fortunately you havent mislead anyone have you IRONMAN
these are all illegal actions according to you.
Let me help you since you need it:
A soldier carrying a fully automatic weapon in his car on the way to a base would be breaking the law.
A soldier carrying a fully auto weapon from the base to his home would be breaking the law.
A soldier in posession of a fully auto weapon in his home would be breaking the law.
I can’t recall one British member who said “so what?”
Perhaps you might remind me?
If it had ever happened, it would be more than “cheezy”(sic).
It hasn’t, doesn’t and won’t.
And if someone can “prove” something to you just by saying it, why are you arguing so much about the M1?
How do I apply for a Permit/License?
Since there is no permit required, there is no application process.
Documents required
N/A
Issuing authority
Date updated: Monday, December 30, 2002
Vermont does not issue carry permits. The Attorney General has a web page that lists all the Vermont laws governing the use and possession of firearms.
And since you are obsessed with this wpns in a vehicle thing, it’s only illegal to have a loaded rifle or shotgun in a car, but not a handgun:
TITLE 10 Chpt.133: Section 4705. Shooting from motor vehicles or aircraft: permit
(b) A person shall not carry or possess while in or on a vehicle propelled by mechanical power or drawn by a vehicle propelled by mechanical power within the right of way of a public highway a rifle or shotgun containing a loaded cartridge or shell in the chamber, mechanism, or in a magazine, or clip within a rifle or shotgun, except as permitted under subsections (d) and (e) of this section. A person who possesses a rifle or shotgun in or on a vehicle propelled by mechanical power, or drawn by a vehicle propelled by mechanical power within a right of way of a public highway shall upon demand of an enforcement officer exhibit the firearm for examination to determine compliance with this section.
Note: because handguns are not mentioned in the statute, it is not illegal to carry a loaded handgun in a vehicle.
No, Shatzer said that, then it was proven true by British members who said “Yea??? So what!!!” (and other things about the Gurkas going in first). I simply stated my opinion of how (to use the same word I used the 1st time I reacted to it) “cheezy” that is.
It was cowardly of the British to send in troops comprised of people from another nation instead of using British-born soldiers. That’s cheap, and it tells you that Britian still has it’s nose in the air thinking that it’s too good to spill it’s littly-white blood in battle if some non-English subject is willing and stupid enough to do the fighting for them
They’ve been at it a long time. They have been recruiting foreigners to go into battle ahead of Brits a long, long time now. Britain is the only nation that I know of that has a history of doing such a thing.
implication being, they fought and we didnt!
funniest yet we know more of your history than you do - your nation does the same thing!
Since you’re having trouble dealing with the subject, let me help you once more. Listen this time.
The conversation was about military personel off-duty carrying a loaded, concealed automatic military rifle on the back seat of a car in the US without a permit.
Let that sink in for a moment…
…which is illegal in Alaska and Vermont.
Let that sink in for a minute. Is it seeping into your noodle yet? No hurry. Take your time.
Got that? OK. Now… take your time… do you see the word “handgun” anywhere in that conversation?
Take your time now…
Take your time reading that while I go to the grocery store.
actually at the time this was the quote - no mention of permits, all to do with dates of manufacture
Young man, you are truly lost in your efforts to support the bullhocky you spout. The liscence would not allow a soldier to have in their posession a military weapon issued by the US military at home - because the weapon would not have been manufactured prior to 1987 or purchased from a Class III weapons dealer!!! That is the US law my boy
!
Even the most cursory glance at an exploded diagram would have shown the parentage.
On the other hand, perhaps I should get a couple out of the safe and strip them down on the pc-room floor ?
The '44 is an assault rifle, not a SMG. Slings are issued with weapons.
Until recently no army had a scope as general issue for all inf. Neither German funds nor their manufacturing were at a level where this would have been feasible.
I bring these up gentlemen, not so that IRONMAN should rail against them, but so that you are aware - if you weren’t before - of the expertise against which you must pit your “bad memories” and your “bogus claims.”
God, you’ve got a selective memory - you claimed that Alaska was shall-issue instead of no permit, which is wrong, and this is why I responded.
I couldn’t give a monkey’s feck about the rules for military personnel carrying arms in civvy clothes cos I can’t find any info on it - but you have not cited anything else either. In the UK it is the case that military personnel can carry wpns in vehicles when on duty, and there are certain circumstances when it would be permitted to do this with the wpns loaded, and it seems logical that this would also be the case in the US. You haven’t provided any evidence that it is not, other than “I say so, get that into your thick skull, batboy”.
I’m still LMAO re. the “spring operated” claim!!! At least you retracted it though!
IRONMAN, you seem to take issue with me making points about the Yalta agreement despite the fact that I haven’t read it? Can I direct you again to the two links I provided when I referenced my original post on the subject? If you click on the link then you will find the amazon page for two well regarded texts on Cold War History. As Yalta and the Wartime Alliance between Britain, America and the Soviet Union are the essential precursors to the Cold war, you will find that both of these books deal with the subject of Yalta, the percentages agreement and the post war division of Europe in some considerable depth.
I have also, as I mentioned, attended several lectures at University on the subject of Yalta, the breakdown of the Grand Alliance et al. I have provided a link to my university home page, should you doubt that it exists. :roll:
I think that this entitles me to some sort of opinion don’t you?
Granted, reading primary source material is always a good thing, but life is short and I’d rather be hunting. :twisted: Oh, and for your information Mr foxy didn’t put in an appearance this evening, but I have a baiting spot on the go, so its only a matter of time. :twisted:
Hammer in an SMG!
XM8 is an SMG!
Higher rate of fire is necessarily better in an SMG!
Stg. 44 is an SMG!
Spray & pray giving with an SMG giving a good chance of killing 3 enemies!
Maybe the confusion of several real assault rifles with SMGs is the source of your problem with the carbine?
Your comments are indicative of somebody who has never handled an SMG, or even read a reasonably technical book about one, or fired full-auto in any type of wpn.
Shall we give the poor fellow the Operating Principles of an SMG 101 lesson? :lol:
Young man, you are truly lost in your efforts to support the bullhocky you spout. The liscence would not allow a soldier to have in their posession a military weapon issued by the US military at home - because the weapon would not have been manufactured prior to 1987 or purchased from a Class III weapons dealer!!! That is the US law my boy
FYI (NB - am not commenting on the military personnel aspect), there are several classes of dealer (e.g. Class 2 NFA mfg) that can build, posess, import (for R&D purposes) and use NFA wpns manufactured after 1987, but these wpns can only be transferred to other dealers, military or law enforcement, and not to normal plebs.
So, that pamphlet is not a product of the British Governemnt or Military?
Why does your quote of it state up to 500m, not 600m? I think we have already seen the doctrine, as it was already quoted. Sorry. The official doctrine is up to 500m, not 600m.
[/quote]
My quote clearly says 600m, not 500m it says it right there in front of you! Is telling the difference between 5 and 6 a challenge?
And the pamphlet is a probuct of the British military, what is it that suggests it isn’t?
Nopers. It was the US. We were discussing automatic weapons in the US, someone made the claim you could carry a loaded auto in the back seat of a car concealed in the US, that they could go rent an auto in Nevada (implying that they could then leave the premisis with it on a rental) and the conversation turned to a tale about 2 soldiers in the US being taken out by a cop.
Bad memory or…
…bad upbringing?[/quote]
If you had looked further down the post about no swearing, you would also see that I called you a cunt.
Now we turn to you questioning my upbringing. I did warn you not to get personal. You ignored my warning…
Please tell me, when you talk about your “father” telling you all about WWII, you don’t actually mean your biological father do you? Surely you never met him?
I think you actually mean one of your “uncles” or your mother’s “special friends”. I’m sure it is confusing for you as, when they fuck you, they get you to call them daddy. It has left you a bit mixed up though hasn’t it?
I mean, this obsession with weapons (very Freudian), the desire to hang around real soldiers especially if they give you abuse (masochism), the choice of an extremely homoerotic screen name - IRONMAN? You may as well call yourself PRIAPICMAN and be done with it. Did “daddy” touch you in your special place? Did he tell you that it would be your little secret?
Tell me, how does it feel to be such a sexual and social inadequate? Do you still feel anger towards the (probably numerous) male role models in your early life that used you like a cheap whore? Did you torture animals when you were small? Did it make you feel good, as though you were transferring your pain onto them? Have you always struggled for approval, even while in the back of your mind you know you will always fail?
You lot are at it so quickly it has taken me some time to catch up. I notices some of the more outlandish claims but the thread move on so quickly the subject has changed, and this brings me to the XM8 being a carbine. Tell me Ironman, how long is a carbines barrel?
This is one of your use of using post out of context to back up your change.
“The secondary mission of the SDM is to engage key targets from 300 to 500 meters with effective, well-aimed fires using the standard weapon system and standard ammunition. He may or may not be equipped with an optic. The SDM must, therefore, possess a thorough understanding and mastery of the fundamentals of rifle marksmanship as well as ballistics, elevation and windage hold-off, sight manipulation, and range estimation”
This is from a post I put up and was an extract from the US manual. As has been said the UK does not put is manuals in the public domain. And this contradicts your post that AR do not engage target over 300m. This is US army doctrine. It also states, which I noted you have ignored, that the effective range of the M16 is 800m.
Reference the long arms in a vehicle, your expert showed a remarkable lack of grasp of the trg undertaken by certain units within the US and other countries.
I was asked if I have ever “seen a US servicemen driving around with automatic weapons on them” [sic]
As I have, both in the United States and elsewhere, I answered truthfully that indeed I had, the response was:
I don’t believe I had been asked if they were on duty or not…
The following interesting exchange occurred, possibly also because of the shallow information he has available on the US armed forces.
Only if covered from view, otherwise they are within reach.[/quote]
And here is the most absurd and idiotic lie you have made yet -
If covered from view? LMFAO You lie so much boy. You truly are an idiot aren’t you? In every state in the US posession of a firearm in a vehicle that is not visible is a felony crime! It is a concealed weapon, and that will land you in jail, civilian or not! If the weapon is inside an automobile, it must be on the dashboard or the seat, otherwise it is a concealed weapon and you do not pass go, you do not collect $200, but instead you go directly to jail. If it is not in plain view when an officer of the law aproaches the vehicle, it is considered concealed, and that is a felony! And you say it must be covered to be legal??? OMG Boy. [/quote] http://www.ww2incolor.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=60&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=90
Not quite the erudition I had hoped from an expert, but if he as is as informed about my personal life as he is about weapons and the services you may draw your own conclusions.
While his knowledge of the forces might be lacking, I think that his forte which shows through his comments suggest that he may be a true athlete, running off at the mouth, jumping to conclusions, etc.
Perhaps while at the grocery store he will be purchasing some more of these “Captain Whamo’s Power Puffs” of which he seems so enamoured.
can we please concentrate on individual aspects until he either refutes his earlier comments in each case. or Sucks on an exhaust pipe, I feel that these are the only two resolutions that we can hope for.
If you want to find things he has said (either for amusement of ammunition) please visit “walther war machines big book of soldier knowledge” www.ww2incolor.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=245
most of the contested articles are in that! along with some handy patronisng phrases if you need them.
[/quote]