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.

(Daily Mail)   Coming soon to a gun store near you - A belt fed rifle that can "spray bullets like a fire hose" and it's perfectly legal. Yippie Ki-yay M@#$#@#ER   (dailymail.co.uk) divider line 278
    More: Spiffy, National Firearms Act, stock, loopholes, Gun Control Act, general public  
•       •       •

19068 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Sep 2013 at 9:23 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-09-13 11:27:56 PM

Dingleberry Dickwad: I will say that cleaning that farker weekly was a bastard though.


I damn near cut my f*cking hand off doing disassemble reassemble under timed conditions. Christ, those Navy specs are serious business.

Whole lotta firepower, though.
 
2013-09-13 11:29:54 PM
I remember awhile back someone suggested that game companies and gun manufacturers should team up to make something, since they are both blamed for violent acts. He suggested the spreadfire gun from Contra.

Pretty sure he was joking...
 
2013-09-13 11:31:16 PM

NetOwl: Is there any good reason for this thing to be legal?
.


Why do you care if someone wants to own one? Do you think its likely it'll start an epidemic of chain gun massacres?
 
2013-09-13 11:32:44 PM

OnlyM3: doglover


How many threads are we gonna have on this gun this week? This is the 6th one.The mods greenlight any thread that will help push their political opinions. It's why there's rarely a thread that puts firearms or Jews in a positive light.

// f- threads, pro posts barely/rarely survive.


You're paranoid, the threads about guns seem to universally turn into a bunch of gun nuts spouting pro-gun anti-regulation propaganda.
 
2013-09-13 11:33:47 PM

Rhino_man: Marcus Aurelius: Belt fed is overrated.  You need a two girl crew.

Three 25 round magazines full of 7.62x39mm is what I call "plenty", which is precisely what that amount of ammo weighs.

7.62x54r is where it's at. If you can't get the job done with bolt-action, you either need more people or an easier job.


I use a 7MM Rem Mag bolt action, .300 Win Mag Bolt, .270 Bolt, or 9MM Semiauto

Any one of those rifles is more than enough, ammo is cheap, although the pistol could be a .40 SW which is a nice round as well.
 
2013-09-13 11:35:24 PM

Dadoody: You can own a machine gun with the proper license.

If you think owning this without a license is A-OK or a loophole, you are not educated about gun ownership, or the ATF.

This article is pure bologna, and google "DavidOlofson" if you want to see what ATF will do to you.

Ignorant people discussing things they're ignorant about. Carry on libtards.


Olofson is a jackass who loaned his illegal machine gun to a friend who then took it to a range and started running bursts through it in front of an audience.  So what?
 
2013-09-13 11:37:00 PM
Anyone point out that this belt fed /bump fire combo will lead to melted barells/recievers/gas tubes yet?
 
2013-09-13 11:42:05 PM

R. Paulson: Anyone point out that this belt fed /bump fire combo will lead to melted barells/recievers/gas tubes yet?


The number one source of bans against this thing are at the gun ranges.
 
2013-09-13 11:46:57 PM
I can bump fire my off the shelf stock 10/22 if I hold it right, and with a big mag on there the barrel gets super hot. You don't even need the stupid kit.
 
2013-09-13 11:48:16 PM
Quit wetting your pants over bump fire devices.  You can take a shoe string and a semi-auto AK, or any semi-auto gun with a reciprocating charging handle, and turn it into a machine gun.

Tie shoe string to reciprocating handle, wrap it around the trigger of the gun, pull it tight until it fires.  If you keep your "trigger finger" which is looped around the shoe string in the same spot the gun will keep firing as the reciprocating handle makes its motions.

The ATF actually registered a SHOE STRING with a serial number on it as a machine gun prior to the 1986 manufacturing ban. A SHOE STRING is what you need to make a machine gun out of a semi-auto rifle.

Mass casualties attributed to this practice: 0

Legally you're making a machine gun if you do this.  Bump firing is not making a machine gun (which is why such devices that assist in it are legal, sometimes, depending on how the ATF feels that day) but you can make an illegal machine gun with a freaking SHOE STRING.

And yet nobody does it.  At least not to the detriment of society.
 
2013-09-13 11:48:40 PM

TuteTibiImperes: As far as the case goes now, it specifies the right to bear arms, but does not in any way define the limits of what those arms may be.  That can be interpreted as there being no limits, or as any limits being acceptable as long as some arms are available.  I'd obviously prefer the latter interpretation.


You are an authoritarian; you "obviously" prefer any measure that imposes further restrictions.
 
2013-09-13 11:49:59 PM
I think i just seen it on Spring Breakers
 
2013-09-13 11:57:53 PM

Dimensio: NetOwl: Is there any good reason for this thing to be legal?

In free societies, the burden is placed upon the government to justify prohibiting actions or rights of ownership.


First off, I totally agree.  Also, I'm kind of a gun nut myself.

That said -- there are good reasons to restrict the right of ownership of a fully automatic weapon (and, frankly, a weapon which had a built-in bump-fire modification sounds like fully automatic to me).  The most striking is that a fully automatic weapon is quite difficult to control.  Shooting a weapon like this has tremendously increase chances of accidents.  Combine that with its lack of utility either for self-defense or for hunting and I don't see a reason why the government can't legitimately restrict it.
 
2013-09-13 11:59:25 PM

meanmutton: Dimensio: NetOwl: Is there any good reason for this thing to be legal?

In free societies, the burden is placed upon the government to justify prohibiting actions or rights of ownership.

First off, I totally agree.  Also, I'm kind of a gun nut myself.

That said -- there are good reasons to restrict the right of ownership of a fully automatic weapon (and, frankly, a weapon which had a built-in bump-fire modification sounds like fully automatic to me).  The most striking is that a fully automatic weapon is quite difficult to control.  Shooting a weapon like this has tremendously increase chances of accidents.  Combine that with its lack of utility either for self-defense or for hunting and I don't see a reason why the government can't legitimately restrict it.


Easy... Make ownership legal, but make firing it outside of a firing range punishable by death, or a substantial jail sentence, regardless of allegedly justification.
 
2013-09-14 12:03:31 AM
Well that article wasn't bias.
 
2013-09-14 12:13:40 AM

Infernalist: Second Amendment doesn't apply unless you're a well-regulated militia.  But you knew that.


  Um, no, only you seem to 'know' that. No constitutional scholar I have ever seen, nor apparently SCOTUS, seems to think thats what it means. But I guess you seem to think you know more about Constitutional scholarship than all of them combined.
  Please, enlighten us.
 
2013-09-14 12:15:20 AM

cajunns: If it is belt fed ,why aren't there any videos on the site?


I noticed that too, as well as the fact that the "belt-fed" piece they were showing look a lot like an M-240 breech. Awhile back, there was shop that made up belt-fed ARs and M-16s, and even then (1988-89?), they were running north of 5K per copy. I never saw one in real-life, but one of those short-lived gun magazines reviewed it, and said that it too was little more than an expensive range toy.

Besides, who wants to hump that much ammo? I learned a long time ago that I didn't like walking long distances with heavy loads on my person. When Cuomo pulled that BS with the SAFE Act, I dumped my AR in a hurry (and made beau-coup money on it, too), and bought a used Rossi lever action carbine in .357.
 
2013-09-14 12:15:35 AM
Boring.  Gatling Guns (real and reproductions) are perfectly legal.  And much cooler!
 
2013-09-14 12:18:05 AM

TheEdibleSnuggie: For those of you ready to lose it because it's a gun, and "ZOMGZZZ SCARY!!! NOBODY SHOULD OWN ONE!!!1111!!!"  let me point you to the price of this thing:

$6,000.

That's out of the range for about 99% of gun owners.  And the ones who DO have the money to spend for something like this typically aren't the kind of crazies you'd worry about handling firearms.  So everybody just calm down.


Think again.  I've seen Eustus there counting out nickels for a nice Desert Eagle so, money is no barrier when fear and racism are holding hands.
Standing at the counter I couldn't believe it.  Scrawny wife, two snot nosed kids, worn thin clothes and wadded up bills and a few rolls of nickels.  For a $2k + .44Mag

You'll do what ever you have to in order to protect your family.  It's what strong men do.

That's what they tell me at least.
 
2013-09-14 12:18:13 AM
Also, how the fark can it "shoot multiple bullets at a time"?  Even machine guns can only fire only bullet at a time.  Sure, they fire them really, really, really quickly, but it is still only one bullet at a time.  I think that the reporter might be more than a lot clueless about how guns work.
 
2013-09-14 12:19:13 AM

BadReligion: grimlock1972: Yeah sooner or later this thing is going to end up being used in a criminal act.

Why? They are near impossible to aim, expensive, and less likely to hit whatever target you may have. Criminal's will stick to the cheap handguns they typically always have, and these will be range toys for people with money to burn.


I agree they will be but i can see some filter down to wealthy criminal organizations or used by the son  of the owner in some random act of violence.

I agree about the aim but if you are shooting indiscriminately its not about accuracy its about the amount of lead you can get in the air..
 
2013-09-14 12:19:39 AM
6 Grand? Good lawd that's a lotta money.

Had a flyer in my e-mail this morning from one of my suppliers selling a non belt fed variant of this for $1,400.00. Maybe I should order up a couple or 6.

I'd offer you all a fark discount but you need to be a resident of my state and pass the background check.
 
2013-09-14 12:21:53 AM

Yogimus: R. Paulson: Anyone point out that this belt fed /bump fire combo will lead to melted barells/recievers/gas tubes yet?

The number one source of bans against this thing are at the gun ranges.


I can see that, but lets say a private range, if you hooked up 1000 rnds and went nuts how long before something failed?
i'm thinking around 1/2 thru that belt.
 
2013-09-14 12:27:04 AM
 
2013-09-14 12:32:17 AM

Marcintosh: TheEdibleSnuggie: For those of you ready to lose it because it's a gun, and "ZOMGZZZ SCARY!!! NOBODY SHOULD OWN ONE!!!1111!!!"  let me point you to the price of this thing:

$6,000.

That's out of the range for about 99% of gun owners.  And the ones who DO have the money to spend for something like this typically aren't the kind of crazies you'd worry about handling firearms.  So everybody just calm down.

Think again.  I've seen Eustus there counting out nickels for a nice Desert Eagle so, money is no barrier when fear and racism are holding hands.
Standing at the counter I couldn't believe it.  Scrawny wife, two snot nosed kids, worn thin clothes and wadded up bills and a few rolls of nickels.  For a $2k + .44Mag

You'll do what ever you have to in order to protect your family.  It's what strong men do.

That's what they tell me at least.


Note: That's a $2,000 handgun.  And if he's spending that much for a Deagle; he's got getting the .44 mag variant.  He's got the original .50AE chambered weapon, with the possibility of him having the .44 mag interchangeable barrel.  And I highly doubt he'll be shooting that thing with .50AE going for nearly $2.00/ shot.  We're talking about $6,000 for what essentially is a stock 7.62 rifle with some over-glorified specialty modification.  That's like Barrett M82 money right there.  And those things aren't exactly FLYING off the shelves to begin with.

So like I said before:  The cost itself makes this gun damn near prohibitive to buy.  And if it goes through ammunition like the article (and most likely the manufacturer) says it will-  it's hella expensive to operate as well.
 
2013-09-14 12:32:36 AM

Prank Monkey: The difference is, you are not allowed to own a handgun (responsible for most gun deaths) until you are 21 years old. You can drive at 16.


Here in Washington State one can buy a handgun from a private individual at 18 years old. Slide fire kits have been out for a while, if you put one on a S&W 15/22 it's like shooting the BB gun at the fair where you have to shoot out the star....
 
2013-09-14 12:35:26 AM

Dingleberry Dickwad: duffblue: vygramul: Mugato: Marcus Aurelius: Belt fed is overrated.  You need a two girl crew.

Three 25 round magazines full of 7.62x39mm is what I call "plenty", which is precisely what that amount of ammo weighs.

What are you preparing for?

Half an hour at the range?

Nobody tell mugato that you can get 7.62x39 by the 1000 rd. Box delivered right to your door from the internet. Or boxes, who can buy just one?

Well considering the prices for ammo these days? Not many people can buy one, much less more than one.


Its czech ammo. Yes people can afford one or 2. Got my last one for 2 bills. Thats alot of plinking at the range for nice and cheap.
 
2013-09-14 12:35:42 AM
 "150 traumatized viewers wrote the Federal Communications Commission to express their outrage about the 20-year-old singer's twerking, foam-fingering, skimpycostume, bumping, grinding, omnipresent tongue, and her interaction with oversize PEDO bears."
 
2013-09-14 12:36:54 AM
Opp's how did that happen? sorry wrong link
 
2013-09-14 12:44:25 AM

Infernalist: Nabb1: TuteTibiImperes: Dimensio: NetOwl: Is there any good reason for this thing to be legal?

In free societies, the burden is placed upon the government to justify prohibiting actions or rights of ownership.

In my opinion that's where things go wrong with the gun debate.  The question should be 'is there a valid reason to allow this' instead of 'is there a valid reason to disallow this'.

Valid reason: the Second Amendment. Now, you tell me why the Second Amendment doesn't cover it. You don't have to like that law, and you can argue that the time has come to change that law, but until that happens, it is the law of the land. I am not some "gun nut" nor do I think that the Second Amendment is the only thing stopping tyranny, but that is the law. As long as there is an enumerated, specific right to bear arms in the Bill of Rights, the burden falls upon those favoring restrictions to justify them.

Second Amendment doesn't apply unless you're a well-regulated militia.  But you knew that.


No, it means that gun ownership is necessary for a well regulated (meaning one that drills regularly) militia. That is why George Washington forced every able bodied man to buy at his own expense a firearm, powder and balls. Which was also the response to conservatives who cried that the government has never required citizens to spend money just to live here.

The whole "National Guard" thing is bs too. A militia is communtity based and supported. Guard are not just funded by the DoD (and for anyone who thinks otherwise... recruiting scams ran by the Guard in various states were aimed at uncaring numbers to get more federal support) and are necessary to any regular military deployment even if it is just logistics. There is no local community based leadership. It is all top down from the state level.

These arguments are made by the government to make it sound perfectly fine in doing what the Constitution expressly forbids because they know that if they said "we have said screw the Constitution since the Alien and Sedition Acts and these are the rules we actually play by" then the streets would run red with the blood of idiots and their victims.

So long as they pretend that the Constitution is the law of the land then we need to hold their feet to the coals on these matters. The rights must be absolute and individually applicable or they are meaningless.

I know they are meaningless because they put limits where the Constitution permits none. I just want the federal government to admit that the Constitution cannot possibly be the "law of the land" in modern society, scrap the damned thing and replace it with an actual workable document.

To that end, I take the extreme position because that is how it was written. No licenses. No tests. No laws or civil regulations. No infringing while the Bill of Rights is still in force. No exceptions were written in only a justification for the uninfringable right backed up almost immediately by our first President. All the weasel words to the contrary are poppycock and have been used to remake society through backdoor means.
 
2013-09-14 12:45:18 AM
Pretty farking cool toy for $350. Check out the Russian guy's slide fire on youtube.
 
2013-09-14 12:48:27 AM
Instead of regulating guns by how they work, wouldn't it make more sense to benchmark them.  Pick a rate of fire that we consider 'too much' and make the manufacturer of the gun put up money for an X-Prize.  If anyone can fire the gun faster than the desired rate of fire, either unmodified or modified with only simple tools in X amount of time, they get the money and the gun gets banned.

You could do the same thing with concealability.  Once a year, have a event where disabled versions of the guns are handed out to people and everyone coming into the event gets $100 if security doesn't find a gun on them (to encourage people to come in unarmed) but $10,000 if they smuggle one of the disabled guns in.  (Give the screeners prizes for finding them).
 
2013-09-14 12:59:34 AM

cajunns: If it is belt fed ,why aren't there any videos on the site?


Turning a closed-bolt, fixed barrel rifle into a belt-fed quasi-machinegun is farking ridiculous.  The thing will melt the first time the owner takes it out into the woods to make a HEY Y'ALL, WATCH THIS! YouTube video.

/Former M240 gunner
 
2013-09-14 01:05:17 AM

LukeR: I honestly can't see how this would be even remotely accurate. Looks like just a fun way to waste ammo.


I'd speculate that over 90% of all rounds fired by civilians are a "fun way to waste ammo."

Hell I'm going to go outside tomorrow and waste ammo. And it's going to be fun.
 
2013-09-14 01:05:44 AM

KimNorth: "150 traumatized viewers wrote the Federal Communications Commission to express their outrage about the 20-year-old singer's twerking, foam-fingering, skimpycostume, bumping, grinding, omnipresent tongue, and her interaction with oversize PEDO bears."


That actually made more sense than the article being discussed here.
 
2013-09-14 01:10:55 AM

HoratioGates: Instead of regulating guns by how they work, wouldn't it make more sense to benchmark them.  Pick a rate of fire that we consider 'too much' and make the manufacturer of the gun put up money for an X-Prize.  If anyone can fire the gun faster than the desired rate of fire, either unmodified or modified with only simple tools in X amount of time, they get the money and the gun gets banned.

You could do the same thing with concealability.  Once a year, have a event where disabled versions of the guns are handed out to people and everyone coming into the event gets $100 if security doesn't find a gun on them (to encourage people to come in unarmed) but $10,000 if they smuggle one of the disabled guns in.  (Give the screeners prizes for finding them).


WTF did i just read?
 
2013-09-14 01:20:21 AM

runescorpio: Dingleberry Dickwad: duffblue: vygramul: Mugato: Marcus Aurelius: Belt fed is overrated.  You need a two girl crew.

Three 25 round magazines full of 7.62x39mm is what I call "plenty", which is precisely what that amount of ammo weighs.

What are you preparing for?

Half an hour at the range?

Nobody tell mugato that you can get 7.62x39 by the 1000 rd. Box delivered right to your door from the internet. Or boxes, who can buy just one?

Well considering the prices for ammo these days? Not many people can buy one, much less more than one.

Its czech ammo. Yes people can afford one or 2. Got my last one for 2 bills. Thats alot of plinking at the range for nice and cheap.


On an AR? Assuming its cyclic rate is around 600, (less than an AR15, but lets be generous) I would put it at irreparable damage to the upper receiver within 300 rounds (head spacing, rifling getting stripped for being too soft), and mechanical failure at the 4000 round mark.  Gas tubes do not enjoy the heat.
 
2013-09-14 01:21:37 AM
I quoted the shiat out of the wrong guy
 
2013-09-14 01:40:45 AM

vygramul: Satan's Dumptruck Driver: vygramul: Mugato: Marcus Aurelius: Belt fed is overrated.  You need a two girl crew.

Three 25 round magazines full of 7.62x39mm is what I call "plenty", which is precisely what that amount of ammo weighs.

What are you preparing for?

Half an hour at the range?

75 rounds in half an hour? Try 10 minutes for <25 yards.

Why on earth would you fire at only 25 yards? 150m with iron sights is the minimum or they revoke your man card.


Yeah I'm a tactical shooter, not a hunter.

I've heard folks at the range talk about CCW and self defense. Then they head into the bay and take 5 seconds to set up a sight picture on a target 10+ yards away. In a self defense situation, you are going to shoot quickly and probably at a target inside 7 yards. If you're not practicing that-- in addition to practicing reloading and drawing, you're not practicing for self defense.

For example: Who the crap is ever going to shoot at 150-yards inside their own home?

Now for hunting or recreational shooting at 100+ yards, sure 75-cartridges would go a long way. 75 cartridges for a hunting rifle is a lot different than for an AR-15 and a half-dozen bowling pins at 15-yards.
 
2013-09-14 01:43:50 AM

NetOwl: Is there any good reason for this thing to be legal?



Is there any good reason that burning a flag should be legal?

Any good reason having the freedom to say "Fark libs eat shiat" should be legal?

For that matter, is there any good reason that eating shiat should be legal?

It's not the job of the citizen to explain why he should be able to retain a constitutional right.  It is the job of the government to prove that it has the authority to restrict that right.

I'll tell ya what...if the number of people murdered by this type of weapon exceeds, say, the number of people who die from other's bare hands, then I'll be willing to listen to why they ought to be banned.
 
2013-09-14 01:43:51 AM

mizchief: TheEdibleSnuggie: For those of you ready to lose it because it's a gun, and "ZOMGZZZ SCARY!!! NOBODY SHOULD OWN ONE!!!1111!!!"  let me point you to the price of this thing:

$6,000.

That's out of the range for about 99% of gun owners.  And the ones who DO have the money to spend for something like this typically aren't the kind of crazies you'd worry about handling firearms.  So everybody just calm down.

Even military grade M4's and M16's will melt the barrels when used for sustained rapid fire, I would hate to see what happens to a cheap ass AR15 with a few clips fired through them with this thing.


They sell plastic lowers now too. I've read (internet mind you) that people have melted/warped them.
 
2013-09-14 01:49:50 AM

ripwry: Not illegal to own. You can own it with a 200 buck license. Over rated. I can get that much fire legally already. Its called a gat trigger. Small device attaches to the trigger guard. Has a small handle looks like one off a fishing reel but smaller. One rotation fires four times. Law states one bullet per pull of trigger. Which this perfectly unlike gimmics like bump fore hellfire etc. Forty bucks and two allen head screws and i can be ready to fire in five minutes. I can get around 750 rounds a minute this way.


That does sound like fun.

Since I'm a little lazy, all my guns are things you could buy at any gun show, so I go to "The Gun Store" in Vegas or various other places nationwide once or twice a year for my full auto fix.
 
2013-09-14 01:55:11 AM

bmihura: ripwry: Not illegal to own. You can own it with a 200 buck license. Over rated. I can get that much fire legally already. Its called a gat trigger. Small device attaches to the trigger guard. Has a small handle looks like one off a fishing reel but smaller. One rotation fires four times. Law states one bullet per pull of trigger. Which this perfectly unlike gimmics like bump fore hellfire etc. Forty bucks and two allen head screws and i can be ready to fire in five minutes. I can get around 750 rounds a minute this way.

That does sound like fun.

Since I'm a little lazy, all my guns are things you could buy at any gun show, so I go to "The Gun Store" in Vegas or various other places nationwide once or twice a year for my full auto fix.


It's been 3 years since I've been behind a 240... I need to get my fix soon.

Vegas, you say?
 
2013-09-14 01:56:25 AM
i.imgur.com

Brap!
 
2013-09-14 01:58:47 AM
www-tc.pbs.org

The ATF loves rapid fire.


/Ask any Branch Davidian
 
2013-09-14 02:02:33 AM
"The Gun Store" is overrated, and their range is old and cramped. Go to Discount Firearms or American Shooters next time you are in Vegas instead. Both are going to be less crowded, cheaper, and more comfortable. Plus their indoor ranges don't suck. Or come to the Desert Hills Shooting Club outside of Boulder City, it has a bunch of great outdoor ranges, skeet, trap, rental machine guns, rental Baretts, anything you could want. Plus after you go shooting, you can visit the bar(you can't shoot after you drink, so do that last, otherwise they will kick you out). I am a member there, but you can go as a non-member as well.
 
2013-09-14 02:13:03 AM

BadReligion: you can't shoot after you drink


chewthedirt.com
 
2013-09-14 02:23:24 AM
Looking forward to the videos of dumbfarks finding out that sustained fire through a barrel that is not built for it tends to end up being either rather costly or completely catastrophic.
 
2013-09-14 02:47:36 AM
Sounds great for home defense accidentally killing all your neighbors.
 
2013-09-14 03:03:46 AM

Dadoody: You can own a machine gun with the proper license.

If you think owning this without a license is A-OK or a loophole, you are not educated about gun ownership, or the ATF.

This article is pure bologna, and google "DavidOlofson" if you want to see what ATF will do to you.

Ignorant people discussing things they're ignorant about. Carry on libtards.


You're dead wrong.
 
Displayed 50 of 278 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report