Mega Rad Gun Thread

As far as I understand it that is accurate.

I also caution celebrating this too early. Yes, it's a good and righteous decision but in terms of practicality not much changes.

Assuming it's held up we would see legal full auto and significantly cheaper full auto weapons as a result, but full auto isn't particularly practical. For example I wouldn't want a full auto pistol or SMG for common self defense. The liability is insane.

That makes it either a range toy or a SHTF gun. As a range toy, the novelty wears off but the ammo costs still remain, and as a SHTF gun its usefulness is situational at best.
Yeah I know I'm not celebrating. This is going to get fought HARD. Like really fucking hard. Now if we win... cool lol. I guess I can get a full auto AK or actual M16. Ammo prices suck ass. If you don't have much money but can get one of these new production full autos, you will either go bankrupt or not have a fun range trip, because it's over in 5 minutes. There's also a question which companies would actually SELL full autos to civies. I doubt FN is going to sell new products M240s to the public any time soon, which is what you want because it's belt fed.
 
I doubt it if only because attorneys are slackers. The only thing we've got going for us is that Chevron is out so nobody can provide a speculative defense against the argument.
Chevron being dead is going to help out. But I'm with you. This was luck. And in the end its going to have to go before scotus for how big a challenge to the status quo it is. If it wins, it will be a narrow 5-4. I'm just saying that now. Failure is very high. It would be undoing at least the Regan era regulations, which was 40 years ago. That's a lot of precident it has to undo.
 
UZI > MP5
🤭
COMMENCE INTERNET SLAP FIGHT!
always liked the uzi.
i really like the way it looks. it has nice lines and has that very cool classic action movie look to it due to it being in literally every action movie.

i like the magazine goes into the grip rather in a mag well forward of the trigger gaurd, i just tend to like guns like that.

i like the charging handle on top. again i like guns like that, including the original version of the ar which had it inside the carry handle on top. just something about charging handles being on top is pleasing to me.

i also had a chance to shoot a full auto one at a range and really liked how it shot. the mp5 might shoot better, probably does, but the uzi fills the submachine gun sized hole in my heart.
 
I found the one machine gun that could be a fun range toy without rendering you bankrupt. It would be good for suppressing fire too.

The American 180, .22lr.

Machine-gun-brokers-1024x575.jpg
 
UZI > MP5
🤭
COMMENCE INTERNET SLAP FIGHT!
MP5 is sexier im just gonna say it.
I found the one machine gun that could be a fun range toy without rendering you bankrupt. It would be good for suppressing fire too.

The American 180, .22lr.

View attachment 6338763
22 LR full autos would sell gangbusters. I'd say sub guns in general would be the most affordable option. Easy and relatively affordable to buy ammo in bulk, all ranges are set up for pistol ammo, and they can be relatively small. Load up a 100 round drum into your SMG of choice for the giggle factor, and watch the lead fly.
 
I found the one machine gun that could be a fun range toy without rendering you bankrupt. It would be good for suppressing fire too.

The American 180, .22lr.

View attachment 6338763

22 LR full autos would sell gangbusters. I'd say sub guns in general would be the most affordable option. Easy and relatively affordable to buy ammo in bulk, all ranges are set up for pistol ammo, and they can be relatively small. Load up a 100 round drum into your SMG of choice for the giggle factor, and watch the lead fly.
yeah, if we didnt have things like the NFA i can pretty much guarantee you that full auto .22s would be very popular. id love to have one myself, seems like it would be very fun, and as preacher points out, it wouldn't break the bank to take one out for a day of shooting.

right now im pictruing a full auto .22 version of the micro uzi. you cant tell me something like that wouldn't be an absolute fun range toy.
 
yeah, if we didnt have things like the NFA i can pretty much guarantee you that full auto .22s would be very popular. id love to have one myself, seems like it would be very fun, and as preacher points out, it wouldn't break the bank to take one out for a day of shooting.

right now im pictruing a full auto .22 version of the micro uzi. you cant tell me something like that wouldn't be an absolute fun range toy.
A 22 cal micro uzi would be such a fun gun. Absolute bullet hoze. And because of the size it probably wouldn't jump much. I could imagine a lot of 22 adaptions of SMG's and pistols getting full auto for fun. Love to strap a helical mag to something like a .22 MP5. That would be a buzzsaw lol.
 
Don't overthink it. If the NFA is abolished, the best sellers will be M16 fire control groups and the jigs to drill the hole necessary to install them as well as Glock switches.
There's also a question which companies would actually SELL full autos to civies. I doubt FN is going to sell new products M240s to the public any time soon, which is what you want because it's belt fed.
Good thing you can already buy a belt-fed AR upper:
 
I'm sure an actual legal expert will show up, but from what I've read, this doesn't set national precedent. It would have to be heard by a circuit court and then the Supreme Court to apply nationwide.
Correct. This didn’t strike down the NFA, nor issue a national injunction forbidding the ATF from enforcing it.
This isn’t even binding precedent on any other district court. The significance of this is mostly prospective: it will hopefully force the circuit and SCOTUS to confront the NFA straight on, and address both its constitutionality directly. That and refine the Bruen-Rahimi Test to explain what exactly can be regulated and what can’t.
 
As far as I understand it that is accurate.

I also caution celebrating this too early. Yes, it's a good and righteous decision but in terms of practicality not much changes.

Assuming it's held up we would see legal full auto and significantly cheaper full auto weapons as a result, but full auto isn't particularly practical. For example I wouldn't want a full auto pistol or SMG for common self defense. The liability is insane.

That makes it either a range toy or a SHTF gun. As a range toy, the novelty wears off but the ammo costs still remain, and as a SHTF gun its usefulness is situational at best.
Listen nigger, you step on my lawn, blood will be drawn. I treat my guns like a samurai treats his sword. If I have to whip it out, it's dishonorable to not take a life with it, and brother? I'm an honorable guy.
 
This might seems controversial but I don’t see how a nog with a Glock with a switch falls under historical rights to bear arms…

But if I get to own a SAW on the cheap then fine
Well the Nog part no. But there were a number of high ROF arms at the time of the ratification, and a number of letters between the founding fathers that sum up to
"Damn this shit is cool, I want one"
 
AKs make no sense to buy in the current year. Any gun in 5.45 is irrelevant. So it comes down to 762x39 vs 556. 556 is lighter, cheaper, shoots flatter, is available at more gun store, is used by more people. 556 is really the only cartridge I'd buy an AK in today. But you look at a decent 556 AK vs a midrange AR and its just like "why bother?". The AR will give you more performance at a lower price, with something that's easier to get accessories on and to work on.

So I'd have to be REALLY in love with the AK to want one in the first place, and even then I'd have to get one in 556 to make any sort of sense.
I mean isn't this basically every gun besides the AR-15 and Glock? You don't need anything else in practical sense (unless we are talking shotguns or .308 hunting rifle). But people like to have stuff for fun.

AKs are fun. They are not better or more practical than ARs. But they are fun.
 
AKs make no sense to buy in the current year. Any gun in 5.45 is irrelevant. So it comes down to 762x39 vs 556. 556 is lighter, cheaper, shoots flatter, is available at more gun store, is used by more people. 556 is really the only cartridge I'd buy an AK in today. But you look at a decent 556 AK vs a midrange AR and its just like "why bother?". The AR will give you more performance at a lower price, with something that's easier to get accessories on and to work on.

So I'd have to be REALLY in love with the AK to want one in the first place, and even then I'd have to get one in 556 to make any sort of sense.
The AK is more reliable, doesn't have the world's worst charging handle, doesn't have a stupid useless forward assist button thats more likely to do harm than good, doesn't have a spring in a tube in the stock that you can hear when you fire, and the performance difference between 7.62 and 5.56 is not quite as you described. Yes, 5.56 is lighter and flatter, but lighter isnt always better and at practical combat distances there isnt enough extra flatness to matter. There are also little quality of life things like 7.62 being more pleasant to handle and load than 5.56. In your efforts to paint the AR as the jack of all trades you've betrayed the fact that within its wheelhouse of short to mid range combat (out to 350yds) the AK is outright better, and the AR isn't good enough outside that range to make up for it. Shots beyond 350yds are unlikely unless you're fighting in a war as part of an organized army. Folks like us if we find ourselves in a war or the classic SHTF scenario combat is going to be much much closer than that. Think Guerilla distances.

A 5.56 AK is like a 9mm 1911, heresy, and 5.45 was never good.

seriously what the fuck is up with AR charging handles? Who thought it was a good idea to put it there? It looks thin, cheap, and breakable, reminds me of a beyblade ripcord.
 
Back