Deployed soldiers put new shotgun to the test

Army Times ^ | Feb 09, 2004 | Matthew Cox

[Boot Hill]

Travis McGee:   "VERY interesting! Time to revisit Miller..."

For those interested, here are the two premier links to summarize all the critical details of that most important case. BOOK MARK THESE LINKS!

U.S. v. Miller, the guide -- The complete guide to everything you've ever wanted to know about this landmark case

U.S. v. Miller, the text -- The complete text of the Supreme court decision

Travis McGee:   "maybe someone should saw off a shotgun to ten inches and take it out to a public range, with lawyers and cameras?"

Look Travis, I hate lawyers as much as the next guy, but how's it going to help matters to blast away at a couple of lawyers with sawed off shotguns? Oh, wait, what if we use some ex's divorce lawyer? That could work and the cameras, now that's a good touch. We could make a fortune selling the video of those lawyers being pureed to the consistency of tomato soup! What music should we accompany that video with? Best not make the music too loud though, we don't want to drown out the agonized screams and pleas for mercy from those retro-grade slime balls! Can we start with rock salt?

--Boot Hill

[SJSAMPLE]

Wrong concept.
Putting a shotgun under the M4/M16 gives you one large and unwieldy weapon. The standard shotgun provides a much more useful solution.

[teeman8r]

in an interesting turn of events, the maryland legislature is trying to classify any weapon with any military characteristics as an assault weapon and then ban them... seems they want the law both ways, no military application denotes no useful ownership and if it has a use in the military then it is an assault weapon. i am sad to say i live in the state of great confusion on the east coast...

teeman

[Centurion2000]

interesting ..... looks like they just provided the perfect challenge to Miller.

[COBOL2Java]

On the downside, the new shotguns cost $1,700 each...

Oooooh, Senator Kerry, this is wayyy too much to be spending on the military, right? Senator Kerry? Sir, your comment please...?

[TheErnFormerlyKnownAsBig]

I volunteer you. You're old. They'd never want the bad press of prosecuting an old man.

[katana]

I think the article mentions that the shotgun is a simple "bolt action" not a gas fed semi-automatic where the bolt would be thrown back on each shot. That being said, I also thought his hand placement looks a bit iffy. The recoil might give him a very sore thumb joint.

[katana]

I think the article mentions that the shotgun is a simple "bolt action" not a gas fed semi-automatic where the bolt would be thrown back on each shot. That being said, I also thought his hand placement looks a bit iffy. The recoil might give him a very sore thumb joint.

[xsrdx]

Primary use is envisioned for non-lethal munitions, and door breaching. Most units do not have shotguns readily available, this option was chosen as it provides a limited capability quickly.

Manual, bolt action, single shot.

[PISANO]

My kinda weapon! I want one!

[LibTeeth]

40 yards might be a lttle optimistic for buckshot out of an 8 inch barrel, both in terms of scatter and retained velocity. On the other hand, a New York Reload to an attached smooth bore might be faster than an empty rifle magazine change at more social distances. Transitioning to a sidearm might be a better solution to that problem. I wonder what problem this is trying to solve?

[TLI]

the new shotguns cost $1,700 each...

I wonder what problem this is trying to solve?

At 1,700.00 per rig it better be a darned tough issue.

[FooBarBaz]

You are obviously lying, RKV. The Miller decision tells us definitively that short barreled shotguns have no place on the battlefield. In fact, based on Miller, I think this whole thread is a hoax. ;)

[RKV]

"When courts fail to engage in oversight or even distort the Constitution to rationalize the ultra vires actions of government, and when academics and political activists aid and abet them in this activity by devising ingenious rationalizations for ignoring the Constitution's words, they are playing a most dangerous game. For they are putting at risk the legitimacy of the lawmaking process and risking the permanent disaffection of significant segments of the people."

Randy Barnett[**] quoted in CAN THE SIMPLE CITE BE TRUSTED?: LOWER COURT INTERPRETATIONS OF UNITED STATES V. MILLER AND THE SECOND AMENDMENT by Brannon P. Denning, Copyright © 1996 Cumberland Law Review. Originally published as 26 Cumb. L. Rev. 961-1004 (1996).

Since we are talking about Miller, you might enjoy this - http://www.guncite.com/journals/dencite.html

[RKV]

Door breaching and room clearing.

[TLI]

and risking the permanent disaffection of significant segments of the people."

Never has so much been said by so few words.

T L I

[RKV]

Barnett is an ace alright - I am ordering his new book. Do read the article on the link, too. It really ought to be required reading in high school civics, at least for those who can determine what the meaning of "is" is.