[atek3]

Given that premium 338 LM ammo is already about 2.50 per round, any idea how much American gun owners would pay for match-grade tungsten carbide cored 338 Lapua ammo?

atek3

[Eightball]

Honestly, .338 Laupa Mag is where I would draw the line for civilian ownership. No one who isn't a sniper needs a round that powerful.

But for that matter, no one needs a .50BMG either........
.....they're just fun. :D

I just can't see how anyone would have a viable use for that round unless you're hunting elephant, elk, moose, or other large game at near obscene distances. It probably doesn't help that the most effective weapons for that cartridge are (what seems like) near astronomical prices. If you can afford the firearm, the ammo shouldn't be a problem. But then again, it's not your "average range gun", so you probably wouldn't use that many of them (bullets).

Just my .02

[vmfrantz]

thats like saying no one needs a vette or viper. we just need geo metros. they all get you from point a to b.

[Erud]

I don't mean to take the thread off topic here, but Eightball, you really need to spend some time thinking about how our country was founded. The 2nd Amendment was written into the Bill of Rights to ensure that we the people would always have the means to resist and if necessary, overthrow our government. Do you really want that government deciding what arms are suitable for your "needs"? Not me.


Erud

[atek3]

i don't think eightball was talking about policy or legality, he was just rightfully pointing out that 338 LM AP does appeal to a very small subset of gun owners.

[Erud]

Better re-read the first 2 sentences of his post...




Erud

[atek3]

I took it as sarcasm. if it wasn't sarcasm, what would he be doing on THR? right?

[Metapotent]

If I had the money or inclination to buy a .338 Lapua-chambered rifle I might think about buying AP rounds. But it's true, there is no real use for it in the civilian market and it, along with the .50BMG, has scary capabilities and I wouldn't want anyone with a questionable mindset or mental state to attain such powerful rounds.

Having said that, I don't think that it should be banned or have laws against its use, however. Especially considering the fact that there is AP, incendiary, and explosive rounds in MANY different rifle cartridges (from .223 to .50BMG) that are completely legal.

I bought 20 rounds of incendiary rounds at a gun show, these bullets exploded on impact and melted through half an inch of steel, and its perfectly legal even for .50 BMG...so there is no sense in selected the .338 AP rounds for control, when there are exploding .50 caliber rounds on the market!

[Erud]

I wouldn't automatically assume sarcasm. I have known plenty of gun owners/enthusiasts who think there should be all kinds of restrictions on gun ownership - limits on caliber, limits on # of guns you can own, 1 gun per month, etc. These all sound reasonable to some gun-owning folks - mostly the same guys that think the 2nd Amendment was written to protect our God-given right to hunt deer.....


Erud

[telomerase]

I have known plenty of gun owners/enthusiasts who think there should be all kinds of restrictions on gun ownership

Yeah... but always on someone else's type of gun, not theirs :rolleyes:

[beerslurpy]

Whats the point? Steel or lead core 338 lapua mag should defeat anything an infantryman can wear. Ditto 50 bmg. AP would be for going through armored vehicles.

Not that it isnt cool, but if I had to shoot at armored anything, I would probably just run and hide unless I had something that worked against armor like an RPG. Shooting at armor with small arms seems like a way to get darwinated.

[the naked prophet]

Not that it isnt cool, but if I had to shoot at armored anything, I would probably just run and hide unless I had something that worked against armor like an RPG. Shooting at armor with small arms seems like a way to get darwinated.

Maybe running away will get you killed. Could be it's your best shot at surviving.

I've been looking for AP .30-06 and it's nigh impossible to find.

[Manedwolf]

Honestly, .338 Laupa Mag is where I would draw the line for civilian ownership. No one who isn't a sniper needs a round that powerful.

The British thought that the colonists didn't need military muskets, either.

[Manedwolf]

I've been looking for AP .30-06 and it's nigh impossible to find.

Wow, someone at a gun show here just had like ten boxes of it. The stuff in the old whitelabel box with the blue stripe and yellow stripes to either side of it. This stuff. They all looked in good shape, too.

http://www.michaelsmilitaryantiques.com/USA/316%5B1%5D.jpg

Seemed like an older dealer...is that something I can buy up and resell on gunbroker without the ATF jumping on my head, or no? :D

[JE223]

Look at this for an appreciation of the .50BMG : http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=219499

It's basically a big .308 or a big .223 - same with the lapua, but it's quite a bit less than the .50BMG. Nothing mystical about .338 lapua or dangerous. An AT-4, or similar, is a very potent anti-armor weapon. Anything that a civilian can buy - there was an answer for it 30 years ago, IMO.

[MTMilitiaman]

Not that it isnt cool, but if I had to shoot at armored anything, I would probably just run and hide unless I had something that worked against armor like an RPG. Shooting at armor with small arms seems like a way to get darwinated.

My thoughts exactly. The .338 Lapua strikes me as a superb round for big game or anti-personal, but little in the way of ammunition is going to make it an anti-armor round. Maybe a SLAP round would get you there, but again, if the revolution comes and I need to go against armor, I am going to run unless I can pick the time and the place, and then I am using something a lot bigger than a .338.

The British thought that the colonists didn't need military muskets, either.

Again, well stated.

[roscoe]

I though newly manufactured AP rounds were illegal, anyway. Surplus, only.

[atek3]

AP ammo is illegal to make if it can be fired from a handgun. Until oly arms comes out with a 338 Lapua pistol it will probably be safe.

let me spin it a bit, would gun owners pay big money for tungsten carbide cored 50 bmg?

atek3

[Eightball]

It's been a while since i've checked back in.

Yes, I was sarcastic.

Even though I cannot personally justify having a .338 LM in my collection (College + expensive firearm don't mix very well :( ), I'm not saying I can't see the point of owning one. It'd be ridiculously fun.

No, I didn't look up "what the gov't thinks" before my post. Yes, I think a Viper or Vette would rock. Yes, I realize some of you probably hate me anyway.

And the heck if the 2nd A refers to only hunting arms :fire: . Before you decide to judge anything I say, how about talking to me personally? I would appreciate it, especially from fellow THR members. I haven't been a member here for a while, and posted several hundred posts because "I think 2nd A was founded to protect out hunting rights".

atek3 is on the right idea with the intent of my post. Just because I can't think of a good reason to own it doesn't mean I would ban it. Now, if you could politely turn this thread around from flaming me and get back to the point at hand, I would appreciate it and I'm sure atek3 would, as well.

[mp510]

The second two lines prove the sarcasm in the first two. :what: