Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Gunmaker Arms the Military and the Stars
ap ^ | Nov 25, 11:21 AM EST | ROSE FRENCH

Posted on 11/25/2005 10:02:03 AM PST by BenLurkin

MURFREESBORO, Tenn. (AP) -- When U.S. soldiers need to penetrate a tank's armor from a mile away, they count on a weapon that evolved from the garage tinkering of a former wedding photographer.

The .50-caliber rifle created by Ronnie Barrett and sold by his company, Barrett Firearms Manufacturing Inc., is the most powerful firearm civilians can buy. It weighs about 30 pounds and can hit targets up to 2,000 yards away with armor-piercing bullets.

That kind of power has drawn a customer base of gun enthusiasts, Hollywood actors and Barrett's most loyal buyer, the U.S. military, which has been buying Barrett's rifles since the 1980s and using them in combat from the 1991 Gulf War to the present.

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.

For years some state and federal lawmakers have sought to limit or ban the gun's sale, as California did this year.

Tom Diaz, a senior policy analyst with the Washington-based Violence Policy Center, says the guns should be more regulated and harder to purchase. The gun can now be bought by anyone 18 or older who passes a background check.

"They're (.50 caliber) easier to buy than a handgun," Diaz said. "These are ideal weapons of terrorist attack. Very dangerous elements gravitate toward these weapons."

The majority of Barrett's sales come from military orders, for armed forces and police departments in some 50 allied countries. Every branch of the U.S. military uses the rifles, and the Department of Defense last year spent about $8 million on his firearms, Barrett said.

Barrett estimates about 1,000 of his rifles - which each cost between $3,500 and $10,000 - have been used in both the 1991 Gulf War and the current war in Iraq.

The guns are used by most civilians for hunting big game and in marksmanship competitions. Civilian sales are crucial to business because military and police orders can fluctuate year to year, Barrett said.

"It's like, what does a 55-year-old man do with a Corvette? You drive it around and enjoy it," said Barrett, 51, whose customers include doctors, lawyers, movie makers and actors. "I know all the current actors who are Barrett rifle shooters, some Academy Award-winning people. But they don't publicize it. They love to play with them and have fun. Shooting is very fun."

A 1999 investigation by the U.S. General Accounting Office found the rifles were available on civilian markets with fewer restrictions than those placed on handguns. Ammunition dealers were willing to sell armor-piercing bullets even when an agent pretending to be a buyer said he wanted the ammunition for use against armored limousines or "to take a helicopter down."

Other reports have observed the rifles have made their way to terrorists, drug cartels and survivalists.

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.

"I don't understand what good a .50-caliber is going to do you," King said. "I don't understand any civilian use of it. The only thing it's good for is for military or police application. You can't really hunt with it because it would destroy most of the meat."

Barrett and gun advocates say the gun's power has been exaggerated and doesn't pose a threat to citizens because the weapons are too expensive and heavy to be used by criminals.

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. Several other states and some federal lawmakers have introduced similar legislation.

Despite these efforts, Barrett says sales are up nearly $6 million from last year thanks to recent military and police orders.

The New York City Police Department recently announced it's training officers in its aviation unit to use the rifles, which will be on board some of the department's helicopters to intercept potential attacks from boats or airplanes. In 2002, the Army placed an order for 4,200 of the guns, Barrett said.

Other manufacturers now make the gun, but Barrett dominates the market.

In the next few years, he said he plans to more than double the current number of employees, 80, and the size of his 20,000-square-foot gun-making facility located in Murfreesboro, about 30 miles southeast of Nashville.

A lifelong gun enthusiast, Barrett never went to college and worked as a commercial photographer and reserve deputy for years before he started tinkering with the .50-caliber Browning Machine Gun in the early 1980s.

The heavy recoil of the Browning made it nearly impossible to shoot without it being mounted on a turret, but Barrett's rifle reduces recoil to the point where it can be shoulder-fired, while the weapon rests on a bipod.

Barrett says he was nearly $1.5 million in debt at one point trying to get the business on its feet. He sold his first guns to the military in the late 1980s and the long-range weapons gained popularity after they were used to attack Iraqi tanks in the 1991 war.

Barrett's son, Chris, who works with his sister at their father's business, said he watched his dad build the gun in the family garage and is not surprised by the growth and success of his father's business.

"He's worked hard all his life. I think he would do as well at anything he pursued," Chris Barrett said. "He's not one of these big suits, a CEO at the top of one these big money machines. He's not one to back down. He can make anything work, no matter what he's doing."

---


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; US: Tennessee
KEYWORDS: bang; banglist; barrett; stupidmedia
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-95 next last
To: CommandoFrank

Some of the women actors actually just buy the ammo. ;-)


61 posted on 11/25/2005 1:25:45 PM PST by School of Rational Thought (Republican - The thinking people's party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: El Gato

While I have never gone Elk hunting, from what I have seen on some TV shows, those animals are big and these guys take shots at some extreme distances.

It seems that moose are also very large, but can be shot at closer distances.

If I ever were to go hunt water buffalo I think I would want one, especially if being charged. They appear to have skulls like boulders.



62 posted on 11/25/2005 1:29:33 PM PST by School of Rational Thought (Republican - The thinking people's party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: El Gato

Try www.sportsmansguide.com They had belted 50 BMG for around $110 for a box of 100 rds.


63 posted on 11/25/2005 2:24:21 PM PST by Deguello (Women will be the death of me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Puppage
Yeah, 5ft+ long, and cost more than 3k. Much easier to buy & conceal, too.

There are some, carbine versions even 42" long, that are single shot for around $2200.

What an idiot.

Definitely. But then they are hoplophobes, so what do expect?

64 posted on 11/25/2005 2:49:24 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Awestruck
isn't this the gun that Arnold banned?

Yeh, but some manufactures are coming out with them in a different claiber, only the .50 BMG was banned, one slightly larger in bore diameter. :)

65 posted on 11/25/2005 2:52:09 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: AEMILIUS PAULUS
How does one avaoid breaking or dislocating one's shoulder when firing this thing?

They all have very large and effective muzzle brakes. Some of them modeled after those on Soviet Artillery pieces. There have even been at least a couple of handgun versions, the Maadi-Griffin and the Thunder .50.

66 posted on 11/25/2005 3:08:15 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: elbucko
It's obvious that these critics do not have any understanding about the resolving of the target solution in an air defense problem

I'll bet I could come up with a computerized mount that would do the job. Still couldn't get a real high Pk, but maybe enough.

Of course anyone with half a brain, letting out most of the terrorists, would go after aircraft stoped in traffic on the taxiway, or coming around to the active just before takeoff. Of course you could do just as well, better really, with a large game hunting rifle, in terms of punching holes in fuel tanks, especially the little feeder tanks by each engine, or punching a hole in the hot section of a spinning turbine, the latter would have "interesting" secondary effects I'm sure.

67 posted on 11/25/2005 3:13:36 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: langleyaction
f springs, pads, fluidic damping, etc. Presumably some of these techniques are used here with this slug-thrower.

AFAIK, all the big .50s depend only on a muzzle brake. These don't spread out the recoil impluse, they counter or balance it by directing some of the propellant gases rearward.

68 posted on 11/25/2005 3:19:10 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
MURFREESBORO, Tenn. (AP) -- When U.S. soldiers need to penetrate a tank's armor from a mile away, they count on a weapon that evolved from the garage tinkering of a former wedding photographer.

Actually they call in an Abrams Main Battle Tank, or a Bradley with TOW launchers, or a Humvee with a Tow launcher. Or an Apache with HellFire missiles and a 25 mm chain gun, an A-10 with a 30 mm Gatling cannon, Maverick missiles or laser guided bombs. Or in a pinch they call for a Harrier, Falcon, Hornet, Bombcat, or Strike Eagle to come "plink" the tank with a laser guided bomb (500, 1000 or 2000 pound varieties)

69 posted on 11/25/2005 3:27:07 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: George Smiley
They used regular, old bolt action rifles designed a hundred years ago...

Not against armored Hinds.

Even against Hinds. You shoot the pilot, by the time the copilot can take it, it's in pieces on the side of a mountain.

70 posted on 11/25/2005 3:29:18 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
"They're (.50 caliber) easier to buy than a handgun," Diaz said. "These are ideal weapons of terrorist attack. Very dangerous elements gravitate toward these weapons."

Bu!!sh!t!!! They're not easy to find, at least not in the gunshops I go to, and they're expensive as hell, like five to seven times what a handgun costs.

This single quote should disqualify any reporter from ever quoting Tom Diaz again. Ever.

71 posted on 11/25/2005 3:53:04 PM PST by Hardastarboard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
"The .50-caliber rifle created by Ronnie Barrett and sold by his company, Barrett Firearms Manufacturing Inc., is the most powerful firearm civilians can buy."

Try a 14.5mm JDJ (50 BMG necked up to 58 cal.) http://www.sskindustries.com/14.htm

It has a non-destructive device exemption from the ATF. But even 'civilians' can own 20mm guns on up if they register them as destructive devices and pay the tax.
72 posted on 11/25/2005 4:14:49 PM PST by ol painless (ol' painless is out of the bag)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
Dear Presstitute and Terrorism Ex'Spurt....

................Too many folks know what the 50BMG Cartridge will and won't do. Your lies don't get a pass from all the GI's, past, present or future. Doom on ya for lying "Joe & Rose"...........ya'll remind me of other breeders of lies, losers and liars.

73 posted on 11/25/2005 5:49:26 PM PST by Squantos (Be polite. Be professional. But, have a plan to kill everyone you meet. ©)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
""I don't understand what good a .50-caliber is going to do you," King said. "I don't understand any civilian use of it."

Well d!ckhead that's why it's called the Bill of RIGHTS not the Bill of Needs.
74 posted on 11/25/2005 5:54:07 PM PST by Lancer_N3502A
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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

Not necessarily. The TC sticking his head out of the turret generally makes an easy target, and would no doubt have negative effect on the outcome of a shoot out, not to mention the crews moral.

75 posted on 11/25/2005 5:59:13 PM PST by Jigsaw John
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Jigsaw John

But not even the best shot in the world can hit a moving tarket the size of a man at a mile.


76 posted on 11/25/2005 6:21:12 PM PST by Blood of Tyrants (G-d is not a Republican. But Satan is definitely a Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: logic
The case applied that to probably the favored weapon in the trenches of WWI, the sawed-off shotgun.

Not quite. It applied to a double barreled break action sawed off shotgun, a Stevens, IIRC. Not a 18" (M 1897) or 20" (M 12) barrel (most were longer) pump shotgun with bayonet lug and bayonet.

Furthermore if you read the decision closely, you'll see that that at most the court indicated that it was not within judicial notice that such a weapon (IE. Stevens break action short double barreled shotgun) "was any part of the ordinary military equipment" or that is use or possession could "contribute to the common defense" and that the "The cause will be remanded for further proceedings. Those further proceedings would have undoubted found many instances of the uses of double barreled short shotguns for military uses, in the Spanish American War for instance, perhaps even in the Banana Wars, then concluding in Central America. Unfortunately such proceedings were never held. The core of the conclusion/ruling of the court is below (less the "further proceedings ruling):

In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a "shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length" at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense.

Clearly implying that if such a weapon were shown to be "part of the ordinary military equipment" and/or that it's "use or possession could contribute to the common defense", it's keeping and bearing, by individuals, is protected by the second amendment. Kinda throws the machine gun portions of the NFA, the various state Assault Weapons Bans, the California .50 cal ban, and even handgun bans (Military M9 9 mm Beretta Pistol (concealable) and the H&K USP 45 caliber pistol) right into a three cornered hat, doesn't it?

77 posted on 11/25/2005 6:53:11 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: School of Rational Thought
While I have never gone Elk hunting, from what I have seen on some TV shows, those animals are big and these guys take shots at some extreme distances.

It seems that moose are also very large, but can be shot at closer distances.

Yeah, but a look at the video linked at #58, you'll see more than just a little "ruined meat". Limbs and other appendages flying everywhere, at some fairly long ranges too.

If I ever were to go hunt water buffalo I think I would want one, especially if being charged. They appear to have skulls like boulders.

Now there you have a point. If the thing is coming with blood in it's eye, you want as much gun as possible to carry into the field. But that's self defense, not hunting.

78 posted on 11/25/2005 7:04:58 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker
Taliban vs. .50cal

Awesome and sickening at the same time.

Now I *know* I want one.

79 posted on 11/25/2005 7:06:13 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

To Mr. Barrett, Well done. Free enterprise, an agile mind and perserverance brought this man success. The fact that the Armed services can use his expertise is fine with me. As far as civilian use, I think that this weapon should fall under the 1934 gun control act. If you don't understand look it up.


80 posted on 11/25/2005 7:13:28 PM PST by Doc91678 (Doc91678)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-95 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson