yes, assault rifles, even semi versions ARE more dangerous

I'm no expert, I'm just a functional shooter but uhm no. I don't think many would consider the 30-06 a "high power cartridge" there's much more powerful common rounds. Secondly a 30-06 is ballistically similar to a .308Win, the standard round for AR10 variants.

 

true enough but compared to the current 556 or 545 it sure is

 

"Common rounds" ? You have to explain.

The 30-06 is a high power rifle cartridge and is probably the most powerful military cartridge that the average soldier could handle in combat without becoming gun shy from the recoil.

There are more powerful cartridges out there but they are not suited for combat where ammunition expenditure per grunt maybe more than a hundred rounds per day. Who could handle putting 100 .458 Winch. Magnums down range ? Your shoulder would be swollen if not fractured and black and blue.

 

Which word don't you understand, common or rounds?

The 30-06 hasn't been in common use by the military for a long time.

There's a fair amount of .308Win and some .50BMG being shoulder fired, but so what. I don't know the point of your post. Are you just arguing to argue about nothing? Cartridges and arms evolve, the 30-06 is obsolete but so what?

 

outside of the Civil War, Viet Nam was one of the most nightmarish and evil wars we have ever fought.
They had nick names for some places. I remember one guy telling me about a spot in-country called Neverland (never come out alive), Very, very, few of our boys came back alive out of there.
That was were we met our first children bombers.........no war has even come close since then.
Mideast comes the closest...............
Thanks to all those who served, and bless those and their families, who never came home

 

30-06 is not obsolete to those who are marksmen, sharpshooters or rifle experts.

I'm a big fan of the 7.62 /.308. When I purchased the best rifle ever produced, the Winchester Pre-64 Mod. 70 rifle it was only produced in long action cartridges like the 30-06 and the Winchester .270. The Pre-64 Mod. 70's wasn't chambered for the Winchester .308 unfortunately. And with me, my rifles have to have a Mauser action. So I own a Pre-64 Winchester Mod. 70 chambered for the Winch. .270.

What's so special about the Pre-64 Mod. 70's besides having a Mauser action ? The top American sniper wasn't Kris Kyle but Carlos Hathcock with 93 confirmed kills and with over 300 probable kills. In the Marine Corps for a sniper to get a confirmed kill, there has to be two wittnesses and one has to be an officer. What was Hathcock armed with ? A 30-06 Winchester Pre-64 Mod 70. There's als an Army sniper who was armed with a 30-06 Winchester Mod. 70 who supposedly had more probable kills that Hathcock during the Vietnam War.

Why did the U.S. military go from the 30-06 Winchester Mod. 70 to the Remington Mod. 700 chambered for the 7.62 / .308 ? Because the last rifle that Winchester manufactured with a Mauser action was in 1963.

http://www.grunt.com/corps/scuttlebutt/marine-corps-stories/marine-corps-sniper-carlos-hathcock/

"Common" ? Oh, you are referring to ammunition used by the worlds militaries.

Well the largest army in the world doesn't field a rifle chambered for the 5.56 NATO round or the 7.62 X 39 but the 5.8 MM cartridge.

>" For the last few decades, the American 5.56x45mm and the Russian 5.45x39mm has dominated the small-caliber high-velocity (SCHV) rifle ammunition of the world. Surprisingly, in the mid-1990s, the Chinese military introduced a new indigenous 5.8x42mm SCHV assault rifle round of their own. Like the Russians, the advantages of SCHV assault rifle ammo observed in Vietnam War battle reports did not go unnoticed by the Chinese military. In March, 1971, the Chinese military logistic department commenced a small arms research meeting known as the “713 Conference” in Beijing to develop the design criteria for an indigenous SCHV assault rifle cartridge. The design criteria called for a cartridge of approximately 6mm caliber, 1,000 meters per second muzzle velocity with the goals of reducing recoil and ammo weight while improving accuracy and terminal ballistics over the Type 56/M43 7.62x39mm full-caliber intermediate round. The following “744 Conference” narrowed down the calibers under consideration to 5.8mm and 6mm caliber. The cartridge case was to be selected from seven designs with overall cartridge lengths ranging from 56mm to 59.5mm. However, the new small caliber cartridge development was mostly a “paper project” for the initial eight years. The actual initiation of the project didn’t begin until late 1978 after most of the Cultural Revolution turmoil had died down. By 1979, the 5.8mm caliber and the 42mm case were chosen as the final design for the new SCHV round. The project completed its development in 1987 and the new SCHV assault rifle cartridge was officially designated as the DBP87.

Shortly afterward, in 1988, Chinese small arms engineers started work on a long-range heavy load version of the 5.8mm cartridge to be used with the corresponding developments of a 5.8mm sniper rifle and 5.8mm lightweight General-Purpose Machine Gun (GPMG). The 5.8mm heavy load variant was created as a replacement for the obsolescent Type 53/Mosin-Nagant 7.62x54R rimmed full power cartridge. Development of the 5.8mm heavy load cartridge was completed in 1995.

The Chinese military has since developed... -> http://www.smallarmsreview.com/display.article.cfm?idarticles=1684

 

Have you ever heard of the Philippine Insurrection ? If you are into cultural Marxism aka political correctness you would have known that about five years ago the revisionist have renamed that war the Philippine-American War. It wasn't a PC war and most military historians don't want to even touch it.

Now the historian and published author James Bradley who wrote "Fly Boys," "Flag of My Fathers," and "The Imperial Cruise" always starts out spending a few paragraphs on the Philippine Insurrection even though the books have nothing to do with the Philippine Insurrection. You can tell James Bradley wants to write the story that few know about and has never been told. Will he write the book ???

Lets put it this way, the way you fight Muslims is the way it was done by American soldiers and Marines during the Philippine Insurrection. There's no room for political correctness on the battlefield if you want to win. Grab them by their balls and their hearts and minds will follow.

 

Actually, no weapon is any more "dangerous" that the next. It is the skill of the user that determines if one weapon is beneficial over the next in each circumstance. Two weapons laying on a table are inanimate objects.


By the way, which weapon do you think took out the terrorists that eventually wound up dead when they boarded Captain Phillips vessel?

 

on the contrary, you have seen the media refer to a 10/22 with folding stock, high-capacity magazine, and other AW type gadgets refered to as an "assault weapon".

 

even if true that still makes them stupid, uneducated, and shrills for the antigun movement. Eh

 

are you saying a 10/22 can't be a dangerous weapon?

[video=youtube;nc_apCd7d1c]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nc_apCd7d1c[/video]

[video=youtube;pf31EZ9gAJk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pf31EZ9gAJk[/video]

 

yeah I have seen the media call a 10=22 an assault weapon

and the California law includes this specialized target pistol as an assault weapon because

1) its semi auto

2) a pistol

3) and has a detachable magazine in front of the trigger mechanism

 

You are DISHONESTLY changing the goal posts

you are intermingling "assault weapon" with Deadly or dangerous weapon

do you have any clue why the military called select fire carbines "assault weapons" and the term assault has NOTHING TO DO with the american term of a crime upon a person by means of violence.

assault in military terms means for attacking soldiers to engage a fixed or fortified position. Normal tactics invoke suppressive automatic fire from machine guns while other soldiers get close enough to the position to destroy it with explosives or flamethrowers. This is what advancing troops do when artillery, air or armor support is not available to take out pillboxes, fixed machine gun nests or other positions. The "assault rifle" was developed to allow fast moving infantry the means of pouring suppressive fire on such positions before machine guns or armor could be obtained.

now the anti gun media calls semi autos "assault weapons" in order to attach some criminal or sinister term to these firearms. the lack of full auto fire controls means these rifles are not particularly suitable for the MILITARY tactic of assault and the media knows this but they also know that the average low wattage voter is going to hear assault and thing "assault and battery" and connect criminal activity with those firearms

 

the media calls ALL semi-auto weapons "assault weapons"?

no they don't.

 

the Federal Assault-Weapons Ban lasted for 10 years.

and in those 10 years, it never was contested in Federal Appeals Court, nor came close to the Supreme Court.

why not?

 

can you prove that nonsense. some of the media has intertwined the two terms. some of the media does not. you probably aren't aware of what Josh Sugarmann did in the mid 80s so I will edify you. He realized the jihad against handguns was failing and wanted to keep the gun ban movement viable. SO he told the media in a widely distributed paper that most people cannot tell the difference between the semi auto military styled rifles like the AR 15s that were becoming quite popular in the 80s with select fire rifles that the military called "assault rifles" He suggested that the movies like Rambo and Delta force could be used to paint these semi auto "assault weapons" as sinister powerful weapons of mass destruction

and after the media got that paper, the use of semi auto by the media skyrocketed. we in the business saw the media call everything from pup shotguns to double action revolvers semi autos. and many claimed semi auto and "assault weapon" were interchangeable.

I don't know what supposed expertise you claim in this field but you constantly say stuff that has no basis in fact

- - - Updated - - -

because it was so stupid and easy to get around no one wanted to spend the millions of dollars to contest it. I suppose you supported it didn't' you?
and now with HELLER in place, it would be struck down.

The Hughes amendment is being challenged in federal courts as we speak

 

its your claim, not mine. So the burden of proof is on you.

You know just as well as I do, that many media persons do not consider ALL semi-auto firearms to be "assault weapons".

You just made that comment hoping that folks would either ignore it or take your word for it.

 

Dangerous or assault...now which is it? Morons classify the 10-22 an assault rifle just because it is dressed up, you know...the anti-gun media types.... and every weapon is dangerous. While the dressed up 10-22's can give some of the media types their hyperbole it don't make em assault weapons.

 

the regular 10/22 out of the box ain't no assault weapon.

attach a folding stock, illegally adjust it to shoot full-auto, and damn right...you have an assault weapon.

 

I guess you didn't bother reading what I wrote additionally-some in the media do, others do not


lets examine your evasive positions on these issues

did you support the clinton assault weapon ban

- - - Updated - - -

why-do you have any clue what an "assault weapon" is

what makes a folding stock any issue

lets hear your definition of "assault weapon" and why it is valid

BTW "assault weapon" is a bogus term created by the anti gun media and dishonest propagandists like Josh Sugarmann

 

this is a common sense issue, and I know you're aware of the answer.

 

nope there is absolutely nothing common sense about "assault weapon" bans or restrictions and claiming a folding or telescoping stock makes a weapon more dangerous pretty well disqualifies anyone who says that from ever being taken seriously in any discussion about firearms


Do you support "assault weapon" restrictions? You apparently support using that silly term

 

a semi-auto .223 rifle being able to fit easily under your coat, is a damn dangerous weapon.

more dangerous than a 42" rifle.

 

I see you aren't answering the questions I posed to you. That in itself is an answer. But you don't seem to understand that the folding stock alone doesn't make it an "assault weapon" it needs something else like a "flash hider" or a "bayonet lug". tell me how those two items make it more dangerous

and how many cases have crimes been perpetrated by someone hiding a semi auto rifle under their coat because it had a folding stock?

I bet you cannot find any case

Oh BTW how does shorter make something MORE DANGEROUS-that is just plain idiotic

 

Doesn't seem to be a problem but I guess you have the need to be afraid of something.