Hey Guest, it looks like you haven't made your first post yet. Until you make an introduction thread, the rest of the site is locked to posting. Why not take a few minutes to say hi!

Military Rifles

1156 Views 5 Replies 5 Participants Last post by chasw, Oct 13, 2016

chasw

Discussion Starter · Oct 12, 2016

The 6.8 SPC was designed as a military cartridge, with optimum performance (i.e., striking power out to 300 meters) from the AR-15 family of rifles. Meanwhile, US gun haters are determined to prohibit private ownership of modern military rifles by nibbling away at key military characteristics: high-cap mags, flash hiders, bayonet mounts, etc. Unspoken is their fear of armed resistance somewhere down the road, "weapons of war on our streets".

Accordingly, if you want to own and shoot an AR-15 in military configuration, I suggest you start accumulating the necessary parts before panic buying sets in and your state legislature follows in the footsteps of California, Connecticut, New York, et al to ban ownership. Sometimes, as a compromise, existing rifles are grandfathered in.

In my case, two of my four AR-15 rifles (pictured below) are configured for military use, even though I am way too old to serve again in any useful capacity beyond my local neighborhood. For me, its a nostalgia thing. The one above is chambered in 6.8, I call it my "US Carbine, 6.8mm, XM5". It weighs 5 lbs, 13 oz, without magazine. The one below is a full size 5.56 with rifle gas, buffer etc. It weighs 7 lbs, 10 oz. My other two rifles (not pictured) are optimized for purely civilian use, an ultra-light 6.8 for hunting and a heavy .223 for punching little holes in paper. Get it while you can - CW

See less See more

Save

1 - 6 of 6 Posts

Texas Hog Man

· #2 · Oct 12, 2016 (Edited)

Those aren't military rifles, nor are they assault rifles, they are modern sporting rifles
It doesn't mater what you call them though as the uneducated will still try to take them away, with the media feeding the frenzy

Nothing wrong with a military rifle anyway, I own a 6.5x55 "military" bolt action rifle from 1890's, and a 7.7x58 "military" bolt action rifle from 1940's, I also own a 30-30 lever action rifle based off the design of an 1860's "military" lever action rifle, and also a few black powder "military" style muzzle loader replica rifles --- that is where the roots of the 2nd amendment come from, being able to protect your person and property with "military" or other style rifles

Save

Kiran04

· #3 · Oct 12, 2016

All of the things gun banners pick at that they think defines an "assault" rifle is all bull**** anyways. They think pistol grips and adjustable stocks are scary, but what they're really saying is, "You're not allowed to be comfortable or shoot accurately while holding a rifle.", which is just garbage. If you have to pick apart accessories to try and sound technical then I know you're an idiot.

Save

Nick M

· #4 · Oct 12, 2016

chasw said:
Accordingly, if you want to own and shoot an AR-15 in military configuration, I suggest you start accumulating the necessary parts before panic buying sets in and your state legislature follows in the footsteps of California, Connecticut, New York, et al to ban ownership.

My suggestion is to not live in those states.

Texas Hog Man said:
Those aren't military rifles, nor are they assault rifles, they are modern sporting rifles

Correct. Last I checked, neither of mine has select fire capability.

Don't be surprised if the thread ends up in "General Discussion".

Save

grayfox

· #5 · Oct 12, 2016

Texas Hog Man said:
Those aren't military rifles, nor are they assault rifles, they are modern sporting rifles
It doesn't mater what you call them though as the uneducated will still try to take them away, with the media feeding the frenzy

Nothing wrong with a military rifle anyway, I own a 6.5x55 "military" bolt action rifle from 1890's, and a 7.7x58 "military" bolt action rifle from 1940's, I also own a 30-30 lever action rifle based off the design of an 1860's "military" lever action rifle, and also a few black powder "military" style muzzle loader replica rifles --- that is where the roots of the 2nd amendment come from, being able to protect your person and property with "military" or other style rifles

IMO, the six-gun, the 30-30, the bolt-action rifle, all were in effect WMD's of their day. They allowed a single person to go way beyond the single-shot that was prevalent back then. Heck, the bow and arrow was a WMD when compared to the sword of that day... an archer could shoot 10-15 people from a distance whereas the swordsman was stuck with trying to get up close and kill 'em one at a time...

But libs never let facts stand in the way of their quest for power.

Save

chasw

Discussion Starter · #6 · Oct 13, 2016

Nick M said:
My suggestion is to not live in those states.

Correct. Last I checked, neither of mine has select fire capability.

Don't be surprised if the thread ends up in "General Discussion".

No state with a major urban center (e.g., Washington, Arizona, Colorado, Georgia) is safe from its own legislature. Also, full auto capability may be a defining characteristic of "assault weapons", but many military and paramilitary establishments around the world are equipped with AR-15 pattern service rifles which are semi auto in function.

Curiously, Soviet infantry doctrine called for "human wave" assaults with full auto fire. Accordingly, modern Russian and allied countries military rifles typically sport muzzle brakes. However, US infantry doctrine (since the Korean War) emphasizes night fighting, thus US and allied forces use flash hiders on their service rifles. This is the misguided reason why gun-hating states tend to ban flash hiders and insist their subjects "pin and weld" brakes on their threaded muzzles. If Russian citizens were in the same predicament, their Duma would probably ban muzzle brakes. - CW

Save

1 - 6 of 6 Posts

Top Contributors this Month