Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

I am not quite sure where we are disagreeing except the need for military grade weapons via 2nd amendment issues.
we already have reasonable limits on 2nd amendment such no rocket launchers, grenades land mines etc. As a veteran trained in insurgency and wecounter insurgency warfare by our own government, it's much easier for insurgant units to at least have semi auto high capacity for them to effective against modern armies.

Let me make this clear I am not advocating armed resistance, civil war etc. I am speaking about American Law and culture which are the roots of this whole issue
I see you are from the East Coast. I would expect to see great differences in culture between there and here in Idaho as opinions in 2nd amendment issues. However we are at least in in a very large minority that's more than large enough to give the Federal government caution in its activities.
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

So we should stop gun violence by having more guns and gun training? How about we just don't have guns?
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

More gun training is absolutely part of the solution.

A lot of people, including a lot of children die due to accidents involving guns. Now, call me a communist, but I don't think a small child should ever be capable of shooting themselves accidentally with their parent's weapon. Educating gun owners about properly securing their weapons (and jailing gun owners who don't) will save lives.
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

They are identical in function. The stock does NOT change the function




The stock and rails does not improve accuracy. I know many people who are marksman with open site. And, the first can be outfitted with good hi-power scopes




They are identical in function. The stock does NOT change the function




They are identical in function. The stock does NOT change the function. Each can use hi cap mags




They are identical in function. The stock does NOT change the function
THEY ARE BOTH THE SAME GUN




SUPPRESSORS ARE NOT THAT EASY TO OBTAIN. SUPPRESSORS ARE CLASS 3

ALSO, YOU NEED CERTAIN AMMO TO DEADEN THE SOUND...BUT THIS WILL STILL GIVE AWAY YOUR POSITION AS SUPPRESSOR DO NOT COMPLETELY "SILENCE" THE ROUND TRAVELING
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

47martialman, since I'm drunk I'm not going to post in depth how stupid your rebuttal was and how much it lacked an understanding of what I was intending to get across in my post . . . so I'm just going to say "cool story bro" for now.

However, based off of that post I would not want you representing an argument for keeping assault rifles legal against any intelligent person who is concerned for the safety of the civilian population as it applies to firearm regulation.

I will continue to drink my Guiness and watch The Pacific and remember all those guys who are living sucky lives right now while we enjoy not having a draft here in the states because we have plenty willing to do the job our government decided we needed to do, which isn't exactly something to speak highly of itself depending on what light you look at it in.

Merry friggen Christmas.
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

It's basically impossible to get rid of illegal guns in the USA, due to our size and our porous borders (two issues that the UK and Japan haven't had to face). Just look at how unsuccessful our War on Drugs has been.

So long as it's basically impossible to disarm the "bad guys," then yes, more firearms ownership and firearms training by law-abiding citizens is better than a disarmed citizen populace.
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

For anyone who wants to go over semantics on weapons capabilities between the two rifles posted earlier in the thread I would like you to imagine this: Two groups of 50 men, one group with the first weapon, the other with the second. Allow the second group to have all the different things that weapon is capable of having that the first is not (or has to be SERIOUSLY modified in order to, which often transfers into unreliability). Assume those two groups of men are equal in capability (beyond all the special stuff the second has for their weapon) and stick them in combat against each other. By common sense (after everything I pointed out in my previous post) who do you think comes out on top?

There is a reason why the military spends money on an assault rifle vs. a traditional rifle even if it has more capability as far as trajectory/ballistics.

I'm not arguing against owning assault rifles, I'm arguing against misinformation and spinning an argument to suit your purposes. If you believe you should own a weapon that is clearly more capable then the same traditional style weapon . . . then stick by that, but don't try to make it sound like one weapon which is made to kill better is the same as one that is meant for hunting in the middle of the day in pristine conditions.
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

Misinformation to suit my purposes? Please. I know you're drunk, so I'm not going to hold it against you, but for the future, be more careful about accusing someone on the other side of a debate of deliberately falsifying or misleading.

You point out the magazine difference in the pictured Mini-14 Ranch Rifle and Mini-14 Tactical. If you had done research, you would have seen that both the Ranch Rifle and the Tactical can fit both 5-round and 20-round magazines. It's just that one is pictured with the five and one is pictured with the twenty.

You say that the stock on the tactical is more durable. First, I don't see why that matters; nether stock is going to fall apart during the course of an afternoon. Second, remember that axes and sledgehammers have wood handles, not metal-and-polymer handles. Wood is durable. A polymer stock is lighter, but it's definitely not sturdier than a traditional wood stock.

You say that a collapsible stock is more concealable. Marginally so, because they're both rifles with identical-length barrels at the end of the day and neither is very concealable at all. We're not talking handguns here.

You say that there's no rails for accessories on the ranch rifle. Well, so what? I don't remember underbarrel grenade launchers and bayonets ever being used in a massacre, and you don't need a fancy scope to shoot someone across a room.

You point out the traditional versus pistol grip. The difference here is minimal. For a heated battle between two trained soldiers of equal ability, that might tip the scales in one way or the other (though remember that throughout the Korean War and in the early Vietnam War, US soldiers used traditional grips despite the existence of pistol-gripped rifles--the difference is not THAT huge). For shooting unarmed civilians, it doesn't make a lick of difference. It's like French grips versus Visconti grips for fencing. For heated competition, I'd prefer a Visconti. If I was going to run through some unarmed individual, it really wouldn't matter.
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

I've sobered up a little bit so hold everything else I say from here on against me! Although I used your previous post, I am not directing what I have said against you as far as misleading information but i can see how you have drawn that conclusion. I was a bit peeved at 47martialman because every statement of his had to do with the stock of the rifle vs. everything else I had mentioned. Posting like that is incredibly annoying and I didn't see it contributing anything. Before I jump to any conclusions I want to state that when I get into these sorts of discussion I am on neither side of the debate, but am rather a truth/honesty seeker first. I do have my own beliefs, but I like to keep those silent as to not get accused by either side of anything. Currently it seems as if you believe me to be on the "other side," which I have just as many problems with in their arguments and I would like to make it clear that I am not taking a position anywhere currently.

As far as the magazine went I will state in my defense that I did say I was not certain if the magazines for the tactical rifle was the same for the more traditional style. Obviously with your input of further information they are the same.

My biggest problem with the dissection of the difference between these two weapon styles is the lack of acknowledgment in what the tactical/assault rifles can potentially have over the traditional style. I agree that a lot of differences are in fact minimal, but when you have 5 -10 minimal differences that make the weapon more effective, overall you have a much more effective weapon. I don't think the acknowledgement of this should be minimized or cast aside. Saying "these rifles are the same" is misleading, especially to those who are ignorant about weapons beyond "pull trigger go bang so far" and when said people start finding out about all these minor differences . . . you have to fight the same battle over and over again convincing them why they shouldn't think the way they are about it.

In all honesty the only real threat between these two weapons I can see in most scenarios, is the 3-4 inches of difference collapsing the stock would give for concealing the weapon a little easier. However I believe it is best to describe the full scope of capability differences, no matter how small, in order to avoid any further confusion, distrust, or plain ignorance in other people. On top of that I think the standards for ownership should be higher the more potential a weapon possesses for being a deadly tool.

One more thing, accessories that make a difference are not necessarily grenade launchers or bayonets, but rather things like peq-15's and surefires, or an ACOG, things I don't see going on the traditional style without some modification but have the potential to increase accuracy tremendously, and in close quarters.
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

Ruby Ridge and Waco Texas were poorly handled responses to heavily armed communes of fundamentalists. Hardly representational of the average gun owner. And Australia confiscated firearms from it's citizens just fine. A few people resisted violently, most did not. The notion that gun owners are silently guarding us from an abuse of government authority is absurdest fantasy. Our government would have little problem violently suppressing it's citizens if it were determined to do it. There would be resistance and rebellion, of course, and soldiers would die, but I suspect the tanks/air planes would trump the civilian AR-15s very efficiently long-term.
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

Ero--

Thanks for clarifying. The reason I referred to the two rifles as identical when I first raised the question of the Mini-14 Tactical and the Mini-14 Ranch Rifle is because they're identical for purposes of a civilian massacre, which is what we're worried about here. Legislation like the infamous "assault weapons ban" was feel-good legislation that outlawed features that really didn't matter in terms of the sort of massacres we've seen at the Aurora theater and the Sandy Creek elementary school. It made people think they'd "made a difference" when they really hadn't. That's what I was trying to explain.

For purposes of civilian crime, there's not really any difference between the Tactical and the Ranch Rifle. They both fire equally-powerful ammunition. They both fire at the same rate. They both can hold the same amount of ammunition. They both can be reloaded just as quickly. And those are things that people THOUGHT we were legislating with laws like the Assault Weapons Ban...but they weren't. Show most non-firearms owners pictures of the Mini-14 Tactical and Ranch Rifle and most will say that the Tactical is more powerful and can fire more bullets faster. And that's simply not true. That's what I'm trying to point out.

There are indeed differences from a military perspective, but these generally don't matter for civilian crime. A collapsable stock makes a big difference in how comfortably soldiers can fit inside a helicopter or transport plane (heck, that's why we introduced a folding stock on the paratrooper version of the M1 Carbine in World War II), but doesn't really matter in terms of shooting-up movie-goers or schoolkids. With or without a fixed stock, these rifles are too long to be concealed weapons. Mounting a tactical flashlight on an accessory rail can mean life-or-death in a nighttime raid to capture an insurgent leader, but it has no relevance whatsoever for shooting up a bunch of civilians in a school or theater. And I've never heard of a massacre involving an underbarrel grenade launcher or underbarrel shotgun. (The one and only accessory that has featured in civilian massacres is a scope or advanced sight, used by Charles Whitman and John Allen Muhaofftopicd, and those can be mounted on non-tactical weapons as well, as was the case with Whitman, who used a scoped bolt-action hunting rifle to massacre college students). The lighter polymer construction of tactical rifles matters when you're carrying the rifle all day for months at a time in blistering Middle East heat, but really doesn't have any effect on the rifle's killing power during a ten-minute massacre at a school or theater. The customizable ergonomics matter when you're dealing with heated firefights in close quarters with formidable opposing-force soldiers, but really doesn't affect the rifle's killing power when you're just opening the door of a classroom and shooting everyone inside.

So I'll agree with you that there are differences between the Mini-14 Ranch Rifle and Mini-14 Tactical. But in terms of the sorts of civilian crimes we're talking about, these differences don't matter. Legislation that focuses on those differences, like the Assault Weapons Ban, is chasing a red herring. These differences don't make any difference in how powerful a gun is, how fast it can fire, how many rounds it carries, and how fast it can be reloaded. I want to make sure we don't chase a similar red herring when we enact whatever sorts of new gun controls we're going to enact after Sandy Creek.
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

We had a woman here who drowned her kids in her bath. I'm thinking we should either ban water or have people register their bath.
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

One thing to consider is that at the time that the 2nd amendment was written guns were single shot black powder weapons. Nowadays a person with a modern civilian rifle has more fire power than a regiment did back then.

Maybe it's time for everyone on both sides to cool down and find some middle ground? I am against banning or registering guns but I do believe that there is some way we can come up with legislation to perhaps train and certify gun owners. Let the certification process be mandated by the government but run by and records maintained by perhaps the NRA. A certification ID could then be issued and it would be illegal to posses a gun without certification. This could get illegal guns off the street, no registration of guns or owners by the government and an opportunity to decrease the incidents like what just happened in Conn.

Just a thought.
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

@Mitlov

I definitely see your point, and I also agree with it. Something I don't think a lot of people don't realize is military power isn't made with assault rifles. Light, medium, and heavy machine guns, rockets, missile systems, artillery, mortars, tanks, jets/helos/planes, ships, and mass numbers make up our military might. My experience in the Marine Corps where rifles were used exclusively in close quarters . . . . you want a pistol for clearing door to door, room to room. Most of the time tactics with an assault rifle involve a maneuvering element to flank the enemy while a stationary unit lays suppressive fire. This involves a lot of rounds . . . far beyond what even a hoarder of ammunition civilian can produce if they decided to go on a rampage. The funny thing is . . . . the military can do that with a ranch style rifle too. The tactical/assault rifles benefit is the ability to mount all those gadgets to make people more accurate and able in different clime/places quickly, as well as enduring having to carry and handle the weapon for months at a time.

I agree that currently there has not been a civilian crime that involved the use of these features. A civilian getting hold of a 203 (attachable grenade launcher) is probably unheard of, much less getting a 40mm grenade to launch from it.

However I do still feel it is important that people understand the uses of a tactical vs. traditional rifle. I am forever changed in my perspective in the use of firearms because I know the full capabilities, how to find out those capabilities, and routes to access those capabilities. Although my experiences are not often shared with a lot of crime with the use of firearms, it only takes one to do it. By acknowledging the benefits of a tactical vs. traditional rifle I would hope that people could understand that there is not a difference as far as rate of fire and ability, but rather that the ability to purchase the tools to make it a more deadly weapon become harder to get and a level of responsibility and competency to be shown before you could purchase those tools rather then blaming one rifle over another. I say this because I know if I wanted to go on a rampage for a mass shooting or theft spree, that because of what I know and how to do it I could probably reach numbers twice that anyone before me has, and the information I know isn't exactly secret. I would say acknowledging those things is a necessary preventative measure, and people have to be informed to understand that. It really isn't about the rifle, it is about the tools and tactics you could use, all of which currently are pretty easily accessible.
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

At the time the Second Amendment was written, speech had the power of the streetcorner (a hundred listeners), not the power of the internet (a million). Yet the First Amendment applies to the internet as well.



Fully in favor of sensible, well-thought out legislation that regulates gun ownership. I just don't want a ban, or a badly-done knee-jerk legislative band-aid (like the system that makes me get groped in the groin when I go through an airport).
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

When ever I hear arguments about which gun is better I always think back to my instructors who had years of combat experience. When asked what was best their reply was terse and to the point, "the best gun is the gun in your hand and your training in them". Therefore we were trained in all major firearm families such as US, German,Soviet and Chinese block and European, Israeli etc. We were taught to shoot them, field strip them and their strengths and weakness. If your weapon was out of ammo you grabbed what was available and continued on. Combat is fluid and you have to flow with it.

What you have tricked out to your rifle is not as important as you think, Sights break. Lights lose battery power, high cap magazines are more prone to malfunction, etc. Dont depend on their presence or absence.
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

You can pound your chest all you want but the reality of being able to shoot your target with near 0% LUM, blind him when you enter the room, shoot him from a distance due to scopes, etc. will always out due iron sights in trained and capable hands. When it comes down to it, sure, all you have are the basics. Keep the weapon clean and functioning and you have a chance. Regardless, the more you have, the more capable you are. To emphasize Mitlov's point, we're not talking about warfare.

Special Forces armed to the teeth in technology get killed by guys with generation old AK's who run in the desert and climb monkey bars for training. I say that all the time and it goes along with what you're saying. But the kill ratio is still drastically different between who we're fighting, and what we're capable of and that is due to the higher percentage of killing ability our technology and training gives us. Just like fighting, everyone has a chance with that lucky/well placed basic punch or kick that you don't even need training in to perform. However, the more you know, the more tools in your box, the more you train, the more likely you are to win because you're a lot more capable in different situations.
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

I think we should register stupid people too. That way, we could ignore posts like this.
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

I am not pounding my chest. It sounds like you were in the Marines too but differant generations . However our night training was without the add on such as NVG etc. Nice to have but don't depend upon. NVG don't help you see at night what you can't see in daylight (except). Semper Fi
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top