Posted on 12/30/2023 5:38:12 AM PST by MtnClimber
Perhaps some gun maker could bring back the 26 shot Evans Lever action rifle from the 1880s.
https://topwar.ru/uploads/posts/2021-08/1629341513_31_-evans_repeating_rifle_co_ad_-_feat_tj.jpg
And I'll bet she's "gender queer".
If the paper trail leads to you, they’ll come looking. “I sold it.” may not get you off the hook with bona fide fascists.
Not to quibble but this is just not true. I've assembled and disassembled both top to bottom. My personal ARs were all built by me. The only difference in design is a drillhole and a sear.
IMO - the "oh it looks scary but it's not" argument is a fail legally and on principal. We're allowed, by law, to have both, and both are deadly... as intended.
Most shooters are actually *more deadly without select-fire. Almost zero mil or leo use full-auto 5.56, for good reason.
Gun grabbers will say that “Sportig Rifle” meas you want to shoot up a sporting event.
See Post #24
“*ARs do not fire a “high-powered” cartridge.”
That one fact will absolutely blow a liberal’s mind. They actually think that the scarier the gun looks, the more powerful it is. They are like the orcs in 40k, who think that the louder a weapon is, the more powerful it is.
ARs are Anti-Tyrant rifles.
and at the bottom of the lake...
Most of us know this, but the 7th Circuit must have forgotten that SCOTUS ruled in 1939 that the 2nd Amendment protects ownership of small arms suitable for militia service. AR15’s might be less robust and capable for regular military service compared to M16’s and M4’s, but they are 100% suitable for irregular “militia” service. That AR’s are also very popular “sporting rifles” is irrelevant to the legal case, except that ubiquity, widespread familiarity, and a standard US military chambering are characteristics of a good militia weapon. See below:
“In 1939 the U.S. Supreme Court heard the case United States v. Miller, ruling that through the National Firearms Act of 1934, Congress could regulate the interstate selling of a short barrel shotgun. The court stated that there was no evidence that a sawed off shotgun “has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia,” and thus “we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument.”
Here’s a fun video that shows the mechanics of an AR in great detail.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=omv85cLfmxU&pp=ygUcaG93IGFuIGFyIDE1IHdvcmtzIGFuaW1hdGlvbg%3D%3D
Most people don’t know this but the beauty of the 5.56 X 45 cartridge. Is it doesn’t always kill. but it causes significant tissue damage. In a battle you leave the dead until it is quiet, but a wounded guy takes three or more people out of the battle. Simple logistics.
This doesn’t matter to Russsian soldiers as the officers don’t care about each soldier, but most other armies do.
I don’t own an AR platform, I’m a 30 Caliber guy.
I want something that penetrates body armor.
5.56 is so weak that US Army is switching to a 6.8x51 higher pressure round beginning in a few months. Sig-Sauer is building the new XM7 rifles.
That’s why the Ruger Mini-14 is still popular. It’s a gas-operated semi-auto chambered in 5.56, but it looks less “assaulty” to the general public.
https://ruger.com/products/mini14RanchRifle/specSheets/5802.html
The idea that the Second Amendment permits the government to ban the people from having instruments of war is false and dangerous. This mistaken notion has led to the government trying to outlaw pistols, bayonet lugs ( not just bayonets), and so-called “short-barreled rifles”.
There are numerous instances in human history where people are obliged to abolish their form of government using force. The Second Amendment is intended to make that less likely for Americans to face and easier for Americans to accomplish.
A properly timed Garand won’t do that. There are four main parts that control/affect the timing: Bullet Guide, Follower Arm, Follower Rod and Operating Rod Catch. Then there’s the timing block insert you can use to verify proper operation.
For the majority of liberals that may be true. But the Democrats in power don’t want you to have an effective defense against a tyrannical government.
I think I need a Mini-14 that accepts AR magazines.
interesting here
https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/founding-fathers-knew-repeating-rifles-bill-rights-drafted/
𝘐 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘬 𝘐 𝘯𝘦𝘦𝘥 𝘢 𝘔𝘪𝘯𝘪-14 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘢𝘤𝘤𝘦𝘱𝘵𝘴 𝘈𝘙 𝘮𝘢𝘨𝘢𝘻𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘴.
Ruger would have to completely redesign the rifle to accomplish that. I like the Mini, and think it’s well thought out, and underrated for what it is. L. James “Jim” Sullivan did amazing work scaling the AR-10 down, and later going to work for Bill Ruger and doing the same with the M-14; that being said, I don’t see a lot that can be done to further improve the Mini without redesigning it which would ultimately increase costs.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
