Page 1 of 22 1211 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 35 of 737

Thread: Military style guns

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    34,191

    Default Military style guns

    We hear a lot about how the military style guns that seem so popular with mass shooters these days are no different from other guns. Sure, if you're not nuts.

    The question you need to ask is why do they choose this style of gun? They seldom seem to use a deer rifle or a shot gun with a nicely carved cherry stock, although some do.

    They choose the military style gun because they view themselves as a self-appointed military out to right the wrongs. They are going out to kill human beings and they want a gun that was made for the same purpose.

    It's psychology. Sure, you can find a few that didn't use a military style gun, but it seems that more and more those are in the minority.

    So, you want to argue that we shouldn't single out the military style guns and outlaw them? Fine. Let's hear your argument. I'll even get you started. "They'll just use another gun... They'll use a knife... They'll build a bomb..." Sure, but maybe if we only allow bolt-action guns we can slow them down a little. And maybe, just maybe, these fools will blow themselves up first.
    "Marriage is a wonderful institution, but who wants to live in an institution?" - Groucho Marx

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Gulf Islands B.C.
    Posts
    1,943

    Default Re: Military style guns

    I used to think that, then I aquired my first "black rifle" and realized the advantages. Softer shooting, light weight, more ergonomic (easily modified to fit different body shapes), easily modified to other calibres, lower maintenance, easier maintenance etc etc etc.


    Btw, they use these rifles because they are the most common. The AR-15 is the single most popular rifle made in the West. They have been in constant production for 70 years.


    I think a better question is:

    "why did people start shooting strangers in mass events at all"

    They certainly had the rifles and the opportunity before they began in earnest.



    There are something around 20 million Ar-15's in the US, on top of all the other "black rifles". No matter what is attempted, they arent going anywhere.
    Last edited by Decourcy; 03-23-2021 at 05:56 PM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Tacoma, WA
    Posts
    17,429

    Default Re: Military style guns

    The Algorithm Is Watching

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    the hills
    Posts
    60,637

    Default Re: Military style guns

    CW, my take is that it’s a fashion like Hummers and off road 4x4 trucks. Sure there are positive attributes to them like Decourcy lists but they aren’t any more dangerous than a semi auto hunting rifle with wood stock.

    My $.02 it’ll get worse before it gets better.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Rockford, IL
    Posts
    12,086

    Default Re: Military style guns

    To add to your points, CW, they don't even carry their weapons like hunters do, with the muzzle generally pointed up so an errant shot merely arcs out over the trackless wilderness. No, these guys tote their weapons pointed down, so thy can shoot their buddy in the foot. The US Army I was enlisted in during the early 1960's toted their weapons at either "port arms" (diagonally in front with the muzzle pointed slantwise up to one's left), or slung over one's right shoulder on a leather strap.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    65,519

    Default Re: Military style guns

    Lee Hummers and trucks wear out and rust away. Guns hang about for generations.
    I agree it'll likely get worse before it get's better.
    I wonder if the attempted insurrection had been more successful whether that would have turned the tide…..probably not…….. Itmay take a dictator to manage that.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Port of Lorain,Ohio
    Posts
    22,046

    Cool Re: Military style guns

    I want a movie shotgun.


    Keep calm, persistence beats resistance.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Uki, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    33,421

    Default Re: Military style guns

    Quote Originally Posted by Decourcy View Post
    I used to think that, then I aquired my first "black rifle" and realized the advantages. Softer shooting, light weight, more ergonomic (easily modified to fit different body shapes), easily modified to other calibres, lower maintenance, easier maintenance etc etc etc.


    Btw, they use these rifles because they are the most common. The AR-15 is the single most popular rifle made in the West. They have been in constant production for 70 years.


    I think a better question is:

    "why did people start shooting strangers in mass events at all"

    They certainly had the rifles and the opportunity before they began in earnest.



    There are something around 20 million Ar-15's in the US, on top of all the other "black rifles". No matter what is attempted, they arent going anywhere.
    70 years?
    ​In a world full of wonders, man invented boredom.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Uki, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    33,421

    Default Re: Military style guns

    The ArmaLite AR-15 is a select-fire, air-cooled, gas-operated, magazine-fed rifle manufactured in the United States between 1959 and 1964, and adopted by the United States Armed Forces as the M16 rifle. Designed by American gun manufacturer ArmaLite in 1956, it was based on its AR-10 rifle.
    ​In a world full of wonders, man invented boredom.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Gulf Islands B.C.
    Posts
    1,943

    Default Re: Military style guns

    Quote Originally Posted by WX View Post
    70 years?
    Sorry, mistype. 60 years now, give or take.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Valley of the Sun
    Posts
    108,985

    Default Re: Military style guns

    Simpler is better, except when complicated looks really cool.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Valley of the Sun
    Posts
    108,985

    Default Re: Military style guns

    1903 springfield perhaps???

    B2C452DD-E46E-480B-94E8-ADCA1F8E59AF.jpg
    Simpler is better, except when complicated looks really cool.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    EU
    Posts
    895

    Default Re: Military style guns

    Most bolt action rifles in existance are actually military guns, even if some where sporterized or restocked. They just have a different styling, as was the fashion back then, but that did not stop them fighting countless wars since 1841, when the first bolt action rifle was adopted into service by Prussia. There are also many military semi-auto guns in the same style as the bolt action ones.
    Why are they not used more by mass shooters has to do with their drawbacks. They are much harder on the shoulders, since most shoot full size cartridges. They are much slower to reload, since most use stripper clips. They are usually longer and heavier and less ergonomic. If you want to shoot fast with a bolt action, you need a lot of training.
    There are of course some models that are better then others for this task, the SKS beeing top of the list. From the bolt actions the Enfields, because the even faster straight pull ones, all use weird calibers that are expensive to train on.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    37,714

    Default Re: Military style guns

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Pless View Post
    1903 springfield perhaps???

    B2C452DD-E46E-480B-94E8-ADCA1F8E59AF.jpg
    Springfield had to pay Mauser $400K for infringement.
    Rattling the teacups.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Do you have a warrant?
    Posts
    9,764

    Default Re: Military style guns

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Pless View Post
    1903 springfield perhaps???

    B2C452DD-E46E-480B-94E8-ADCA1F8E59AF.jpg
    Beat me to it, along with M1 Garand and Carbine, et al. But... umm... even I've never seen an '03 with a 30 round(?) box magazine, that must have been super experimental. I'm guessing the scope is a Warner and Swasey?
    When you can take the pebble from my hand, it will be time for you to leave.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Deepest Darkest Wales
    Posts
    23,509

    Default Re: Military style guns

    Quote Originally Posted by Decourcy View Post
    Sorry, mistype. 60 years now, give or take.
    Take, in this case.

    First civilian sales were in 1989.
    I'd much rather lay in my bunk all freakin day lookin at Youtube videos .

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Gulf Islands B.C.
    Posts
    1,943

    Default Re: Military style guns

    Colt sent a pilot model rifle (serial no. GX4968) to the BATF for civilian sale approval on Oct. 23, 1963. It was approved on Dec. 10, 1963, and sales of the "Model R6000 Colt AR-15 SP1 Sporter Rifle" began on Jan 2, 1964. The M16 wasn't issued to infantry units until 1965 (as the XM16E1), wasn't standardized as the M16A1 until 1967, and didn't officially replace the M14 until 1969. Colt had been selling semi-automatic AR-15's to civilians for 5 years by the time the M16A1 replaced the M14. Going off of the serial number records for the SP1, Colt had sold at least 2,501 rifles to the civilian market by 1965, 8,250 rifles by 1967, and 14,653 rifles by 1969.





    Also, the Stoner patent expired in 1977 not 1989



    An SP1 came up for sale on one of the forums I frequent just before the ban on sales here last year. Early serial number, early 1960's





    But my main point over the years of production is that it's an older design than many of the standard looking style rifles out there. Older than the Ruger falling block that is presently my go-to hunting rifle.


    To clarify, you aren't entirely wrong, as the AR-15's sold by other manufacturers since 1977 weren't called AR-15's since that's a trademark name. They were, however, identical. Colt, which had stopped selling on the civilian market for many years, restarted in 1989, selling under the AR-15 name.

    My AR is technically not an AR but a CQ, but the parts are interchangeable.
    Last edited by Decourcy; 03-24-2021 at 08:11 AM.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    34,191

    Default Re: Military style guns

    Just to be clear, when I referred to military-style rifles, I was referring to this century. I don't mean early rifles that were introduced during the Civil War, or muskets, or slings that throw stones...

    There are 4 reasons for owning a gun: (1) hunting, (2) target shooting, (3) killing on an organized level (including unsanctioned armies such as The Proud Boys), and (4) killing on the individual level (including self defense).

    I'm fine with (1) and (2). (3) is delusional. Nobody is going to defeat the US Military with a home-grown militia. The need for (4) is greatly exaggerated in most places.

    Here is my basic point: If you can't kill a deer with a bolt action rifle, then you need to go back to the range and practice. Semiautomatic hunting rifles are for people too lazy and undisciplined to practice. If you don't need it for deer, you shouldn't need it on the streets of your town.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rumars View Post
    If you want to shoot fast with a bolt action, you need a lot of training.
    Yes. Exactly my point. Thank you.
    "Marriage is a wonderful institution, but who wants to live in an institution?" - Groucho Marx

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Valley of the Sun
    Posts
    108,985

    Default Re: Military style guns

    Quote Originally Posted by CWSmith View Post
    Just to be clear, when I referred to military-style rifles, I was referring to this century.
    ar's date from 1956

    the point i was inferring is that most sporting rifles, including ar style sporter rifles, have been or are descendants of military arms
    Simpler is better, except when complicated looks really cool.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Indian Land, SC, USA
    Posts
    3,284

    Default Re: Military style guns

    Quote Originally Posted by CWSmith View Post
    Just to be clear, when I referred to military-style rifles, I was referring to this century. I don't mean early rifles that were introduced during the Civil War, or muskets, or slings that throw stones...

    There are 4 reasons for owning a gun: (1) hunting, (2) target shooting, (3) killing on an organized level (including unsanctioned armies such as The Proud Boys), and (4) killing on the individual level (including self defense).

    I'm fine with (1) and (2). (3) is delusional. Nobody is going to defeat the US Military with a home-grown militia. The need for (4) is greatly exaggerated in most places.

    Here is my basic point: If you can't kill a deer with a bolt action rifle, then you need to go back to the range and practice. Semiautomatic hunting rifles are for people too lazy and undisciplined to practice. If you don't need it for deer, you shouldn't need it on the streets of your town.



    Yes. Exactly my point. Thank you.
    Or, as my military small-arms instructor put it : " When you hunt a deer with this-here BAR, it'll kill it, skin it, cut it into small pieces, and wrap it for the freezer" (he had a way with words)



    Rick

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Pleasant Valley NS Canada
    Posts
    23,145

    Default Re: Military style guns

    Put it simply: If you see a picture of a full-body-armoured, helmetted, bad-ass military Special Ops guy carrying a modern military-issue weapon with a big clip, you do not need a rifle like that for hunting. If you see a picture of a responsible hunter carrying a full-stock, long-barrel, scoped rifle, that is the type of rifle you need for deer hunting.

    Yes:




    No:

    Hope for the best, but plan for the worst.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Gulf Islands B.C.
    Posts
    1,943

    Default Re: Military style guns

    Quote Originally Posted by CWSmith View Post
    Just to be clear, when I referred to military-style rifles, I was referring to this century. I don't mean early rifles that were introduced during the Civil War, or muskets, or slings that throw stones...

    There are 4 reasons for owning a gun: (1) hunting, (2) target shooting, (3) killing on an organized level (including unsanctioned armies such as The Proud Boys), and (4) killing on the individual level (including self defense).

    I'm fine with (1) and (2). (3) is delusional. Nobody is going to defeat the US Military with a home-grown militia. The need for (4) is greatly exaggerated in most places.

    Here is my basic point: If you can't kill a deer with a bolt action rifle, then you need to go back to the range and practice. Semiautomatic hunting rifles are for people too lazy and undisciplined to practice. If you don't need it for deer, you shouldn't need it on the streets of your town.



    Yes. Exactly my point. Thank you.

    So where, how, and what do you hunt? Do you assume all animals are the same and all terrain is the same? Do you understand that a semi, by its nature, is better for smaller framed people and people with disabilities? Where I hunt most of the deer I hunt, the bush is too think to get a second shot with a bolt action. I choose to hunt with a single shot, others prefer the security of being able to take a second shot if required. Who are you and who am I to tell them how and what they should hunt with as long as they follow the laws, regulations and common sense.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    34,191

    Default Re: Military style guns

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Pless View Post
    ar's date from 1956

    the point i was inferring is that most sporting rifles, including ar style sporter rifles, have been or are descendants of military arms
    I got the point. There is an old expression "the right tool for the job". If you need a semiautomatic to hunt deer, you should buy your deer meat and stay out of the woods. The military will continue to evolve, but do we want to hunt deer with drones? Or grenades?

    My original point is that the nutters who think they need to walk into a food store and kill 10 people they don't know are drawn to guns that closely resemble current military weapons and this is not an accident. Much of it is psychological (someone who has never accomplished anything in their life wants to make a grand statement of power) and some of it is function. Do we really deny ourselves anything of importance when we outlaw weapons that scratch this particular itch?
    "Marriage is a wonderful institution, but who wants to live in an institution?" - Groucho Marx

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Gulf Islands B.C.
    Posts
    1,943

    Default Re: Military style guns

    mmd, the single most popular rifle for new hunters is the sks. How does that fit into your bias?

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    37,714

    Default Re: Military style guns

    Quote Originally Posted by CWSmith View Post
    Just to be clear, when I referred to military-style rifles, I was referring to this century. I don't mean early rifles that were introduced during the Civil War, or muskets, or slings that throw stones...

    There are 4 reasons for owning a gun: (1) hunting, (2) target shooting, (3) killing on an organized level (including unsanctioned armies such as The Proud Boys), and (4) killing on the individual level (including self defense).

    I'm fine with (1) and (2). (3) is delusional. Nobody is going to defeat the US Military with a home-grown militia. The need for (4) is greatly exaggerated in most places.

    Here is my basic point: If you can't kill a deer with a bolt action rifle, then you need to go back to the range and practice. Semiautomatic hunting rifles are for people too lazy and undisciplined to practice. If you don't need it for deer, you shouldn't need it on the streets of your town.



    Yes. Exactly my point. Thank you.
    Uhhhh . . .

    Viet Cong, Taliban . . .

    Defeating the US military with a home grown militia has become fairly commonplace.

    Furthermore, you may consider that the moment any sort of large scale US military aggression occurs against US citizens on US soil, the US Constitution is a political dead weight.

    Merely bringing such attention to themselves would have to be considered an epic victory on the part of the insurgents.


    Sure, you can take 5,000 Redneck Revolutionaries and throw them into the Daniel Boone National Forest along with 5,000 US Marines, and the Rednecks are not walking out, except in handcuffs, but even though the Marines won the battle, that doesn't mean the Rednecks lost the war.

    Military victory ≠ political victory.
    Rattling the teacups.

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Valley of the Sun
    Posts
    108,985

    Default Re: Military style guns

    Put it simply: If you see a picture of a full-body-armoured, helmetted, bad-ass military Special Ops guy carrying a modern military-issue weapon with a big clip, you do not need a rifle like that for hunting. If you see a picture of a responsible hunter carrying a full-stock, long-barrel, scoped rifle, that is the type of rifle you need for deer hunting.
    got it, how to make the ar15 not scary

    Simpler is better, except when complicated looks really cool.

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    34,191

    Default Re: Military style guns

    Quote Originally Posted by Decourcy View Post
    Who are you and who am I to tell them how and what they should hunt with as long as they follow the laws, regulations and common sense.
    I'm just a guy who knows bullsh1t when he sees it. I'm a guy with a boat load of city boys who hunt in the woods behind his house where I hear a series of 5 or 6 shots whenever I hear 1. And I have a whole lot of relatives who hunt and have no respect for the semiautomatic crowd.
    "Marriage is a wonderful institution, but who wants to live in an institution?" - Groucho Marx

  28. #28
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Victoria BC
    Posts
    17,890

    Default Re: Military style guns

    The AR is, for the most part, an amazing bozo magnet and its entry into the consumer market was a solution in search of a problem.

    The Cosplay comment was spot on.

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Gulf Islands B.C.
    Posts
    1,943

    Default Re: Military style guns

    Quote Originally Posted by CWSmith View Post
    I'm just a guy who knows bullsh1t when he sees it. I'm a guy with a boat load of city boys who hunt in the woods behind his house where I hear a series of 5 or 6 shots whenever I hear 1. And I have a whole lot of relatives who hunt and have no respect for the semiautomatic crowd.
    Lots of responsible hunters that I know use semi’s. Your experiences are not the only ones out there. My experiences with dodge truck drivers is that they have big scary dogs and lift kits, but I’m aware enough to know that that isn’t every one.

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Fredericton, New Brunswick
    Posts
    45,294

    Default Re: Military style guns

    Saw a thread on Twitter this morning by a longtime firearms owner and user, about the AR and the "most popular rifle in America" thing. Said that he well remembers ads for ARs back in the Field and Stream and similar magazines from the 60s and 70s, but they were a really small proportion of sporting arms sold then. Because hunters didn't see much use for them.

    In contrast, there's been about a 3M firearm/year market for a long, long time, for rifles which aren't ARs. Mostly divided between .22 rimfires, and larger calibre center-fire rifles - the first kind for things woodchuck sized and smaller ... and for making holes in targets ... and the latter kind for hunting larger game (deer, moose, bears, elk, etc.).

    The AR didn't really fit either market. Not enough punch to reliably put down large animals, and the semi-auto capability (especially when paired with larger magazines) kinda superfluous to rabbit-hunting or plinking. As the guy said, there hasn't been an uprising among woodchucks, and the squirrels haven't got any smarter or started an arms race. Bolt action .22 rifles still do the job they ever did.

    What happened to make the AR the "most popular rifle in America," this Twitter guy said, was a combination of advertising and media focus about allegedly rising human threats, paired shortly thereafter with the return of waves of veterans from wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. The ARs were weapons that felt very familiar to these returning soldiers, and the spiking number of fear stories about criminal human threats - and wild-@ssed stories about Government threats to eliminate the 2nd amendment altogether - provided a rationale to purchase - to the tune of now about 8M/year - weapons such as the AR. Poorly designed in its usual calibre and semi-auto capability for any hunted species other than humans. That's 8M/year in addition to the 3M/year of the other type of rifle, which has continued to sell at about that pace.

    The author finished by observing that many will claim that an AR as sold on the civilian market isn't really something folks should consider as "military" in its capability - because it can't go full-auto. The author observed, though, that on his first day in Vietnam, his squad was instructed to never put their rifles on full-auto, and only shoot them as semi-auto. Because on full-auto, they'd be out of ammunition in about 1.5 seconds. And vulnerable 'till they were able to reload.

    In the combat they were expecting to undertake in Vietnam, semi-auto was plenty fast enough for an infantry grunt to be able to take out as many of the enemy as he'd likely see before the other guys had taken cover again.

    All said though, I understand how a lighter stock, more easily customized and maintained, would be a real benefit to a hunter. A finish on the metal that resisted rust without a helluva lot of work would simplify things too. Kinda like how most boaters have fiberglass rather than wood, eh? Often look like crap, but don't have to, if you're into that kind of thing.

    But there's no reason that a hunter-oriented rifle with those attributes has to be different in the possible rate of fire or magazine capacity than anything the majority of hunters have used at any time in the 20th Century.
    Last edited by TomF; 03-24-2021 at 10:13 AM.
    If I use the word "God," I sure don't mean an old man in the sky who just loves the occasional goat sacrifice. - Anne Lamott

  31. #31
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Pleasant Valley NS Canada
    Posts
    23,145

    Default Re: Military style guns

    Quote Originally Posted by Decourcy View Post
    mmd, the single most popular rifle for new hunters is the sks. How does that fit into your bias?
    First I would like to address the 'single most popular' admonition: Popular does not make right. Among some folks, opiates are popular, but that don't make 'em right. So popularity should not be a viable criteria to maintain status as an acceptable weapon for civilian use.

    Second, the SKS meets most of my biased criteria - long barrel, full stock, hard to look like Special Ops bad-ass guys while carrying one. However, I do not see the need for a 10-round clip, and the fold-down bayonet is... well, when was the last time you heard of a hunter having to use his bayonet in close hand-to-hoof combat with a whitetail? (Not the legendary, "I heard of a guy...", but someone you personally know who needed to use a bayonet while hunting big game.)


    Edit to add for Paul: You are just trying to play "what if" to an illogical conclusion. Sorry, Paul, I like you an' all, but you seem to have drank the kool-aid marked, "I'm a 'Murican and have the right to not be denied any weapon I want to have, regardless of how inappropriate for the reason I say I want it for!"
    Last edited by mmd; 03-24-2021 at 10:19 AM.
    Hope for the best, but plan for the worst.

  32. #32
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Gulf Islands B.C.
    Posts
    1,943

    Default Re: Military style guns

    “I don’t want it, so neither should anyone else”
    “I see no need for it, so no need can exist”

    Does that sum it up?

  33. #33
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Victoria BC
    Posts
    17,890

    Default Re: Military style guns

    We've all heard of cost vs benefit, perhaps it time to consider harm vs benefit.

  34. #34
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Pleasant Valley NS Canada
    Posts
    23,145

    Default Re: Military style guns

    Quote Originally Posted by Decourcy View Post
    “I don’t want it, so neither should anyone else”
    “I see no need for it, so no need can exist”

    Does that sum it up?
    Not in the least. You are ascribing an attitude to me that I do not have, merely to buttress your opinion. Debate the substance, don't ascribe fictitious character to the person you are debating. That is weak and cheap.
    Hope for the best, but plan for the worst.

  35. #35
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Gulf Islands B.C.
    Posts
    1,943

    Default Re: Military style guns

    Quote Originally Posted by mmd View Post
    First I would like to address the 'single most popular' admonition: Popular does not make right. Among some folks, opiates are popular, but that don't make 'em right. So popularity should not be a viable criteria to maintain status as an acceptable weapon for civilian use.

    Second, the SKS meets most of my biased criteria - long barrel, full stock, hard to look like Special Ops bad-ass guys while carrying one. However, I do not see the need for a 10-round clip, and the fold-down bayonet is... well, when was the last time you heard of a hunter having to use his bayonet in close hand-to-hoof combat with a whitetail? (Not the legendary, "I heard of a guy...", but someone you personally know who needed to use a bayonet while hunting big game.)
    As you know, all non restricted semis in Canada must have an 18” barrel. As you know, many guys with sks’s modify them with magpul hardware and most remove the bayonet. As you know, the Lee enfield, which used to hold the title as most popular, for the same reason (inexpensive) has a 10 round magazine (not clip) while the sks has 5.
    lee enfield good because it looks the way you think a rifle should look. AR bad because it doesn’t look the way you think a rifle should look. Have you looked at a blaser or other modern bolt hunting rifle recently? They look more and more like modern sporting rifles. Not because marketing pushes that but because the features work.

    we build wooden boats mostly with sheets and glue now rather than sewn planking for the same reasons. Things develop, and the modern rifle style (which will one day look dated and be surpassed by something else) is here because the features work well.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •