What is wrong with a bayonet lug?


PDA






ol' scratch
March 6, 2011, 02:45 PM
Sorry if this appears to be a rant, but I don't get it. Why the heck do governments try and have the bayonet lugs cut off of rifles? I only mention this because I got an e-mail from a firearms enthusiast from Germany who said they forced owners of M1 Garands to grind the bayonet lugs off of the gas cylinders. He is trying to make his Winchester correct and wanted one of my gas cylinders. It was a while back that they forced the public to do this, but it is still stupid.

What the heck is the big deal with bayonet lugs? Is there something I am not seeing? Are there a lot of 'bayonet'-ings in this country or others? I may be asking a question for which there is no answer on this forum. Outside of the SHTF and sometimes zombie threads, I tend to think people have a brain on The High Road, I am just looking for some insight.

If you enjoyed reading about "What is wrong with a bayonet lug?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
chevyman097
March 6, 2011, 03:02 PM
What makes you think there is any logic to the decisions our governments make.....? Pretty much isnt any, that sums up the answer.

Mac's Precision
March 6, 2011, 03:09 PM
Certainly the bayonet lug is gateway hardware to assault weapon violence. First the owner discovers that he HAS a bayonet lug.....then he escalates to owning the bayonet .....next it will be drive by bayoneting.

I never did understand how a lug made a gun more evil. Actually the bayonets used here in the US are rather tame compared to the "toad stickers" affixed to foreign military guns from past history. All in all it is a knife on a stick... Somehow that is a bad thing.

Cheers
Mac.

Kurt S.
March 6, 2011, 03:09 PM
My guess is the anti-bayonet lug thing is a holdover from the old AWB law of 1994, and your answer lies somewhere in the minds of those that formulated said law.

I have a bunch of honeydo's this afternoon but you have me interested and I do some google-fu later on the subject.

EddieNFL
March 6, 2011, 03:24 PM
I have to keep my pre-bans in the safe lest they go on a bloody rampage. Post-bans are very docile.

22-rimfire
March 6, 2011, 03:35 PM
Governments do things that don't make a lot of sense past the surface concept.

WardenWolf
March 6, 2011, 03:35 PM
Politicians don't want people having "military" weapons, and a bayonet lug is a common feature of a military-style weapon. Basically, they're doing it in an attempt to outlaw entire styles of weapons.

LubeckTech
March 6, 2011, 03:42 PM
It is quite simple - bayonet lugs lead to drive by bayonettings!!

Seriously bayonet lugs on guns make them more suitable for citizens to use them against oppressive governments.

When some anti 2A idiot wants to run their mouth the best reply is one name - Joseph Stalin. This man was a monster period he tortured and murdered more people than Hitler. If the people are disarmed the stage is set for the same thing to happen here. Every day it draws closer the US now has laws on the books that allow for anyone declared a "terrorist" to be inprisoned and executed in secret and without trial. During the Clinton administration Janet Reno and the justice department considered the John Burch Society a terrorist organization.

AlexanderA
March 6, 2011, 03:47 PM
Of course a ban on bayonet lugs makes no sense.

That said, bayonets are a characteristic of military rifles. Removing them, I suppose, makes the rifles more "sporting." To this way of thinking, "sporting" rifles are more acceptable than "military" rifles. (Some countries even ban "military" calibers, such as 9mm Parabellum, for civilian use.)

The NRA, back in the 50's and 60's, used to publish a lot of articles and pamphlets on how to "sporterize" military rifles, including M1 Garands. Part of the process was removing the bayonet lugs (as well as handguards, sight protectors, etc.). Reading those NRA publications today is enough to make any collector cringe.

The "sporting use" fallacy, unfortunately, is something that the gun community has bought into in the past. When will we get it through our heads that the Second Amendment has absolutely nothing to do with "sporting use"?

geekWithA.45
March 6, 2011, 04:04 PM
There isn't a darned thing wrong with a bayonet lug on your rifle, as long as you accept the premise that the individual citizen has the right to keep and bear militarily credible arms for the serious purpose of individual and collective defense.

It's when people reject that premise that they start getting wrapped around the axle talking about sports and other trivial applications of the right of arms.

bearcreek
March 6, 2011, 04:11 PM
http://www.guardian-series.co.uk/news/1013959.bullet_found_in_doorway/

As you can see from this article, in Europe, .22 short rounds have the ability to "fire themselves" so I would imagine that European bayonets can probably go on rampages and kill hundreds of people if they can find an ungrinded bayonet lug to attach themselves to. It's for peoples safety! :scrutiny:

Vern Humphrey
March 6, 2011, 05:43 PM
A long time ago, back in the matchlock era, hunters in the Pyranees mountains, on the border between France and Spain carried huge knives. There are bears in the Pyranees, and if you shot a bear and only wounded him, he would not stand still while you went through the 50 or so steps to reload your matchlock, hence the knife.

Then someone woke up and smelled the coffee, "If I'm close enough to the bear to stick him with my knife, he's close enough to me to . . . hmmm . . . this is not good."

This bright guy had a knifesmith make him up a new knife, with a handle that tapered from the cross guard to the pommel. With this knife, once he fired his match lock, he could ram the handle of the knife down the muzzle and he had a spear.

Other hunters saw it and liked it. Soon a lot of them were being made in a French town, Bayonne. And these knives were called "Bayonets."

Bayonets were developed for hunters, not soldiers.

scaatylobo
March 6, 2011, 05:46 PM
What is wrong with the "lug" .

Short answer = NOTHING at all.

Its the govt that is wrong !.

merlinfire
March 6, 2011, 07:23 PM
.....next it will be drive by bayoneting.

Classic! But what about the dangers of The Mosin Nagant's bayonet? It's a WMD you can buy for only $69!

"You can bayonet your foe on the other side of the river without leaving the comfort of your hole."

http://7.62x54r.net/MosinID/MosinHumor.htm

NMGonzo
March 6, 2011, 08:25 PM
you might poke an eye out

Tim the student
March 6, 2011, 09:04 PM
Nothing wrong with them at all. Pure idiocy.

DougW
March 6, 2011, 09:13 PM
The killer to the deal is that the Army is dropping bayonet training fro the Basic Markmanship Curriculum. I would guess that will make our soldiers less mean!

Owen Sparks
March 6, 2011, 09:43 PM
Bayonets are just about obsolete. They were a great idea back in the days of single shot muskets that could double as a pike after the one shot was fired but there has not been a recorded military bayonet charge in over a century. BTW the reason that the old musket bayonets wers so long was because in those days the primairy mode of transportation was the horse and they needed something long enough to penitrate the vitals of a 1500 pound animal. I personaly have no need for a bayonet. For its size, weight and expense I could carry another magazine, The lug is a different story. It is a very useful device for attatching bipods and other accessories.

xcgates
March 6, 2011, 09:52 PM
Bearcreek, I'm hoping my humor (humour?) meter is broken, because even for the UK that article seems, for lack of proper words, off.

AlexanderA
March 6, 2011, 09:52 PM
Classic! But what about the dangers of The Mosin Nagant's bayonet? It's a WMD you can buy for only $69!

Russian practice was to keep the Mosin Nagant's bayonet perpetually fixed. Most were not even issued with scabbards -- they were simply thrust through the belt, bare, on the rare occasions when they were not fixed.

So for historical accuracy a Mosin should always have a bayonet.

(BTW, the Americans carried this idea a step further, a century earlier, when some M1795 flintlock muskets had their bayonets permanently soldered to the barrels.)

SlamFire1
March 6, 2011, 09:57 PM
Because everyone has been cut but few people have been shot.

Tim the student
March 6, 2011, 10:02 PM
there has not been a recorded military bayonet charge in over a century.

Incorrect. You can read an obit/story about the man that led the last one (that I am aware of) here. (http://www.army.mil/-news/2009/11/19/30673-hero-who-led-last-major-us-bayonet-charge-dies/) He died in 2009, BTW.

bearcreek
March 6, 2011, 10:34 PM
Bearcreek, I'm hoping my humor (humour?) meter is broken, because even for the UK that article seems, for lack of proper words, off.
Crazy, isn't it? Far as I know it's an actual article. Here's another similar one from more recently. http://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/8805022.Fossgate_bullet_find_mystery/ I think this was posted on THR not too long ago but I got it on another site. Seems like some mischievous person could keep the UK police and crime labs busy for a 100 years or better just with the ammo I've got in my closet.

earlthegoat2
March 6, 2011, 10:36 PM
Even though I am well aware of the lunacy behind the bayonet lug legislation, it does have to do with a making a rifle less "sporting"

(Yeah, to the one getting bayoneted) haha JK folks.

Who decides what makes a rifle less sporting? I have no clue.

gunnutery
March 7, 2011, 12:16 AM
Governments don't like their subjects to have the same capabilities as the militaries. Although during a civil war you would be able to shoot at the oppresive gov. you just shouldn't be able to bayonet them...that'd just be wrong.

Who knows. Maybe it's a good thing we don't understand crazy.

hso
March 7, 2011, 12:18 AM
It doesn't make sense because ... it doesn't make sense.

Owen Sparks
March 7, 2011, 12:30 AM
I stand corrected, there has not been a recorded military bayonet charge in slightly over 50 years. Even so, the lug is very useful for a bipod mount and adds almost no extra weight to the weapon. I would rather have it and not need it. The 2A does not say anything about bayonet lugs and it was written back when the actually used the things.

Remo223
March 7, 2011, 12:30 AM
Incorrect. You can read an obit/story about the man that led the last one (that I am aware of) here. (http://www.army.mil/-news/2009/11/19/30673-hero-who-led-last-major-us-bayonet-charge-dies/) He died in 2009, BTW.
I thought I read about the british using bayonets in afghanistan just a year or two ago. could be wrong though.

John Wayne
March 7, 2011, 12:31 AM
It seems bayonets would tend to increase muzzle awareness and reduce "sweeping," so they might actually have practical applications to non-military use after all.

Remo223
March 7, 2011, 12:35 AM
Here's some examples:

http://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?98976-Outstanding-story-of-British-Bayonet-Charge-in-Basra

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8252974.stm

Remo223
March 7, 2011, 12:37 AM
From wikipedia:

The British Army performed bayonet charges during the Falklands War, the Second Gulf War, and the war in Afghanistan.[7] Recently in Iraq at the Battle of Danny Boy, the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders bayonet charged mortar positions filled with over 100 Mahdi Army members. The ensuing hand to hand fighting resulted in an estimate of over 40 insurgents killed and 35 bodies collected (many floated down the river) and 9 prisoners. Sergeant Brian Wood, of the Princess of Wales's Royal Regiment, was awarded the Military Cross for his part in the battle.[8] This engagement brought to notice the tactical use of the weapon for close combat and the sheer psychological effect it can have. Similarly, in 2009, Lieutenant James Adamson, aged 24, of the Royal Regiment of Scotland was awarded the Military Cross for a bayonet charge whilst on a tour of duty in Afghanistan: after shooting one Taliban fighter dead Adamson had run out of ammunition when another enemy appeared. Adamson immediately charged the second Taliban fighter and bayoneted him.[9]

Tim the student
March 7, 2011, 12:39 AM
I thought I read about the british using bayonets in afghanistan just a year or two ago. could be wrong though.

I've read some stuff like that too, but with mixed accounts of the events. I can't find any articles about it either. A forum discussion with a couple different stories here (http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showthread.php?t=6495). I've also heard about them being used in Vietnam, but not as a whole elemental attack. I'm not a military history scholar though.

I know for a while we had to carry them in Iraq, but I never personally heard the command to "Fix Bayonets".

Jim NE
March 7, 2011, 12:56 AM
Geez, I believe I saw a couple of sks style guns with bayonets on them at the store a couple of weeks ago. Maybe I shoulda bought one of 'em.

vito
March 7, 2011, 08:01 AM
Why are you even expecting a rational answer for this? So much of gun control is irrational and this is certainly a good example. And I'm not sure of why you disparage the zombie threads on this forum. We have been seeing hoirdes of mindless zombies as recently as yesterday milling around the state capital in Wisconsin.

geekWithA.45
March 7, 2011, 08:24 AM
Bayonets are just about obsolete. They were a great idea back in the days of single shot muskets...

I'm not so sure, at least until the solve the "infinite ammo" problem.

Bayonets are one possible solution to the problem of "what do I fight with once I run out of ammo?"

True, the 30 round magazine do kick the problem down the road a bit, but anyone who has walked into a range with two mags and 100 rounds of loose ammo and has depleted it in 10 minutes can tell you, ammo goes darned fast.

The m4/m16/ar does make a really dumb spear, but it's an even worse club.

Nushif
March 7, 2011, 10:13 AM
My Lee Enfield came with a lug ... AND a bayonet. 8)

Kenneth
March 7, 2011, 11:08 AM
Bayonets make me want to rape and kill.:evil:
Father stabbers and mother rapers prefer bayonets over flash hiders, hand guards, pistol grips, and thumb holes.



"Our wrongs we must right if we can through the Ballot Box, and if this fails us, through the Cartridge Box."

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story wrote;

danprkr
March 7, 2011, 11:13 AM
I just like them because every rifle should have a large pointy piece of steel hanging off the end.:evil:

xcgates
March 7, 2011, 12:21 PM
I don't know what is wrong with bayonet lugs, all my Mosin Nagant's bayonet is, is a really long screwdriver! Or hot dog stick!:p

gatorjames85
March 7, 2011, 01:36 PM
Too similar to the shoulder things that go up.:rolleyes:

AlexanderA
March 7, 2011, 02:21 PM
Bayonets are just about obsolete.

Utility knives are handy, especially when combined with wire cutters (M9). If you're going to carry one anyway, why not include a means of attachment, so that a rifle can be made into a spear when needed?

Bayonet training is really about instilling aggressiveness and a warrior spirit.

cleardiddion
March 7, 2011, 02:42 PM
Bayonets are just about obsolete. They were a great idea back in the days of single shot muskets that could double as a pike after the one shot was fired but there has not been a recorded military bayonet charge in over a century

Not true!
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article88661.ece

But seriously though, people's irrational fear of bayonets just confounds me.

animator
March 7, 2011, 02:44 PM
Like what was eluded to in an earlier post. Bayonet lugs, along with other "evil" features, such as pistol grips, folding stocks, removable box magazines were items commonly found on military-style weapons that later became mislabeled as assault weapons.


The infinite wisdom of politicians concluded that by banning weapons with these features, they would effectively remove the military-style weapons from the possession of citizens, while at the same time "preserving" the right to keep and bear arms by not restricting non-military-style weapons, such as most bolt-action hunting rifles and similar.


Unfortunately for the politicians, most manufactures quickly realized that these new laws could easily be gotten around by simply removing some, but not necessarily all, of these deemed "evil" features, and still produce a military-styled weapon that was within the law.


Banning the features had no direct impact on the production of military-styled rifles, except to say that it, much to the dismay of many former politicians, actually increased the overall popularity of these military-style rifles, while having absolutely no effect on the overall, and unproportionally low crime rate committed with these types of weapons.

xcgates
March 7, 2011, 03:58 PM
Oh, man, I just googled "the thing that goes up", and can't believe I ever missed that one! Perfect similarity, ban one little part of something because of emotions, even if we don't know what it does.

I suspect the OP's question can be answered thusly (is that a word?): Because government is inefficient, want's to be seen "DOOOOINNNGG SOMETHING!", and isn't accountable for knowing what the laws it passes are. (Not to mention, looking for logic in the government is a good way to drive yourself insane.)

Owen Sparks
March 7, 2011, 04:13 PM
Utility knives are handy, especially when combined with wire cutters (M9). If you're going to carry one anyway, why not include a means of attachment, so that a rifle can be made into a spear when needed?


That does make sense. I was thinking more along the lines of a civilian SHTF bug out weapon. If I found myself on foot in a Katrina type situation, I believe that I would rather carry one more magazine than a bayonet. Anyway, one good use that no one brought up yet is using an AK or SKS folding bayonet as a monopod by unfolding it half way down and sticking the tip into the ground. I have seen pictures of Chinese soldiers shooting this way.

CapnMac
March 7, 2011, 04:20 PM
The 2A does not say anything about bayonet lugs and it was written back when the actually used the things.

I still like Tench Coxe's phrase: "Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American."

Recall too, that the Fed AWB began in CA with either a DiFi or Babs Boxer aide being given a Guns Almanac and a marks-a-lot and being told to "circle everything that looks like a machine gun." Knowing that a law could not be passed if written that way, they sorted out what all the "appearance-evil" weapons had in common. And, thus, the list of "characteristics" was created. Nothing about function, use, even documentation of criminal use; all merely about appearance.

Average Joe
March 7, 2011, 07:56 PM
They don't want you to hurt yourself. See, they really care......

Gladius
March 7, 2011, 09:18 PM
Because, when you're in a rough part of town, and you see a bunch of Scary-loooking young men hanging out, and they're looking you over as though you were a medium-rare filet mignon, the very last thing you want to hear from those gangstas is the order to "FIX.... BAYONETS!!!!"


:neener:

NG VI
March 7, 2011, 09:52 PM
For centuries the bayonet was the primary infantry weapon, the musket/rifle was just a neat extra trick. That could have something to do with it, but mostly it's just another way to try to ban an entire format of firearm.

GRIZ22
March 7, 2011, 10:46 PM
Certainly the bayonet lug is gateway hardware to assault weapon violence.

This is most certainly the answer. A bayonet lug is an evil "assault weapon" feature. Look at the "assault weapon" law in NJ. If you have a Ruger GB Mini 14 in a standard stock you still have one too many evil features. If you grind off the bayonet lug the rifle becomes legal and obviously safer to the public.

Go ahead and try to find me an incident of someone in NJ being bayoneted since their AWB!

svtruth
March 8, 2011, 01:06 PM
that using a bayonet is an instantaneous time travel from the 21st century to the stone age.

ball3006
March 8, 2011, 02:02 PM
and the liberal I was talking with said no rifle should have a bayonet lug. I asked him if the bayonet lugs should be removed from Mosin Nagants and Springfield trapdoor rifles too? He said yes............chris3

xcgates
March 8, 2011, 02:58 PM
I'm curious, did they say why they thought bayonet lugs should be banned?

Nushif
March 8, 2011, 03:17 PM
As much as I understand how it doesn't make much sense ... I really do have to question the lethality of a bayonet in terms of like ... "Assault Weaponry."

I mean, I see why black may be bad, for some night fighting reason or somesuch, but I really don't understand the bayonet lug.

thorn726
March 8, 2011, 05:26 PM
from another forum >>Bayonets and their lugs have ZERO relevance to any CA gun laws.
I am continually amazed that people continue to confuse an expired Federal law with California's AW laws.

is this thread really old or what? it appears bayonets/ lugs are NOT illegal...or are they? ugg, confused.

also still searching for ANY logic as to why they were banned, not finding a single argument- and by any logic, i cant even find some wacko with backwards logic for a ban.

Owen Sparks
March 8, 2011, 06:59 PM
This is the same logic they apply to pistol grips. Remember the thumb hole stocks? I know a guy wko ownes a "MAK 90" with a thumb hole stock no bayonet lug and no flash hider. These "evil" features had to be removed before it could be imported.

merlinfire
March 8, 2011, 08:34 PM
It's what happens when you have people making laws about subjects they have little to no knowledge of.

They'd get more mileage out of banning the ability to gain weight. Sadly, its "that thing that goes up."

straitnate14
March 8, 2011, 08:40 PM
The killer to the deal is that the Army is dropping bayonet training fro the Basic Markmanship Curriculum. I would guess that will make our soldiers less mean!
The army got rid of training with a bayonet a few years ago! I went to basic training in 2006 and we were showed a bayonet and told that we would never see them in our units so there was no reason to train with them.

Murphy4570
March 8, 2011, 09:33 PM
***!

A bayonet belongs on the end of an infantryman's rifle and nowhere else.

Obsolete technology? Not if we ever face an enemy that outnumbers us 4-1, and SWARM over our positions! Bayonets are great for psychological warfare, and damn useful if you can see whites of their eyes, and more....

Read up on the Korean War, 1950-53. It may very well happen again.

Then again, I'm just student in History, not a professional infantryman, what do I know. (not being sarcastic)

230RN
March 8, 2011, 10:32 PM
What bugs me about it is that it's one more pre-assumption that if you have a bayonet lug on your rifle, you will get (or have) a bayonet.

Which leads to the pre-assumption that if you have a baonet you will kill someone with it.

Men have the equipment that allows them to commit rape, too.

lobo9er
March 8, 2011, 10:39 PM
bayonet lug on a Mossberg 590 LEGAL & SAFE! Baynoet lug on a AR ILLEGAL & UNSAFE!
They dont even know the laws they have or understand them.

Nushif
March 9, 2011, 08:30 AM
Actually ... I have a little story about this one.

Me and a guy from my unit, along with my wife were standing on Mary's Peak plinking with out shotguns one day, when he turns around and says "Hey guys. I've always wanted to do this!"

Next I know, he does a by the book infantry charge with an imaginary buddy, right up to the box we had been perforating, stabs it with his bayonet, lifts it up and shoots it off the bayonet.

In the mean time ze wife and I are standing there laughing. Covered in mud and gravel he walks on back and says "I needed that."

So, can we list bayonets as therapy now?

loadedround
March 9, 2011, 08:47 AM
I have to stick my two cents here regarding bayonet lugs. Several years ago (actually before 9/11) I belonged to a very active CMP shooting club and most of us shot M! Garands purchased through the CMP program. We competed against many Army reserve groups especially at Indiantown Gap in Anneville , Pa. Once we were invited to shoot one weekend at Ft Dix, NJ against some Army reserve groups. In checking New Jersey law, we found our Garands were classified as assault weapons because of the bayonet lug and we could not transport them in our POV's w/o violating NJ law on transporting assault weapons. Needless to say we did not shot at Ft Dix.

Carl N. Brown
March 9, 2011, 08:48 AM
A military gun or replica should have a bayonet lug if that was part of the standard equipment as just a curio and relic or civilian marksmanship trainer.

If you do a strict read of U.S. v Miller (1939) if any gun is protected under the Second Amendment, the current military small arm suitable for militia training for voluntary service is the first protected. That logically includes pre-service training in any weapon one might encounter on the modern battlefield if/when called up for active duty. Everyone eligible for military service should be eligible to own and practice with an AR and an AK. And that includes a bayonet lug on the rifle. And a bayonet suitable for opening cans and sharpening tent pegs.

ball3006
March 9, 2011, 05:44 PM
The point I was making with the liberal was Mosin Nagants, except the M44 and M39, do not have a bayonet lug. The bayonet is mounted on the barrel itself and locks against the front sight. Same with the 1873 trapdoor rifle. Come to think of it, the MAS 36 does not have a bayonet lug either....chris3

Carl N. Brown
March 9, 2011, 05:53 PM
Bayonet attacks are not a crime problem. The urge to ban bayonet lugs (and "shoulder things that go up") is pure holpophobia, a knee jerk psychological reaction to anything to do with weapons.

xcgates
March 9, 2011, 07:31 PM
Ball, that would depend on what you define a "bayonet lug" as. I would define one as "something on the rifle used to secure a bayonet." In other words, baring something really strange, like strapping a bayonet on with a band, every rifle (with a bayonet) I've seen has some feature that is used to secure a bayonet. In the case of the Mosin Nagant, that same feature does double duty as the base of the front sight.

AlexanderA
March 9, 2011, 09:17 PM
Back in the early 70's (long before any "Assault Weapons Ban"), the second factory to make the Armalite AR-180 was Howa in Japan (the first was Armalite's own facility in Costa Mesa, Calif., and the third was Sterling in Britain). Japan had a rule (perhaps written into its constitution?) that it could not export military weapons to any country currently at war. Since the U.S. was then involved in Vietnam, Howa could not send "military" AR-180's to the U.S. Apparently, the only thing that made the AR-180 "military" was the bayonet lug. So Howa hit on an ingenious solution -- it press-fit two little blocks in the notches on the bayonet lug, so that a bayonet could not be locked in place. When I got mine, it was 10 seconds' work with a punch to make mine "military" again. (I think I actually saved those two little blocks somewhere, in case I ever wanted to restore it to "original" condition.)

This was as much a fiction as Colt putting U-shaped spacers in the 20-rd. magazines of the early commercial AR-15's, so it could say they were being sold with "5-rd. magazines"). At one point, Colt even riveted these spacers to the floorplates. Even the riveted spacers could be removed with 5 minutes' work with a drill.

This is the sort of political correctness that doesn't see the forest for the trees.

Carl N. Brown
March 9, 2011, 09:57 PM
I was taught to block the weapon, take out the man, because just blocking the weapon would do no good, because the man is the danger, the man behind the weapon is the killer.

One of our local killers knifed a woman in a boarding house, beat a man and woman to death with a baseball bat in their home. In a nearby town, an ambush between drug dealers was carried out with Elmer Fudd single shot wabbit guns.

The problem is murderers and violent crimes, not my M1 Carbine or M70AB2 with bayonet lugs.

A couple of Knoxville police were interviewed about a proposed gun law: they pointed out that most criminals they encountered did not have guns, and those that did got them illegally anyway. The majority of criminals are not gun owners.

The NAS 2004 review on Firearms and Violence in looking at gun policies pointed out on "gun buybacks" that there were 6,500 homicides with handguns and 65 million handguns so a gun buyback would have to randomly select 10,000 handguns to get one potential murder weapon. The vast majority of guns are not used for crime and the vast majority of gun owners are not criminals.

Gun control is a huge waste, and banning bayonet lugs is a sign of a mentality hung up on unimportant trivia, grasping for control.

Davey Wavey
March 10, 2011, 06:01 AM
http://www.guardian-series.co.uk/new...nd_in_doorway/

As you can see from this article, in Europe, .22 short rounds have the ability to "fire themselves" so I would imagine that European bayonets can probably go on rampages and kill hundreds of people if they can find an ungrinded bayonet lug to attach themselves to. It's for peoples safety!

Not only was the round live, it was LIVE! :what:

230RN
March 10, 2011, 11:59 AM
On awakening this morning, thinking about this thread, I had the bizarre thought that since my SKS bayonet is chrome plated, it must be doubly deadly.

Don't know why I thought of that, but I hope Carolyn McCarthy doesn't think of it, too.

ZOMG! Chrome plated! And what about all those evil gun barrels that are Chrome Plated? Inside, where you can't even see it! Concealed Chrome Plating!

Aaagh!

<sucks down another cuppa good strong coffee, takes a wake-up shower>

The gun shop owner finding a .22 short, per Davey Wavey's post 70 also tickled me:

Really, I found it bizarre that the gun shop owner was so concerned and grossly exaggerated the danger of finding a .22 short. Either he's stupid, or he's trying to make a pointless point by spoofing British well-known paranoid concerns about these things. (Assuming the story wasn't just made up by the tabloid --I'm thinking, like The Onion would.)

Jeeze, and they'd call me paranoid because I carry a defensive firearm at all times.

I can't count the number of .22s I found in my car under my seat and in the cushions for years after I spilled a partly-used box of 50 in there.

OMG! What if you hit a bump and they went off! Hah, hah? What about that, hah? Why, you might get a bullet up your butt!

:eek:

What if one fell out on the highway and a hazmat truck ran over it and blew out the tires! Hah, hah? What about that, too, hah?

:what:

Terry, 230RN

Nicky Santoro
March 10, 2011, 12:29 PM
What is wrong with a bayonet lug?

In some states the political hacks believe that the incidence of drive by bayonetings has been woefully underreported and that they need to protect us poor subjects from yet another evil.

Nushif
March 10, 2011, 12:50 PM
I had one.

The idea of a bayonet lug or any actual "feature" being outlawed for no obvious reason isn't uncommon in pretty much every day life. As a matter of fact, even within the gun community we can see it.

Take for instance a range that has the rules of ...
"One shot per ten seconds"
"Three rounds maximum in a rifle"
"Six rounds maximum in a handgun"
"No shooting from standing."
"No loaded guns anywhere other than the firing line."
"No drawing from holsters."

These rules seem like more or less reasonable rules that don't really disallow any type of shooting or type of guns directly, but what it did was...

"No loud and obnoxious people we don't like, as we disagree with their definition of the shooting sport."

The same thing happened with the "Assualt Weapons" ban. they didn't say "No AKs, no M16, No LE type handguns." They said:
"No high capacity magazines.
"No bayonet lugs."
"No folding buttstocks."
"No Pistol Grips."

What the Anti's did here is say "No weapons that are in use currently by operational fighting forces."

Carl N. Brown
March 24, 2011, 04:05 PM
Take for instance a range that has the rules of ...
"No shooting from standing."

[mock outrage]I WISH! Last weekend was the military match at my range, and ALL shots had to be taken from standing position only, ten shots each at three targets at 100 yards. My scores with M1 carbine were 82, 59 and 72 (of 100). If they had been sitting or prone, they all would have been in the 80's. "No shooting from standing." I would wish. Range rules were no mercy for old men.[/off]

BTW, I used a gun with a bayonet lug, folding stock, detachable box magazine, and Full Metal Jacket ammo known to have defeated Japanese helmets and body armor in WWII. If I could figure out what a "shoulder thing that goes up" is, I would have retrofitted one of those just to be defiant.

CZguy
March 24, 2011, 04:14 PM
"No shooting from standing." I would wish. Range rules were no mercy for old men.


That's done purely for safety...........some us can't get up after assuming a kneeling position. :D

SlamFire1
March 24, 2011, 04:46 PM
I like the bayonet lug on my M1a's. I drill a hole in the sight protector, put a tie wrap through it, loop the tie wrap over the bayonet lug. You can pick up the rifle by the sight protector, it stays on.

Every rifle ought to have one. To hold the sight protector on.

Should be called the sight protector lug.

Limeyfellow
March 24, 2011, 04:56 PM
Kurt S.:

My guess is the anti-bayonet lug thing is a holdover from the old AWB law of 1994, and your answer lies somewhere in the minds of those that formulated said law.

They were doing stuff to get rid of the bayonet lug long before then. It was a major part of the restrictions in the 1989 importation ban for instance and they were trying to add it to laws restricting back in the 80s. The 1994 law just solidified a long held mistrust in bayonet lugs.

DoubleTapDrew
March 24, 2011, 05:45 PM
I'm curious, did they say why they thought bayonet lugs should be banned?


To prevent senseless tragedies such as this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DO6pjHiVEVA

Millwright
March 24, 2011, 07:46 PM
Don't look, but at least one congresscritter is proposing bans on stripper clips as well......

How long before rifles featuring slots for their use are banned as well ? >MW

macadore
March 24, 2011, 07:53 PM
What sense does 922r make?

fatcat4620
March 24, 2011, 08:35 PM
All this talk makes me want to get my M44 and pop out the bayonet out, since once it is it turns into a full auto rocket launcher!

merlinfire
March 25, 2011, 12:20 PM
Lug rhymes with thug.

merlinfire
March 25, 2011, 12:28 PM
Without a bayo lug on a AK, you can't put a proper sling on it, right?

oldbear
March 25, 2011, 12:39 PM
I have not read all of the posts, so if this is a repeat please excuse me. I believe that when the original “assault weapon” ban was passed, an illegal weapon must have more than a certain number of items. Some of these items were 1- folding stock, 2- ventilated hand guard, 3- mounting for a bayonet, extended magazine capacity, 4- flash hider (?). So the easiest way to make a weapon legal was to remove the bayonet lug.
Even though I don’t agree I do believe that the seller of any item has the right to place any legal conditions on an item they are selling. But I would be surprised that, even, the government would try and force the owner to modify an item that they had already purchased.

If you enjoyed reading about "What is wrong with a bayonet lug?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!