Civilian ownership of "military style weapons"

[BAM-BAM]

As I've been reading over the past several days it's occured to me that American civilians have; at least for the past 120 years owned and used "military style weapons". But until the AR they haven't "looked" like the then current military issue weapon.

1890s-1917-Army went to the mag fed bolt action rifle....... civilians were still using lever actions and rolling block rifles from the "Indian wars"

1930s-1950s Army was developing the semi-auto M-1 Grande and m-1 Carbine....... civilians were using sporterized Springfields and Mausers from WWI. Police might have 1-2 Thompsons in the armory

1950s-1980s Army was going to select fire M-14 and M-16s.......civilians were getting their hands on surplus semi auto M-1s and carbines of WWII era. Police might have some Thompsons and M-1 carbines in the armory but rarely do they see the street.

1990s-today The Army is using M-4s select fire and burst...... civilians were getting into AR-15, Bushmasters and Armalites...... all semi's..... but to a non- shooter they look just like the military "assault rifles" they see on the evening news.... always being fired full auto (LOL)......Every police car seems to have a "M-16" in the gun rack.

Civilians for the most part are still a generation behind in technology; semi vs select or full auto....... but we; I mean you, look like "you" have military weapons!!!!!

How easy is that to demonize.......... I've noticed that the Ruger Mini-14 seems to escape notice....... hey it looks like a gun from WWII or with a 20rd mag a gun from the 50s.

just saying!!!!!

 

[Old TexMex]

So...miniguns are the next.... Nahh, nevermind....

 

[BAM-BAM]

Well maybe given that you are in "south Texas".......... of course they will be coming up from further "south" LOL

 

[SanJoseScott]

Spoilers were developed to keep the rear end of high speed race cars on the ground when racing. Ground effects skirts were developed to keep formula 1 cars in contact with the road at extreme speeds.

I can't count the number of spoilers there are on cars that will never NEED them and the amount of plastic on "fast and furious" type cars is truly impressive but they dont NEED it.

The bottom line is that AR owners have a semi automatic .223 rifle that has some dress up accessories that change the look. Just like the cars with spoilers and ground effects packages it is cosmetic and doesn't change the function of the gun....or car.

 

[BAM-BAM]

Scott..... no argument

My observation was that American's have been using "military style" weapons for over 100 years......without issue ....... well except for "Tommy guns"

The first mass shooting I can think of was in the 60's, the Texas Tower shooter........ the issue/question is what has changed in the past 12-15 years........to make 14-25 year old white males (for the most part) go on killing sprees......

video games?...... more and more violence in movies?....... Anti-heros vs heros in movies and TV.... Kids on meds?.... No parents at home after school..gun free zones? ........

I don't think the problem is access to "military style rifles" we have had access to high cap semi auto guns since 1935 with the Browning Hi-Power (13rounds) and the BAR in 30.06 ..... and M-1 rifles and carbines since the 50s.

 

[mkk41]

Some random thoughts.

The AR-15 has been on the civillian market since 1963. That's coming up on 50yrs. During the 60-70-80s , it really wasn't all that popular , except with SOME vets. Some loved it , some hated it. I hated it (M-16A1). I loved the M-14 and have owned at least 1 M-1A for over 25 years.

I do own a full-size Bushmaster -A2 spec AR. Bought it from a co-worker whose wife made him sell it. To me. Cheap. Maybe once or twice a year , I'll shoot a service rifle match at my gun club with it. I like to use old USGI 20rd mags , even though I rarely load more than 5-10 rds. I mostly shoot 5-shot strings.

All of a sudden , it's the devils right arm. There have been more mass murders with the AR in the past 5 years than the previous 45. Every time one of these massacres happen with an AR or other such semi-auto , more wacko's know what can be done with one and how easy it is to get one.

I could probably sell it now for 5x what I paid. If I sold all my 20 and 30rd mags at the going rate , I could probably buy a new truck.



Could there be something to the proliferation of cable TV and the sensationalism of these incidents by the commercial news outlets. These problem children , ruled by non-stop TV , video games , internet , etc. Mom and Dad are too busy chasing monetary wealth and social status. If these kids turn out to be a real social outcast , and become so introverted into their own little world , they know how to lash out and be talked about and effectively change the world , if for a short time.

No laws or potential punishment is doing to deter someone who is intent on killing themselves after committing their crime.

 

[SanJoseScott]

Scott..... no argument

My observation was that American's have been using "military style" weapons for over 100 years......without issue ....... well except for "Tommy guns"

The first mass shooting I can think of was in the 60's, the Texas Tower shooter........ the issue/question is what has changed in the past 12-15 years........to make 14-25 year old white males (for the most part) go on killing sprees......

video games?...... more and more violence in movies?....... Anti-heros vs heros in movies and TV.... Kids on meds?.... No parents at home after school..gun free zones? ........

I don't think the problem is access to "military style rifles" we have had access to high cap semi auto guns since 1935 with the Browning Hi-Power (13rounds) and the BAR in 30.06 ..... and M-1 rifles and carbines since the 50s.

No, Bam-bam I apologize for the tangent on your post. You are right on about the transition of "military" arms to civilians over time and the generational gap you point out. My feeble attempt at illustration of the looks versus function aspect perhaps was off base a bit.

 

[keith44spl]

Scott..... no argument

My observation was that American's have been using "military style" weapons for over 100 years......without issue ....... well except for "Tommy guns"

.

Ya could be gettin a lit'l outta yur depth on that statement, right thar


Su Amigo,
Dave

 

[jtpur]

The other day two people debated "military style assault weapons" The anti gun person said, So if civilians Need assault rifles they can have shoulder fired rocket launchers. No said the gun guy, and he explained his reasons, that guns keep the government in check. The anti gunner said that made no sense because the government would win. The gun guy said we. Don't have to win just make the government know there would be bloodshed, and the government doesn't want to be like Syria and fire on their citizens. The anti gunner would have no part of the logic, but the gun guy would not agree that shoulder fired rocket launchers were necessary.

Had the Branch Davidians had a shoulder fired rocket launcher, they may have prevented the Governments armored CEV from knocking the walls of the compound down which would have prevented the Military grade 651e1 pyrotec gas grenades from causing a massive inferno, killing 67 human beings, 19 ( I think was the number of kids)childeren ages As young as one killed. Perhaps we should arm citizens with military style assault weapons and ban them from the Government. I believe the Government is a bit more reckless and just think, those guys were supposed to be sane.

 

[Poodle Soup]

Ya could be gettin a lit'l outta yur depth on that statement, right thar


Su Amigo,
Dave

Also the only concealable sized gun you could walk around chicago with at the time.... crazy corrupt politicians never change do they.

 

[BAM-BAM]

Kieth44

LOL on that ad....... it cracks me up every time I see it.... I'm more of "The Duke" with a big loop 92/94 kind of guy..

OK, there are some really bad JW 30s Westerns.. but.. I loved " The Shootest"...... 2 engraved blue colts with ivory grips... in .45lc.........

the "Tommy Gun" is more of a "urban", dare I say,....... street sweeper........................

 

[Xtasy]

somebody should strip a AR15 and wrap it into a gun with wood stock etc.. Tada the evil military gun is now a nice friendly good looking gun..

 

[Pasifikawv]

Cosmetics and color do not an "assault weapon" make.

Modern sporting rifles and carbines like the AR-15 are small-caliber firearms intended for civilian use in sport and recreational shooting. They are the most popular sporting rifle in America, rarely used in crime, but the standard for shooting sport and competition. Given their tremendous popularity, they often serve as home defense once off the range.

Modern sporting rifles do not fire any faster (one round per trigger squeeze) than pappy's revolver; they fire a round much smaller than pappy's .45 caliber revolver; they fire only one .22 caliber projectile per trigger squeeze whereas pappy's shotgun fires nine (9) .30 caliber projectiles with one trigger press; they operate no differently than pappy's Ranch Rifle used for varmint control and small-game hunting.

The term "assault weapon" (or "military-style assault weapon" as preferred by the President) is blatantly and admittedly designed to gin up fear and create confusion. The intent is for the public unfamiliar with firearms tech to think that these civilian sporting arms are rapid-fire, high-power, large-caliber, automatic weapons. They are not.

Military-style assault weapons have been banned and tightly controlled since the 1930s. Civilian firearms that fire one round per trigger press have been around for ages and are not "military-style assault weapons" or "assault rifles." They are small-caliber sporting arms.

While their function is different, these sporting arms are the most cosmetically-similar to those glorified in sadistic and violent video games. It isn't any wonder that mental cases going on some violent Zombie/Warcraft/Grand Theft-like rampage they dreamed up in their insanity-fueled basement netherworld end up choosing something that emulates their psychotic X-Box fantasy. .... But it's all the gun's fault....

 

[HotRoderX]

Couldn't this be turned around thought? Which sector has more guns the Military or civilian? I would think if its the civilian market then we could say military guns look to civilian perhaps?

All joking aside I think calling something a "Military Gun" is just plane dumb. The best comparison I can think of at the moment is cell phones. Recently Apple sued Samsung over the design of there flagship phones.

The lawsuit basically said Apple had the rights to a rectangle with rounded edges. This pretty much sums up 99.9% of cell phones out there today. Manufactures figured out a while back that the basic design of a rectangle with rounded edges is easier to hold and pleasing to the eye. All manufactures went with this its a basic evolution process.

We have seen the same thing with guns if you look thought the years all guns pretty much share the same basic shape compare a Glock to a 1911. There the same basic shape as each other there made of different materials and the interfaces are different. I never heard some one call the 1911 a assault weapon. I have heard people call the Glock one thought

What I am getting at is the way a Rifle/Handgun looks is not what makes it "Military" Its the insides of the weapon in question. Semi Auto VS Full Auto.

One step further Hummer vs Humvee there both produced by the same company that makes military vehicles they both look the same from the outside but there two completely different products.

 

[calmex]

Could there be something to the proliferation of cable TV and the sensationalism of these incidents by the commercial news outlets. These problem children , ruled by non-stop TV , video games , internet , etc. Mom and Dad are too busy chasing monetary wealth and social status. If these kids turn out to be a real social outcast , and become so introverted into their own little world , they know how to lash out and be talked about and effectively change the world , if for a short time.

No laws or potential punishment is doing to deter someone who is intent on killing themselves after committing their crime.

I have often wondered (and no, I am not a Doctor or a shrink, nor do I play one on T.V.) how often these mass-shooters are deliberately hoping that their vile act will change the gun-control laws and make them into someone "who changed things" instead of your average murderous psycho. It's impossible to ask, they always kill themselves, and the opinions of everyone afterwards are just opinions, nothing solid.

70 years ago, fanatics crashed their planes onto Allied ships to try to change the course of the war. In modern times, suicide bombers attack their targets -- intending to die in the attempt -- to try to force social or religous change.

A lot of these mass-shooters tested out to be quite intelligent, I've heard, whether or not they had "problems". They had to know in advance that their acts would cause a certain public reaction. They may well know -- and intend -- to provoke the kind of change their acts invoke to somehow justify to themselves that "it's okay, I'll have counted for something".

I don't know, I'm just saying it's something I've wondered about over the years.

 

[Buffalohunter60]

IF OB ever sees Bob Munden shoot a revolver, they will be banning them next.

 

[mkk41]

I have often wondered (and no, I am not a Doctor or a shrink, nor do I play one on T.V.) how often these mass-shooters are deliberately hoping that their vile act will change the gun-control laws and make them into someone "who changed things" instead of your average murderous psycho. It's impossible to ask, they always kill themselves, and the opinions of everyone afterwards are just opinions, nothing solid.

70 years ago, fanatics crashed their planes onto Allied ships to try to change the course of the war. In modern times, suicide bombers attack their targets -- intending to die in the attempt -- to try to force social or religous change.

A lot of these mass-shooters tested out to be quite intelligent, I've heard, whether or not they had "problems". They had to know in advance that their acts would cause a certain public reaction. They may well know -- and intend -- to provoke the kind of change their acts invoke to somehow justify to themselves that "it's okay, I'll have counted for something".

I don't know, I'm just saying it's something I've wondered about over the years.

I doubt if gun control laws or changing them , or any laws , are even part of their thinking. They don't have the attachment to the firearms hobby most of us have.

Same with the people who drive sport/muscle cars or motorcycles like maniacs have no concern or regard for current or potential laws. All they care about is their own satisfaction at the moment. All of a sudden , YOU shouldn't have a motorcycle because of all those idiots shown on TV doing stupid stunts , getting hurt , driving the health care cost expense arguement at the same time parents and other bleeding heart do-gooders are blaming the the media and ultimately , the objects , cars/motorcycles , that THEY bought for the kid..

 

[calmex]

Yes, you're probably right. Trying to understand these wackos from any normal perspective seems pretty useless because they are not normal to begin with.

 

[mkk41]

Yes, you're probably right. Trying to understand these wackos from any normal perspective seems pretty useless because they are not normal to begin with.

Same with the wealthy vs the working class. Average people shouldn't have guns. They say if you're afraid , simply move to a big gated property or exclusive community with alarms and private security patrol.

Still not feeling secure? Hire private body guards.

Can't afford it? Then you must be poorer than us (because you didn't apply yourself) and you don't count.

 

[Poodle Soup]

Same with the wealthy vs the working class. Average people shouldn't have guns. They say if you're afraid , simply move to a big gated property or exclusive community with alarms and private security patrol.

Still not feeling secure? Hire private body guards.

Can't afford it? Then you must be poorer than us (because you didn't apply yourself) and you don't count.

Our HR reps at work actually told us this lol.

"And if we are not able to make it in to work due to the weather?"

"Well you choose where you live its not our fault you live in X neighborhood instead of Y neighborhood."

whole time thinking to my self you pay me barley enough to keep the lights on and put gas in the car to get to this **** hole... and now you think I should move closer?