It is sad that the folks with money are the ones that can get a legal transferable FA weapon. I strongly believe that ANYONE that has the background check should be allowed to own a fully automatic firearm, from the stand point that we should have weapons that are used by combat troops to our disposal. Price keeps many from buying a FA, and sometimes state regulations curtail this. Wonder how this will work when the Second Amendment is found to be state to state wide and not just in D.C. in the up coming SCOTUS decisions?
I also believe that one should always have ability to have or build a sound suppressor. It is ecologically better, it's less annoying to neighbors, and since the inception of the NFA on that silencer only 2 people have been killed with suppressors illegally. I also would advocate a suppressor for a deer hunting rifle. Would keep you from giving away your position and would be easier on your ear drums. Perhaps if there were a way to eliminate some of the emissions of the powder burn one could put on a suppressor to keep the air clean?
All in all I believe in full auto weapons, just not illegal ones and dangerous ones tinkered with at home. Leave it to a professional gunsmith that has knowledge of such things. I also believe in suppressors and would love to enact legislature to remove that outdated law from the books.
Any tips om build sites or plans to build legal silencers. I assume each one has a unique s/n. What system is easyist for home builders to use to s/n ?
legal silencers are tax paid and leo signed off.
A piece can count as the whole. It's my understanding that Paperwork is first.
There is a good site but I lost the link when my other machine went down.
There is no nonsense so errant that it cannot be made the creed of the vast majority by adequate governmental action. -- Bertrand Russell
"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." Robert J. Hanlon
When I was in the military (Navy) we had M-14's (man how I love 'em). My instructor told us right off the bat, " I know all of you want to shoot this full auto, but let me show you why you don't want to". Each one of us shot it full auto and could not hit the broad side of a barn with any sort of accuracy or ability, just wasting ammo. Once we were done, he asked an interesting question. "How many of you would still be alive with adequate ammo for a possible second attack after being in a firefight where you shot full auto and didn't hit anything?" Answer... none. When your life depends on finite numbers of lead hitting enough targets to where the other targets lose thier nerve, break camp, and regroup for another day, full auto kind of goes out the window with Santa Clause and the Tooth Fairy.
That said, regardless of how wildly inaccurate full auto can be... It's still great fun.
True, Markp. Some rifles are better designed for full auto firing. The new HK 416 ( ref: Heckler & Koch HK416 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ) can shoot very well under full auto, and keep right on firing because the bolt does not get gas bled on it and neither does it get hot. I've seen it fire and it baffles me that it is not adapted over the more jam prone M4. Piston driven system. It is designed to take the action straight back upon firing. It is alway inherently more accurate to fire semi -auto and make clean placement shots as opposed to full auto. However, as I said, some calibers, such as 7.62 NATO and 7.62 x 39 Soviet do not lend themselves well to full auto. It was the difficulty of the FN FAL in 7.62 x 51. My .308 Saiga would have a similar problem.
Any ak can be made to fire FA
During WW1 the 1903 Springfield Bolt action rifle was converted to fire full auto.
Is it worth going to jail for?
“Those that would give up essential liberty in pursuit of a little temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security."
That depends... If you are a prohibited person, the penalty for having a full auto weapon is the same as having any firearm. Where is the incentive for criminals not to own machine guns?
Don't think so? Prohibited persons are not subject to the NFA, see US v. Haynes. Requiring criminals to register their full automatic weapons violates their 5th amendment rights. Sure, they are still subject to the CGA of 1968 but there is no material difference of violating 922(g) regardless of the type of firearm involved.
"Man needs but two things to survive alone in the woods. A blow up female doll and his trusty old AK-47" - Thomas Jefferson 1781