You can buy fully automatic weapons in Nevada without a permit from the Secretary of the Treasury?
NO. You cannot.
[/quote]
Did you see me use the word buy? I was saying that there is nothing stopping anyone renting from a gun store.
I presume this privately owned small business has authorization from Treasury. Walt.
That would have been a trajedy, but I doubt it actually happened. What kind of bizarre circumstances would there be for such a conflict? Hoever, IF it actually did happen, it would appear to have been somehow the mistake of the soldiers, for if they were on excersizes, they would have been in uniform, possibly near a military vehicle and the officer would have been aware that they might have been carrying weapons as he approached the them (or their vehicle?). What could provoke a cop to take down the soldiers? Did they reach for their weapons (like morons) in the presence of a cop? Did they refuse to drop their weapons or point them in the cop’s direction after he ordered them to drop thier weapons?
That story does not sound plausible. But then again, if it happened, it is obviously because they reached for or had their weapons in their hands and would not drop them when ordered to do so by the cop. No way did the cop simply see them and start firing without ordering them to drop their weapons, especially if they are in uniform, with military weapons, near a military vehicle. How did the cop encounter suich a situation anyway? BTW, you did not mention if it had been ruled a justifyable shooting and the cop was aquitted or not of any wrong-doing.
That story has so many holes in it that it does not sound a bit believeable. But if it happened, no doubt those soldiers did something to provoke the cop to fire upon them.
[/quote]
You want it, you got it. I cut and pasted from Lexis-Nexis. It turns out there was one killed, one injured and they were u/t, taking part in the graduation exercise. Bloody shame really.
Daily News (New York)
February 25, 2002, Monday SPORTS FINAL EDITION
SECTION: NEWS; Pg. 16
LENGTH: 296 words
HEADLINE: DEPUTY KILLS SOLDIER AS DRILL GOES WRONG
BYLINE: By JOSE MARTINEZ DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
BODY:
A North Carolina sheriff’s deputy shot two Fort Bragg soldiers - killing one - during a traffic stop that the soldiers mistakenly thought was part of a drill, authorities said yesterday.Moore County Deputy Sheriff Randall Butler thought his life was in danger when the two soldiers in civilian clothes tried to disarm him - apparently thinking he was in on their training exercise.
Butler, however, had no idea when he opened fire that the soldiers were taking part in “Robin Sage,” the 19-day final exam of the Special Forces Qualification Course. The soldiers’ identities were not immediately released.
The Army did not detail the drill to the sheriff’s department, even though it had been notified that the exercise was underway, an Army spokesman said.
“In this instance, they were not informed about this, because the scenario itself was not intended to draw the attention of the local authorities,” said Special Operations spokesman Major Gary Kolb.
The soldiers, armed with a bagged, disassembled M-4 carbine rifle, were participating in an off-base reconnaissance mission when they were stopped by Butler about 25 miles from Fort Bragg.
They were in a vehicle driven by a civilian, who was playing the role of a local of the fictitious country “Pineland.” When the deputy pulled over the car, they tried to disarm him, officials said, leading to the fatal gunfire.
“The deputy believed that the two individuals intended on killing him,” the sheriff’s department said in a statement.
Soldiers at Fort Bragg have participated in similar survival-skill and decision-making drills - in which civilians often play guerrillas - for more than 40 years.
As of last night, no charges had been filed against the deputy, who was placed on administrative leave.
Also:
The New York Times
February 18, 2004 Wednesday
Late Edition - FinalSECTION: Section A; Column 1; National Desk; Pg. 16
LENGTH: 127 words
HEADLINE: National Briefing South: North Carolina: Suit Filed In Shooting Of Soldiers
BYLINE: By Ariel Hart (NYT)
BODY:
A soldier and the estate of another soldier are suing the sheriff’s deputy who shot the soldiers two years ago when he mistook Green Beret training exercises for criminal activity. The suit also names the sheriff’s office.
Sheriff Lane Carter said that the deputy, Randall Butler, killed First Lt. Tallas Tomeny and wounded Sgt. Stephen Phelps in February 2002 near Fort Bragg after Deputy Butler stopped their pickup truck and found a bag with a disassembled machine gun in it. The sheriff said the deputy fired to protect himself when the soldiers came at him and went for the gun. A lawyer for the soldiers said there had been no provocation for deadly force. The State Bureau of Investigation examined the matter, and no charges were filed. Ariel Hart (NYT)
It would seem that you know the square root of bugger-all about how SF trains and operates anyhow. How dare you doubt me. Walt.
That link is dead. The domain is currently registered to Network Solutions.
DNS Whois:
Domain Name: THEGUNSTORE.COM
Registrar: NETWORK SOLUTIONS, LLC.
Whois Server: whois.networksolutions.com
Referral URL: http://www.networksolutions.com
Name Server: REUBEN.MEGANET.NET
Name Server: NS1.BOS.MA.MEGANET.NET
Name Server: NS1.PRV.RI.MEGANET.NET
Status: REGISTRAR-LOCK
Updated Date: 29-oct-2004
Creation Date: 04-feb-1998
Expiration Date: 03-feb-2008
Registrant:
Joncas, Paul
Joncas
5 SANDPIPER DR
WESTPORT, MA 02790-1258
US
It looks like Mr. Joncas did not pay to renew the domain name. I hope they didn’t go out of business because they were breaking the law. I must say that the concept of “renting” or “leasing” a fully automatic weapon does not sound like a good idea, especially in the US since 911. I can’t imagine anyone being allowed to “rent” a fully automatic weapon. But then, personally I doubt anyone can rent a sub machinegun in the US.
If you can actually do that, someone let that one slip beteween the legal cracks.
I never said it didn’t happen, only that I doubted it. I knew there was something bizarre about that story. However, the soldiers were in civilian clothes, somehow thought the cop was a part of their excersize, so they tried to disarm the cop. No wonder they got killed. That answers my question about how and where the incident took place. It’s a sad thing that happened though.
The soldiers were on duty, by the way. 
So far no evidence that it is legal for a soldier to carry their military issued automatic weapon in their car when they are off duty, as you said they could.
Walt?
Thanks a lot, crabtastic. Story is clear for now.
“Butler, however, had no idea when he opened fire that the soldiers were taking part in “Robin Sage,” the 19-day final exam of the Special Forces Qualification Course. The soldiers’ identities were not immediately released.”
At my look is it meand - soldiers don’t passed this exam. Sheriff’s deputy passed.
Preatorian, the term general purpose usually means that it can be used in both the light role, ie from a bipod in close support of, and moving with, troops, or in the sustained fire role in a position from a tripod allowing firing on fixed lines.
The name for that particular weapon within the British Army is the General Purpose Machine Gun or GPMG, pronounced by squaddies as ‘Jimpy.’
However it is a compromise between roles, and sustained fire is limited.
Personally I still consider the best SF MG to be the Vickers, but it is deemed old fashioned and therefore unacceptable to many.
That’s the way things go ![/quote]
Thanks, Cuts. I know what “general purpouse machinegun” does meand.
I just make an attempt defending position of MG-34 as LMG… 
Nazi don’t have during WWII something else than MG34/34S/41/42 (not counting small quantity of ZB-26/30) to role of LMG. And MG-34 with drum 75 rnd magazine - pretty good in LMG role.
By the way, people, who digging ground around St. Petersburg in search of WWII weapons (sometimes they got great examples of weaponary, looks as new) gived to MG-34 in LMG version nickname “dick with balls”…
Some quantity of czech ZB-26/30 (brittish just copyed that and named BREN…) nazis have used after occupaion of Czech in 1938.
Vickers machinegun ? Modified Maxim machinegun ? Sure, great tool !
Both sides of WWII used Maxims invention, USSR, Germany, GB… real instrument of war.
Sorry mate, I wasn’t trying to teach my granny to suck eggs !
I misunderstood your question.
Yeah that’s the one I mean, as you say a modified version of Hiram’s great toy. Everyone should have one !
I’ts okay - sometimes i need good lession. And if is it lession from you - you welcome with lessions any time.
I like this expression about granny and eggs… :lol:
Russians sometimes used to say “Don’t teach my granny to piss in test tube.”
Ironman Wrote
It looks like Mr. Joncas did not pay to renew the domain name. I hope they didn’t go out of business because they were breaking the law.
and:
I can’t imagine anyone being allowed to “rent” a fully automatic weapon. But then, personally I doubt anyone can rent a sub machinegun in the US.
No, they didn’t go out of business: they just changed the domain name.
And oh, look, they’re still renting machine guns !!
http://www.thegunstorelasvegas.com/rental.htm
Machine Guns Available:
Colt M16 Carbine .223
M249 Minimi .223
AK47 Assault Rifle .223
H&K MP5 SMG 9mm
Colt M16 SMG 9mm
UZI SMG 9mm
Thompson M1A1 SMG .45
STEN MKII SMG 9mm
Madsen M50 SMG 9mm (suppressed)
MP40 “Schmeisser” SMG 9mm
Stemple “K” SMG 9mm
M3A1 “Grease Gun” SMG .45
Huzzah!
the wonders of google,
Also as wide a range of pistols as I have seen anywhere. Vegas, the one stop shop for all your boys night out needs- cheap booze, strippers, sportscars, Humvees and Humvee limos, bungee jumping, outdoor and indoor sky-diving, climbing walls, and now firearms!!!
Huzzah! Thier site says,
“STOP BY AND SHOOT A LIVE
MACHINE GUN!
In Our Indoor Shooting Range”
You can rent an automatic weapon that is registered to them and shoot it in thier range on their property only. You cannot take the weapon away from thier place of business by renting it.
And they even let you shoot them with their play bullets!
“Featuring Non-Toxic Frangible Ammo for customer’s health and safety.”
Frangible means readily or easily broken.
Since the discussion was about whether or not someone can travel with a loaded SMG in the back seat of their car like the soldiers you brought up, your comment implies that you can go rent an SMG and take it somewhere in a car (like the soldiers) to shoot it somewhere.
Perhaps the reason they do not allow you to leave with a rented SMG is because the government does not want people such easy access to such weapons, like not having a permit for it themselves and not being allowed to carry one around without a liscence for it and other such sensible things. Perhaps.
Ooops! That’s wrong. The M2 is certainly an assult rifle, as it has all of the characteristics of one:
Rifle length barrel
Carbine length barrel
Selective fire
Large capacity magazine
Rifle ammuniton
as several of us agreed on another thread. M1 and M2 Carbines fall into the SMG range? Umm… no. The M1 Carbine was semi-auto and the M2 was an assult rifle, not an smg. You see, the difference is the manner in which they are intended to be primarily used. The M2 is a rifle (carbine is a French word meaning “short barelled rifle”). No SMG there.
Dear Tinwlat
You dull bugger. Frangible rounds are designed to disintegrate on impact with a hard surface and will still take out a human without body armour with a direct hit- ask an air marshal. (As will even blanks at close range.) Safety of the customer means that there is no risk of a ricochet since their range is indoors.
Secondly, did I say anything about renting and leaving the premises? Obviously that would be silly. I’ve been there and trust me there is little to stop a committed idiot legging it with anything up to 200rds of 5.56 apart from a fat fcuker behind the counter that looks about one 1/4 pounder with cheese away from cardiac arrest. No ID is required as long as you appear to be over 21. You just sign for the weapon and trot to the range goggles, ear defenders and Gatt in hand.
I thought I’d already demonstrated to you that I know what I’m talking about. Walt.
I might say the same to you. Step away from the keyboard.
Um, didn’t I say they were frangible? But they are not lead, btw.
No, you simply implied it. Why now do you say it would be silly to be able to rent an SMG and carry it off somewhere, when that is exactly what you implied? Perhaps the reason their customers are not allowed to “rent and carry” SMG’s is because the renter is not required to have a liscence to be in posession of an SMG to use one owned by the gun shop on the gun shop’s property. Maybe that’s it. Maybe a soldier off duty does not own a state required liscence to be in posession of an SMG when not on duty. Perhaps a soldier can’t carry an SMG on the back seat of their car covered up because it would constitute a concealed weapon, for which a seperate liscence is required. Perhaps.
I know only this, as I first stated and which caused you and another to go schizoid on me and call me names and cause lots of posts: In the US, anywhere in the US, carrying a weapon inside an automobile, and not in the trunk or glovebox, that is not visible is a concealed weapon, and requires a “concealed weapon liscence”.
I know that you’d like us to think so. But why do you backtrack so much to later say that you did not mean what you so very clearly imply, as you and South African Military have done in the jet engine thread, and the one before that and the one before that…? Are you saying that we should wait untill 4 pages and several otherwise-proving posts later to find out what you REALLY meant every time you post some of your extraordinary knowledge?
You and South African Military have a pattern of doing that, you know. A considerable percentage of the posts in this forum directly relate to you calling people names, like “walt” (whatever that is) and trying to disprove anything anyone says if it is something that you don’t know much about, because you want so very much for others to think that you are knowledgable about everything.
So if someone posts some pertinent information in a thread about which you have little or no real knowledge, as I have done few times, you start the name calling and 20 posts ensue in order to get you to come back your habitual “You clueless Walt! What I meant was…” or “Dear Tinwlat, You dull bugger… Did I say anything about…?” thing.
How many times in this forum have you said, “You helpless Walt! What I meant was that…”
Enough already. You don’t know everything dude. Neither do I or anyone else here. You need not try to disprove everything someone says because they post information that you were unaware of. As of yet, it keeps coming back to bite you when you find that after attempting to rebullte factual information because you have made a gross error, you resort to name calling and your “interpretation game” with words (What I meant was…) and denying clearly made implications to try to twist the evens to give the impression that you were right all along, and others are a “clueless walt” and simply not intelligent enough to understand what you REALLY mean when you say something.
Enough already. Everyone has something to learn from someone else. Myself included.
:!:
Hi Crabtastic,
Good info you posted on that indoor range by the way, I didn’t think they’d gone out of business.
Bit of a cretinous trick to insinuate that the owner was involved in something illegal don’t you think ?
I hope some of the site readers that live in the area give the range a try.
Apart from the fact that it can be fun to shoot this sort of weapon, it also gives those that have never tried full-auto or selective fire to get a basic idea of how it feels.
They won’t be able to give an informed opinion of their reliability or battle worthiness, that would need some in-depth experience and of course, correct training.
Like the training one receives in the armed forces, and the experience gained in using them in various theatres for example. You know what I mean because you’ve served.
I notice the resident walt claims that frangible rounds are “play bullets” !
It’s amazing what rubbish those whose experience comes from computer games come out with, eh ?
I suppose the maxim ‘more to be pitied than scorned’ counts with some of the walts.
Ooops! That’s wrong. The M2 is certainly an assult rifle, as it has all of the characteristics of one:
Rifle length barrel
Carbine length barrel
Selective fire
Large capacity magazine
Rifle ammuniton
as several of us agreed on another thread. M1 and M2 Carbines fall into the SMG range? Umm… no. The M1 Carbine was semi-auto and the M2 was an assult rifle, not an smg. You see, the difference is the manner in which they are intended to be primarily used. The M2 is a rifle (carbine is a French word meaning “short barelled rifle”). No SMG there.[/quote]
This is from a US site dealing with the KW.
http://www.rt66.com/~korteng/SmallArms/m1carbin.htm
The M1 Garand was the weapon of choice for infantry. The M1 Carbine, half the weight and with a less powerful cartridge, was the weapon of choice for support troops, and others not primarily involved in infantry combat. It was designed to meet combat needs less demanding than the M1 Rifle, but more than can be met by the M1911A1 pistol. It was more convenient to use than the M1, and less intrusive to their other duties, while still much more effective than hand guns.
The M1 and M2 Carbines were also much more powerful than the Russian type burp guns used by the North Koreans and, later, the Chinese, having more than twice their muzzle energy.
In the infantry, the M2 Carbine was carried by Staff NCOs and officers. With its 30 round magazine, rapid fire and greater stopping power, it was an effective counter to the various submachine guns used by the Communists in the Korean War.
Now ask any infantryman that has been under fire if he would like to carry a weapon firing a pistol round or a rifle firing a full calibre round, as the choice was in the KW. Let count the hand, and mine will most definitely not be among them.
Just because you call it a rifle does not mean it is, as one para just before GW1 said of Milan. “they stick a handle on it and call it man portable, if they put tomato sauce on it would be edible”. Name has nothing to do with the use, its use has. It was used for support troops or soldiers who would not normally fire their weapon as their primary role. It was not use as an assault rifle.
I forgot to mention that having a rifled barell is one of the characteristics of a rifle, and an assult rifle as well.
Yes, we know that the M1 Carbine was designed for use as a more powerful replacement of the pistol, however, it was not a pistol, nor was it an SMG. It was a rifle. I have three .22 calibre rifles. Are they not rifles simply because they are not as powerful as an M1 Garand? Ofcourse they are rifles! In fact, it was used quite a bit by front line troops because it was such a good little rifle for close to medium range fighting. The M2 Carbine was an assult rifle by definition, and was the inspiration for the popular and brotherly-looking Ruger Mini 14 assult rifle. While the M1 Carbine is not technically an assult rifle because by modern definition of the term the M1 did not have selective fire, it was used in that capacity numerous times.
Your post is confusing. Are saying the M1/M2 Carbine were not a rifles? It seems that you are saying that they fired pistol ammunition. Is that what you mean by, “Now ask any infantryman that has been under fire if he would like to carry a weapon firing a pistol round”?
I think you meant the Thompson, even though you did not mention it. If you meant the M1\M2 Carbines, then I offer the following:
The M1\M2 Carbines used short rifle ammunition, like the MP44 (although the MP44’s ammo was a bit longer). I have a box of them in my closet. They were given to me by my father recently, who faught at Chosin Reservoir in Korea where the 7,000 soldiers of the US 7th Marines Division fought against 220,000-240,000 Chinese in damp -40 weather in the bloodiest battle in the history of modern warfare.
This is not pistol ammunition:
The muzzle velocity of the M1\M2 Carbine was 1960-1975 fps. - 2 or more times that of a typical semi-auto pistol.
A very large number of the US troops in that battle, Chosin Reservoir, and others in Europe during WWII, used an M1 Carbine rifle because it was faster to reload and effective at the close ranges of that battle. They had to put alcohol-based hair tonic on the action of their M1 Carbines rifles to keep the action loose by stopping the ice build-up.
The M1 Carbine rifle was also used quite a bit by front-line troops, even though that was not what it was designed for. Ofcourse the M1 Garand was used more than any other rifle by US troops in WWII, but the M1 Carbine rifle was used far far more than it was intended to be used, and in ways the US military did not at first expect it would be used by the troops.
Despite the fact the the M1 Carbine rifle was not technically an assult rifle by definition because it lacked selective fire, thousands of US troops used the M1 Carbine rifle as an assult weapon while attacking Japanese positions on the islands of the Pacific. It was used in Europe that way too. Just because the M1 Garand was a more powerful weapon does not mean the M1 Carbine rifle was hardly used, or that it was not used as an assult weapon to levy an assult on enemy positions. It was also used in a folding stock version especially, as a rifle for airborne troops, and sometimes the M4 bayonete was fitted to the rifle.
BTW, quite a few of the tens of thousands of soldiers that landed on the beaches in Normandy on D-Day carried an M1 Carbine rifle, because a short, fast reloading rifle was a good choice for that range. Also because you can carry more of the smaller cartridges.
M1 Carbine rifles on Normandy:
M1 Carbine rifles on at the battle of the Bulge:
These are the men that took Foy from the Germans:
Elements of the 506th PIR, 2d Battalion, E (Easy) Company
Battalion HQ TAC 4 Morale 4
Lieutenant Dick Winters with M1 Excellent leader – optional rule P4
2 Gunners with .30 cal MMG and M1911 (Pistol)
2 Assistant Gunners with M1 carbine
Easy Company Command group TAC 7 Morale 6
Lieutenant Dike M1911
1 Radioman – M1 Carbine
Sergeant Lipton Assistant Company Leader M1 Carbine
Radioman M1
8 Riflemen M1 – represents elements on the board of 2d platoon
1st Platoon Command group TAC 6 Morale 5 (initial)
Sergeant Foley M1 carbine
Assistant leader Perconte M1 carbine
1 Gunner BAR LMG attached to Company Command
1 Assistant gunner M1 attached to Company Command
1 Radioman
60mm Mortar team
Gunner M1911 attached to Company Command
Assistant Gunner M1 carbine attached to Company Command
Spotter M1 carbine
1st Platoon - NB all squads are under strength TAC 6 Morale 5 (initial)
1st Squad Sergeant Sisk M1 carbine
BAR gunner BAR loader (M1 carbine) 3 riflemen (M1)
2d Squad Sergeant Grant M1 carbine
BAR gunner BAR loader (M1 carbine) 3 riflemen (M1)
3rd Squad Sergeant Talbert M1 carbine
5 riflemen (Bazooka with 4 HEAT rounds present)
I counted more M1 Carbine rifles than M1 Garands there. Although Foy had changed hands between the Germans and Allies four times, it was again needed to move artillery through the town. The Americans levied an assult upon Foy. It was decided that it had to be done quickly and efficiently - they had to rush in and wipe them out. The assult was swift and merciless, and it was effective. So you see, the M1 Carbine, short-barelled rifle was used quite extensively, even by front line troops, and in assult situations as an assult weapon! The US military had no idea when they authorized the weapon how useful and effective it would prove to be, or how the servicemen would ultimately chose to use it! A lot of people underestimate how much the M1 Carbine rifle was used and in the ways it was used. I guess it’s because they simply had no idea.
My personal opinion is that although the M1 Carbine rifle was not an assult rifle by the definition, it was in my opinion an assult rifle because it was very often used in that role and was quite effectiveness in that role. I personally don’t feel that the inability to fire fully automatic is reason enough to say that a rifle which is or was extensively used in assult situations is not an assult rifle. But then, that is only my opinion. By the modern definition, the M2 Carbine was an assult rifle, but the M1 Carbine was not.
Hi 2nd of foot,
I have moved my post to the ‘Discussion about Firearms Classifications’ thread in the Off Topic forum.
[quote]A very large number of the US troops in that battle, Chosin Reservoir, and others in Europe during WWII, used an M1 Carbine rifle because it was faster to reload and effective at the close ranges of that battle. They had to put alcohol-based hair tonic on the action of their M1 Carbines rifles to keep the action loose by stopping the ice build-up.
are you on commision? thats the second time youve brought out your hair tonic anecdote, at no point has it added to the value of your posts, Why do you have this fascination with it?
Troops adapt and improvise and I presume being able to refer to these titbits from the front line does lend you an air of “I was there.” Sadly the truth is you werent, your father was, stop trying to sponge authenticity and credibility of men that have actually fought wars when you havent, especially when the man you are questioning has avoided telling his “war stories” to support his case.[/quote]