Why is the Barrett 50 prohib?

K98ACTION said:
Hey what are you implying here to m39a2, THAT HE COULD NOT MAKE A TWO MILE SHOT WITH A .50

Are you awhere that a Canadian Soldier holds the world record for a sniper kill using the .50 at 2400m?? Probably not that must be why you are so cocky.

Originally Posted by m39a2
Im pretty sure it's prohibited because it can reach out and touch a government parasite at 2 miles!
Scott

Good on you m39a2, as I agree that this is another more likely reason why the .50 is banned. Again you can't have joe public able to shoot a .50 slug accurately out to two miles, upping and or equaling what they may or may not have in their inventory.

Someone out there wanted to back up the BS, by saying that yeah, especially when the russian AT 14.5mm is allowed. Buddy, no comparison to the modern Barrett .50 SNIPER RIFLE.

Guys got to stop shooting down people with your bull s**t replies.
Click to expand...

Relax, Kano's comment was sarcastic as that poster should've said 2 Km. 2 miles is 3.22 KM, so yes not really possible with the Barrett, as it's maximum effective range is rated out to 2,000 meters. The record held by the Canadian is with a bolt action rifle, a Tac-50 McMillan I believe. And as for a rifle chambered in 14.5 being less capable than a .50, how do you back that up?
 
Body armor... Car armor... LOL!

Mosin-Nagant 91/30 penetrates up to an inch of mild steel and up to 8mm of titanium at 50 yards using steel cored bullets. Plain and simple - bang, a hole. 7.62x54R is not the most powerful round out there, just has enough energy to fit the purpose of the main battle rifle. Never heard of a similar test of a mauser K98, but I am sure it does exactly same thing - bang, a hole.

Those are 100 year old designs by now. Gun control makes no sense at all.

Do you know how nazi executed the Jews in Prague ghetto? They lined up 5 and shot. If the last guy survived, he was lined up as the first in the next column of five. It is FIVE bodies using a regular FMJ.
 
:agree:
he's right
I guess you must have dyslexia If yu read more carefully I said penetrate car ARMOUR! Get it ARMOUR! Look up the definition of armour. And no not all rifle calibers in the .30 cal class can defeat standard armour, some yes, all no. A .50 on the other hand can defeat pretty much anything the cops tac units use up to and including the basic modern infantry LAV III in its stock form. I.E. without add on armour.
Click to expand...

and your right too, about penetrating armour but that it has noting to do with it

any large cal with the right ammo and right load will punch through a lot of armour.
you can own 50 BMG in Canada but you just can't own a Barrett ......because just as the man said ......:eek: it looks SCARY!!!!!!!!
and its called a sniper rifle!!! oooooooo thats it it doesn't make sense, an unfortunatly it doesn't have to

the reason why you don't see alot is just frankly its too expensive and alot of ranges are not templated for it.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure if I could make that shot, 2 miles is indeed a long shot. I guess in depends on how pissed off the target made me. I do know I can hit a 6" circle at 500m with a 7.62mm, been there done that!
My comment has raised far more hackles than I first suspected it would however. It's funny how some people read far more into a comment than was intended.

Scott
 
not all barrett 50 cal rifles are verboten. only m82, m95, m107 are verboten.

m99 is Ok to own in canada, it is classed as nonrestricted. rcmp's expert has said "even though it is bull-pup style, because its action is not part of the stock..."

the trouble is that usa does not allow exportation of any 50 cal rifles and ammo is hard to get anyways.
 
Look who cares what the reasons are why they banned the .50 in my estimation all of the above are correct. i.e. Looks scarey, shoots far, more penetration power etc, etc, etc.

Bureaucrats made the stinking law and wrote it up without any imput from the gun community. So if any of you have ever dealt with Bureaucratic BS before then I think it should be pretty clear as to why they banned what they did.

However I do believe that there was and is a true fear of armed citizens by those who control government, this why they will use any excuse they can to totally ban your guns. Don't worry friends, it is not over by any means. They will come for your guns again. Maybe sooner now that Virgina Tech happened. Wait for the ranting BS from THE CUK,, AND HER ANTIES.
 
why is the FN fal prohib ... it loks scary and people fear "heat seeking 50 cal" (lol you have to find the link in here to a us news story about the heat seeking 50 cal inceniary round)
 
vdovichk said:
why is the FN fal prohib ... it loks scary and people fear "heat seeking 50 cal" (lol you have to find the link in here to a us news story about the heat seeking 50 cal inceniary round)
Click to expand...

Because they sent out a circular saying that it could be made fully automatic, complete with instructions on how to do it
 
vdovichk said:
why is the FN fal prohib ... it loks scary and people fear "heat seeking 50 cal" (lol you have to find the link in here to a us news story about the heat seeking 50 cal inceniary round)
Click to expand...

the fn-fal/c1 whatever has been at least restricted since 75 or earlier-i remember there were some isreali ones in that last shipment going for as little as 250 canadian, but i wouldn't buy one as it was 'just another range gun'- ie you can take it to and from the range only- just like a pistol-not when there were UNRESTRICTED m14s( the real thing , not norcs) in the same container
but basically, it's the same reason- BECAUSE THE GOV'T SAYS SO-that's THE WHOLE FOUNDATION OF THE CURRENT GUN LAWS
 
Because it is was in the gun digest annual. Plain and simple. THe AR was there too but DCRA jumped in and said that the AR is vital for the service rifle program so it became restricted.

You guys should start writing to the Conservative government and partition to have any variants of past and current CF service firearms to be removed from the prohibition order. I think it is a very convincing arguement as it is part of the military heritage of canada that should be preserved adn that it pays tribute to all those who sacrifice their lives - Get the Legion and the vet association onto it as well. We need to do some basic work to build a fundational to protect the AR, FN, Sterling, Bren, MAG58 and Minimi
 
greentips said:
Because it is was in the gun digest annual. Plain and simple. THe AR was there too but DCRA jumped in and said that the AR is vital for the service rifle program so it became restricted.

You guys should start writing to the Conservative government and partition to have any variants of past and current CF service firearms to be removed from the prohibition order. I think it is a very convincing arguement as it is part of the military heritage of canada that should be preserved adn that it pays tribute to all those who sacrifice their lives - Get the Legion and the vet association onto it as well. We need to do some basic work to build a fundational to protect the AR, FN, Sterling, Bren, MAG58 and Minimi
Click to expand...

+1
I'd add the Sten for collector sentimentality too -
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom