Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

How is this carbine worthy of being banned?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU
 
skippythwndrdog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-19-05 09:31 PM
Original message
How is this carbine worthy of being banned?
Well, I did some gunsmithing today. I took an AR15 "postban" carbine today and did some work. I threaded the barrel and added a flash reducer/suppressor. I also removed the old stock and replaced it with a collapsable stock. Additionally, I changed out the front sight base so that I could have a bayonet lug. Why is this same carbine now worthy of being banned?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Wickerman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-19-05 09:40 PM
Response to Original message
1. uh, I'll bite. It, uh, isn't?
Every god-fearing red-blooded american needs a bayonet. Hell, in your case you could be in the backwoods of Kentucky and get attacked by by a wild boar. That bayonet may very well save your life. The collapsable stock will come in handy, too - cuz.

And even if you don't need them, dammit, you want them, and that is good enough.

How did I do?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MichaelHarris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-19-05 09:50 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. you forgot
the addin' of a flash suppressor for night killin' of squirrels, mmmmmmm nocturnal squirrels.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wickerman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-19-05 09:55 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Damn, I forgot Poland!
pesky squirrels - them is good eating...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MichaelHarris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-20-05 04:48 AM
Response to Reply #3
13. mmmmm
Polish squirrel sausage. That's some good grillin'
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lenidog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-19-05 10:01 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. I have to agree with you
totally useless items on the gun outside the military but dammit if you are a law abiding citizen and want them you should be able to have them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
-..__... Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-19-05 10:33 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. What will the Bradys reaction be when they find out about this?


:P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wickerman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-19-05 11:14 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Now THAT is awfully close to
gun porn!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alwynsw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-20-05 11:57 AM
Response to Reply #8
28. I think it is gun porn.
Notice the thrusting action?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wickerman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-20-05 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #28
31. Inanimate object my ass
and to think I trusted you guys.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alwynsw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-20-05 08:28 PM
Response to Reply #31
33. Guns with bayonets are kinda like sex in reverse.
Shoot THEN thrust.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NorthernSpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-20-05 08:54 AM
Response to Reply #6
17. what is that thing?
Is it real? I've never seen a gun that looked like that before...

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Billy Ruffian Donating Member (672 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-20-05 10:43 AM
Response to Reply #17
23. The picture has been photoshopped, of course
The bayonet gizmo is fake, but the weapon is real. It's a prototype under development by Steyr, I think. It has a small caliber rifle, and a large (20mm, iirc) tube as well, for a grenade launcher/heavy rifle.

It's a military weapon, and would not be available to the public.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NorthernSpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-20-05 11:02 AM
Response to Reply #23
24. OIC!
Thank you. :)

I wonder what it's like to use it. Looks like it would weigh a ton.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Billy Ruffian Donating Member (672 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-20-05 12:11 PM
Response to Reply #24
30. My first thought when I saw that
was that no soldier would want to carry that, and the ammo for the 20mm.

It would have to be part of a squad or even platoon level equipment, not issued to every member of the infantry. Too darn heavy.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benEzra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-20-05 11:06 AM
Response to Reply #17
25. It's an OICW
Edited on Thu Jan-20-05 11:06 AM by benEzra
(Objective Individual Combat Weapon), a prototype military weapon as Billy Ruffian said (now canceled, I think). It combined a selective-fire .223 AND a 20mm rifle firing electronically-fused mini-grenades into one (unwieldy) unit. Seems to me that the overall unit was being developed by Alliant Techsystems.

The .223 subassembly was made by HK and subsequently developed into the XM-8 action, I think. Hopefully we will eventually see a civilian non-automatic version of, since it remedies some of the gas-system troubles inherent in the AR-15/M16 system (it uses a gas piston assembly instead of direct bolt impingement like an AR).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enfield collector Donating Member (821 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-22-05 07:28 PM
Response to Reply #6
37. more thrusts per sqeeze?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skippythwndrdog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-20-05 12:09 AM
Response to Reply #1
9. You did OK, but I don't see many wild boars around the homestead!
Collapsable stocks rock because...different sized people can use them comfortably, they can be adjusted for what clothing I wear (winter coat or summer T shirt), and...they look evil! You really earned an A+ with your final reason!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maria Celeste Donating Member (104 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-20-05 08:24 AM
Response to Reply #1
16. Bayonet Lugs
That is one restriction I have never figured out. Some accessories mount to the the bayonet lug IIRC, but I have never ever heard of a rifle with bayonet used in a crime. The lug is just cosmetic. Maybe because it makes it look more martial. I could see how magazines fit the anti gun bigots agenda, but a bayonet lug?



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Union Thug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-20-05 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #16
26. I took the bayonet off my 'shooter' sks...
For collector's value, of course, you want that bayo, but practically speaking, it really is a nuisance. On the other hand, with some guns, like my M44 with the side folding bayonet, it makes a difference because the gun was sighted in with the bayonet extended.

But, like you, I've never figured that restriction out, either. Maybe the architects of that stipulation envisioned throngs of bayonet wielding gangstas charging down the street in formation after exhausting their surplus ammo supply?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benEzra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-20-05 11:51 AM
Response to Reply #26
27. Maybe they think a spear is more dangerous than a rifle...
but I'd be more concerned about that little hole in the front of the barrel than about any sharp pointy thing attached thereto...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Krinkov Donating Member (96 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-23-05 04:27 AM
Response to Reply #1
38. the horror of drive-by bayonettings
regardless of "needs" or "wants" and redneck stereotypes, doesnt that part of the law seem a LITTLE silly in principle, and a waste of money to enforce? Think about it.. legal to to have a knife, legal to have a gun.. not legal to attach a knife to a gun. Why? because it gives you 16.25 extra inches of reach with which to stab someone? Why not ban swords and spears?

Perhaps you can get me info on the rash of drive-by bayonettings and gun spearings that made this clause such a necessity 'to protect our children'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
-..__... Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-19-05 10:22 PM
Response to Original message
5. What took you so long?
It's been almost 5 months since "the streets will be flooded with bullet hoses and blood". B-)

If I had the opportunity, I would have made the conversion on AWB Day + 1!

What FS did you attach? I'm more partial to a 5 slot Phantom.

"Why is this same carbine now worthy of being banned?"

It's not now and never was.

Next up on the hot new to "ban list": the FN FiveSeveN.

:eyes:

Happy stabbing with your new bayonet lug! :+
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skippythwndrdog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-20-05 12:10 AM
Response to Reply #5
10. I put on an A2 as a temporary measure...the phantom goes on next week.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MichaelHarris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-20-05 04:50 AM
Response to Reply #5
14. hahahahaha
happy stabbin' man that's funny.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UL_Approved Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-19-05 10:36 PM
Response to Original message
7. Making a statement?
I know lots of anti-gun people are on DU, but I think this is perhaps a bit one-sided.

As far as I am concerned, gun ownership, free speech (real free speech, not permission to kiss the status quo's ass), and freedom of choice in abortion are all the same thing: freedom. Any one of these things can be restricted by arguing, "people don't need automatic weapons", "guns kill people", "you might help terrorists by saying the wrong thing", "you can't say things that are offensive", "it's God's will", "life starts in the womb", etc. These are just smoke and mirror arguments.

Infringing on ANY of these things, or any other civil rights for that matter, come down to one thing: centralized control.

Neo-Cons pride themselves on gaining control. They do this as a game, as a business, and as a hobby. When you think about it, who sponsored the Brady Bill? If I remember, it was Sarah Brady, notorious RW "champion". And how did the gun registration get through a Republican congress? Well, obviously, some people bucked the line.

The argument that people with automatic weapons are too dangerous to allow is misguided. People are worried that this will cause massive amounts of killing. The fact is that most shooting is done illegally, and no law will stop these criminals. Many people own automatic firearms as a trophy or thrill piece, but they don't commit crime with these weapons. Some people even own them as HISTORICAL pieces (I'm not making this up). These old firearms are worth too much to use because of the collector's value.

Profiling of firearms is just like racial profiling. We find that we can blame a certain group for dangerous actions. We say that this color of persons, this make of guns, or whatever other physical traits we choose to cite, is responsible for the majority of our woes. We then single out these entities for restriction.

I welcome people of all views to add to this post, I want to hear what people have to say.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benEzra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-20-05 07:03 AM
Response to Reply #7
15. Just to clarify...
automatic weapons are already restricted by the National Firearms Act. The expired "assault weapons ban" covered non-automatic weapons that have two or more "evil features" like a threaded muzzle or a protruding handgrip...

And yes, I added a folding stock to my mini-14 in October... :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UL_Approved Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-21-05 06:51 AM
Response to Reply #15
34. Yeah, that ban was unnecessary
This is what happens when people get carried away. Banning features that are NEVER going to be used as a special means or method of killing people.

When was the last time somebody was killed with a BAYONET in the United States? I'd like to see some statistics on that...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Columbia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-20-05 12:50 AM
Response to Original message
11. Because it is pure EVIL
*** WARNING: IMAGE THAT FOLLOWS IS NOT SAFE FOR WORK!!! MAY CAUSE BLOOD-CURDLING SCREAMS AND PERSISTENT NIGHTMARES!!! VIEW AT YOUR OWN DISCRETION!!! ***

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skippythwndrdog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-20-05 01:37 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. I named my carbine the EBC...Evil Black Carbine!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NorthernSpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-20-05 08:59 AM
Response to Reply #11
18. ...and what is this thing?
This thing you showed us: what is it and what does it do?

Sorry -- I just don't know much about guns/gun-related items.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benEzra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-20-05 09:04 AM
Response to Reply #18
19. It's one of those evil bayonet lugs...
that allow you to attach a bayonet to a rifle.

Between Sept. 1994 and Sept. 2004, adding a bayonet lug to a self-loading rifle with a protruding handgrip was a Federal felony.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NorthernSpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-20-05 09:17 AM
Response to Reply #19
20. thanx :)
So that's what one looks like!

I can see why they banned it. The minute saw it, I just knew that it posed a terrible threat to all I hold dear, but I wasn't sure why...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aikoaiko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-20-05 09:53 AM
Response to Original message
21. Drive by Bayonetting
I remember seeing a video of a drive by bayonetting. Its was scary, bloody, and, of course, fiction. :)

I always wondered about the thinking behind the AWB (why the no more than 2 evil features approach) when the only thing that made any sense was restricting the size of magazines.

I hate to write this publicly, but if Feinstein et al had argued for nonremovable, 10 round mags in rifles (and forgotten all the rest of the evil features) they might have had a chance of not looking like such dorks. I was always sympathetic (yet not in agreement with a ban) that the one thing that might make the so called assault weapons more dangerous was the ease of reloading large magazines. The other evil features were superfluous.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Paladin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-20-05 07:59 PM
Response to Reply #21
32. A Little Moment Of Clarity For You

Out there in the Real World, Sen. Feinstein et al are not considered to be "dorks" for their advocacy of the Assault Weapons Ban. In the Real World, a "dork" is somebody who thinks a bayonet lug is an absolutely essential part of a firearm. And it's "evil features" like that which make people think of a "dork" as a "potentially dangerous dork."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aikoaiko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-21-05 10:17 AM
Response to Reply #32
35. Do you think the AWB debate was well served by...
...including pistol grips, flash supressors, and bayonet lugs?

Because I don't. I think including these features just made it easy to get the ban repealed. I apologize for the use of the word "dork", I just meant to impart that to many gun owners (like myself, AR15) the inclusion of some of the features made no (little) sense at all even to gun owners (like me) who recognized that hi cap removable mags might be worth considering in a ban.

If Feinstein et al and you would like to define the AWB debate in all or nothing terms, then I will fight for nothing (no AWB).

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cms Donating Member (79 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-21-05 10:34 AM
Response to Reply #32
36. How about a moment of clarity for you...
A bayonet is not essential on almost all firearms, but why change a rifles original format to make Sen. Feinstein happy. Her and her pals are considered "dorks" out there in the real world. I personally don't see how any politician makes it into office and tries to tear apart the constitution one amendment at a time. I have not seen one factual piece of evidence supporting any of the filth that spews out of her mouth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-20-05 10:18 AM
Response to Original message
22. I did my token post-post-ban conversion on 9/14/2004
Put a genuine US government issue M16A2 upper receiver assembly onto a formerly post-(federal)-ban AR-15 clone lower receiver assembly.

The two pieces are held together with two 1/4" captive pins, and no tools are required to do the switch.

It was kind of a let-down, OTOH I have the satisfaction of knowing that I fully complied with the federal AW ban during its 10 year period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alwynsw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-20-05 12:01 PM
Response to Original message
29. You evil, jeans-creaming fetishist!
What took you so long to get it done? I had my stuff laid out and ready to go before midnight on the day before expiration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 10:40 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC