Question on .308 AR, how do they respond to extended lengths of shooting?


PDA






JJ cosle
October 21, 2013, 01:14 AM
Thinking about the idea of a .308 AR on a mount on our boat when traveling to questionable areas of Europe and South Africa. I mainly ask about how a standard AR-10 will hold up to semi rapid fire for about 20 rounds. If we were ever being pursued by a boat with identifiable weapons, will this gun work to shoot warning shots in the vicinity of a boat at around 400 yards? We have 5.56 ARs for closer range stuff, but the idea would be to be able to reach out beyond the distance of their AK's (300-400 yards) and be able to just shoot a few warning shots in the general area of their boat. Warning shots from a distance seem to be the safest way to ward off confirmed attackers who are following you. What do you guys think, will the ar-10 fit this application? I dont need to disable or destroy anything, I would just like to have a caliber that could hit a few shots in the vicinity.

If you enjoyed reading about "Question on .308 AR, how do they respond to extended lengths of shooting?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
MachIVshooter
October 21, 2013, 01:24 AM
That's about the most far-fetched application I've ever heard of for any semi-auto rifle.

In short, no, the weapon is not designed to fire rapidly for an extended period. Nor is any rifle.

For this purpose, you need to be looking at an M1919, RPK, etc. Something belt fed that was originally designed as a machine gun.

Or just don't take your boat into war zones. That's probably the best solution.

Frank Ettin
October 21, 2013, 01:32 AM
...Warning shots from a distance seem to be the safest way to ward off potential attackers. What do you guys think,...Would you be contemplating doing this within the territorial waters of the United States? If so, I think there's a very good chance you'd be going to jail.

In general under the laws of the United States lethal force, i. e., shooting at someone even if you call them "warning shots", is not legally justified merely to ward off potential attackers. Lethal force is in general justified only when a reasonable person would conclude that is necessary to prevent otherwise unavoidable, imminent death or grave bodily injury to an innocent.

JJ cosle
October 21, 2013, 01:41 AM
Lol maybe some more background info would have been good. When I say questionable, I mean in international waters, near Europe or off of south Africa. I most CERTAINLY would not shoot warning shots at anyone inside US waters!

Aikibiker
October 21, 2013, 01:53 AM
I would first suggest some sort of intermediate force options before going to guns. Flares, bright lights, loud hailer/warning sirens would all be good legal first steps before lethal force. You are talking about naval engagements here, they happen slower then your typical self defense scenario. Also make sure you have a good RADAR system with audible distance alerts and have a standing watch especially at night that can monitor the RADAR and surrounding waters.

After that if you want to stick with semi auto I would go with one of the semi auto belt feds and a crankfire trigger. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9hpblc1luk Put on a naval mount this thing would be legal in US waters, most state waters, and international waters as well.

However since most other countries are going to arrest you if you have any kind of firearm on your boat when you pull into harbor, if you are going to carry something a real machine gun won't really get you a longer sentence then a semiauto and will be much more effective. An auto grenade launcher or RPG would work great too, but you might get buried under the local jail for that one.

JJ cosle
October 21, 2013, 02:01 AM
Yea again I expect no encounters whatsoever, this is really just more of a crazy hypothetical situation. After reviewing the piracy attacks in 2012, I have noticed that almost all encounters happen the same way. Small skiffs start following the big boats. There are raggidy open skiffs without any walls, often times the cargo boats can look and identify weapons on the skiffs all the way out from 500 yards. After they have identified weapons for sure, the cargo boats fire a few warning rounds and the skiff immediately turns away. Again I know how unlikely this is. But realistically if I am visiting family in south africa, and I identify a skiff with men on it holding weapons and -following- me 500 yards away in the middle of the ocean, why would I want to wait for them to get close enough to use those weapons? Firing a few rounds around the skiff, remember this is after confirming they are following you WITH WEAPONS, seems to be the absolute safest way to avoid a confrontation

Aikibiker
October 21, 2013, 02:08 AM
That is how it happens with the big cargo ships. Modern pirate attacks on civilian vessels are much less publicized, though occur more frequently and follow a slightly different form that you should familiarize yourself with if you have any intention of traveling in African waters. However if you are going to Africa in a boat I would try to get hold of something heavy and made in the former Soviet Union and be prepared to pay the bribes for customs officials to look the other way.

Alternatively I would just fly and leave my boat at home.

JJ cosle
October 21, 2013, 02:11 AM
Eh, I believe that if you fire at pursuing pirates, they give up regardless of if you are a cargo boat or yacht. They are cowards that feed on easy prey, fire a few rounds and show them that they'll have to fight and possibly die and they run away.
Flying would absolutely be better, and for that reason I wouldn't have my boat there, this again really is mostly hypothetical. You are right. But suppose I wanted to have the biggest, baddest guns that would work the best for boat defense. What would they be?

MachIVshooter
October 21, 2013, 02:15 AM
However if you are going to Africa in a boat I would try to get hold of something heavy and made in the former Soviet Union and be prepared to pay the bribes for customs officials to look the other way.

Agreed. Of course, easier to procure in the US would be a semi-auto M2 .50 cal Browning. They can still be had for under $10k, and are a formidable weapon even if only semi-auto.

Alternatively I would just fly and leave my boat at home.

I agree with that even more. I hate boats almost as much as I hate airplanes, but the drastically reduced time in an aircraft makes it more appealing.

Of course, I personally don't even like leaving my county, let alone the country.

Frank Ettin
October 21, 2013, 02:19 AM
Piracy on the high seas is outside the scope of THR.

If you enjoyed reading about "Question on .308 AR, how do they respond to extended lengths of shooting?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!