Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I totally dig the M-14. It has been my fav for a long while. I prefer going old school on it (original wood and no folding stock). I have been jonesing for a Springfield Armory M1 Garand as well. But, yes - when I was in Iraq, there were plenty of complaints about the ineffectiveness of the M4 outside of urban areas.
I totally dig the M-14. It has been my fav for a long while. I prefer going old school on it (original wood and no folding stock). I have been jonesing for a Springfield Armory M1 Garand as well. But, yes - when I was in Iraq, there were plenty of complaints about the ineffectiveness of the M4 outside of urban areas.
They said the wooden stock was too long for people wearing body armor. The armor pushes the rifle out too much. The new stock was a simple solution for a simple problem.
Location: In a Galaxy far, far away called Germany
4,301 posts, read 4,429,054 times
Reputation: 2397
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber
They said the wooden stock was too long for people wearing body armor. The armor pushes the rifle out too much. The new stock was a simple solution for a simple problem.
Yes. I could see how that would be the case. Shorter and retractable are better options for today's soldier. This may change with the advent of the new body armor coming soon. However, I think the days of permanent stocks are over for military purposes as the ability to adjust is just smarter.
if you are going to limit a person right to own firearms for being a criminal or having a mental illness, then the right to vote based upon that should also be in place.
If the day comes when someone shoots up a movie theater with their vote,killing and maiming 70 people,your idea may have merit.
With a gun-grabber in the whitehouse embolding people to start calling to ban assault weapons, I have a question.
What makes this:
More dangerous than this:
They both put identical bullets downrange at identical velocities. Since F=ma, the damage caused by these rifles would be identical. Yet the top one is demonized because it "looks scary". Does that make any sense whatsoever??
Both rifles are Ruger Mini-14 model .223 caliber semi-automatic carbines. Both shoot the same ammo, both load and fire the same, and both shoot the same speed, and take the same magazines; but uninformed idiots (liberals) will say the rifle on the bottom should be outlawed.
Actually the bottom one is a bolt action, not a semi auto.
If the day comes when someone shoots up a movie theater with their vote,killing and maiming 70 people,your idea may have merit.
My solution is to not restrict my rights, but to ask, why more people wouldn't exercise their right, to have protection from the loonies(they are every where) with them just in case... You never know in this dog eat dog world we live in today.
My 1911 has been going more and more, with me.
No one in that theater was armed. Just think if everyone in the theater was armed. He would not have thought about stepping foot in there.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
complaints?
