Gunmaker Arms the Military and the Stars

ap ^ | Nov 25, 11:21 AM EST | ROSE FRENCH

[elbucko]

Well, if you had 1,000 Barretts lined up, SOMEBODY would have to hit it, right?

Nope! Not a chance. Even if all the rifles were scoped. The dynamics of target velocity, altitude, winds aloft, projectile velocity, projectile profile, etc, all conspire to miss the target. I could go on but even a thousand rifles do not raise the odds of a hit up to 1:1. It is obvious that these "critics" have never hunted desert dove or Canadian Geese on the wing with a 12ga., or they would know the impossibility of hitting an aircraft either close and fast or high and slow.

What I find to be curious about these critics is that they also tend to be against the US having an Anti-Ballistic Missile system based on the issues of "accuracy" and cost.

[MediaMole]

It would be fascinating to see a first draft of this story before the editors got hold of it. Somehow, I suspect this started out as a profile of Barrett and his rifles, but became aa bigger anti-gun screed with each revision.

[SeaWolf]

Utter stupidity.

"Joseph King, a terrorism expert at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York, said terrorists could use the weapon to take out a plane."

Really...they why did the P-51 and F-86 have 6 .50 BMG guns and the P-47 8 if all you needed was one round?

Earlier in the article we had:

"But the powerful gun has drawn plenty of critics, who say the rifle could be used by terrorists to bring down commercial airliners or penetrate rail cars and storage plants holding hazardous materials."

A few years back a rather tipsy individual shot a hole in the trans Alaska pipeline with a plain old .338. Any of the big game rounds (.375 .458 not to mention the Weatherby speedsters such as the .378 and .460) This is just another anti-gun lunatic fringe group out to ban all guns a little at a time.

[langleyaction]

Just in general, reducing recoil is a process of "spreading" the rearward recoil impulse, which is only measured in milliseconds duration to some longer period of time by the ingenious use of springs, pads, fluidic damping, etc.
Presumably some of these techniques are used here with this slug-thrower. I once (only) fired a large caliber rifle (maybve it was something like a .458) and I did not want to fire it again.

[El Gato]

Boy, you could gut (maybe skin, too!) your deer with one shot!

Ain't fer hunting deer, nor even elephants. They're fer hunting tyrants.

They're militia weapons, as defined by the Surpeme Court in the Miller decision of 1939.

[rellimpank]

--I don't know where you would have to go to see it but Barrett used to have a simulator at gunshows to demonstrate the recoil of the typical Barrett rifle--

[El Gato]

The only thing it's good for is for military or police application.

The militia serves both a military and police function, in the latter role it is known as the posse commitatus

[rellimpank]

---yes--the Barrett is a lot easier to shoot than a Ruger #1 African .458---

[rellimpank]

"Joseph King, a terrorism expert at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York, said terrorists could use the weapon to take out a plane."

--sounds about like the typical "expert"--wonder what else he knows that he doesn't really know --

[dhuffman@awod.com]

Yes. This is the most succinct and correct comment. They are anti-tyrant weapons. Unfortunately here in the good ol' USA tyrants are the favored form of rule. Democracy is the rule of fools by fools. Americans are to be ruled by laws and not by mere men.

[Right Wing Assault]

I would love to see the complete list of shooting toys the Hollywood folks own. They can and do buy anything that is fun. I bet they could put together a small army. Of course, they would be against US owning them.

[proud_yank]

I would be curious to see how the common criminal plans on stuffing this into his belt-line:



Officer: "Excuse me sir, is that a Barrett 50 in your pants, or are you just excited that I pulled you over??"

[Towed_Jumper]

"Barrett and other gun advocacy groups heavily lobbied the state of California, the first state to pass a law making it illegal to make and sell the gun."

As a result of Los Angeles and California banned the .50-Cals Ronnie Barrett took an appropriate and bold step - he no longer sells or services any of his weapons to California LE agencies.

Here's a copy of the text he includes in has advertising:

"The California Legislature has banned the .50 BMG from the good citizens of the state of California violating their rights and the constitution of our republic. Therefore, Barrett will not sell to or services any California government agencies."

Kudos to Ronnie Barrett for putting principals before sales. Now if Glock and Sig would do the same...say, in places like Massachusetts, Chicago, Baltimore, Boston, etc...t

[Tarantulas]

Very dangerous elements gravitate toward these weapons."

Really? Which ones?

[El Gato]

Bullsh*t! A 50 cal is as useless against a tank a 100 yards as a spitwad, much less a mile.

Probably depends on how loosely one defines a tank. It would be useful against a PTR, or BTR, or for that matter an M113 or even a Stryker. Even the rear or top armor of some true tanks.

But of course these Bozos are just repeating whatever slop they hear from the Brady Bunch.

[Spirochete]

"has drawn a customer base of gun enthusiasts, Hollywood actors

This surely must be a typo..."

More of case of lib's "Do as I say, not as I do" ethos. Gun control is for the untermenschen, not the intelligenstia & glitterati.

[El Gato]

Anybody know what ammo costs for that gun? I have heard $4 a round and up.. Better go out and buy one before they are outlawed.....

I'm looking at an ad in SGN (www.jgsales.com) as I type. Remanufactured Mil surplus, FMJ, 150 rounds for $199.00.

It goes UP from there. Especially for specialty loadings, AP is a bit higher, some of the others A LOT higher.

[LibWhacker]

Taliban vs. .50cal (2.3MB)

[logic]

How do you figure?

The Miller case determined it was perfectly appropriate for the government to regulate weapons that had no millitary purpouse. They claimed the second amendment only protected weapons with a military purpouse. The case applied that to probably the favored weapon in the trenches of WWI, the sawed-off shotgun.

Therefore, I would suggest, using the same logic, the .50 is perfectly suitable for government bans since it is undeniably used in military combat, it must have no military purpouse...

[logic]

Of course he's an expert:

Ex = old has been.
Spurt = a drip under pressure.