Best viewed with fast connection. Enjoy 
I can’t be the only one who thinks civvies having 50 cal MGs and grenade launchers is a little teensy winsy bit weird?
Some cracking fire discipline too :lol:
These type firearms in the U.S. are VERY VERY regulated. The grenade launcher is not launching a projectile with schrapnel, more like a big firecracker. I would say about 40 states + or minus a few let you own these if you have a clean record. IF YOU CAN AFFORD THEM
Edit…On another note this type of shooting does not happen every day, I think this might be knob creek and they have a shoot like this 1 or 2 times a year.
LOL Knob Creek sounds apt!
Anyway, where can I buy a flamethrower, Id like to have a go with one of these babies!
looks very expensive. but i thought such automatic weapons were illegal.
Nope, you just need a very special license which is highly expensive and time-consuming.
IIRC there are only a few weapons that are completely illegal in the US. I suspect the DeLisle carbine is one of them - the original variant not the knock-offs that do appear to be legal.
Ownership of Full-autos in the USA is determined on a State by State basis. Some allow unrestricted ownership, some only only allow those that are C&R, some allow full-autos but the police will not sign off your application and others that have outlawed them.
For individuals there is no “class three licence”. Each time you buy a full-auto you need to send your application to the ATF who will process it (3-6 months). With the application you send in $200 for the tax stamp.
There is a licence for dealers who sell, hire or manufacture full-autos as a business but this is a different issue and requires that an actual store front business exists.
The cost in Full-autos (apart from feeding them) comes from a ban on new registrations in 1986. Effectively capping the number on the market.
BDL: Unfortunatly you are not alone in thinking that. But ask yourself honestly is the government all that trustworthy? Nazi Germany is an extreme example of what can go wrong, but the current “war on terrism” and the ongoing “war on drugs” has seen some serious reduction in the rights of US citizens and censership of the peoples opinions. Where is that heading?
And really what does it matter if your neighbour has a .50 cal in his living room? How does that affect you anymore than him backing out of his driveway without looking?
I’m not for the unrestricted ownership of firearms, but I do believe that if you meet a minimum requrement you should be allowed to own what you like (like driving a car).
Yeah, full autos are fun. I’ve fired a Thompson and an M-16 variant of on full automatic, but my friend’s going to let me shoot on of his MAC-10’s soon.
Even taking into account the price of surplus ammunition, a full belt through the M2 must make a hole in your Bank balance :shock:
It isn’t Knob Creek - different scenery. 
Here’s another…Only in ameica…Well in some states. :?
And really what does it matter if your neighbour has a .50 cal in his living room? How does that affect you anymore than him backing out of his driveway without looking?
Depends if he knows what he is doing with it!!!
A burst through the wall might be more harmfull than a vehicle/vehicle shunt or a low speed vehicle/pedestrian crash.
Last time I looked bullets aren’t fitted with brakes!!!
Seriously, why would you want to own a .50 cal? There is no sporting use for one.
Don’t get me wrong, I love a quick squirt on full auto, but HMG pay me to do it and pay for the hardware.
The 2nd Amendment wasn’t written with sporting use in mind. It was written to give citizens of the US the means to remove a Government that no longer obeyed the will of the People.
Sounds like a good reason to own an M2 to me
Because they’re enjoyable to shoot ?
Seems a fair reason to me.
Old man Dillon of the reloading press fame has a nice example that he shoots out on the (large) patch of desert he owns.
He does have the quad though !
Ultra-long range target shooting. People even do it in the UK!
Although I think having a .50 or any other gun as easy as you can have one in the U.S legally is a bit weird. I don’t see the point in having one and what is more shameful is the new law in Florida were you can kill a person and be treated as an innocent. “defend your territory” law :roll:
This is my opinion by the way…
Salutes…!
That depends entirely on the situation and charge chum.
If you killed someone who was raping your daughter at gunpoint, don’t you think that you would be innocent of murder ?
That is a legitimate question…but then you have to ask yourself…
Why… Are cars able to go faster than the speed limit
Why…Do people need fast speed boats
Why…Do they sell alcohol where the sell gasoline
Why…Is there NO drinking age in some countries
Why… Can anyone go buy gasoline?? can you imagine the damage you could do with 5 gallons in a crowded theater and a couple matches.
This list can go on and on…Why own a 50?? Because they are fun to shoot, Im law abiding and pay my taxes…thats a good start.
It went past “need” a long time ago. I hear people use that term all the time speaking about choices of firearms and SUVs for that matter. We don’t NEED a damned thing beyond the freedom of choice. I don’t own an SUV but also don’t give a hoot if someone owns one just because they want one. Fifty cals are for the big boys with big $$ to play with.
I own a few classic cars and there is a huge amount of disposable income being thrown around in that hobby for cars that no one really needs. If someone has more money than sense and pays $200,000 for a factory Hemi-cuda which is one of 9 in existence fine. If someone spends $5000 on a .50 MG legally when a bad guy can get one on the world arms market for about $1000 there’s something wrong in damning the legal purchaser.
I own half a dozen or so full-autos that I have no sporting use for at all. But then I’m not a hunter or a target shooter, I’m a collector and thats enough reason for me.
I don’t need book loads of old stamps or coins, Royal Dalton china or cars… But I understand and respect the desire to collect and preserve history.
Show me the same curtesy with my hobby.
That depends entirely on the situation and charge chum.
If you killed someone who was raping your daughter at gunpoint, don’t you think that you would be innocent of murder ?[/quote]
I think the new law in Florida is a step back in the right direction. This used to be the way in most Western countries prior to the early 1920’s. What people don’t realise is that the whole concept of the state being responsible for your protection is a recent one. Whats more, given the rises in crime it doesn’t appear to be working does it?
Lets think about this logically, most people don’t want to kill others. Who here will say that they feel the urge to kill someone? Sure we get frustrated at times and vent some but never with deadly force even though there is always a good selection of tools to kill with at hand.
So if we accept that society is still conditioning us against killing, why should this law install fear of your neighbour? The only people who should be afraid of this are those who would trespass against your land or person and force a non-violent person into a violent situation.
Why should we as a society care about the rights and well being of those who choose to live outside the rules of society i.e. those who break the law and steal and rape those of us who do follow the law?