Does law Enforcement really need select fire?

[WyattandDoc]

And that opinion is formed on what factual basis?

You forget Sir that you're on CalGuns. Factual Basis.....You're such a Kidder

[Artema]

South Carolina PD acquires an M113 armored personnel carrier armed with an M2 Browning .50 caliber belt-fed machine gun.

http://boingboing.net/2008/09/02/south-carolina-sheri.html

The Richland County, South Carolina Sheriff's Department (that's them above) just obtained an armored personnel carrier, complete with a belt-fed, .50-cal turreted machine gun. Sheriff Leon Lott has charmingly named the vehicle "The Peacemaker," and insists that using a caliber of ammunition that even the U.S. military is reluctant to use against human targets (it's generally reserved for use against armored vehicles) will "save lives."

The military called the .50 an anti-MATERIAL rifle, as it is not intended for use on personnel. It is designed to break through things, not hit people. I question the wisdom in having those used against people in the USA.

[Sudaev]

For specialized units/swat? Possibly. Keep in mind I think the useage of swat teams has gone WAY beyond what they were intended for.

You said it! The concept as originally conceived by LAPD was a response to armed revolutionary groups and, most of all, barricaded gunmen, especially those with hostages.

As to select fire, I recall an interview with one of the early LAPD SWAT members who stated that there is no need for SWAT teams to have full-auto capability for their weapons.

[audiophil2]

The police should not have anything that the general population is not allowed to have. People forget that the police are regular citizens and should not have any special privileges.

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk

The majority of the general population that can legally purchase a single shot rifle can legally buy a machine gun. Price is the major limiting factor, not legality.

I am just a regular citizen and legally drive around with a Colt M16 in my vehicle when I go out to the desert for plinking.

[KABA556]

The majority of the general population that can legally purchase a single shot rifle can legally buy a machine gun. Price is the major limiting factor, not legality.

I am just a regular citizen and legally drive around with a Colt M16 in my vehicle when I go out to the desert for plinking.

The Hughes Amendment of the 1986 FOPA is probably not going to go away unless it is given a serious legal challenge.

The problem is that the mainstream gun owners really don't care about fully automatic weapons, the NRA really doesn't care, and the people who presently own fully automatic weapons do not want to see their $200,000 dollar collection suddenly drop in value down to MSRP for new full auto weapons...

The only people who would be actively involved in challenging the Hughes Amendment would be gun owners/people who presently do not own fully automatic weapons [probably because of price] but who wish to be able to own them. This group of people is not sufficiently powerful or organized enough to mount a substantial legal challenge to the Hughes Amendment.


In short, the guy who has 4 fully automatic weapons, an AKM, an M-16A2, an M-14, and an M-60, doesn't really want his collection to drop from nearly $100,000 dollars to say $5,000 dollars because laws changed and now people can buy a newly made M-16 or M-4 direct from Colt for $1,200 dollars + tax stamp.

The people who already have fully automatic weapons are generally thinking of their own financial interests. An exceptional few are supportive of change for reasons of general principle, but most people will think about their financial interests before anything else.

[audiophil2]

and the people who presently own fully automatic weapons do not want to see their $200,000 dollar collection suddenly drop in value down to MSRP for new full auto weapons...

In short, the guy who has 4 fully automatic weapons, an AKM, an M-16A2, an M-14, and an M-60, doesn't really want his collection to drop from nearly $100,000 dollars to say $5,000 dollars because laws changed and now people can buy a newly made M-16 or M-4 direct from Colt for $1,200 dollars + tax stamp.

The people who already have fully automatic weapons are generally thinking of their own financial interests. An exceptional few are supportive of change for reasons of general principle, but most people will think about their financial interests before anything else.

That is a complete myth. I have not talked to a single transferable owner that does not want the registry opened for everyone.

Why would I not want to be able to buy more machine guns? Even if I paid top dollar today, say $30,000 for an M16A2 and tomorrow I was able to buy a full auto SCAR, M240, AUG, KRISS, TAVOR, etc. for under $15k total I would buy all of them up. If I had a $200,000 collection of pre-86 guns and could buy $1200 full autos tomorrow I would be buying them and expanding my collection into grenades, howitzers, and tanks.

Absolutely no one in their right mind thinks of NFA machine guns as investments. They can be taken away at any time. The prices change by the hour. People buy machine guns because they are fun. Period.

[KABA556]

That is a complete myth. I have not talked to a single transferable owner that does not want the registry opened for everyone.

Why would I not want to be able to buy more machine guns? Even if I paid top dollar today, say $30,000 for an M16A2 and tomorrow I was able to buy a full auto SCAR, M240, AUG, KRISS, TAVOR, etc. for under $15k total I would buy all of them up. If I had a $200,000 collection of pre-86 guns and could buy $1200 full autos tomorrow I would be buying them and expanding my collection into grenades, howitzers, and tanks.

Absolutely no one in their right mind thinks of NFA machine guns as investments. They can be taken away at any time. The prices change by the hour. People buy machine guns because they are fun. Period.

Well the legal challenge is fairly simple to mount...


Somebody with the time and money files a form 1 requesting to manufacture a machine gun, or they file a form 4 requesting to transfer a post-86 weapon to an individual...

Once their form is summarily denied they would file suit in the appropriate court, work their way through the proper channels, and within 4-10 years they might ready to go to the Supreme Court.


If people really wanted to challenge this they might have started the ball rolling in 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, etc... There have been plenty of opportunities to do so.

[IrishJoe3]

You forget Sir that you're on CalGuns. Factual Basis.....You're such a Kidder

Ah! Silly me, what was I thinking?!

[USMC VET]

No, they should not have automatic weapons since it will not improve their accuracy. However, they should carry much larger magazines to compensate for their marksmanship skills.

[Nodaedul]

Our local SWAT came to one of my companies lunchtime work morale functions, basically one SWAT guy brought the armored vehicle and one of each of their weapons laid out on a table. It was fun fiddling with his HK416 but I was very surprised to see that it was full auto capable. It also felt very strange playing around with a machine gun and a grenade launcher in the middle of the tech company I work at, surrounded by fellow employees.

Do cops normally lay out a table full of guns for random people to come handle? Maybe it's because we are a Mil contractor tech company. It was awesome anyway.

[audiophil2]

Well the legal challenge is fairly simple to mount...


Somebody with the time and money files a form 1 requesting to manufacture a machine gun, or they file a form 4 requesting to transfer a post-86 weapon to an individual...

Once their form is summarily denied they would file suit in the appropriate court, work their way through the proper channels, and within 4-10 years they might ready to go to the Supreme Court.


If people really wanted to challenge this they might have started the ball rolling in 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, etc... There have been plenty of opportunities to do so.

Some time in the future there might be a challenge but as you see even in this thread a lot of gun owners don't see a reason to have these in anyone's hands. The NFA started in 1934. FOPA in 1986. The folks that remember being able to buy a machine gun with no hassles are dead or dying. Just like the Californians that remember cash and carry, loaded open and concealed carry statewide, and non-bulletbuttoned AR15's. The gun population is being "historied" out of its rights.

If you think every year since 86 was an opportunity to re-open the NFA you are either grasping at straws for your argument or are clueless. It took 32 years to get handguns back in DC homes, guns which were originally supposed to go into the NFA. We are still decades away from fixing the illegal FOPA. By the way the country is headed new MGs will be made by revolutionaries, not by judges.

[SVT-40]

That is a complete myth. I have not talked to a single transferable owner that does not want the registry opened for everyone.

Why would I not want to be able to buy more machine guns? Even if I paid top dollar today, say $30,000 for an M16A2 and tomorrow I was able to buy a full auto SCAR, M240, AUG, KRISS, TAVOR, etc. for under $15k total I would buy all of them up. If I had a $200,000 collection of pre-86 guns and could buy $1200 full autos tomorrow I would be buying them and expanding my collection into grenades, howitzers, and tanks.

Absolutely no one in their right mind thinks of NFA machine guns as investments. They can be taken away at any time. The prices change by the hour. People buy machine guns because they are fun. Period.

Don't rain on KABA556's parade he like myths..

Everybody should have a MG or two!!! Cops included!!!

[SVT-40]

I intend to launch a project over the next several years with a remote controlled drone that will stay airborne for several hours and have a range of several miles with recording equipment. The purpose is to fly around town and observe the police at their worst, when they believe nobody is watching. If they are going to fly drones over us and record us, we can return the favor.

Hey moderators can you move this post to the Calguns comedy sub forum...



I love Calguns... Some of the best laughs on the internet, and it's free!!!!!

[KABA556]

Some time in the future there might be a challenge but as you see even in this thread a lot of gun owners don't see a reason to have these in anyone's hands. The NFA started in 1934. FOPA in 1986. The folks that remember being able to buy a machine gun with no hassles are dead or dying. Just like the Californians that remember cash and carry, loaded open and concealed carry statewide, and non-bulletbuttoned AR15's. The gun population is being "historied" out of its rights.

If you think every year since 86 was an opportunity to re-open the NFA you are either grasping at straws for your argument or are clueless. It took 32 years to get handguns back in DC homes, guns which were originally supposed to go into the NFA. We are still decades away from fixing the illegal FOPA. By the way the country is headed new MGs will be made by revolutionaries, not by judges.

I generally agree, but we don't gain victories by declining to fight battles.

The NRA should have been leading the charge to get rid of the Hughes Amendment starting the day after it supposedly passed.

If you watch the video archive available from C-SPAN, it is clear that the Hughes Amendment did not pass, but because Rangel recorded that it passed, it is considered law. The Supreme Court will not hear arguments pertaining to improper passing of a law, if Congress states that the provision passed then they will accept that.

[teetsjones]

South Carolina PD acquires an M113 armored personnel carrier armed with an M2 Browning .50 caliber belt-fed machine gun.

http://boingboing.net/2008/09/02/south-carolina-sheri.html

The Richland County, South Carolina Sheriff's Department (that's them above) just obtained an armored personnel carrier, complete with a belt-fed, .50-cal turreted machine gun. Sheriff Leon Lott has charmingly named the vehicle "The Peacemaker," and insists that using a caliber of ammunition that even the U.S. military is reluctant to use against human targets (it's generally reserved for use against armored vehicles) will "save lives."

That just SCREAMS collateral damage. Remember when Police agencies upgraded to the .357 magnum. Remember why those were phased out.
Now a .50 cal belt fed? "save lives"!?
This is on seriously deluded individual.