BobAsh 582 Posted August 29, 2007 Report Share Posted August 29, 2007 (edited) "If I understand it correctly, it's not NFA that makes a machine gun cost 10,000. " It IS the ban that makes these guns cost so much, Shane. Why? Because without the ban you could make your own. For example, you can buy enough parts for a post-sample M-60 for only a few thousand dollars. A transferable M-60 is now upwards of 30 grand. This is scarcity value created by the ban. There are around 300 transferable M-60s, period. There will never be more. This equates to about one gun per 1 million US residents. This, BTW, also makes NFA guns an excellent investment. Unless of course they are made non-transferable by some liberal administration in the future, in which case you'd be fucked. But all worthwhile investments involve risk, right? Saiganoobie, it's cheaper in the long run to become a machine-gun manufacturer and fill your safe with post-samples. Edited August 29, 2007 by BobAsh Link to post Share on other sites
Willie D 2 Posted August 30, 2007 Report Share Posted August 30, 2007 Take a look at how much cheaper select fire weapons are in Canada where the supply isn't finite. http://www.marstar.ca/index.shtm Actually, what I'd really like from there is the Norinco CZ clone with safety AND decocker or the -$400 M14! Link to post Share on other sites
fossten 1 Posted August 30, 2007 Report Share Posted August 30, 2007 I was actually thinking that I'd be afraid to shoot at the local range next to a guy with a brand new mac-10 that has no idea how to control it. I've been to MG rental shoots, and they had to keep two men watching each person firing and until they knew if you could handle yourself they had one man holding the gun down and one pushing on their firing shoulder so they didn't lose the butt of the weapon either. I saw too many people firing off the last shot in a string at a 30 degree angle or worse. Also with full auto comes a much increased chance of cook offs emptying a mag because that chamber is going to get hot. I'm not getting a hole in my car or leg or something from some asshat that hasn't been told how to handle the situation.Add: Oh and I just remembered they don't allow some rifles (maybe M14?) or any automatic pistols without a front grip to be fired at that MG shoot anymore because of all the people firing their last round at a ridiculous upward angle. I know a bunch about the arguement, I'm not one of the guys that thinks an M60 is a horrible device. Not being able to own full auto in my state is the 2nd most awful thing about gun control for me. The worst is that they list by name every military firearm I can think of and say they are illegal. I'd be sitting here with a BAR, Thompson, and a Galil right now if I could. Because shit, they'd be cheap. Even if somebody wanted a full auto gun to mow into a big crowd, he wouldn't go ahead and legally buy the gun anyway. I do NOT want it to be the way it is now, but I do not want it to be fully open, I just picked the option in the poll I thought was closest to what I envision. Added: And I'd have a USAS-12. I fired one using birdshot, but it was still amazingly fun and controllable... enough. I know what you're describing can be frustrating, but look, the range can make its own rules to prevent yahoos from pissing everybody off. That's all well and good. However, that's a far cry from the GOVERNMENT telling you that you can't even OWN a machine gun. Big difference. Let the marketplace police itself. If somebody's being a jerkoff on the MG range, kick his ass out, but don't let some paperpushing losers who don't know the first thing about the 2nd Amendment tell me I can't own the gun I want. Link to post Share on other sites
shaneman153a 39 Posted August 30, 2007 Report Share Posted August 30, 2007 "If I understand it correctly, it's not NFA that makes a machine gun cost 10,000. " It IS the ban that makes these guns cost so much, Shane. Why? Because without the ban you could make your own. For example, you can buy enough parts for a post-sample M-60 for only a few thousand dollars. A transferable M-60 is now upwards of 30 grand. This is scarcity value created by the ban. There are around 300 transferable M-60s, period. There will never be more. This equates to about one gun per 1 million US residents. This, BTW, also makes NFA guns an excellent investment. Unless of course they are made non-transferable by some liberal administration in the future, in which case you'd be fucked. But all worthwhile investments involve risk, right? Saiganoobie, it's cheaper in the long run to become a machine-gun manufacturer and fill your safe with post-samples. I'm trying to distinguish between NFA of 1934 and the 1986 Machine Gun ban here. (Yes, I only know the difference because Bobash schooled me up). I don't want any old douchebag to be able to get a full auto. Bob, would you agree that if you were able to purchase firearms made after 1986, they would cost a fraction of what the transferrable mg's do now? I always thought the reason they cost so goddamn much is because they were all made more than 21 years ago, there's only so many out there. 4500 for a mac-11? The semi auto one is $289 for christ's sake!! Let's stop using the M-60 as our MG example. It is a 45 year old design that sucks ass. You know why the US Army doesn't use them anymore?? Cause they're all so fuckin old they don't fire reliably. So let's label that one a "rare antique". Great back in it's day, but so were muskets. Now, the M240 on the other hand, is being manufactured by FN as we speak. A "H" model (air) costs Uncle Sam 8500 dollars (I think). Uncle Sam pays $27 for a padlock, so how much do you think you could buy one for if it weren't for the mg ban?? How many MG's have been DESIGNED since 1986 that can't be transferred ever? Bob, now you see why I was interested in getting that Manufacturer's FFL. Link to post Share on other sites
BobAsh 582 Posted August 30, 2007 Report Share Posted August 30, 2007 Shane, the only thing I disagree with is your assessment of the M-60. It's my favorite belt gun. Link to post Share on other sites
joelrod47 373 Posted August 30, 2007 Report Share Posted August 30, 2007 Link to post Share on other sites
fossten 1 Posted August 30, 2007 Report Share Posted August 30, 2007 I don't want any old douchebag to be able to get a full auto. You're buying into the flawed argument of the antigunners. Any old douchebag CAN obtain a full auto weapon ILLEGALLY. And only douchebags will have them (not counting NFA purchases) because they don't care about the law. The only group of people the NFA and the MG Ban of 1986 is meant for is the law-abiding citizens group. And don't get me started on silencers. That's one of the most offensive things about the NFA. Link to post Share on other sites
Twinsen 86 Posted August 30, 2007 Report Share Posted August 30, 2007 I don't want any old douchebag to be able to get a full auto. You're buying into the flawed argument of the antigunners. Any old douchebag CAN obtain a full auto weapon ILLEGALLY. And only douchebags will have them (not counting NFA purchases) because they don't care about the law. The only group of people the NFA and the MG Ban of 1986 is meant for is the law-abiding citizens group. And don't get me started on silencers. That's one of the most offensive things about the NFA. A silencer crawled into my house and killed my baby brother. Link to post Share on other sites
SaigaNoobie 66 Posted August 30, 2007 Report Share Posted August 30, 2007 I don't want any old douchebag to be able to get a full auto. You're buying into the flawed argument of the antigunners. Any old douchebag CAN obtain a full auto weapon ILLEGALLY. And only douchebags will have them (not counting NFA purchases) because they don't care about the law. The only group of people the NFA and the MG Ban of 1986 is meant for is the law-abiding citizens group. And don't get me started on silencers. That's one of the most offensive things about the NFA. Whats the big deal about silencers? Link to post Share on other sites
shaneman153a 39 Posted August 31, 2007 Report Share Posted August 31, 2007 Shane, the only thing I disagree with is your assessment of the M-60. It's my favorite belt gun. sorry Bob, I've seen video of the one you guys fire, it's reliable and nice. The M60's I've fired are 40+ years old and fail at the MOST inopportune time. "Taking fire 4 o'clock" "clear left" "P.I.D." "engage" Bang!.....click "Fuck!!!" "roger fuck" Bob, you've got to check out a M240B, after it's break-in period (1000-2000 rounds) it sings! Link to post Share on other sites
shaneman153a 39 Posted August 31, 2007 Report Share Posted August 31, 2007 +1 on the silencers, that's the dumbest shit I've ever heard of. Whoever made them NFA watched too many goddamn spy movies! Link to post Share on other sites
KySoldier 2 Posted August 31, 2007 Report Share Posted August 31, 2007 (edited) Twinsen,Machine guns aren't efficient for mass killing. Can you see that? The government should not have the authority to tell us what kinds of guns we can own, TO A POINT. I don't believe we should be permitted to own nukes, ok? But any portable arm used by the military should be ours if we wish. I'd say there is nothing better for mass killing than a FA. If you really wanted to take out a group of unprepared people in a small area, there is nothing better short of explosives. As fair as what guns we can own, I'd think it best if all Title 1 guns were allowed NATIONWIDE, title II guns were regulated JUST by the 1934 Law which calls for the more extensive background check and tax, and no explosives or MG mfg without SOT. But I also think that even if things were as I described (FAs weren't in every gunshop BUT were more readily accessible since supply would be up and the price no longer inflated) there would eventually be a school/mall/federal bldg/etc type shooting which would have congress targeting them just like they do "assault weapons" now. A silencer crawled into my house and killed my baby brother. Edited August 31, 2007 by KySoldier Link to post Share on other sites
BobAsh 582 Posted August 31, 2007 Report Share Posted August 31, 2007 "Whoever made them NFA watched too many goddamn spy movies!" ...exactly what I was thinking. Shane, Tony's got quite a few M-60's, and they all run flawlessly. It's a gun he's very accustomed to, and that means he's an expert at tuning it. I'm an old jarhead fron the 70's. I like new MG's, but the '60 will always be my go-to gun. Link to post Share on other sites
termite 463 Posted August 31, 2007 Report Share Posted August 31, 2007 WTF is this, I LOVE FA guns, play with them at the "toy store" and guys bring them to the range. I agree that anyone should be allowed to own one, but not every swinging dick in the country that just feels he's got to show off shit or as they say "bust a cap on yo ass". But there's no way in hell that it should be "open season" to purchase a FA. Go thru the checks, pay your fees, and then act like a normal human, or else this country will become like Iraq, when a kid is born, his first present is an AK, and let's don't forget that if you don't have an AK, you are NOT a man, evidently the dudes in Iraq have a complex about what it takes to be a man. I don't need a FA gun to let my neighbors know I'm a man, my wife KNOWS that I am, with the cost of ammo, and seeing the way they aim and shoot, I'll just use 1 round, 1 kill, go back to eating my dinner and await the next asshole. But every one can type it down in your ditty computer, if not in the next generation, it will be in the next, the people here will be fighting, just as they are over there. I PRAY that this won't happen, but stop and look at all the "give away" programs, when the money dries up, the shit hits the fan. And Hillary is running for president, bend over, grab your feets and kiss your sweet ass good by, or even worse, Obama. Hey, we all may be eating government cheeze. Link to post Share on other sites
shaneman153a 39 Posted August 31, 2007 Report Share Posted August 31, 2007 I'd say there is nothing better for mass killing than a FA. If you really wanted to take out a group of unprepared people in a small area, there is nothing better short of explosives. God, people used to get pissed in this forum when you said the word "drum". KY, I'm sure that couldn't be taken out of context by the casual observer. Link to post Share on other sites
fossten 1 Posted August 31, 2007 Report Share Posted August 31, 2007 But every one can type it down in your ditty computer, if not in the next generation, it will be in the next, the people here will be fighting, just as they are over there. I PRAY that this won't happen, but stop and look at all the "give away" programs, when the money dries up, the shit hits the fan. And Hillary is running for president, bend over, grab your feets and kiss your sweet ass good by, or even worse, Obama. Hey, we all may be eating government cheeze. What would Thomas Jefferson do? (WWTJD) Link to post Share on other sites
netpackrat 566 Posted August 31, 2007 Report Share Posted August 31, 2007 I think it should be mentioned, that the only crime ever committed with a legal, registered machine gun was committed by a police officer. Link to post Share on other sites
fossten 1 Posted August 31, 2007 Report Share Posted August 31, 2007 I think it should be mentioned, that the only crime ever committed with a legal, registered machine gun was committed by a police officer. Don't forget Waco. Just because the crimes weren't prosecuted doesn't mean they weren't committed. I think hosing down a building with an M60 mounted on a helicopter thus killing women and children is a crime. Link to post Share on other sites
buckandaquarterquarterstaff 5 Posted August 31, 2007 Report Share Posted August 31, 2007 Link to post Share on other sites
fossten 1 Posted September 1, 2007 Report Share Posted September 1, 2007 (edited) Okay, that's impressive. I'm sold. Just two questions: 1. Is the TAC trigger considered a machine gun by the BATFE? 2. Is the rubber band considered a machine gun by the BATFE? I'm not being a wiseass, I've heard this and I'd like confirmation. Edit: I just found a Saiga forum thread where the guys trashed the TAC trigger. Apparently it's a POS. Also found this letter from the BATF that says the trigger is NOT a machinegun. Edited September 1, 2007 by fossten Link to post Share on other sites
buckandaquarterquarterstaff 5 Posted September 1, 2007 Report Share Posted September 1, 2007 2. Is the rubber band considered a machine gun by the BATFE? Not to my knowledge, but maybe if Hillary gets in office. For now, a rubber band is still just a rubber band. All wise assing aside, I really don't know. I think if given an opportunity to rule on it, they'd be against it. They did say that things like gatling setups for 10/22's were a no no. Not advising or suggesting anything, just thought that it was interesting given the topic at hand... Link to post Share on other sites
BobAsh 582 Posted September 1, 2007 Report Share Posted September 1, 2007 Bump firing is not illegal. Link to post Share on other sites
netpackrat 566 Posted September 1, 2007 Report Share Posted September 1, 2007 Bump firing is not illegal. Tell that to the people who bought the Akins Accelerator. Link to post Share on other sites
netpackrat 566 Posted September 1, 2007 Report Share Posted September 1, 2007 I think it should be mentioned, that the only crime ever committed with a legal, registered machine gun was committed by a police officer. Don't forget Waco. Just because the crimes weren't prosecuted doesn't mean they weren't committed. I think hosing down a building with an M60 mounted on a helicopter thus killing women and children is a crime. And again, committed by police officers. Go figure. Link to post Share on other sites
KySoldier 2 Posted September 2, 2007 Report Share Posted September 2, 2007 I'd say there is nothing better for mass killing than a FA. If you really wanted to take out a group of unprepared people in a small area, there is nothing better short of explosives. God, people used to get pissed in this forum when you said the word "drum". KY, I'm sure that couldn't be taken out of context by the casual observer. Yeah, got a bit carried away trying to prove a point....I gotta remember everyone on the net can read this, and some people scare easily. Okay, that's impressive. I'm sold. Just two questions: 1. Is the TAC trigger considered a machine gun by the BATFE? No but its considered a POS by many shooters. If I knew where mine was I'd give it away. I imagine the rubber band works best on small, light ARs like SBRs, but it is intriguing Link to post Share on other sites
dangerman 0 Posted September 6, 2007 Report Share Posted September 6, 2007 Let's buy some land in a Red State and start Saigatown, USA. We'll all be citizen-deputies and we'll have a mayorial Council rather than a single mayor The only bad news is we'd have to homeschool because there's no room in the budget for a bus You should join Free State Project or just move here to NH, free-est state in the nation. We would love to have all of y'all. Link to post Share on other sites
Leo.Kermes 1 Posted April 16, 2008 Report Share Posted April 16, 2008 why do you think the saiga with the third y is so popular Link to post Share on other sites
jhereg 0 Posted April 16, 2008 Report Share Posted April 16, 2008 (edited) why do you think the saiga with the third y is so popular Of course there are rifles which are *far* easier than an AK to make full auto. (IMO) I know of at least one where it's possible to buy all of the parts at a gun show & drop them in. (Still not legal unless you're a C2, but no machine work necessary.) Edited April 16, 2008 by jhereg Link to post Share on other sites
macbeau 902 Posted April 16, 2008 Report Share Posted April 16, 2008 In this country, the registered machinegun (all NFA items for that matter) has a far better safety record than the tricycle, skateboard or trampoline. The May 86 ban came about largely because of the "legitimate sporting purpose" hoseshit. I wonder why the ATF has never had another "amnesty" registration since '68. They are authorized to do so "from time to time"... Link to post Share on other sites
dancapostagno 0 Posted April 16, 2008 Report Share Posted April 16, 2008 well, let me add my take and you let me know how far off i am... Point 1- anybody can pull a trigger multiple (i.e. 2 or 3+) times in rapid succession, so banning bursting/raffica/select fire is ridiculous. Point 2- fully automatic fire (excepting balanced automatics and many open-bolt automatics) in most calibres tends to inhibit accuracy, ergo: Point 3- large calibres we use for hunting wouldn't be practical in terms of either accuracy or cost, therefore: Point 4- .22lr (full auto GSG-5 plinker anyone?) to about 5.54soviet or 223rem should be both cost-effective and controllable (therefore safe) to fire in full auto Point 5- while 308win and above is not controllable or cheap or necessary for sporting purposes, so i would be less inclined to see full (>3) auto on these calibres Point 6- the real concern comes with the "military calibres"...5.54/5.56/6.5/6.8...the man-stoppers, and the rub is this: Point 7- its not that it can't be done, its done in countries like Switzerland, where people are both trained in proper usage and responsible in demeanor Point 8- now some countries go even further than us and restrict "military calibres" or allow gun ownership at all Point 9- and its not like picking up a gun warps your mind; its a tool just like a car is a tool, and improper use can be lethal...but: Point 10- many people, even amongst us, can think of how many of the local yahoos can ruin it all by acting flat-out retarded Point 11- and this is where we differ from the Swiss; we are neither trained, nor inherently responsible in demeanor across the board Point 12- now those may be related or even cyclical factors, as i have come to believe that we are neither taught to be nor told that we are responsible Point 13- and that many of our "neo-liberal brahmans" insist that we are in fact too immature to be trusted with the means of protecting our freedoms Point 14- and by believing that, behaving according to that (as if now justified), we reinforce that cycle... allowing our social & political "elites" to MAKE US INTO CHILDREN Point 15- the making taboo of automatic fire, and of guns in general, is therefore part a much larger and systemic and cultural problem Point 16- so perhaps just the addition of one law or the repeal of another won't work in the way we would probably like eh, what say you all? Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts