Where have all the Tommys gone?

americanthinker.com ^ | 6/17/2016 | Thomas J. Hall

[archy]

Ever pick one up with the drum mag? They are HEAVY!. A buddy has the civilized (civilian) version and you gotta eat some Wheaties if you're gonna tote it around.

When the alternative is a 28-pound Lewis gun, the Tommy doesn't seem so bad.

[Lurker]

They were available, but really expensive, on the open market until the NFA. Now a vintage full auto A-1 runs tens of thousands of dollars, if you can find one for sale at all.

L

[Iron Munro]

The federal government killed the Tommy Gun.

[vetvetdoug]

I had a Tommy once. It had feeder problems with both the stick magazine and the drum. No matter how many times it was worked upon, it jammed even with pre examined ammo. I used it to shoot turtles in ponds. Other than the uniqueness of having a Thompson I didn't have any other need for it and sold it during the last assault rifle ban scare.

[archy]

Just heft one of the original walnut USGI stocks. Just the stock by itself makes an impressive club.

the Thompson, the M1A1 version in particular, is one of the few military weapons for which the factory stock is too long for me. It's a two-minute job with a screwdriver to change the butt out on an M1/ M1A1, so I've often had one with about an inch and a quarter off it and the buttplate trimmed to swap out when needed. The M1928 with its pushbutton butt release is even quicker.

On the other hand, the poor Vietnamese who got the things in the 1960s found even that too long, and usually just pitched the buttstock altogether. And that was how we very often came across the things there.

[archy]

I’ve never fired a real M-14 but I can’t imagine what it’s like trying to keep the muzzle down while firing .308 caliber on full auto.

Not too bad if you've got the bipod on- another pound and a half- and the accessory compensator, and keep the bursts short and use the sling. I liked the M14, but it's nowhere as controllable in full-auto as a German G3. Or, for that matter, a 15-20 pound BAR.

[archy]

Hey while we’re on a gun thread I'm having a bit of difficulty arguing with some air head liberal who says AR 15 should be banned and no one should be allowed to own one. I said to this person ‘’It's not a bill of needs, it's a bill of rights’’.

***Okay, if you can ban my Second Amendment rights, I get to ban your First Amendment rights. Shut up.***

[x1stcav]

At various times I carried a Thompson, CAR15, M79 blooper, M14, and M3 grease gun and of course an M16. I have to think as I may have missed one or two.

I was always looking for a good brush-chopper. The .45 cals excelled in the role but were just too damned heavy even if you only carried a hundred rounds. I used to see trace round from the 5.56mm’s bounce off of and be deflected by the undergrowth.

I finally got an M14 and hallelujah!

[archy]

I need to check which model 20ga Remington I have. I'm pretty sure the barrel on mine is longer.

I can fix that for you in about two minutes. The paperwork to do it legally takes around eight months.

[Retain Mike]

Not that this will be definitive for dealing with a faith based position, but here goes.

The AR-15 is not a military weapon, but the ubiquitous civilian version of the military M-16. The best legal thought at present says civilians should have access to firearms in common usage. Nothing is more commonly available than the AR-15.

The Constitution was written in common language for common people. The most obvious interpretation of the Second Amendment, and that comma, would say that because every citizen is potentially a member of the militia, the access to firearms should not be restricted. The manifest understanding then of firearm possession is much more than use for personal protection and hunting. At this time the most reasonable extension of that basic thought would be to require the sort of firearms training required in Switzerland.

Any other interpretation involves application of premeditated ignorance to arrive at a tortured, imbecilic rendering of the sentence.

[archy]

Thompson gun was replaced by the cheaply mass produceable "grease gun."

Amusingly, a Valkyrie Arms semi-auto version of the M3A1 greasegun now costs a couple of hundred dollars more than a semiauto Thompson.

[archy]

The AR-15 is not a military weapon, but the ubiquitous civilian version of the military M-16.

The original design of the weapon was the AR-15, and it was fully automatic, as was its predecessor design, the AR-10, a 7,62 NATO military rifle, also full-auto. The Army Limited Warfare Laboratory purchased several thousand for the Army Special Forces around 1961, as did the US Air Force, looking for an individual airfield defense weapon and aircraft guard weapon to replace the leftover WWI M1 and M2 carbines then being used for that purpose. The first reifles to see combatr in Vietnam were the original military AR-15s, which after modifications by the Army Ordnance branch meant to make the weaopon more suitable for general troop issue, was designated XM16, then adopted in 1967 as the M16.

It was around 1964 that the civilian-legal AR-15 version was developed, then designated the SP-1. They sold for around $200 each at the time, for which you could buy three M1 Garands. I got my first SP-1 in 1965.

[Domangart]

The Thompson had a problem with both the stick and the heaver drum./ I fired the stick and still had to keep the stick from swinging back and forth. The M-16 does not like more than 40 rounds. The M-16 was more fun.

[elcid1970]

In retirement I love my M-14A. Originally qualified on the M-14 in 1969.

So comfortable to shoot; sometimes I have to drop the magazine so I won’t waste ammo enjoying that barely noticeable recoil.

Back to VN, one crewchief had an M79 made into a pistol which he wore around his neck. That was so long ago.

[Does so]

I always thought that he carried a carbine, but Dad recently found some wartime pictures of him, and Grandpa was carrying a Springfield '03 in them.

I'm thinking of trading my '88 Springfield Trapdoor for an M-1 Carbine. Lightweight, ammo is available presently, and if my position is overrun, the "enemy" will find it an "odd-man out" for ammo.

[Does so]

I always thought that he carried a carbine, but Dad recently found some wartime pictures of him, and Grandpa was carrying a Springfield '03 in them.

I'm thinking of trading my '88 Springfield Trapdoor for an M-1 Carbine. Lightweight, ammo is available presently, and if my position is overrun, the thugs will find it an "odd-man out" for ammo.

[Does so]

Magazines can be taped—inverted—together.

Sorry for the double post.

[jmacusa]

Good one! Thanks.

[jmacusa]

Thanks for the info.

[Does so]

Can anyone here maybe give me a few more thoughtful, intelligent spot on answers to shut this liberal whack job up? I'd be much obliged.

"The AR-15 is available in several different calibers. Which one do you want to ban?".

It's a similar argument I bring to a stop with, "What temperature would you like the Erf to be?"