Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/19/2017 7:27:10 PM
Posted: 1/13/2006 1:44:13 PM EDT
I am new to the forum and kinda new to AR's. Just wondering what is the attraction to LEO and US marked weapons? I would think that a LEO weapon would be a problem unless you are in fact LEO. So educate me please!
Link Posted: 1/13/2006 1:48:26 PM EDT
what problem would it be?

some like it some dont
Link Posted: 1/13/2006 1:50:22 PM EDT
because Bush restored our God givin right to own the LEO marked weapons. They arnt realy anything special, it just gives me a warm fuzzy feeling to know that it pisses off the librals that I own one.
Link Posted: 1/13/2006 1:51:28 PM EDT
I went the other way with Superior Arms.





WIZZO
Link Posted: 1/13/2006 2:06:31 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/13/2006 2:06:46 PM EDT by BigGeorgeC]
+1 for Wizzo !

Now that's fooking funny !
Link Posted: 1/13/2006 2:23:19 PM EDT
WIZZO I really, really like that! Thats awsome!
Link Posted: 1/13/2006 4:16:59 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/13/2006 6:58:59 PM EDT

Originally Posted By J75player:
because Bush restored our God givin right to own the LEO marked weapons. They arnt realy anything special, it just gives me a warm fuzzy feeling to know that it pisses off the librals that I own one.


no he didn't, the ban sunsetted and bush said he would infact sign the new one were it to make it to his desk... Alot of poeple are fooling themselves into thinking bush is a friend..


Back to the matter at hand, I just wanted one.. There's alot of stuff I want just becasue I think it'd be cool to have.
Link Posted: 1/13/2006 8:55:55 PM EDT
The more such marked firearms are out among us "unwashed masses", the harder it will be to do "LEO ONLY" firearms in the future.

Besides, I like anything I am told I shouldn't have.
Link Posted: 1/13/2006 9:06:51 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/13/2006 9:10:50 PM EDT by Mazeman]
My Colt LE6920 is marked LEO/Govt only. But I chose the weapon, after lots of research, because of its reputaion for quality.

The markings are just gravy.

I also think Colt might know there's a certain appeal to these markings, and keeps them on the rifle to help keep the price up, even though they know they're meaningless.
Link Posted: 1/13/2006 9:14:34 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/13/2006 9:15:51 PM EDT by FlyingFive0]

Originally Posted By David_Hineline:
If you have to ask why, then you won't understand the answer.

+1 on this statement. Hell, my sheriff for some reason quite signing letters of authorization in 2001 so even LEO's in my department were stuck trying to find pre ban rifles or try to talk another officer out of an AR that was bought while the letters were still being signed. Someone told him the liability would be greater if he signed for them (or something like that). We could buy and carry post ban AR's and even SKS's and AK's but no LEO only stuff without the letters

He will sign C3 stuff though!
Link Posted: 1/13/2006 9:14:35 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Snaps:

Originally Posted By J75player:
because Bush restored our God givin right to own the LEO marked weapons. They arnt realy anything special, it just gives me a warm fuzzy feeling to know that it pisses off the librals that I own one.


no he didn't, the ban sunsetted and bush said he would infact sign the new one were it to make it to his desk... Alot of poeple are fooling themselves into thinking bush is a friend..


Back to the matter at hand, I just wanted one.. There's alot of stuff I want just becasue I think it'd be cool to have.



Thank you. I'm glad renewal legislation didn't make it to Bush's desk or we'd still be in the same shape we were before Sep 2004.
Link Posted: 1/13/2006 9:16:29 PM EDT

no he didn't, the ban sunsetted and bush said he would infact sign the new one were it to make it to his desk... Alot of poeple are fooling themselves into thinking bush is a friend..



So the answer was to vote for Kerry!?
Link Posted: 1/14/2006 7:11:02 AM EDT
The reason that I ask is that I was thinking that I would be at the range with a LEO/US only rifle and have a LEO wander over and start asking me about it. The last that that I need is to have to explain to a LEO what is or is not legal. 'You got papers for that boy?' Know whatta I mean? I just don't want or need the attention.
Link Posted: 1/14/2006 7:18:56 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/14/2006 7:28:07 AM EDT by Mazeman]
Here's all the papers you need.

Pertinent portions:

"Existing markings on firearms and magazines relating to law enforcement or government use may be disregarded."

and

"Law enforcement officers and police departments may now sell or transfer semiautomatic assault weapons to persons who are not prohibited from receiving firearms."

You can always print this ATF factsheet and carry it with you.

There is a certain hassle risk with one of these guns, and a couple other forum members described situations like you mentioned. If that's something you don't want to deal with, there are plenty of great ARs without the markings. I, for one, like the added "sense of danger".
Link Posted: 1/14/2006 7:22:03 AM EDT
My Colt's are marked that way and I wish they weren't. I don't know why some people are facinated with these markings, but I suspect it has something to do with a sort of celebration after years of not being able to have them.
Link Posted: 1/14/2006 8:10:15 AM EDT
The man said we couldn't have them, now the tables have turned. I guess some people consider it a way to stick it to the man. Others want them because they are different from your average AR markings. Plus they tell the story of victory for firearms owners during uncertain times.

Our grandchildren may actually use them come the next Revolution...talk about sticking it to the man!
Link Posted: 1/14/2006 10:11:21 AM EDT
Cause it really pisses off Kennedy/Feinstein/Schumer that I can own it now. They will never see my rifle, but its my constant "Up Yours Shitbags!" to all the anti's!

Besides, it looks cool...

Link Posted: 1/14/2006 10:14:22 AM EDT
Any rifle, especially a black rifle, pisses off the libs, so that's not much to go on there.

There will be some collector value on these rifles, for those who do silly stuff like that.

The stamping, by itself, adds nothing to the rifle.
Link Posted: 1/14/2006 10:28:16 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/14/2006 10:38:32 AM EDT by JackalAR]
I personally don't care for the markings, but to some it's a big "f#ck you" to the gov't which I think is pretty damn funny. Colt uses the markings because they don't give a rat's ass about non LEO / military and they can cleanse my left one. These markings NEVER had any place on these rifles / mags to begin with!!! If anything, this equipment should be made available to us BEFORE the powers that be. How else would we defend our rights and uphold our RESPONSIBILITY to keep our gov't in check? The idea is, (suppose to be) we put em there, we should be able to remove them.

Don't kid yourself, Bush has nothing to do with it and is little better than Klinton, but no point in arguing that...I voted for his ass afterall. The Civi use only ROCKS!!!

I also agree that if you don't get it, you wouldn't understand the answer. Papers? Are you freaking kidding me? Come on man, MANY LEO don't know half the laws they are empowered to enforce and if they drag you in over it, they deserve whatever they have coming to them, though most would simply accept an apology or less and feel lucky if they even got their property returned to them. Screw that...
Link Posted: 1/14/2006 10:28:40 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Mazeman:

no he didn't, the ban sunsetted and bush said he would infact sign the new one were it to make it to his desk... Alot of poeple are fooling themselves into thinking bush is a friend..



So the answer was to vote for Kerry!?



Face the facts, Bush had NOTHING to do with the ban ending, it ended because the Dems couldn't get it passed originally without the 10 year sunset clause and it sunsetted because the NRA, GOA and other organizations pushed hard on some pro gun, or at least non anti gun, senators to let it die.

Not only did Bush have nothing to do with it but, as was pointed out to you, he said he would sign a renewel of the AWB if it came to his desk.

If you want to somehow spin that into thinking that the only other answer was Kerry then go ahead, but it's about as intellectually dishonest as you can get. The Bush presidents have NOT been gun friendly, no they're not as bad as the Dems, but the answer isn't to just accept them as the lesser of two evils, but to vote someone in who IS pro gun, or force the Republicans into becoming pro gun if they want to get re-elected.

It's about time that this "lesser of two evils" bullshit is shot down....before it goes any further.
Link Posted: 1/14/2006 10:31:46 AM EDT
I agree...I won't whore out my vote any longer. "Wasted vote" or not, I'll go to the right-leaning middle if there is such an option next time around.
Link Posted: 1/14/2006 12:20:15 PM EDT
I was a poor college student way back in 1994 whan the ban went in to effect. I wanted an AR for as long as I can remember. I settled for a post ban Bushy during the Klinton reign. As soon as the ban lifted I bought a Colt 6920, mainly because I wanted a carbine and because it had all the "evil"features. The fact that it has restricted markings is a reminder that we must not take our new "freedom" for granted.
Link Posted: 1/14/2006 12:36:16 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Snaps:

Originally Posted By J75player:
because Bush restored our God givin right to own the LEO marked weapons. They arnt realy anything special, it just gives me a warm fuzzy feeling to know that it pisses off the librals that I own one.


no he didn't, the ban sunsetted and bush said he would infact sign the new one were it to make it to his desk... Alot of poeple are fooling themselves into thinking bush is a friend..


Back to the matter at hand, I just wanted one.. There's alot of stuff I want just becasue I think it'd be cool to have.



+1

Link Posted: 1/14/2006 2:07:26 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/14/2006 2:09:54 PM EDT by Snaps]

Originally Posted By Mazeman:
So the answer was to vote for Kerry!?


no, the answer is to never use a vote against anybody. I personally refuse which is why I voted for a 3rd party...

Do you think they're too stupid to realize that people are just picking what they feel is the lesser of two evils? Just reinforces their beliefs that they can do whatever they want and at least half the country will still vote for them even if they disagree with their platform.. Just becasue they're not the other guys

EDIT: The only poeple you have to thank for the vote ending are voters a decade ago. Those who voted for it were shown how poeple felt about that in the next election... They didn't want to make that mistake again. So they didn't pass it, and didn't get it to Dubya who would have been more than happy to sign our rights away. The way he did it just was really his way of passing all responsibility of a decision off onto others.
Link Posted: 1/14/2006 2:11:18 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Orion67:
Cause it really pisses off Kennedy/Feinstein/Schumer that I can own it now. They will never see my rifle, but its my constant "Up Yours Shitbags!" to all the anti's!

Besides, it looks cool...

i42.photobucket.com/albums/e331/airforcecop67/StagEject.jpg



Thanks for that pic... you make me feel like maybe i'm not such a bad photographer after all
Link Posted: 1/14/2006 2:12:17 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Snaps:

Thanks for that pic... you make me feel like maybe i'm not such a bad photographer after all





Link Posted: 1/14/2006 2:16:48 PM EDT
That's enough out of you as you're the opposite..... make me blame my camera
Link Posted: 1/14/2006 2:55:47 PM EDT
They don't, by themselves add anything but the one's with markings from Colt DO come with Chromed bore and chambers, flash hiders, bayo lugs, M-16 carriers, and correct buffers[don't know about the non LEO one's on that] which the civvie one's don't. So, I prefer the LEO one's. As far as hassles, take an AK, FAL or other semi to the range with a few unsure police officers, you will get as much or more interest. Most are just nosy and end up shooting it a bit, it's not like many of them actually shoot much other then their duty weapons unless they like guns on their off time.
Link Posted: 1/14/2006 3:20:27 PM EDT

Originally Posted By 3rdpig:

Not only did Bush have nothing to do with it but, as was pointed out to you, he said he would sign a renewel of the AWB if it came to his desk.




Admittedly, Bush isn't perfect, but Kerry would have ACTIVELY lobbied for the AWB.

Plus, under the Bush presidency (Ashcroft), the State Dept has made a statement that the 2nd Amendment explicitly refers to *individual* rights. A nice move, that may result in the Supreme Court looking at this issue. A ruling which might benefit all of us....
Link Posted: 1/14/2006 7:01:13 PM EDT
Yeah that pic is very bad, but it was taken with an older Sony Digital Video Camera, and poor light placement.

Oh well, I only had the camera for a few hours (borrowed from work) and I had to live with what I got.

I would buy a digital camera for myself, but ammo.....camera.............

Ammo wins!
Top Top