapons," you'd rewrite the NFA to make some damn sense. Banning short-barreled rifles and shotguns when there are legal pistols that chamber the same ammo, or bullpups that are shorter than a sawed-off, is retarded.

//I think I could actually write legislation that would distinguish between functionally more-dangerous weapons (semi-autos, .50 BMG rifles, etc.) and "civilian" hunting and self-defense weapons. But it would require mass confiscation to have any effect, and gun makers would find loopholes. Seriously, try defining what's a good ammo and what's a bad ammo in terms of public safety. You'd have to make some arbitrary call on foot-pounds at the muzzle, and getting into armor-piercing definitions, fugeddaboudit.

Or just maybe we could stop wasting time on what is used in a tiny amount of gun crime and start doing soemthing about people getting weapons illegally.

Make it acrime not to report a lost/stolen gun in a certain amount of time. Make everybody who purchases a gun have to go through a background check and keep records of who buys what somewhere.


Because the gun grabbers want to ban and confiscate all privately owned firearms.
 
2012-12-28 08:52:13 PM  

danpanic77: piratetech: Notice they never show you a good picture of the front and back of the "rocket launcher". Maybe because then you would see that there is no rocket in them and what you have is the discarded metal tube that is not reusable to fire rockets out of and NOT a live ready to fire rocket

This.


They go on to say that the launchers had no projectiles.
 
2012-12-28 09:05:43 PM  

Asphyxium: You wouldn't say that about an unloaded assault rifle. It's still a deadly weapon.


It's obvious you've never served a day in your life or qualified with the weapon in question. Listen to the people who have.

It's not a deadly weapon. It's not a firearm. It's the casing from a spent round of ammunition. In other words, it's a scary looking paperweight. It's a single use item. The military throws them away after use for a reason - because they're farking scrap metal.

A rifle can be reloaded with commercially available ammunition. A Javelin or LAW tube is not reusable and, even if it were, the rockets are not commercially available.

Assuming you could find a legal source for an unfired Javelin or LAW, you could (subject to state law), own it provided it was registered as a destructive device with the BATFE. It would be expensive and involve a metric shiat-ton of paperwork, but it could be done in theory. (Possession or construction of an unregistered destructive device is a big-time felony.)

If you want to legally make things go boom, it's probably cheaper and easier to buy a couple of acres of land in the mountains and get a blasting permit to improve it. Yes, you can legally own and use high explosives (with the proper permits)
 
2012-12-28 09:07:32 PM  

Great Janitor: If I was a criminal, I'm not going through a police gun by back. Take a weapon that was used in a crime, to the police and sell them the evidence that can convict me? I've never been to a gun buy back program, but I'd imagine that it would be similar to when you pawn something, show ID, get a receipt. I'm also guessing that they aren't just piled up for destruction, I'm sure they are investigated just on the off chance someone thought they could toss a murder weapon into a gun buy back program.


They do not check your ID and the weapon gets destroyed. What better way to dispose of evidence than to have the police destroy it for you? These buy backs are not intended to reduce crime in the least bit. Why do you think they have an "anonymous, no-questions asked" policy?
 
2012-12-28 09:13:44 PM  

mbillips: Snaps: mbillips: factoryconnection: Launch Code: If a thug/tard/jilted lover bashes in someone's skull with a baseball bat, that makes the bat an assault weapon. I blame Americas favorite pastime. All bats should be wiffel, lets get the teachers out there protesting MLB.

1. Cars are just about the most regulated, controlled, registered, tracked, and licensed consumer product out there. We pay special taxes on their purchase, ownership, annual registration and tags, fueling, periodic operator's re-licensing, re-sale, and in many states annual inspections of safety and emissions. The government has acted boldly to limit injuries and deaths from auto accidents since the 60s, and a massive reduction in the death rate has resulted, from about 22 down to 1.2 per 100,000mi driven. And yet we still expand the mandatory safety equipment to greater airbag suites, vehicle stability control, rear-view cameras, and pedestrian crash protection. So if you're asking for guns to be controlled the same way, that would be a major change.

2. As mentioned in the article, California still has assault weapon legislation on the books that define the term for that state. So while you might like to pretend words have freely-assigned meanings, and that bat crime is anywhere near the menace that gun crime is, the rest of the country doesn't.

Yeah, but those terms are dumb, and include loopholes that a truck could drive through.

This is illegal under California law:

[pm.b5z.net image 500x104]

This is legal:

[www.huntingriflesreviews.com image 525x425]

Saigas aren't banned by name in CA.  The version you show is banned due to its "evil feature" the flash hider.  They are sold in CA as featureless rifles, same as the Mini.

[www.mississippiautoarms.com image 500x165]

I beg to differ; the 2001 update to the law specifically lists Kalashnikov USA hunting rifles/Saigas. Check Page 58.


It was ruled that you have to list specific models in there. Listing by series was deemed unconstitutional and vague.
 
2012-12-28 09:16:25 PM  

mbillips: Snaps: mbillips: Snaps: mbillips: Snaps: mbillips: factoryconnection: Launch Code: If a thug/tard/jilted lover bashes in someone's skull with a baseball bat, that makes the bat an assault weapon. I blame Americas favorite pastime. All bats should be wiffel, lets get the teachers out there protesting MLB.


[www.mississippiautoarms.com image 500x165]

I beg to differ; the 2001 update to the law specifically lists Kalashnikov USA hunting rifles/Saigas. Check Page 58.

Not the same gun anymore.  Same way Off List Lowers are legal while tons and tons of "AR-15s" ar ...

Until they get around to listing it. The way the law reads, if it has an AK mechanism, it's gonna get banned. There's a general ban on "AK types."

Doesn't work that way, DOJ can't add new models to the list.

http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/resources/faq.html?view=category&la yo ut=categorylist&task=lists&catid=4

Read "What is an Off-List receiver?"

Interesting. Considering there's a Democratic super-majority in both houses of California's legislature, I would not expect that loophole to hold up, though. Especially in the current air of hysteria.


It's not a "loophole" the courts ruled on the AW ban and gave the AG a deadline to add any new models to the list. Any "by series" ban was deemed vague and invalid.
 
2012-12-28 09:20:14 PM  

Alphakronik: Snaps: mbillips: Snaps: mbillips: Snaps: mbillips: Snaps: mbillips: factoryconnection: Launch Code: If a thug/tard/jilted lover bashes in someone's skull with a baseball bat, that makes the bat an assault weapon. I blame Americas favorite pastime. All bats should be wiffel, lets get the teachers out there protesting MLB.


[www.mississippiautoarms.com image 500x165]

I beg to differ; the 2001 update to the law specifically lists Kalashnikov USA hunting rifles/Saigas. Check Page 58.

Not the same gun anymore.  Same way Off List Lowers are legal while tons and tons of "AR-15s" ar ...

Until they get around to listing it. The way the law reads, if it has an AK mechanism, it's gonna get banned. There's a general ban on "AK types."

Doesn't work that way, DOJ can't add new models to the list.

http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/resources/faq.html?view=category&la yo ut=categorylist&task=lists&catid=4

Read "What is an Off-List receiver?"

Interesting. Considering there's a Democratic super-majority in both houses of California's legislature, I would not expect that loophole to hold up, though. Especially in the current air of hysteria.

THAT we can agree on 100%

Now just to confuse everyone a little more...

[cdn2.armslist.com image 640x240]
Semi Auto Rifle - Legal

[world.guns.ru image 650x142]
Oogey-Boogey scary assault rifle (it really is) NFA item, highly restricted.

The part of an assault rifle that scares the shiat out of me isn't the parts that you see, its the internals that you can't see that make it nothing more than a human mower.


It is damn near impossible to hit anything with a full auto. The full auto is only meant for throwing down suppressing fire, i.e. to keep the enemies head down. In fact the standard issue M-16 doesn't even have a selection for full auto, it only does single and 3-round burst.
 
2012-12-28 09:27:46 PM  

davidab: kendelrio: mbillips: kendelrio: mbillips:

This is illegal under California law:
This is legal:

One is an evil, Russian-made Saiga based on the oogah boogah AK-47 mechanism, listed by name on the ban list. The other is a true-blue, patriotic Ruger Mini-14, which is not on the ban list, and lacks the features that would cause it to be banned without being listed (pistol grip, flash suppressor, bayonet lug, etc.). They're ballistically and mechanically almost identical in terms of function.

To be fair, the Ruger can't be sold with that 20-round mag in California, but you can sell it with a 10-round mag, as on the Saiga.

Ah! Plain as the nose on my face!


I feel the need to simplify this further.
1. the name is illegal in CA
2. the muzzle is illegal in CA unless you restrict the actuation of the magazine with a "bullet button"
a Bullet Button is a locking device that makes operation of the magazine latch impossible to actuate unless a tool, such as the tip of a bullet, is employed.
3. no firearm in CA may hold more than 10 rounds (unless you are one of the few many who had a normal capacity magazine before they were banned.


Fixed that for you. I can guarantee you that millions of standard capacity magazines were legally acquired in the months leading up to the CA AW ban.
 
2012-12-28 10:28:04 PM  

redhook: davidab: kendelrio: mbillips: kendelrio: mbillips:

3. no firearm in CA may hold more than 10 rounds (unless you are one of the few many who had a normal capacity magazine before they were banned.

Fixed that for you. I can guarantee you that millions of standard capacity magazines were legally acquired in the months leading up to the CA AW ban.


fair enough, but I dont know many who have them.
 
2012-12-29 01:23:57 AM  

Snaps: Oogey-Boogey scary assault rifle (it really is) NFA item, highly restricted.


Actually, an M14 would be properly be classified as a battle rifle - not an assault rifle. A battle rifle uses a high-power cartridge with an effective range of 600-1000 yards. An assault rifle uses an intermediate cartridge with an effective range of 200-300 yards.

Analysis of battle data showed that infantry rarely engaged targets beyond 300 yards with their rifles (heavy weapons were used instead), so anything more than that was overkill. Moving to a less powerful round allowed the infantryman to carry a lighter rifle and more ammunition for the same weight.
 
2012-12-29 02:00:58 AM  

Alphakronik: The part of an assault rifle that scares the shiat out of me isn't the parts that you see, its the internals that you can't see that make it nothing more than a human mower.


Your ignorance is showing.

1) A full-auto weapon is an NFA item. There is a limited pool of them available (no full-auto weapon made after 1996 can be transferred to a civilian), and it takes a metric ton of paperwork and about 6-9 months wait time for it to clear. Only one legally owned full auto weapon has ever been used in a crime, and the perpetrator of that crime was a cop.

2) Full auto is overrated. It's fun as hell on the range, and intimidating to be downrange of it, but it's almost completely useless in the real world. Even on a rifle like the M16/M4 which has minimal recoil it's still almost impossible to hit anything with it, which is why trained shooters almost never use it.

It just doesn't work the way it does on TV. There's plenty of real-world current combat footage on YouTube. Watch it and watch how often the riflemen use it (IE: not often). The only real use of full auto fire is suppressive fire -- shooting in the general direction of the enemy to force him to keep his head down so your teammates can move to a better position. Suppressive fire is pretty much pointless if you're on your own.

3) If someone is shooting at you with full auto, it's almost guaranteed they don't know what the fark they're doing. The shooter you need to fear is the one who squeezes off 2-3 aimed shots in as many seconds, then moves to a new position.

If someone is just blasting away all their shots are going to go over your head - a fact which has saved the lives of countless Soldiers and Marines in Afghanistan (The taliban loves to rock-and-roll, and they can't hit the broad side of a barn). If you ever are in that situation, be grateful they're using up all their ammo shooting clouds / ceiling tiles instead of you.
 
2012-12-29 02:13:54 AM  
I'm watching late, but just saw NBC repeat this story... on the evening news
 
2012-12-29 02:46:24 AM  

biglot: Pffffffffft. This is nothing. My friend in TN tells me that one of his neighbours has a Triple-A piece sitting on his front lawn.


yes, i'm familiar with it. it's not really triple-a its a quad-50 AA cannon from WWII. fires it once in awhile too but at $4/shot its more of a show piece than anything. designed for aircraft carrier use i think but mounted to a bofors trailer so its mobile. it would certainly tear the shiat out of a zero, should once choose to strafe his barn.
 
2012-12-29 03:11:11 AM  
gayscifinerds.co.uk

"I hope they got the Malibu Barbie Dreamhouse for that one"
 
2012-12-29 03:43:21 AM  

MythDragon: Giltric: MythDragon: so I can go buy a cheap hi point .380, for $130, make a stock out of scrap wood and bailing wire, and trade it in as an 'assault weapon' for $70 profit?

No you would wind up creating a short barelled rifle. A highly regulated NFA item. And would be arrested for tax evasion for not having a tax stamp.

Hey, it's 'no questions asked'. Ask long as I make it into the station without anyone seeing it.

Plus I already have one of these babies:
[home.comcast.net image 800x516]
Antique firearms FTW!
Bastard police ain't getting my Mauser though.


Very nice. Original C96 with 7.63, clip loading?
 
2012-12-29 10:53:28 AM  

cynicalbastard: MythDragon: Giltric: MythDragon: so I can go buy a cheap hi point .380, for $130, make a stock out of scrap wood and bailing wire, and trade it in as an 'assault weapon' for $70 profit?

No you would wind up creating a short barelled rifle. A highly regulated NFA item. And would be arrested for tax evasion for not having a tax stamp.

Hey, it's 'no questions asked'. Ask long as I make it into the station without anyone seeing it.

Plus I already have one of these babies:
[home.comcast.net image 800x516]
Antique firearms FTW!
Bastard police ain't getting my Mauser though.

Very nice. Original C96 with 7.63, clip loading?


Yeah, though mine is a flat side.
 
Displayed 46 of 196 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.

In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report