Why would anyone need an assault rifle? (1 Viewer)

[[icon]]

This kind of customization ability is the far more effective argument against the AR, in my opinion.  I think it would ultimately fail, but it's that ability that makes it possible for someone to break it down, put it in a backpack, take an uber to a school, and put it back together again.

Any gun can do this. I can pull the barrel out of my Remington 870 shotgun or strip down my Glock 26 carry Pistol in seconds... and I am a comparative noob. 

 

[El Floppo]

I'm sure this was answered... but I"m too lazy to read through the thread. the question asked by the OP-  and I'll rephrase it because I guess "assault rifles" is a somewhat vague or meaningless term...

- what's the function or purpose of semi/automatic guns for joe public? (guns that shoot multiple rounds quickly- long stock or pistols as far as I'm concerned)

looking for an actual answer here- I don't get it. I'll admit up front- I don't like guns and don't see the need for them in a civilized and modern society, but I accept the 2nd amendment is not going away and would like to hear more from those of you guys who own the guns... my social media is entirely lefty SF, NYC and Euro people- not a single pro gun person there.

"semiautomatic guns" is a category so broad the answer to "what does Joe Public do with them?" could be literally any gun use.

ok- this is part of my needed discussion then,and I'm happy to continue asking until I understand better and reach a point where the discussion is had without being about semantics.

I'm thinking about a gun that can hold and shoot multiple rounds in less than a minute. where it's clearly not about hunting and more about causing maximum damage to as many people as quickly as possible. pistol, rifle... whatever.

I don't see or understand the need for joe public to use one of these, but would like to hear from FFA gun friends about why they own them and what they think.

 

[[icon]]

I fear some ####### getting ahold of an AA-12 and going into a school.  fortunately they are not available to the public.  Still in a crowded situation the Kel Tec would be unthinkable.

Yeah.. that FPSRussia YouTube video of him dual-weilding full-auto AA-12’s is insane.  

 

[Henry Ford]

Any gun can do this. I can pull the barrel out of my Remington 870 shotgun or strip down my Glock 26 carry Pistol in seconds... and I am a comparative noob. 

Well, not "any" gun.  And a Glock 26 fits in a backpack anyway. And I don't think an 870 fits in a backpack even once you remove the barrel.

Edit: unless you're using the 870 super shorty.  Didn't think about that.

 

[Henry Ford]

ok- this is part of my needed discussion then,and I'm happy to continue asking until I understand better and reach a point where the discussion is had without being about semantics.

I'm thinking about a gun that can hold and shoot multiple rounds in less than a minute. where it's clearly not about hunting and more about causing maximum damage to as many people as quickly as possible. pistol, rifle... whatever.

I don't see or understand the need for joe public to use one of these, but would like to hear from FFA gun friends about why they own them and what they think.

A revolver holds 6 shots and can fire them all in less than three seconds with someone who hasn't ever trained with a gun pulling the trigger.  So I guess I'm not sure what you're asking.

 

[Reg Lllama of Brixton]

I fear some ####### getting ahold of an AA-12 and going into a school.  fortunately they are not available to the public.  Still in a crowded situation the Kel Tec would be unthinkable.

But I thought that legislation restricting access to certain guns don't actually work?  

Or so I'm told.

 

[Ditka Butkus]

I know people who build their own semi automatic weapons....Would a ban take that into consideration?

 

[Henry Ford]

I know people who build their own semi automatic weapons....Would a ban take that into consideration?

It should.  The automatic weapon ban does (or at least tries to.)

 

[Ditka Butkus]

It should.  The automatic weapon ban does (or at least tries to.)

So not just a pre- assembled weapon but also the components that can make one? I'm not being a wise guy, just trying to understand..

 

[Henry Ford]

So not just a pre- assembled weapon but also the components that can make one? I'm not being a wise guy, just trying to understand..

Yeah.  

The automatic weapons ban considers any device that affects the trigger to modify the weapon to fire full auto to be a regulated firearm independently.  That's what bump stocks got around, because they don't modify the firing action of the weapon's trigger.  Similarly, a component designed to make a weapon semiautomatic (any of the pieces necessary to build a semiautomatic) would likely be independently considered to be a semiautomatic weapon.

 

[[icon]]

So not just a pre- assembled weapon but also the components that can make one? I'm not being a wise guy, just trying to understand..

Generally speaking with AR’s the lower receiver is the part of the rifle that is regulated and stamped with a serial number.

You can buy all the other parts you want, but when you buy the lower receiver, you face a background check and have to transfer the firearm to you via a FFL. 

 

[Henry Ford]

Generally speaking with AR’s the lower receiver is the part of the rifle that is regulated and stamped with a serial number.

You can buy all the other parts you want, but when you buy the lower receiver, you face a background check and have to transfer the firearm to you via a FFL. 

And we'd need to end the practice of selling "unfinished" lower receivers.

 

[[icon]]

And we'd need to end the practice of selling "unfinished" lower receivers.

True, although Home mills are now turning out excellent receivers with a paltry $1600 investment and a block of aluminum. 

 

[Henry Ford]

True, although Home mills are now turning out excellent receivers with a paltry $1600 investment and a block of aluminum. 

Which is of course a problem.  Much like homemade full auto conversions are a problem.

 

[Hawkeye21]

Did you know that you can buy 25 round drums for pump action shotguns? I believe they sell a double drum. What kind of carnage could someone do with 25 rounds of buck shot or slugs?

I did know that.  You can buy them online from outdoor stores like Cabela's.  That would be an easy item to add to the ban list for me.

 

[El Floppo]

I'm sure this was answered... but I"m too lazy to read through the thread. the question asked by the OP-  and I'll rephrase it because I guess "assault rifles" is a somewhat vague or meaningless term...

- what's the function or purpose of semi/automatic guns for joe public? (guns that shoot multiple rounds quickly- long stock or pistols as far as I'm concerned)

looking for an actual answer here- I don't get it. I'll admit up front- I don't like guns and don't see the need for them in a civilized and modern society, but I accept the 2nd amendment is not going away and would like to hear more from those of you guys who own the guns... my social media is entirely lefty SF, NYC and Euro people- not a single pro gun person there.

"semiautomatic guns" is a category so broad the answer to "what does Joe Public do with them?" could be literally any gun use.

ok... so semi automatic- those are essentially standard at this point? single trigger pull per shot, but automatically loading the gun for each shot? are revolvers semi-automatic, or just the guns that hold magazines/clips?

I'll try to get myself more clear on what my question is as I learn more about this...

the idea for me is this- guns that hold and deliver multiple shots (the old type of pistol holds six? nine? so in my head, I'm think more than that) in less than a minute without reloading. 

 

[msommer]

ok... so semi automatic- those are essentially standard at this point? single trigger pull per shot, but automatically loading the gun for each shot? are revolvers semi-automatic, or just the guns that hold magazines/clips?

I'll try to get myself more clear on what my question is as I learn more about this...

the idea for me is this- guns that hold and deliver multiple shots (the old type of pistol holds six? nine? so in my head, I'm think more than that) in less than a minute without reloading. 

AFAIK revolvers are not considered semiautomatic even if double action Pistols are.

 

[El Floppo]

AFAIK revolvers are not considered semiautomatic even if double action Pistols are.

what is this?

I feel like I need a gun 101 lesson here...

eta: and probably better to get from some of my US homies instead of the lefty euro  

 

[msommer]

what is this?

I feel like I need a gun 101 lesson here...

eta: and probably better to get from some of my US homies instead of the lefty euro  

First part/action of the trigger pull rotates the cylinder, second part/second drops the hammer

A single action revolver you first #### the hammer by pulling it backwards with your thumb (which simultaneously rotates the cylinder), then you pull the trigger, dropping the hammer

ETA: the censored word is the first four letters of cockney

 

[El Floppo]

First part/action of the trigger pull rotates the cylinder, second part/second drops the hammer

A single action revolver you first #### the hammer by pulling it backwards with your thumb (which simultaneously rotates the cylinder), then you pull the trigger, dropping the hammer

ETA: the censored word is the first four letters of cockney

thanks.

so single action is the old wild west version, with teh cowboy using his non-grip/trigger hand to use the palm of his hand to manually #### the gun over and over between shots? 

double action doesn't require that, and makes the revolver essentially semi-automatic? each squeeze of the trigger shoots a bullet, with nothing else required?

 

[El Floppo]

sorry gun people- trying to get up to speed so I can consider and ask my question better.

 

[Henry Ford]

ok... so semi automatic- those are essentially standard at this point? single trigger pull per shot, but automatically loading the gun for each shot? are revolvers semi-automatic, or just the guns that hold magazines/clips?

I'll try to get myself more clear on what my question is as I learn more about this...

the idea for me is this- guns that hold and deliver multiple shots (the old type of pistol holds six? nine? so in my head, I'm think more than that) in less than a minute without reloading. 

Generally when you're talking about semiautomatic, you mean a gun that takes a magazine.  When it fires, it uses the energy from the shot to eject the spent casing, and then the next round pops into place from the loaded magazine into the chamber.

A minute is a really long time.  It doesn't sound like it, but it is.  Sit and stare at your watch for a full minute.  Any gun that isn't a musket is going to get off way more than six shots in a minute.

I could absolutely get 12 good, well-aimed shots off with a loaded revolver (six chambers) in ten seconds.  And I am not fast.  World record is something like 12 shots in under 3 seconds.

But it involves reloading.  And that can make a big difference.  Seconds make a big difference.

 

[unckeyherb]

what is this?

I feel like I need a gun 101 lesson here...

eta: and probably better to get from some of my US homies instead of the lefty euro  

The big difference in single vs double is the amount of pressure required for trigger pull. 

Double action requires the same force for each trigger pull.  Each trigger pull does a number of things, including pulling the hammer back and releasing it.  This is consistent in semi auto's as well as revolvers.  Single action means that once the pistols hammer has been cocked, the trigger pull only performs the task of releasing the hammer.  As part of the act of firing the round, the hammer automatically cocks back into firing position.  So the trigger pull only has to perform one function, ie single action.

Trigger pulls on single actions require a lot less finger pressure to depress than double action.

 

[msommer]

thanks.

so single action is the old wild west version, with teh cowboy using his non-grip/trigger hand to use the palm of his hand to manually #### the gun over and over between shots? 

double action doesn't require that, and makes the revolver essentially semi-automatic? each squeeze of the trigger shoots a bullet, with nothing else required?

Compared to a pistol I beieve you need a stronger force to pull the trigger on a double action. And since you use you finger to pull it is not "semi-automatic"

On a pistol the recoil from the ignited "gunpowder" forces the slide back to send the spent cartrideg flying out and a new can come from the spring loaded magazine into the chamber - "semi automatic" as each trigger pull fires exactly one shot. On automatics you hold the trigger in and the guns keeps firing until it is empty

 

[unckeyherb]

thanks.

so single action is the old wild west version, with teh cowboy using his non-grip/trigger hand to use the palm of his hand to manually #### the gun over and over between shots? 

double action doesn't require that, and makes the revolver essentially semi-automatic? each squeeze of the trigger shoots a bullet, with nothing else required?

flip that.

 

[El Floppo]

flip that.

 

thanks- makes sense. I'll get there eventually.

 

[El Floppo]

Generally when you're talking about semiautomatic, you mean a gun that takes a magazine.  When it fires, it uses the energy from the shot to eject the spent casing, and then the next round pops into place from the loaded magazine into the chamber.

A minute is a really long time.  It doesn't sound like it, but it is.  Sit and stare at your watch for a full minute.  Any gun that isn't a musket is going to get off way more than six shots in a minute.

I could absolutely get 12 good, well-aimed shots off with a loaded revolver (six chambers) in ten seconds.  And I am not fast.  World record is something like 12 shots in under 3 seconds.

But it involves reloading.  And that can make a big difference.  Seconds make a big difference.

yeah- truth about a minute. maybe I'm thinking 10 seconds or less. 

a guy walks into a bar (ouch), with a gun and starts firing. revolver is looking at emptying all the shots (6?) in 10 seconds, and then needing to reload. (is that essentially true of single and double action?). how many rounds do a semi auto pistol hold? are they firing about as fast as a standard single-action revolver?

 

[msommer]

flip that.

Not according to this

Single actions derive their name from the fact that they can only be fired by cocking the hammer and squeezing the trigger one shot at a time, whereas the double action can be fired in the same manner as the single action or simply by squeezing the trigger to fire – hence “double action.”

or Wiki

Single-action

From Top: Replica of 1849 vintage. .44 Colt Revolving Holster Pistol (Dragoon); Colt Single Action Army Model 1873; Ruger (New Model) Super Blackhawk- Mid and late 20th Century.

In a single-action revolver, the hammer is manually cocked, usually with the thumb of the firing or supporting hand. This action advances the cylinder to the next round and locks the cylinder in place with the chamber aligned with the barrel. The trigger, when pulled, releases the hammer, which fires the round in the chamber. To fire again, the hammer must be manually cocked again. This is called "single-action" because the trigger only performs a single action, of releasing the hammer. Because only a single action is performed and trigger pull is lightened, firing a revolver in this way allows most shooters to achieve greater accuracy. Additionally, the need to #### the hammer manually acts as a safety. The Colt Paterson Revolver, the Walker Colt, the Colt's Dragoon and the Colt Single Action Army pistol of the American Frontier era are all good examples of this system.[15]

Double-action

Colt Anaconda .44 Magnum double-action revolver

In double-action (DA), the stroke of the trigger pull generates two actions:

The hammer is pulled back to the cocked position which also indexes the cylinder to the next round.

The hammer is released to strike the firing pin.

Thus, DA means that a cocking action separate from the trigger pull is unnecessary; every trigger pull will result in a complete cycle. This allows uncocked carry, while also allowing draw-and-fire using only the trigger. A longer and harder trigger stroke is the trade-off. However, this drawback can also be viewed as a safety feature, as the gun is safer against accidental discharges from being dropped.[15]

Most double-action revolvers may be fired in two ways.[15]

The first way is single-action; that is, exactly the same as a single-action revolver; the hammer is cocked with the thumb, which indexes the cylinder, and when the trigger is pulled, the hammer is tripped.

The second way is double-action, or from a hammer-down position. In this case, the trigger first cocks the hammer and revolves the cylinder, then trips the hammer at the rear of the trigger stroke, firing the round in the chamber.

Enfield No. 2 Mk I* double-action-only revolver. Note the spurless hammer.

Certain revolvers, called double-action-only (DAO) or, more correctly but less commonly, self-cocking, lack the latch that enables the hammer to be locked to the rear, and thus can only be fired in the double-action mode. With no way to lock the hammer back, DAO designs tend to have bobbed or spurless hammers, and may even have the hammer completely covered by the revolver's frame (i.e., shrouded or hooded). These are generally intended for concealed carrying, where a hammer spur could snag when the revolver is drawn. The potential reduction in accuracy in aimed fire is offset by the increased capability for concealment.[37]

 

[Henry Ford]

yeah- truth about a minute. maybe I'm thinking 10 seconds or less. 

a guy walks into a bar (ouch), with a gun and starts firing. revolver is looking at emptying all the shots (6?) in 10 seconds, and then needing to reload. (is that essentially true of single and double action?). how many rounds do a semi auto pistol hold? are they firing about as fast as a standard single-action revolver?

Well, that's kind of the thing.  And why people talk about restricting magazine capacity.

A semi-automatic weapon generally is just a gun with a hole that a magazine feeds rounds into.  The magazine holds the rounds.  So if you put a magazine that holds 13 rounds into it, it holds 13 (plus one in the chamber).  If you attach a drum magazine to it it holds 100 rounds (plus one in the chamber).

 

[parrot]

yeah- truth about a minute. maybe I'm thinking 10 seconds or less. 

a guy walks into a bar (ouch), with a gun and starts firing. revolver is looking at emptying all the shots (6?) in 10 seconds, and then needing to reload. (is that essentially true of single and double action?). how many rounds do a semi auto pistol hold? are they firing about as fast as a standard single-action revolver?

A normal revolver holds 6 rounds.  Many semi autos hold 16. Firing rate is similar.  Revolvers are also slower to reload.  Even with a speed-loader - which allows 6 rounds to be loaded simultaneously - reloading a revolver is a much more involved and time consuming process ("time consuming" meaning maybe 15 seconds as compared to maybe 3 seconds for a semi-auto magazine).  

 

[El Floppo]

Well, that's kind of the thing.  And why people talk about restricting magazine capacity.

A semi-automatic weapon generally is just a gun with a hole that a magazine feeds rounds into.  The magazine holds the rounds.  So if you put a magazine that holds 13 rounds into it, it holds 13 (plus one in the chamber).  If you attach a drum magazine to it it holds 100 rounds (plus one in the chamber).

ok- thanks, seems clear. is there a typical sized magazine for pistols? 

but the difference in firing speed between non semi-auto and semi-auto...essentially negligible? if so, is the primary difference one of capacity?

eta: looks like parrot may have answered my question...

 

[unckeyherb]

Well, that's kind of the thing.  And why people talk about restricting magazine capacity.

A semi-automatic weapon generally is just a gun with a hole that a magazine feeds rounds into.  The magazine holds the rounds.  So if you put a magazine that holds 13 rounds into it, it holds 13 (plus one in the chamber).  If you attach a drum magazine to it it holds 100 rounds (plus one in the chamber).

Right.  I mean you can get 33 round magazines from glock for a slew of 9mm handguns.  the point about the 'breakdown' ability of an AR 15 being of concern is fair I guess, but a shooter with a single Glock 17 and 4 of these mags can unleash hundred + aimed rounds in a few minutes, easily.

 

[Henry Ford]

A normal revolver holds 6 rounds.  Many semi autos hold 16. Firing rate is similar.  Revolvers are also slower to reload.  Even with a speed-loader - which allows 6 rounds to be loaded simultaneously - reloading a revolver is a much more involved and time consuming process ("time consuming" meaning maybe 15 seconds as compared to maybe 3 seconds for a semi-auto magazine).  

Again, I think you're way overestimating the amount of time it takes to do things. Most people with any reasonable amount of practice can reload a semiautomatic in under a second even with heavy adrenaline.  It's much more difficult (without a speed loader) to do a revolver, but anyone trying to do so quickly who took fifteen seconds would be a complete goober.

 

[parrot]

Again, I think you're way overestimating the amount of time it takes to do things. Most people with any reasonable amount of practice can reload a semiautomatic in under a second even with heavy adrenaline.  It's much more difficult (without a speed loader) to do a revolver, but anyone trying to do so quickly who took fifteen seconds would be a complete goober.

Maybe so.  But I don't completely discount the effect of adrenaline in real-life scenarios either.  I've seen highly experienced people have trouble cycling a bolt-action if a big enough bull elk is standing in front of them.  

 

[Henry Ford]

Right.  I mean you can get 33 round magazines from glock for a slew of 9mm handguns.  the point about the 'breakdown' ability of an AR 15 being of concern is fair I guess, but a shooter with a single Glock 17 and 4 of these mags can unleash hundred + aimed rounds in a few minutes, easily.

There's also the added aiming ability, the fact that it's made to fire continuous, high volume shots...

You use a Glock, yes, time-wise you could fire off hundreds of rounds in a few minutes, but the plastic guide rod would melt.  Which means the recoil spring would be in constant danger of getting all screwed up and jamming you.

 

[Henry Ford]

Maybe so.  But I don't completely discount the effect of adrenaline in real-life scenarios either.  I've seen highly experienced people have trouble cycling a bolt-action if a big enough bull elk is standing in front of them.  

I agree, and it's one reason people harp on semi-auto.  The fact is, it is much more likely that an opening presents itself for the prospective victims to turn the tables or get out if the perpetrator doesn't have a semi-automatic weapon.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

There's also the added aiming ability, the fact that it's made to fire continuous, high volume shots...

You use a Glock, yes, time-wise you could fire off hundreds of rounds in a few minutes, but the plastic guide rod would melt.  Which means the recoil spring would be in constant danger of getting all screwed up and jamming you.

I've never encountered any melting in mine.  That said my manor of shooting would not be conducive to melting as I never try to see how many rounds I can get off in a short period of time, well certainly not beyond those in a single magazine.  I have noticed an abundance of aftermarket springs in stainless steel and or tungsten, so apparently the melting is not uncommon, though I have never encountered it.

You seem well versed in this subject matter.  Unusually well, I would say. 

 

[Henry Ford]

I've never encountered any melting in mine.  That said my manor of shooting would not be conducive to melting as I never try to see how many rounds I can get off in a short period of time, well certainly not beyond those in a single magazine.  I have noticed an abundance of aftermarket springs in stainless steel and or tungsten, so apparently the melting is not uncommon, though I have never encountered it.

You seem well versed in this subject matter.  Unusually well, I would say. 

I believe that is generally for accuracy reasons. 

 

[sho nuff]

Put this in the gun control thread...maybe here is a better place.

Thoughts?

http://www.providencejournal.com/news/20180226/us-rep-cicilline-of-ri-introduces-assault-weapons-ban-of-2018

U.S. Rep. David N. Cicilline on Monday introduced the Assault Weapons Ban of 2018, his office said in a news release.

HR 5087 would prohibit the sale, transfer, production, and importation of semi-automatic rifles and pistols that have a magazine or can accept a magazine that can hold more than 10 bullets, and any ammunition-feeding device that can hold more than 10 bullets. It also covers certain weapons listed by name. The measure has 162 co-sponsors.

 

[jonessed]

Put this in the gun control thread...maybe here is a better place.

Thoughts?

http://www.providencejournal.com/news/20180226/us-rep-cicilline-of-ri-introduces-assault-weapons-ban-of-2018

That’s not an assault weapon ban.  That’s a semi-automatic weapon ban.  Just about all of them (even pistols) can accept magazines of varied sizes.

 

[sho nuff]

That’s not an assault weapon ban.  That’s a semi-automatic weapon ban.  Just about all of them (even pistols) can accept magazines of varied sizes.

But it pretty much handles assault weapons as well...which have a pretty broad definition.

Should we limit magazine size to 10 and under?  Whats the case to be made for needing more?

 

[Henry Ford]

Put this in the gun control thread...maybe here is a better place.

Thoughts?

http://www.providencejournal.com/news/20180226/us-rep-cicilline-of-ri-introduces-assault-weapons-ban-of-2018

As I said in the gun control thread, this is a ban on any semiautomatic weapon.  It's a dead bill before it ever gets read.

 

[Henry Ford]

But it pretty much handles assault weapons as well...which have a pretty broad definition.

Should we limit magazine size to 10 and under?  Whats the case to be made for needing more?

I'm fine with limiting magazines to ten, but most gun enthusiasts won't be.  The argument for needing more is that when you go to a range or a field or wherever you shoot more than ten rounds.

 

[unckeyherb]

But it pretty much handles assault weapons as well...which have a pretty broad definition.

Should we limit magazine size to 10 and under?  Whats the case to be made for needing more?

It just seems arbitrary and would make-illegal, a huge swath of firearms that are in no way related to AR-15 type rifles.  I mean, yes it would handle assault weapons because it would handle a large majority of weapons in general.

 

[jonessed]

But it pretty much handles assault weapons as well...which have a pretty broad definition.

Should we limit magazine size to 10 and under?  Whats the case to be made for needing more?

Maybe, but that bill attempts to ban any semi-automatic weapon that can even accept a 10+ round magazine.  That’s pretty much all of them.

 

[sho nuff]

Maybe, but that bill attempts to ban any semi-automatic weapon that can even accept a 10+ round magazine.  That’s pretty much all of them.

Yes...and there would be those to replace them quickly after...correct?

 

[unckeyherb]

Yes...and there would be those to replace them quickly after...correct?

What does the bill propose to do with the 50-100 million currently legal, but soon to be illegal handguns?

 

[sho nuff]

What does the bill propose to do with the 50-100 million currently legal, but soon to be illegal handguns?

Not sure...what would be done if they just limit magazine capacity going forward with what’s already out there.  Haven’t read it all just found it interesting.

 

[unckeyherb]

Not sure...what would be done if they just limit magazine capacity going forward with what’s already out there.  Haven’t read it all just found it interesting.

I guess that's why I think its a non-starter.  If you limit the magazine of a handgun to only be as long as the butt of the gun (and not extend out) I could see that working.  My 1911 holds a magazine w/ 7 .45 caliber bullets.  A typical Glock has a wider grip and is double stacked.  It can hold 17 rounds.  The 33 round magazine is literally the same 17 round mag but twice as long.  It just sticks 7" out the base of the gun.  You could eliminate THOSE types of magazines and keep the gun legal.  

 

[jonessed]

Not sure...what would be done if they just limit magazine capacity going forward with what’s already out there.  Haven’t read it all just found it interesting.

It would help a little, but someone like the Vegas shooter would just 3D print a high capacity magazine I imagine.