Minneapolis Finder Forum MN
RegisterSearchTutorialsMemberlistLog in
Reply to topic Page 1 of 1
Gun Rights Shoots Self In Foot
Author Message
Reply with quote
Post Gun Rights Shoots Self In Foot 
I own guns. A number of them. To include a certain Chinese made military semiauto rifle, which basically remains in mothballs for the express purpose of breaking it out if this country is invaded or otherwise winds up in some kind of urban anarchy that would require an efficient means of self defense with a very common cartridge designation.

Having said all that, I remain disturbed with so called "gun rights owners" who regularly encourage gun owners to break existing laws or pump out products to enhance existing guns for high volume fire. It's pretty hard to continue making the argument for lawful hunting and target practice purposes of certain long arms when vendors gleefully market enhancements and cartridge magazines that are utterly impractical and prohibitively expensive to do either one with them.

I used to see these kinds of things for sale in Shotgun News and other publications. I've long had a problem with that publication's ethics, considering they permit numerous ads to run that help people make their semiautos fully automatic, and aren't terribly likely to worry about jumping through the extensive legal process of obtaining the required Federal permits to do so.

This Sunday, I saw something that irked me in the weekly flyer for Cabelas, one of the best known national chains of sporting goods. Please tell me what the sporting application is for a 90 round magazine for an AR-15, the civilian version of the military M16. The cartridges for this gun are extremely expensive, and it's not even a legal round for deer hunting in Minnesota last I heard. Unless they've changed the rules, the legal minimum is a .23 caliber, just a tad larger than the 5.56mm, or .223. This high capacity mag looks to be of pretty fragile construction, certainly not practical for any extended self defense or field use. But it could be awfully effective in the short run, if your purpose was to lay down 90 rounds from an AR-15 very, very quickly. Just can't imagine many reasons one would want to do so in a legal purpose.

It's foolish products like this that give "ammo" to the Brady gun banners of the world.

http://tinyurl.com/m6dnkr

Reply with quote
Post  
Oh yeah, those have been around for a while. They're not terribly practical for laying down a lot of fire either. You'll note that the magazine loops ammo up to the left and back down. Can you imagine 90 rounds just on the left side of your gun? Heavy heavy heavy.

And that's a damn shame about that law. I'll double check 'cause I want to use my AR to hunt this season. I found a sweet deal on some 80 grain rounds that you need a match rifle to shoot. It's a LOT more economical to shoot one of those than my .300 Win Mag.

But as far as the mag though. If you've gone and gotten yourself a Chinese AK as a SHTF gun would it be that hard to imagine an AR as a SHTF gun and then have an extreme high capacity mag for said SHTF scenario? I'm not personally hyped about a 90 or even the more balanced 200 round mags for the AR. I like my 30 round mags, for target shooting, SHTF or whatever. If for no other reason than you don't need a special loader for a 30 round mag.

Reply with quote
Post Rule Change 
From 2009 MN DNR regulations:

LEGAL FIREARmS FOR bIG GAmE
It is at least .220 caliber and has center fire ignition;

So I guess a .223 is legal now.

"But as far as the mag though. If you've gone and gotten yourself a Chinese AK as a SHTF gun would it be that hard to imagine an AR as a SHTF gun and then have an extreme high capacity mag for said SHTF scenario? I'm not personally hyped about a 90 or even the more balanced 200 round mags for the AR. I like my 30 round mags, for target shooting, SHTF or whatever. If for no other reason than you don't need a special loader for a 30 round mag."

For SHTF, I would want mutiple metal-only magazines. The military has been in business a while, and I think they have weighed the pros and cons. You want something that is practical to carry on your person, simple and not prone to malfunctions, and can function reliably in all weather conditions and be resistant to corrosion. This assumes that one may be in less than ideal conditions for extended periods of time. Personally I'd stick with a number of standard issue military mags rather than a couple of oversized ones. If it ever comes down to SHTF, you would have to assume that you will be the quarry and not the hunter, mobility will be a primary concern, and you will be engaged in hit and run encounters and not high volume toe to toe.

PS- If I were viewing myself as an opponent of a potential invading force, the odds are excellent that they would be armed with 7.62. If things had broken down to that point, I would think my odds of scavenging ammo would be better with theirs than trying to get rounds from defeated US forces, or from production facilities that would probably be shut down...

PSII- in low light or highly vegetated conditions, combat forces often identify friend or foe by the different sounds of their firearms shooting. If surrounded by a larger force, I'd rather they couldn't distinguish my shots from theirs.

Reply with quote
Post  
Oh yes, I'm certainly not arguing your logic. I'm actually right there with you all the way. But you could see the appeal, even if it's to the lowest common denominator, of high capacity magazines in a SHTF scenario. "Look at me, I'm Robocop! I reload every other movie!"

And thanks for the info on the law change. 80 grain rounds, come to papa! Smile

Display posts from previous:
Reply to topic Page 1 of 1
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum