Anyone here ever fire anything like this monster?

[tedrbr]

Originally posted by Seagoon
I'm not sure where this idea that the 2nd Amendment is about "sporting guns" came from. The use of the word militia indicates incontrovertibly that the right is to keep and own military guns for the common defense against enemies foreign (and in the case of tyrannical governments) domestic. The founders intention was that the people would always have access to the kind of weapons that the average soldier in the Continental Army carried, especially as they weren't wild about the idea of a standing army...)
 

You also have to consider the term "militia" in the 1770's.  It pretty much could include every able adult male, if that was what was required.  "Militia" are what normally protected settlements on the frontier from Indian uprisings and raids.  "Well regulated militia" makes some people think there was a well organized force, like todays National Guard, but it was no where that organized, disciplined, well trained, or well equipped.  

Think of the Swiss model if used here: every able adult to serve their time in the military, or equivalent, and thereafter always be part of the Reserves, with a rifle and magazine of (accounted for) ammo in the house.  The Swiss can mobilize a 1 to 1.5 million strong fighting force in hours.  America cannot in any way, shape, or form match that without going nuclear.

In America you will always have the Government which wants to take the guns, because people are easier to 'protect' and control when they are not armed.   You will have the percentage of the population that actually believes that "violence never solves anything" and wants the guns to magically disappear (after all; outlawing drugs worked so well), and big daddy to protect them.   You've got those that won't give up their guns without a fight, or will keep them, even if they are outlawed.

The Guns issue in the States has come down to two polar opposite extremist camps.  Neither side will compromise, and neither side can risk giving an inch of ground in the political or public relation battle.  That's why there can be no reasonable gun laws in the states in the future.  That's why you never see a concession from either camp in acknowledgment of any violent act that a gun is part of the issue.

[Halo]

(quote)

Just a brief thought. I'm not sure where this idea that the 2nd Ammendment is about "sporting guns" came from. The use of the word militia indicates incontrovertibly that the right is to keep and own military guns for the common defense against enemies foreign (and in the case of tryannical governments) domestic. The founders intention was that the people would always have access to the kind of weapons that the average soldier in the Continental Army carried, especially as they weren't wild about the idea of a standing army (which tended to be used for the kinds of things they are currently used for in South America and Africa).

(unquote)

Good point, Seagoon. My impression is that the 2nd Amendment has always been primarily about individual weapons, not weapons large enough to be crew served, or their more destructive modern counterparts that pack even more punch in individual weapons, like 40mm grenade launchers, rocket launchers, and .50 caliber weapons, including sniper rifles.  

For example, most people seem to accept the ban against automatic weapons and explosive weapons like hand grenades.  The big sniper rifles probably are the current dividing line between acceptable and unacceptable.  Even for hunting the largest game, it seems calibers under .50 are sufficient (except for shotgun slugs and other shorter range special purpose heavier bullets like African big game calibers).  

People who still want to possess particularly lethal weapons apparently can get BATF permits or perhaps some other special dispensation for their special circumstances.  

As for nightmare Hitler or Stalin scenarios, dispersing heavy weapons among Guard and Reserve units presumably helps deter any inclinations toward a federal dictatorship.  

As with any regulations, there probably will always be debate about particular weapons that are right on the borderline between generally acceptable and generally unacceptable.  For me, that line at present is between .50 caliber and larger, particularly sniper rifles.  

If we think gun control is a tough issue now, wait until a .50 caliber sniper rifle is used in a crime.

[FrodeMk3]

That's a good point too, Halo. What's been explained to me in different discussions, is that the .50 cal's and other weapons are feared because of their range. A .50 cal could accurately take out a VIP target at up to a mile or more. That is outside of the protective cordon that people like the Secret Service or police could cover to protect someone like the President, Sec. of state, congressman, governors, celebrity's, etc. Plus, By simply being farther away, the assasin would have more lead time on potential pursuers. Add to that, a large cal. weapon like that 20mm. firing an HE round would guarantee a one shot kill, and likely one or more "collateral" deaths. It is, after all, what those things were made for.

As for sporting purposes, African bull elephants' used to be taken with something like a .458 Win. Mag, or .416 rigby, .505 Gibbs, etc. None of those cartridges are quite as powerful as even a .50 BMG round. However, I would say that a .50 BMG would'nt be out of place on an African dangerous game hunt.

[evenhaim]

ok
A: just to clarify i hate hunting
B: i like guns(owns an uzi)
getting an m16 soon lol
but ya with that gun aim within 5-10 feet of the guy and hell be blown to bits.
i wonder what the recoils like on that monster.

[Halo]

A clip I saw someplace apparently has some soldiers firing the .50 BMG sniper rifle from the shoulder!  Apparently the semi auto recoil management is extremely effective.  

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

You have to realize that most 50 BMG sniper rifles are heavy, as much as 20 pounds or more. The recoil is usually on the same level as heavy 20 gauge shotgun loads in a mid weight shotgun. The bolt action version I looked at building would weigh around 21 pounds. It'll be a while before I tackle that project.

[Larry]

If they take away our guns what will we do when the canadians invade with tier hockeysticks?



But really if the country ever melts down and anarchy ensues Id rather have my guns then a stick or a 2x4 with a rusty nail.

[lasersailor184]

Well regulated at that time didn't mean well organized.  It meant "Well Practiced."  See, the founders realized how powerful the rifleman is when he can hit his target.


It's the same in switzerland.  They all have rifles and are VERY well practiced, with national days where they come together to shoot.





And the fun thing about the constitution, is that it's never outdated.

[Viking]

Originally posted by tedrbr
But the ammo load for the Payload guns is whole a lot cheaper than the guided missiles cost per round.  Many are also semi auto with 4 to 6 round mags for follow on shots.  For many situations, big bore sniper rifles have their uses and are more flexible.  

Using a Javelin to take out a mud brick building in Iraq is expensive (been done, many times, and I'm sure some bean counters reamed out some COs for letting it happen too).  Tanks not always available or nearby.  Shooting a dozen rounds of 25mm will get the job done pretty well at a fraction of the cost of the Javelin.  

But that's what you use mortars and recoilless rifles for. For shorter ranges rifle grenades and grenade launchers are much more practical, and ammunition costs approximately the same. That monster gun is simply too heavy and cumbersome to be of any practical use.

[storch]

Originally posted by Viking
But that's what you use mortars and recoilless rifles for. For shorter ranges rifle grenades and grenade launchers are much more practical, and ammunition costs approximately the same. That monster gun is simply too heavy and cumbersome to be of any practical use.

true but think of the car alarms you'll set off in the parking at the range every time you fire a fifteen dollar projectile at the berm.

[Viking]

Well, there is that...

[Neubob]

Here's the vid of the guy shooting the big gun, with a suppressor. The sound may be misleading, but look at the reaction of the people behind the shooter. There is none. Hear protection or not, the sound of an unmuffled 20mm going off would probably disturb bystanders, at least enough to turn their heads. The recoil is definitely present, however.

20mm at the range


The muzzle velocity quoted was around 3600 fps. If that's accurate, this is no low-velocity payload rifle.

[tedrbr]

Originally posted by Viking
But that's what you use mortars and recoilless rifles for. For shorter ranges rifle grenades and grenade launchers are much more practical, and ammunition costs approximately the same. That monster gun is simply too heavy and cumbersome to be of any practical use.

That monster gun may weight more than a recoilless rifle or mortar, but less that a recoilless rifle or a mortar AND a decent ammo load would weight altogether as compared to the payload rifle and ammo.  It's shorter in length than a .50 cal Barrett sniper rifle.  A large sniper or "payload" rifle is a lot faster to deploy than a mortar position, easier to move with on the bounce, and very simple to use.  

I don't know who still actively fields rifle grenades these days.  I think France still has them in modern inventories, among some other nations.  Payload rifles have a flatter trajectory and more range (and more penetration) than a M203 or MM-1 revolver grenade launcher.  A Vehicle mounted Mk-19 (or Mk-47) grenade launcher (or M2 .50 cal with API rounds for that matter) has more fire power than these payload rifles, but there are times when operations are conducted by infantry on foot, not mounted or supported by vehicles or good air support.

It's one more tool in the toolbox.  As payload rifle use grows, you'll find more specialized rounds incorporated into their use.  You see a lot of MOUT-based weapons coming out now to support troops fighting in urban environments, as that is the growing trend.  The MPIM/SRAW, Mk-153 SMAW, XM307 ACSW, and M-32 MGL "six pack" are all good examples.  The two calibers most commonly seen seem to be the 25mm in high velocity, flat trajectory platforms, and 40mm in low and high velocity rounds with typically less flat trajectories.  

There's a lot of evolution and revolution trends in military weapons happening right now at all levels to deal with the changing face of warfare.  A lot of new weapons, specifically specialized weapons, will result as well as expanded inventories.  It will be up to the warfighters on the ground to determine what will work for them for a particular environment.  Not every tool is appropriate for every job.

[GRUNHERZ]

Rose O'dennels body guards have a couple I'm sure...