Full-auto/Suppressors or Integrated ATT/No Shooting Restrictions

Full-auto/Suppressors or Integrated ATT/No Shooting Restrictions?

  • Full-auto/Suppressors

    Votes: 58 14.8%

  • Integrated ATT/No Shooting Restrictions

    Votes: 334 85.2%
  • Total voters
    392
D3TH_OVRH3D said:
Integrated ATT/No shooting restrictions.

IMO having full auto and suppressors wouldn't be nearly as practical as being able to enjoy what is currently a restricted firearm on private property with the integrated ATT.
Click to expand...

+1. Full auto is really just a very expensive gimmick for the vast majority of shooters, whereas allowing restricteds to be used anywhere would greatly benefit the shooting community overall.

While I would prefer all be legal (a gun is a gun, period), if it has to be one or the other in the poll, use of restricteds outside ranges is a much bigger, more useful step to be taken.


Mark
 
andrew3081 said:
Because 30 rounds of .223 REM from an AR15 will do a lot of damage if it falls into the wrong hands and used during criminal activity. (eg. that shooting for the bank of America in the US like 15 years ago..2 robbers with AK47 equipped with 100 rounds magazines basically destroyed the police)

But I think 5 rounds is a bit stupid...10 rounds is better.
But our gun laws are alot better than British gun laws....at least semi auto are allowed here.
Click to expand...
Fail post fails hard
Unregistered_ said:
What a typical anti response.
Click to expand...

This
 
andrew3081 said:
Because 30 rounds of .223 REM from an AR15 will do a lot of damage if it falls into the wrong hands and used during criminal activity. (eg. that shooting for the bank of America in the US like 15 years ago..2 robbers with AK47 equipped with 100 rounds magazines basically destroyed the police)

But I think 5 rounds is a bit stupid...10 rounds is better.
But our gun laws are alot better than British gun laws....at least semi auto are allowed here.
Click to expand...

I think you should click HERE.
 
what a tard!!!!!!!!!


andrew3081 said:
Because 30 rounds of .223 REM from an AR15 will do a lot of damage if it falls into the wrong hands and used during criminal activity. (eg. that shooting for the bank of America in the US like 15 years ago..2 robbers with AK47 equipped with 100 rounds magazines basically destroyed the police)

But I think 5 rounds is a bit stupid...10 rounds is better.
But our gun laws are alot better than British gun laws....at least semi auto are allowed here.
Click to expand...
 
mmattockx said:
+1. Full auto is really just a very expensive gimmick for the vast majority of shooters, whereas allowing restricteds to be used anywhere would greatly benefit the shooting community overall.

While I would prefer all be legal (a gun is a gun, period), if it has to be one or the other in the poll, use of restricteds outside ranges is a much bigger, more useful step to be taken.
Click to expand...

You sir, are officially cut off ;)

Besides, what are you complaining about, it wasn't expensive for you, just for me. :(
 
The suppressor fight is theoretically winnable. The Brits won a court case based on existing health and safety legislation. It turns out the exact same loophole they exploited exists in our H&S legislation. The challenge for us would be to find the will and funding to sue the government.

Silencers are excellent for use in the field and can be used on both restricteds and non restricteds alike. IMO There is pretty much nothing better than full auto suppressed.

The biggest problem with this thread is that it is a crappy question. Kinda like asking t**s or ass but not both. :(
 
Suputin said:
The suppressor fight is theoretically winnable. The Brits won a court case based on existing health and safety legislation. It turns out the exact same loophole they exploited exists in our H&S legislation. The challenge for us would be to find the will and funding to sue the government.

Silencers are excellent for use in the field and can be used on both restricteds and non restricteds alike. IMO There is pretty much nothing better than full auto suppressed.

The biggest problem with this thread is that it is a crappy question. Kinda like asking t**s or ass but not both. :(
Click to expand...

The categorize suppressors with full auto over no shooting restrictions/integrated ATT's is apples to oranges. Suppressors, Shooting Restrictions, and Integrated ATT's are all winnable fights. Full Auto is not.
 
Supressor could be legal.... Think about noise and neighborhood around clubs.

ATT are papers and worth nothing for safety. No criminal ask for an ATT before "attacking armored vehicule" for example. I think that if you have RPAL there is no need for ATT.
 
I would have to vote for the integrated ATT. My primary intention while doing my restricted PAL was to eventually own an an AR(and a few handguns because they're awesome). But I have yet to purchase a restricted firearm simply due to the restrictions. Id love nothing more then to take an AR out in the bush and wait for coyotes or take a 22lr six shooter out in the woods while looking for some raccoons. I could live with the mags being pinned to 5 rounds, sure a 10 round or 25 round mag would be ideal but I could live with 5 if it meant I could shoot it elsewhere then just the range and not get in ####.
 
Suputin said:
You sir, are officially cut off ;)

Besides, what are you complaining about, it wasn't expensive for you, just for me. :(
Click to expand...

Damn, you weren't supposed to see that. :D

It may not have been my money, but it was still expensive. I think you just didn't want to hold onto the AR that was glowing red in a number of spots. Or breathe all the crap being thrown back from the breech.;)

I am certainly not complaining, but for the poll question, the lifting of range only restrictions on restricted firearms is much, much bigger overall. As I said, I would prefer all guns were treated equally and that everything was legal, including suppressors.


Suputin said:
IMO There is pretty much nothing better than full auto suppressed.
Click to expand...

I can certainly agree with that. A suppressed full auto AR in 300 Whisper is a sweet, sweet thing.


Mark
 
I'm worried that all the "de-restrict the AR" guys are just like the shotgun/hunting crowd who willingly let the handgun crowd fall under the bus all those years ago.

We need to stay together on this issue and have all restricteds freed from range only use.
 
I voted #2 as it seems more realistic to me. I have no use for full auto and could not afford to feed in, and suppressors, as cool as they be I would much rather be able to shoot my pistols and AR out in the bush.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom