[RMc]

Should civilian ownership of guns capable of firing up to fifty 9mm projectiles in 3 seconds be severely restricted?

[dogmush]

No, why?

[CaptMac]

ROFLMAO I don't think anyone except a civilian would want a 9mm weapon with that rate of fire.

We should re-visit the special "Automatic Assault Transmissions" people have in those special designed cars that are capabile of going faster than the posted speed limit!

[BLB68]

I'd think they'd be severely restricted by ammo costs. =P

[TAB]

define "severely restricted"

[plexreticle]

Should civilian ownership of guns capable of firing up to fifty 9mm projectiles in 3 seconds be severely restricted?

My M1 Super 90 will do this as will most shotguns.

[coloradokevin]

What is the point of this thread, where did the question come from, and what gun are we talking about?

[leadcounsel]

Troll??? "9mm projectiles" ????

This is really a 2A question.

To answer the question, YES! Why SHOULDN'T a civilian have the ability to own modern firearm technology? With freedom comes responsibility.

Isn't that the intent behind the 2nd Amendment? To arm citizens with the practical modern ability to suppress a tryannical external or internal government. What good is the 2A if the only arms citizens are allowed to own are ancient technology? The 2A is toothless if it means that civilians are allowed anything LESS than modern firearm weaponry.

Think about the 1st Amendment. What good is the 1st Amendment if the only speech it protected was 18th Century speech and modes of communication - eg quill and ink. No internet, no mass print papers, no telephones.... The reality is that the Constitution and the Bill of Rights recognized advances in technology so the ideas put forth in our RIGHTS evolve to incorporate those advances in techology. "Speech" includes type written words, artwork, even gestures. Similarly, "Arms" isn't limited to "muskets," it includes rapid firing military weaponry.


"An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it."

[mnrivrat]

I think leadcounsel said it about as well as I could .

The type of question is one of restriction, limitation, and infringment on an object of ownership . The wrong path !

[Treo]

The most disturbing thing about this thread,to me , is that a yes answer would take away every weapon I own.

I mean we're talking ,what ? 16 aimed rounds a minute?

EDIT: Sorry I read the OP as asking
about a weapon that could shoot 50 rounds in 3 minutes which would cover every single autoloader out there.

[bogie]

I'm just really tired of all the folks who show up here from the Brady side.

And a lot of you guys encourage them.

[JWarren]

Troll.


-- John

[Gunsby_Blazen]

What the heck kind of question is that? I cant help it, but I am confused. Are they talking about shotguns? machine guns? The bionic man with a handgun?? Or perhaps David Carradine's character from the movie Death Race 2000, I bet he could shoot a handgun that fast, especially with that robot hand.

[alsaqr]

Troll.


+1

[romma]

No person needs a gun like that to hunt with... :neener:

[1911 guy]

Dont feed the trolls.

[geekWithA.45]

Well, the OP is a bit vague and cryptic, but let's not be too quick on the draw with the troll thing.

If you skim the OP's 26 other posts, you'd see that most of them have to do with shotguns, and so I'm guessing that he's talking about #4 buck, my favorite defense load. Each load has 27 roughly 9mm projectiles in it, and so any ordinary side by side or over/under would meet the qualifications he's set out.

[Auburn1992]

I was thinking troll as well

[fletcher]

As for restricting them on their ability to fire rapidly, no, they should not be.

I'd think they'd be severely restricted by ammo costs. =P
That was my first thought - I'd think that it's more of a $3.33/second gun ;)

[230RN]

Number 4 buck is 0.24" in diameter, not 9mm.

Triple-ought buck is closer to 9mm, which is a really odd size, unless you're talking about a 10-ga shotgun. I understand that nothing larger than 10-ga is legal for waterfowling --I don't know if >10 ga is legal for big game hunting.

So I don't think RMc is referring to shotguns.

RMc, can you amplify on what kinds of firearm you are referring to? The question does not make too much technical sense without some background.

(Maybe for some perpective: The Italians had a 9mm submachine gun which fired at a rate of about 1000 rd/minute... the Glisenti, I believe? The sound, according to Hatcher, was like canvas ripping. That's 15 rd/second, close to the fifty rounds per three seconds specified. There's another gun with laods stacked in the barrel which fires at some unbelievable rate.)

Your question also does not make much legal sense to many of us on this forum, who believe as leadcounsel does, that any restrictions on firearms is fundamentally illegal under 2A.

Much confused, but willing to give the benefit of the doubt,

Sincerely,
--Terry

[moooose102]

The most disturbing thing about this thread,to me , is that a yes answer would take away every weapon I own.

I mean we're talking ,what ? 16 aimed rounds a minute?

HOW DOES 50 ROUNDS IN 3 SECONDS = 16 ROUNDS IN A MINUTE? \\ IT = 1000 ROUNDS A MINUTE!

No person needs a gun like that to hunt with...

NO, NOT TO HUNT WITH, IN FACT, HERE IN MICHIGAN IT WOULD BE STRICTLY ILLEGAL, BUT WHY SHOULD A PERSON (WHO CAN AFFORD THE AMMO) BE RESTRICTED ON HAVING FUN? OR IN THE WORST CASE SCENARIO, BE ABLE TO DEFEND HIS/HER HOME ANGAINST A THREAT?

[sacp81170a]

Size Weight Diameter
#0000 Buck 85 gr. 0.380"
#000 Buck 70 gr. 0.360"
#00 Buck 53.8 gr. 0.330"
#0 Buck 49 gr. 0.320"
#1 Buck 40.5 gr. 0.300"
#2 Buck 29.4 gr. 0.270"
#3 Buck 23.4 gr. 0.250"
#4 Buck 20.7 gr. 0.240"

So you're talking about, what, 0000 buck? I'm not sure where to get any. <sniff> Smells like a troll.

[romma]

NO, NOT TO HUNT WITH, IN FACT, HERE IN MICHIGAN IT WOULD BE STRICTLY ILLEGAL, BUT WHY SHOULD A PERSON (WHO CAN AFFORD THE AMMO) BE RESTRICTED ON HAVING FUN?

That was a joke moooose...

[Hawk]

Methinks Plexreticle nailed it.

Not a troll, just a trick question.
Buckshot.

[ctdonath]

Sounds like either an MP5 (already severely restricted) or a shotgun with buckshot.

I own one and want the other.

No, ownership shouldn't be restricted.
The one(s) doing the restricting is no better/superior a human than the one(s) being restricted.

[Thain]

No, but perhaps boldfaced enlarged fonts, or posts written entirely in CAPSLOCK should be...

[nplant]

I think it is a trick question - no trolling in RMc's history. BUT, questions and posts regarding BIG buck shot IS in RMc's history.

So, I have to ask, RMc, what cool toys are you working with?

[Pigspitter]

You know, that has always been a question of mine. I've always wondered if it's just too much to add the 49th extra barrel to my Glock. But I guess I might as well before it gets banned.

[sacp81170a]

Knowing that only 10 pellets of 0000 buck will fit in a 12 ga. 3 1/2 inch shell, how many can you fire before your shoulder falls off? I think the problem would be self limiting in terms of expense and the "if it hurts worse on that end it hurts worse on this end" principle. Ouch. Let's not be giving the anti's any ideas, shall we?

[berettashotgun]

So..............
It doesn't really matter ---if----the weapon fires 51 or MORE projectiles per 3 seconds?:evil:
I say restrict the slow guns,those are worthless; I need some speed.:D
As far as the buckshot size a fellow member posted, about 6-8 years ago when Hevi shot was still under $7.00 lb, I made a sorting screen for the stuff.
I understood the shapes and pellets were NOT uniform when I bought, but dang, getting single pellets that weighed 70gr.!!!
I really gained respect for the guys at the marsh/swamp/waterhole shooting those .32 bullets at me from less than 200 yards. Duck/geese hunting has never been done since without safety glasses.
BTW, my H.D. shotgun load IS #4 hevishot turkey loads...followed by a few slugs.

[brighamr]

No, but perhaps boldfaced enlarged fonts, or posts written entirely in CAPSLOCK should be...

exactly

[cortez kid]

Why, there's no need for that kind of projectile dispensing unit for any usage by the peaceful populace. Is the TROLL gone yet? Hey just bought a "HEX" MN91/30. I do the happy dance now:D. Wait... I thought I heard the TROLL again:scrutiny:;)
kid
PS The thread starter said UP to 50rnds in three secs.. What does that mean down to?. I can fire 15 rnds of 9 out of my Glock in under whatever some would seem reasonable. Not including a fast reload of another 15. Any restriction of any firearm is a restriction of my right under the Constitution. Nothing less

[Gunsby_Blazen]

I still think the only one capable of doing so is the Bionic Man and maybe Frankenstein from Death Race 2000. He had that robot hand that could shift really fast that doubled as a grenade, but thats illegal too just as any machine guns are.

[Tribal]

We should re-visit the special "Automatic Assault Transmissions" people have in those special designed cars that are capabile of going faster than the posted speed limit!

Don't tempt them.

That said, I can see where the concern is: in the eternal battle between armor and arms, arms are clearly dominant right now. That's what the school shootings have been: someone using surprise and a tool that allows power projection to wreak havoc. Instead of falling into the trap of seeking better armor (meaning that better arms have to be developed, restarting the cycle), the question is whether we can truly prevent this sort of thing through education and character. I think this latter approach is far more likely to succeed, even as it must be recognized that it's impossible to anticipate everything; boxcutters on airplanes weren't seen as much of a threat.

[DoubleTapDrew]

Unless you are talking about a shotgun, 1000rpm 9mm guns are already severely restricted. Apparently some yahoos in the gov't thought the 2nd amendment had something to do with "sporting" or some such nonsense.

[MinnMooney]

I'm sure most of you have seen the fire-power equivilent of a proficient semi-auto shooter or even a few revolver shooters. How about the Benelli guy shooting 9 or 10 of his self-thrown clays and hitting each one separately!! They could do way more harm than most could with a 50 shot/3 sec. 9mm rifle. When are people going to understand, it's the person behind the gun, car, knife, plane, bulldozer, baseball bat or tire iron that is going to do the damage. The item(s) mentioned above are only dumb tools.

[jackmead]

No, a gun like that would restrict me in about 4 minutes, but I'd still like to try one. :)

[SoCalShooter]

Yup I want one, but I do not think I can afford it.

[44AMP]

No gun should be "restricted". Period. We have plenty of laws stateing quite clearly that it wrong and punishable to shoot people for fun or profit. We don't need anything else.

[.cheese.]

should it be restricted - how?

by law? No

It would be restricted no matter what by the price of ammunition though. Not much that can be done about that.

[Karl Hungus]

IMO I should be able to go down to the local gun shop and walk out with an RPG.

[Dksimon]

no, it shouldnt be restricted.

Maybe a little bit more information in the question next time so you dont sound so trollish

[MartinBrody]

Yes, but only if it has a barrel shroud, you know "the shoulder thing that goes up", only cops should have them.

[shc1]

How about banning “cough” severely restricting vehicles that go over the speed limit, no matter what it is… yuk yuk yuk

[mike6161]

don't feed the troll

[Hammer-52]

I don't think we should restrict, severely or otherwise, any firearms. We already have over 20,000 laws on the books related to firearms so why add any more?? Restricting people who are psychotic from owning firearms is another issue. Our founding fathers were concerned with ensuring the citizenry had access to adequate firepower to keep the "king" from taking away our liberties. Why should it matter 5 9mm in 3 seconds or 50?

[Huddog]

Absolutely not, since the 2nd means what it says.

[AZ_Rebel]

No... why would you even ask?

[BammaYankee]

Judging from all of RMc's previous posts I assume this one was in reference to shotguns.

[Gator]

This thread is still open? :confused:

[Wildfire]

Hey guys:
I'm a little leery of this one. Don't sound right to me.

But my answer would be. Why ? nothing wrong with what we already have.

I still think this is a trick question. Wonder if his name is Chuck?????/

[MikePGS]

Don't feed the trolls.

[VARifleman]

So you're talking about, what, 0000 buck? I'm not sure where to get any. <sniff> Smells like a troll.

How do you come to that...it would be 000 buck, which is easy to find on midway.

http://www.midwayusa.com/eproductpage.exe/showproduct?saleitemid=624573

10 pellets of 000, 5 rounds => 50 9mm projectiles, 5 shots in 3 seconds is not difficult.

[GigaBuist]

Doesn't sound like a troll to me at all. The fact that shotguns dump a significant amount of lead down range quickly is something that I bring up whenever somebody around me is dumb enough to say something like,"Why does anybody need an AK-47? That's only good for mowing down a room full of people!"

GigaBuist: "Actually..a shotgun would be better."

Lay out the numbers and the light might go on in their head.

[Sebastian the Ibis]

Are you talking about the Metalstorm, The million round per minute gun?

Yes it should be legal, and the government should subsidize it for me!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AEu9LLQpOF8

[Mr White]

Restricted?? You're asking that question to the WRONG group of people. Most of us here feel that they should be issued to everyone who isn't a criminal or crazy, and the crazy part is sometimes up for debate.

[Hoppy590]

i am innocent until proven guilty

a form of that means i should be trusted until i F up!

[jungleroy]

The short answer, is a big NO.
The long answer is a bigger NO.
Ownership should not be restricted.

[dmazur]

Nothing wrong with owning any type of gun. The debate rages on about full-auto, but I still don't see why they have to be illegal to own and shoot at a proper setting.

Stiff penalties with no parole for firearms violations, sure. But not crimes for ownership.

This is just fundamentally wrong. It is a form of "guilt before commission of a crime."

As there are so many legitimate uses for firearms, why not repeal the nonsense laws that are drafted along the lines of "guilt for possession?

[PTK]

Sounds like a 12ga firing 000 buck, to me... :)

[jakemccoy]

I was thinking troll, but his other prior posts threw me off.

[ScotZ]

Resticting ANYTHING is only going to stop law abiding citizens from having it. There are enough laws. How about if we revisit and enforce some of the laws we already have. Then keep our politicians from resticting our constitutional rights in order to gather "cheap feel good" votes.:banghead:

[Catherine]

I don't think that ANY kind of gun should be restricted.

I think that ALL types of guns should be 'legal'.

I think that most of the gun laws are stupid, wrong and not Constitutional even though I obey them.

If that is the case in firearms... maybe they will limit how fast a vehicle can go and that they can only be painted a certain color.

I think that MOST if not ALL of the gun laws should be repealed.

What part of 'shall not be infringed' don't people understand? Who cares what the tool looks like or how it shoots? ONLY the anti gunners and the ATF. I think that they should be abolished too. NO offense.

ANY object or tool or thing can be used in a wrong or bad way by people. It is the person who uses it in a bad or wrong way not the tool or OBJECT.

Catherine

[Catherine]

PS:

The original poster mentioned 'civilian'.

Any NON military person, including the police, ARE civilians.

Military = military.

Civilians = NON military.

I happen to think that ALL people, all citizens, should have the same equipment or be able to purchase the same/exact equipment, including firearms, to be on a LEVEL playing field with the military of their country or ANY other country.

It helps us when it comes to TYRANTS, dictators, zealots in ANY subject matter, NWO power control freaks in ANY political party, the anti gunners, the Brady bunch, the past, present and future anti gun candidates including Presidents, Govs, Congress, etc.

PEACE through superior firepower!

Catherine
George Santayana wrote:
Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

[sacp81170a]

How do you come to that...it would be 000 buck, which is easy to find on midway.

You're correct. My mistake was forgetting that 9mm is ~.355". 0000 buck is .380" and I was equating 9mm to .38 caliber, which in fact isn't .380" but ~.357" in diameter. 0000 buck is hard to find, but 000 buck isn't. Either way, it still hurts to shoot it. ;)

[RMc]

Gents,

The example of "...guns capable of firing up to 50 9mm projectiles in 3 seconds..." was deliberately misleading to make the point. A Remington 1187 loaded with 5 rounds of 3 inch magnum #000 buckshot is indeed capable of firing up to 50 9mm projectiles in 3 seconds!

With the U.S. Supreme Court about to rule on the Second Amendment, where to draw the line on the "...right to keep and bear arms" will continue to be a complex and divisive issue even in the pro-gun community.

My apologies to anyone who may have taken offense at this approach. This was merely an example of how those who would restrict our rights might manipulate the facts in order to mislead John Q. Public and divide the gun-rights community.

Think about it.

[ylapirrynag]

If (when, depends on how paranoid you are) we (the American people in genereal not just THR people) have to do something called preservation of liberty, we should have options without resorting to the black market. But of course, that's what the facists don't want. :|

[denfoote]

The stupidity of those who would infringe upon our second amendment rights should be painful

[RockyMtnTactical]

Hell no.

00 Buck is closer to a the size of .32 ACP projectile though, just for the record...

[RMc]

As currently factory loaded in the U.S., these buckshot sizes actually measure:

1B: .295"
00B: .325"
000B: .350"
Tri-Ball II .600"

RMc