Do You Support Ownership of FA (full auto) Firearms?
- Thread starter blaxsun
- Start date
Because your scared of it is no reason to not allow it. The reality is that in the places that it is legal, exactly the same as with CCW, it have been proven to simply not be an issue.
Shawn
Dave_Shotgun
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Ford Nation! :)
Full-auto is really only needed in war zones, where ammo costs are covered by the army and you have to kill as many enemies as possible. It would probably cause range accidents and make life for firearm owners even harder.
I would like to see full auto and CCW as specific endorsements on an RPAL with the caveat that the individual seeking these endorsements undergo a certified training program. I would not want a belt fed machine gun based on the enormous cost. That being said if an individual were so inclined to spend several thousand dollars plus ammo and tech support go ahead. I think that the range businesses would be doing huge business and all of us average gun owners would be buying 9mm sub guns or 7.62x39/5.56 assault rifles. To feed any of them at the current prices would put you in the poor house. It's not unlike buying a high end gas guzzling sports car with a thirst for $1.50/L high octane. I would love to read the complaints about having to hump the gpmg from the parking lot to the firing line.
A gpmg on a tripod (sf kit) or light role bipod is pretty damn hard to have an incident with. The only issue with it would be burnt hands from those untrained to correctly change the barrel provided you could afford to shoot a belt through it.
My opinion on high explosives is much different because that will f}<%^ you up if you are complacent
My opinion on high explosives is much different because that will f}<%^ you up if you are complacent
I have been beside hundreds of thousands if not millions of rounds fired on full auto and I never saw anything dangerous.
People who no experience of full auto have no right to lecture me on how I am not allowed to own a firearm.
People who no experience of full auto have no right to lecture me on how I am not allowed to own a firearm.
Newfie_1986
CGN Regular
- Location
- St. John's
Hmm by the looks of your signature you own hand guns but yet you say full auto is not needed. How is it you need those hand guns ? Not allowed to hunt with them or use them outside the range. Let me guess you have them because they are cool and you find them fun ? Some of us would like the option to own full auto. Its a funny thing Im not a big fan of hand guns but ya know I own two Norinco's, a 1911 and an NP 22, I only purchased those guns to have 2 more on the registry and to fall in line behind my fellow gun owner.
I like the comment about killing as many enemy as possible too. You do realize full auto in the army is primarily used to cover fire to keep your enemies heads down. Hell the M16 only has 3 round burst now because the Americans found full auto to be a waste in the M16. And what do ammo costs have to do with it ? If you don't want to shoot auto that day put it on semi, or if you want to shoot a mag full auto go right ahead then switch it to semi. Maybe we should ban .50's and .338s because ammo is expensive and they are not needed. Hell who needs a gun that can shoot over a mile ? The whole needed vs not needed is a real slippery slope to go down dude.
Sometimes the people on this forum make me want to sell all my restricted firearms and throw you all under the bus, I have a brand new AR from Arms East a 14 inch heavy barrel, its had 4 rounds through it since I got it a year ago, really nice gun. Purchased it just after the Parliament shooting, again I just got it to add another one to the registry, the more there are the harder they are to take. I like my CSA VZ 58 and my TRG 42, to be honest my restricteds could all go in the trash can, the laws we have make them a pain in the ass to use, I only have them to stand in solidarity with my fellow gun owners.
Agreed if I have spent a considerable amount of money on cars and my HD so if I can get this expience oked by my wife then so be it, how I spend my hard earned money is my business. I continue to be disappointed by the indivuals who continually bring up reasons for my not owning a FA. Some day these same individuals will argue against my SA and possibly my pumps.
The gun divisiveness in Canada compared to the U. S. Is very alarming.
Last edited:
I'm qualified to fly twin engine aircraft - in fact I own two right now.
I have my eye on an A-26 gunship and have the financial stroke to afford one.
In the Australia buyback one owner was compensated $100K for "aircraft cannon" so the guns are out there.
Would anybody on this thread have a problem with me achieving my dream of flying low level with 12 or 16 - 50 caliber MG blazing? I mean why piss around with those wimpy UZIs and ARs with select fires when I could really "show everybody how big they are"?
Thank you in advance for your support. Now what are the chances of me getting Transport Canada, CFO, RCMP etc. approval to live my dream? Roughly speaking I'd say about the same as yours ...........
I have my eye on an A-26 gunship and have the financial stroke to afford one.
In the Australia buyback one owner was compensated $100K for "aircraft cannon" so the guns are out there.
Would anybody on this thread have a problem with me achieving my dream of flying low level with 12 or 16 - 50 caliber MG blazing? I mean why piss around with those wimpy UZIs and ARs with select fires when I could really "show everybody how big they are"?
Thank you in advance for your support. Now what are the chances of me getting Transport Canada, CFO, RCMP etc. approval to live my dream? Roughly speaking I'd say about the same as yours ...........
YES
With good training, and as long as they play nice.
Treat people like responsible adults, and we might start to behave like responsible adults.
For people who have demonstrated irresponsibility and/or violence, no guns. (Drunk/drugged driving, violent behaviours, criminality, ...)
With good training, and as long as they play nice.
Treat people like responsible adults, and we might start to behave like responsible adults.
For people who have demonstrated irresponsibility and/or violence, no guns. (Drunk/drugged driving, violent behaviours, criminality, ...)
Same BS as in the CCW thread make up a completely retarded situation and pretend that is the point being argued.
LOL
Shawn
Not making a mockery at all, enthusiasts in the USA have obtained all of the necessary permission to fly warbirds with functional armament so why can't I? Here in Canada I'd probably need a tad more support than yours ...........
Setting my dream aside, what I would like to obtain is to you a "mockery" just as the dream of FA without restriction is a "mockery" to the average citizen. Sometimes it help to frame a debate by taking one's point to an extreme.
I'm not adverse to FA. Hell, back in the 60's I loved it when my Mossberg 152K got dirty enough to dump all 7 rounds when I pulled the trigger! Most people, whether they want to admit it or not, would like to try FA at least once. But as my closing line suggests, our chances of getting FA privileges in Canada are about the same as my getting flight authority with an A-26 gunship - as in why waste your time? And check on the rules for FA South of the border, it's far from lasser faire.
So just a piece of advice - do not attribute someone's motives for a post without (reasonably) politely asking them what they meant first. saves you from being embarrassed when it's not what you think.
Seems reasonable but there is a sizeable contingent within our ranks that believe anyone can have any gun at any time anywhere without any training or qualification. The open nature of the poll question leaves too much for individual interpretation.
LOL
That's because there is a sizable contingent within our ranks that are able to think rationally and use the nearly 100 years of data from places that these things are legal and there are zero issues as a basis for what may or may not be required.
Unlike you who bases his opinion on nothing but his own made up BS situations and an irrational fear that some how a magic dotted line on the a map means everyone in Canada needs some magical training/restrictions. Where below and beside that dotted line absolutely nothing happens when people do not have this magical training/restrictions that you have yet to ever describe.
Other than to say its needed.
Shawn
Sounds fine by me, honestly. You'd have to go through the hassle of finding a patch of remote territory, coordination with the police and local community to ensure noone wandered into the target zone, or find a someone with private property big enough, etc etc. Maybe a CF base would let you rent their artillery impact area of something like that? Maybe film production companies have something similar?
All that matters is that you can do it safely. If you can, then I've got no problem with it.
Right answer in theory Jarvy and it's interesting that you outlined challenges to me that sound very similar to the challenges of setting up a range and getting it templated for FA 50 cal - none of the FA proponents are going to stop at "land based" 9mm are they?
My example had the desired effect of some posters coming back with "that's too out there" which is what, unfortunately, the reaction of the public and politicians would undoubtedly be to a request to open up public ownership to medium weapons. Worse yet, as some people have pointed out to me when I suggested that the gun orgs form links with and show support for issues of mental health the push for full auto for hunting and range use may draw unwelcome pressure on us to dial back from where we are today. After all, both initiatives have the potential to backfire and label us as "crazies" in the media eye.
Anyways, unrestricted FA isn't going to happen in Canada. Ever. So I should exercise self discipline and stay away from this goofy click bait. I'll keep putting my efforts into easing the restrictions on us for the guns that are out there now and which are somewhat accepted by the public. Getting a classification system system that makes the AR unrestricted and convincing law makers that properly licensed individuals do not present a significant risk to the public for example.
After all, the next four years are going to have two foci - keep from getting dialled back and electing the most gun friendly government in 2019 - on balance with other aspects of their platform of course. Preparation for the latter begins NOW by getting involved with the EDAs as they shape the tone and content of their next campaign.
Leave unrestricted FA to the dreamers who feel that their time is better spent peeing at windmills.
My example had the desired effect of some posters coming back with "that's too out there" which is what, unfortunately, the reaction of the public and politicians would undoubtedly be to a request to open up public ownership to medium weapons. Worse yet, as some people have pointed out to me when I suggested that the gun orgs form links with and show support for issues of mental health the push for full auto for hunting and range use may draw unwelcome pressure on us to dial back from where we are today. After all, both initiatives have the potential to backfire and label us as "crazies" in the media eye.
Anyways, unrestricted FA isn't going to happen in Canada. Ever. So I should exercise self discipline and stay away from this goofy click bait. I'll keep putting my efforts into easing the restrictions on us for the guns that are out there now and which are somewhat accepted by the public. Getting a classification system system that makes the AR unrestricted and convincing law makers that properly licensed individuals do not present a significant risk to the public for example.
After all, the next four years are going to have two foci - keep from getting dialled back and electing the most gun friendly government in 2019 - on balance with other aspects of their platform of course. Preparation for the latter begins NOW by getting involved with the EDAs as they shape the tone and content of their next campaign.
Leave unrestricted FA to the dreamers who feel that their time is better spent peeing at windmills.
LOL
Coming from the guy that says these same properly licensed individuals do present a significant risk to the public if they CCW
You guys really need to go through his posts, he is definitely living in a different world.
Shawn
