"Sniper Rifles" are next

[JBBenson]

"The Pentagon Considers This Russian Sniper Rifle a Big Threat to US Soldiers. The NRA Helped Promote It. So much for patriotism."

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/05/the-pentagon-considers-this-russian-sniper-rifle-a-big-threat-to-us-soldiers-the-nra-helped-promote-it/

Anyone who thinks that it will end with a semi-auto ban should WTFU. They will never, ever stop. Ever.

[Rickrock1]

Really progressive Mother Jones

[Dakie]

Exactly. Just wait until the antis figure out that the bullets from a sniper/hunting rifle are larger than the standard .223/5.56

[TrappedinCalifornia]

It's been going on for awhile in terms of using the 'terrifying' term Sniper...

2001 - Congressman urges sniper rifle ban

2002 - Ban on 'Sniper' Rifles Proposed

2005 - Hunting Rifle Ban Introduced as "Sniper Rifle" Ban

...If guns can be arbitrarily banned according to the mere diameter of the bullet, what is to prevent banning guns that use smaller bullets than .50 caliber? The anti-gun group that conceived the idea of a ban on .50 caliber rifles has already proposed banning .30 caliber rifles as "intermediate sniper rifles."...

Most of the above was focused on .50 calibers. But...

2002 - THE HUNT FOR A SNIPER: THE WEAPON; Officials Say Records Show Gun Was Illegally Owned

...The gun is a Bushmaster XM15 A3 M4, a civilian version of the standard American military rifle, the M-16, made with a removable handle on top so that a scope can be easily mounted on it, say officials of its maker, Bushmaster Firearms... The sniper's choice of the XM15 was a little unusual, Mr. Faraday said, because it has a 16-inch barrel and is therefore less accurate than the conventional M-16, which has a 20-inch barrel, or many sniper rifles that have 26-inch barrels. The shorter barrel, however, does make the XM15 easier to conceal...

2012 - If Assault Weapons Are Banned, Sniper Rifles Are Next

2016 - Why Can Civilians Buy Sniper Rifles? The Risks Are Real After Dallas Shooting

...Specifically, why can civilians buy sniper rifles, weapons colloquially perceived to be notoriously deadly?... As Stokes notes, the AR-15 can be adapted to make it effective at sniper shots. When that type of gun, or another military-style weapon, ends up in the hands of someone like Johnson — with dangerous intentions and the skills to make them a reality — that capability can turn deadly. As the nation mourns the five officers killed Thursday night, our lawmakers should continually reexamine gun laws to evaluate why "sniper rifles" are so ubiquitous and accessible here, and what courses of action would best ensure the safety of Americans, both civilians and those sworn to serve and protect.

Here's a list of press releases regarding weapons for 'snipers' from the Violence Policy Center dating back to 1999. According to the 56-page, 1999 release...

Sniper rifles are radically different from standard hunting rifles... Sniper rifles are “purpose-designed” and “purpose-built” weapons of war... No single feature marks this special class of purpose-designed and purpose built sniper rifles. Rather, the true sniper rifle is an amalgam of specific design features... Such “purpose-designed” and “purpose-built” sniper rifles are designed and manufactured for the purpose of killing human beings at more than five times the range hunters shoot deer, and to destroy “materiel” targets such as light armored vehicles and aircraft at distances of more than a mile...

So, 20 years ago, they were, evidently, contemplating a ban on specific models and features; much like they've gone after so-called "assault weapons." Bear in mind that a good part of that piece is made up of quotes from "our side" of the debate.

[Jimi Jah]

Better get that Rem 700 while you can.

[Citadelgrad87]

Better get that Rem 700 while you can.

Way ahead of you, but, yes, dont ignore the long range tools just because ARs are sexy.

You get some Charles Whitman clone making kills at hundreds of yards ans shooting 43 people, and expect the shoe to drop.

[YubaRiver]

"The sniper's choice of the XM15 was a little unusual, Mr. Faraday said, because it has a 16-inch barrel and is therefore less accurate than the conventional M-16, which has a 20-inch barrel, or many sniper rifles that have 26-inch barrels. The shorter barrel, however, does make the XM15 easier to conceal..."

The maker of the gun calls a shorter barrel "less accurate"?

Guess he never made a benchrest gun.

[madjack956]

You put the best "sniper" rifle in the world in the hands of 99.99999% of people in this world, and they aint gonna hit **** with it @ 2000 yards.

Again liberals, when it comes to firearms, good or bad, its the person behind the weapon, not the weapon.

[mit31]

Did you read the article? It really had nothing to do with the rifle and everything to do with NRA visits to Russia to promote it.

"The Pentagon Considers This Russian Sniper Rifle a Big Threat to US Soldiers. The NRA Helped Promote It. So much for patriotism."

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/05/the-pentagon-considers-this-russian-sniper-rifle-a-big-threat-to-us-soldiers-the-nra-helped-promote-it/

Anyone who thinks that it will end with a semi-auto ban should WTFU. They will never, ever stop. Ever.

[tenemae]

Yeah, well... my bolt-action isn't a "sniper" rifle, it's an anti-materiel rifle, so Ha! Loopholes!

Wait until they find out about the .416 Barrett

[MrFancyPants]

Better get that Rem 700 while you can.

Already got a few which could be considered deadly and accurate at long range, but maybe now I'll expedite the process of building a Creedmoor. Don't have one of those yet.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

[eswrite]

Hmm. I guess I should speed up that Valkyrie upper acquisition in case it gets bundled with this mess.

Seriously, how many sniper mass shootings have we had recently?

[vintagearms]

Hmm. I guess I should speed up that Valkyrie upper acquisition in case it gets bundled with this mess.

Seriously, how many sniper mass shootings have we had recently?

With libs, it will only take one. Of course, all those babies that they kill through abortion don't count.

[madjack956]

Did you read the article? It really had nothing to do with the rifle and everything to do with NRA visits to Russia to promote it.

If that was directed at me, yes I did. From what I read, the article was about a rifle that was being touted as exceptional at great distances, and also being able to defeat armor. In the enemies hands it was formidable against the enemy ,and that US forces may be outgunned on the battlefield because of it. That actually has something to do with the rifle in my book.
It also stated the NRA promoted it with over tones elsewhere in the article that they may have funneled Russian money for Trumps campaign.


Mother Jones is trying to paint the NRA as traitorous or something to that effect because it promotes a weapon with certain characteristics or capabilities.


Its a non issue. The NRA promoting it or not promoting it is not going to change the fact it exists, and who or what country uses it. It also doesn't change the fact that it needs to be in capable hands no matter how evil they paint it.
Hence my comment.

The article also stated that they were looking into a sporting version, which in my mind was an attempt to scare the American public that a new lethal killing machine may hit our streets, even though Russian imports are kaput.

I admit that may be a stretch, but I never underestimate the lefts motives.

I hope that satisfactorily clears things up for you. You seemed quite concerned.

[mit31]

No, I was responding to the OP. The article was 3% "rifle capabilities" and 97% "NRA in Russia." I don't disagree that "sniper rifles" may be "evil" some day, but I think this article is not addressing that issue at all. The article title implies it is about scary sniper rifles, but the article itself is really not.

If that was directed at me, yes I did. From what I read, the article was about a rifle that was being touted as exceptional at great distances, and also being able to defeat armor. In the enemies hands it was formidable against the enemy ,and that US forces may be outgunned on the battlefield because of it. That actually has something to do with the rifle in my book.
It also stated the NRA promoted it with over tones elsewhere in the article that they may have funneled Russian money for Trumps campaign.


Mother Jones is trying to paint the NRA as traitorous or something to that effect because it promotes a weapon with certain characteristics or capabilities.


Its a non issue. The NRA promoting it or not promoting it is not going to change the fact it exists, and who or what country uses it. It also doesn't change the fact that it needs to be in capable hands no matter how evil they paint it.
Hence my comment.

The article also stated that they were looking into a sporting version, which in my mind was an attempt to scare the American public that a new lethal killing machine may hit our streets, even though Russian imports are kaput.

I admit that may be a stretch, but I never underestimate the lefts motives.

I hope that satisfactorily clears things up for you. You seemed quite concerned.