Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 9/20/2005 10:03:26 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/20/2005 10:05:51 AM EDT by NYPatriot]
www.easternecho.com/cgi-bin/story.cgi?3911


Military guns too accessible to public

By Adam Slingwein / Columnist
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 2005

If I gave you $7,000 to spend on whatever you wanted, what would you buy? Seven thousand dollars may not be a huge sum of money, but it is still a significant chunk of change. I mean, you could buy a car, pay your room and board at EMU for the year, or have 70% of the buy-in for the World Series of Poker main event. The list is almost endless, but there is one item in particular that really struck me as surprising when I learned that my gift money could purchase it. It is the Barrett M82A1 sniper rifle, and for the fairly modest amount of seven grand, you could take one home today.

To those of you unfamiliar with the M82A1, as I was, my saying that it could be purchased for that price may not strike you as startling or worrisome. Upon researching this firearm further, my opinion rapidly changed. Just looking at the weapon, totally ignorant of its capabilities, I could tell that this was no peashooter. It looks like a modern-day cannon, but with a comfortable pistol grip slapped on the bottom. Thanks to war movies and an uncle who's a card carrying NRA member, I have seen and fired my fair share of weaponry, but never had I even seen a firearm as intimidating as this one.

Reading the gun's specs proved to be more than intimidating; it was downright scary. According to the product's website, the M82A1 "easily fires the largest commercially available cartridge in the world, the .50 caliber." The weapon doesn't just fire .50 caliber cartridges like a few other weapons, but does so with ease. What sets it apart from other .50 caliber rifles is the fact that it is not bolt action, but semiautomatic with a ten round clip. Instead of having to manually discharge the empty cartridge then load the next, you can snap off ten shots as fast as you can pull the trigger. Ten rounds at a buck from any .50 caliber rifle will leave hunters with very little to mount. I also learned that the gun has an effective range of over 2,000 yards. Hunters generally shoot at targets 150-200 yards away, so accuracy over ten times that distance is understandable, right? No, it really isn't, especially with a weapon so powerful. Unless the gun was designed for hunters planning on shooting game from over a mile away and then walking 15 minutes to go retrieve it, this weapon could not have been made for hunting.

Sure enough, the M82A1 was not created for civilian gamesmen. It was designed for use in the military and in law enforcement, both of which herald the M107 as the premier big bore rifle (the M82A1 is the civilian version). Used by the United States armed forces as well as over 40 others worldwide, the weapon has won several awards and Barrett has yet to have a contract not renewed due to the military being unsatisfied. What makes the gun so loved by armies across the globe? Not only does it boast incredible range and extremely destructive ammunition (standard rounds can go through brick walls); it has minimal recoil and is extremely easy to fire. With the recoil of a 12-gauge shotgun if fired from the shoulder and considerably less when fired from the stock bipod, it is very easy for a soldier with little practice or training to become very proficient with the weapon. This reason for praise quickly becomes cause for alarm if the gun falls into the wrong hands.

Now that I knew how effective the weapon was, I looked up what its applications are. Due to their gratuitous power, these guns are used to attack stationary or landing aircraft, tanks, armored personnel carriers and concrete bunkers. They are very rarely used on single enemy combatants, just as I rarely swat flies with a baseball bat. Like a rocket launcher with a tighter shot pattern, these rifles destroy enemy aircraft and tanks cleaner, faster and from farther away.

I think I have established the fact that the Barrett M82A1 is any target's worst nightmare, but now I think we all need to look at why I can get one of these easier than I could get a handgun. There is absolutely no reason why a civilian would need to own this weapon, yet background checks are looser on this gun than on a handgun because the M82A1 falls under the category of "hunting rifle" (Honestly, who are they kidding?). The amount of havoc that can be caused by this weapon if it found its way into the wrong hands is off the charts. Pedestrians would have to worry the least; the rounds can go through motor vehicles, walls or aircraft shells from over a mile away. Whether it be terrorism or just criminal use, no one would be safe. Another feature of the weapon that should get the thing banned is its ease of use. With minimal training, anyone could become extremely accurate with this weapon, endangering everyone within a mile radius.

Despite my firm agreement with the Second Amendment, there are specific cases where the right to bear certain arms is significantly more dangerous than what may happen if one could not. This is one of those cases. The Barrett M82A1 .50 caliber rifle, as well as all other semiautomatic .50 caliber rifles, has no place in society. They are not effective hunting weapons, and anyone could defend themselves more than effectively with a less powerful gun. This weapon is extremely dangerous and not worth the risk.

Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:06:55 AM EDT

They are not effective hunting weapons,


I disagree.

.50 will kill anything in North America
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:09:55 AM EDT
Cool article. I want one!

Although, that probably wasn't the purpose of the article.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:11:21 AM EDT
Wow it can kill tanks! Must be that new Pu235 explosive space modulator they installed in them.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:11:30 AM EDT

Originally Posted By purplecheese:

They are not effective hunting weapons,


I disagree.

.50 will kill anything in North America


+1
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:12:08 AM EDT

Like a rocket launcher with a tighter shot pattern, these rifles destroy enemy aircraft and tanks cleaner, faster and from farther away.


Damn I didn't realize we had replaced the Javelin, TOW, and Stinger with Barretts
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:12:56 AM EDT
He makes some good points!
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:12:57 AM EDT
Why the hell would police need a .50 sniper? Seriously, I dont see one situation where a .50 would be needed.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:13:16 AM EDT
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:13:31 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/20/2005 10:14:18 AM EDT by SO-COM]

Military guns too accessible to public

By Adam Slingwein / Colummunist
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 2005

*Snip



ETA: Stupid L wont strike out
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:14:11 AM EDT
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:15:08 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/20/2005 10:15:30 AM EDT by Silesius]
All stories like that make me want to do is buy an M82A1 from Mr. Barret.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:15:09 AM EDT

Originally Posted By RRTX:

Like a rocket launcher with a tighter shot pattern, these rifles destroy enemy aircraft and tanks cleaner, faster and from farther away.


Damn I didn't realize we had replaced the Javelin, TOW, and Stinger with Barretts




It's the Army equivalent to the Navy SuperBug.

Pretty soon, they'll claim the M1 Abrams can be replaced by a Jeep with a Barrett on it.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:15:51 AM EDT

Originally Posted By DoubleFeed:
There may be real words there, but I could only decipher "blah blah blah", ad infinitum.



Thousand monkies at a thousand computers approach to gun control essays.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:16:00 AM EDT

Originally Posted By NYPatriot:
They are not effective hunting weapons, and anyone could defend themselves more than effectively with a less powerful gun.



A: I think that they would make a fine sporting arm. This way, I can pick off Cape Buffalo with impunity before they even hear the boom. Much better than mucking about in the bush, toting a .460 Wby Mag and stumbling on an ill-tempered, near-sighted 2000lb animal.

B: I think it would be excellent defense against airliners filled with islamo-facists who are intent on crashing said plane into my house. After all, they CAN shoot down planes....right?

If not, it's still suitable defense against an M113 full of islamo-facsists rolling up my driveway and I am pretty certain I can "brain" a suicide driver quite some distance away from whatever check-point I decide I need to errect on my property.



Sheep
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:16:31 AM EDT

Like a rocket launcher with a tighter shot pattern, these rifles destroy enemy aircraft and tanks cleaner, faster and from farther away.



that's some funny fucking claims. I'd love to watch someone try to shoot down a flying aircraft with a barrett
damage one the ground sure, even make it unable to take off due to a hole in the engine. but destroy? no
while .50BMG AP might go through the armor in a thin spot on a tank, it isn't going to destroy it
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:17:43 AM EDT
"Despite my firm agreement with the Second Amendment, there are specific cases where the right to bear certain arms is significantly more dangerous than what may happen if one could not. "

I hate liars, and all libs are just that.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:19:01 AM EDT
I was a civilian contractor for NASA, and they had me as lead door gunner on the space shuttle back in the mid 80s, and that's where I used my .50. So, there is a place in the civilian world for .50s. That guy is full of crap.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:19:11 AM EDT
I have no use whatsoever for a .50 - and no desire to own one 'just because' - but one of these days I'm going to get sick of reading these stupid articles and go buy one just out of spite.

Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:19:13 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/20/2005 10:19:51 AM EDT by EPOCH96]

Originally Posted By NYPatriot:
www.easternecho.com/cgi-bin/story.cgi?3911


Military guns too accessible to public

By Adam Slingwein / Columnist
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 2005

According to the product's website, the M82A1 "easily fires the largest commercially available cartridge in the world, the .50 caliber." The weapon doesn't just fire .50 caliber cartridges like a few other weapons, but does so with ease. What sets it apart from other .50 caliber rifles is the fact that it is not bolt action, but semiautomatic with a ten round clip.






damn, even the barret website makes this mistake?

Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:19:20 AM EDT
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:20:29 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/20/2005 10:21:16 AM EDT by SheepDog_556]

Originally Posted By JustinOK34:
I was a civilian contractor for NASA, and they had me as lead door gunner on the space shuttle back in the mid 80s, and that's where I used my .50. So, there is a place in the civilian world for .50s. That guy is full of crap.



When did they change the Shuttle Door-Gunner Issued Sidearm SOP? When I was in, we were issued SPAS-12s in drop-leg rigs.

You new guys get all the cool toys.


Sheep
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:20:56 AM EDT

Despite my firm agreement with the Second Amendment


Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:21:49 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/20/2005 10:24:34 AM EDT by NYPatriot]
Why do I get the feeling that the author of this drivel has never so much as been in the same room as a real firearm, let alone actually shot one?
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:23:30 AM EDT

Originally Posted By NYPatriot:
Why do I get the feeling that the author of this drivel has never so much as been in the same room as a real firearm, let alone actually shot one?





Same here - I think he would pee his pants if he had to be around too many guns at once.

Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:24:48 AM EDT
Well truth be told, I really want to buy a .50 cal sniper rifle just for when they get banned.

When will they get banned? Whenever a well to do upper middle class dude goes crazy and blows up police cars with a Barret. But I somehow don't see this happening to soon. Good thing! Because $7000 is a lot of pennies!

I noted that the author had a same point about firearms laws that I've been bitching about: I can't buy a handgun but I can buy a .50 cal sniper rifle, haha
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:25:03 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Chaingun:

Despite my firm agreement with the Second Amendment for hunting with muzzleloading rifles and shotguns only





Fixed it for you.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:28:08 AM EDT


Like a rocket launcher with a tighter shot pattern, these rifles destroy enemy aircraft and tanks cleaner, faster and from farther away.



So what's the problem?
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:31:25 AM EDT
I'll take two! Shoot, there'er only $7K each. How quickly do you think I could empty that ten round mag?
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:38:45 AM EDT
Heck, the barret was designed for civilians, and the military saw the benefit of it.

Douchebag

Also, it needs to be pointed out that the .50 BMG round is what, in it's 6-7th decade of existance?

libtards.


TXL
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:39:30 AM EDT
What I find scarry is that for $7000 you could easily rent 20 white vans, fill them with gasoline and fertilizer, and blow up 20 buildings, easily killing thousands, and all you need is a drivers license. No background check, etc.

Why aren't people like him clamoring for banning rent-a-cars/gasoline/fertilizer?
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:40:39 AM EDT

Originally Posted By QuantumPion:
What I find scarry is that for $7000 you could easily rent 20 white vans, fill them with gasoline and fertilizer, and blow up 20 buildings, easily killing thousands, and all you need is a drivers license. No background check, etc.

Why aren't people like him clamoring for banning rent-a-cars/gasoline/fertilizer?




Because that would require the application of logic and reasoned thought instead of hysterical emotionalism.

The former doesn't sell. The latter does.

Unfortunately.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:44:01 AM EDT

Originally Posted By QuantumPion:
What I find scarry is that for $7000 you could easily rent 20 white vans, fill them with gasoline and fertilizer, and blow up 20 buildings, easily killing thousands, and all you need is a drivers license. No background check, etc.

Why aren't people like him clamoring for banning rent-a-cars/gasoline/fertilizer?



Excellent point.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:44:40 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/20/2005 10:45:34 AM EDT by vanilla_gorilla]

Originally Posted By p331083:
Why the hell would police need a .50 sniper? Seriously, I dont see one situation where a .50 would be needed.




I can't believe I'm humoring this silly as question, but I am anyway.


Edited for OpSec.



Nevermind.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:48:59 AM EDT


It is the Barrett M82A1 sniper rifle, and for the fairly modest amount of seven grand, you could take one home today



Oh that's it, seven grand? I'll have to run that by the wife. "Honey, I could get this here .50 cal for the MODEST amount of $7,000. What! What!"
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:54:17 AM EDT

Originally Posted By gordon_freeman:
Well truth be told, I really want to buy a .50 cal sniper rifle just for when they get banned.

When will they get banned? Whenever a well to do upper middle class dude goes crazy and blows up police cars with a Barret. But I somehow don't see this happening to soon. Good thing! Because $7000 is a lot of pennies!

I noted that the author had a same point about firearms laws that I've been bitching about: I can't buy a handgun but I can buy a .50 cal sniper rifle, haha



Banned in cali yep, by our own "republican" Govnu. Fucking arnold, I can't wait till you are outta there you liberal dipshit.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:57:04 AM EDT
Yeah, for the modest sum of 7,000 lol...thats the thing that would garentee there will never be one at my house, unless i find one in a roadside ditch. And yes I would like to have one just for grins.
but he acts like seven grand is nothing.

Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:57:41 AM EDT
wish I had the $7,000 & a place to shoot...other than that, I'd get one just to support Barrett for his 2nd ammendment stand!
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:01:10 AM EDT
Why do I get the feeling that the author of this drivel has never so much as been in the same room as a real firearm, let alone actually shot one?

I got the same feeling when I read "Instead of having to manually discharge the empty cartridge then load the next, you can snap off ten shots as fast as you can pull the trigger." and "With the recoil of a 12-gauge shotgun if fired from the shoulder and considerably less when fired from the stock bipod,"


Having actually fired an M82A1 I can tell you that you would have to have a lot of strength to shoot it from the shoulder. You could do it, but to hold it steady and aim would be nearly impossible. The only way you can shoot this thing is prone. Even though the recoil feels similar to that of a 12 ga, it has a long shove that pushes you back and off target. It takes a while to recover, reposition, aim, and fire again. Because of this, you can't "snap off ten shots as fast as you can pull the trigger." No way, not and hit what you want to hit.

This guy is full of it.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:01:49 AM EDT
I'm pretty sure he pissed his skirt while writing that artical.


GM
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:05:21 AM EDT
Hand-held guns taking out tanks, huh? He's been watching too much Anime.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:08:42 AM EDT
Really? where can I buy real military guns?
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:09:03 AM EDT

Originally Posted By gordon_freeman:
Well truth be told, I really want to buy a .50 cal sniper rifle just for when they get banned.

When will they get banned? Whenever a well to do upper middle class dude goes crazy and blows up police cars with a Barret. But I somehow don't see this happening to soon. Good thing! Because $7000 is a lot of pennies!

I noted that the author had a same point about firearms laws that I've been bitching about: I can't buy a handgun but I can buy a .50 cal sniper rifle, haha



You still got a lot to learn kid


Whenever a well to do upper middle class dude goes crazy and blows up police cars with a Barret


That'll be neat trick - anyone ever seen a car get blown up by ball ammo?
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:12:32 AM EDT

Despite my firm agreement with the Second Amendment, there are specific cases where the right to bear certain arms is significantly more dangerous than what may happen if one could not. This is one of those cases. The Barrett M82A1 .50 caliber rifle, as well as all other semiautomatic .50 caliber rifles, has no place in society. They are not effective hunting weapons, and anyone could defend themselves more than effectively with a less powerful gun. This weapon is extremely dangerous and not worth the risk.


Damn! He sounds like some of those fucking duck hunters at the shooting range.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:15:38 AM EDT
If 7K is a modest amount of money for a semi-auto magazine fed firearm, I'm clearly a failure in life. I've paid less than that for transportation in the last two years.

Guess I need to spend more time writing alarmist nonsense. Maybe I could earn enough doing that to afford the SEAK that I'm going to have to pass up
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:16:58 AM EDT


Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:19:21 AM EDT
As usual, this piece of literary marvel is simply based on emotion and invective and far short on actual facts.

Notice how he injects how scary it is?

but never had I even seen a firearm as intimidating as this one.

Reading the gun's specs proved to be more than intimidating; it was downright scary.



He also is basing this on the fact that the only legal use of a firearm, and the intent of the 2nd was and is based on "hunting" only. Why would you hunt with this? Who would "need" this?

They are not effective hunting weapons, and anyone could defend themselves more than effectively with a less powerful gun. This weapon is extremely dangerous and not worth the risk.

It's really sad that anybody with the ability to type can unleash this wreckless garbage and slant it on pure fearful emotion. If anything, we should have a "safety" lever against this kind of drivel. Words can be just as dangerous as firearms. See how many people have been killed over words throughout history.

I have an appointment right now (wish it was with the gun shop to pick up an M82) but I plan to fire off a nasty-gram as soon as I return. This kind of crap needs to be met and challenged. I would suggest we flood him over this. Maybe fire off a letter to his editor as well.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:21:35 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 3rdStreet:
www.specialoperations.com/Images_Folder/library2/ag90p71.jpg

www.specialoperations.com/Images_Folder/library6/bullets.gif



Looks to me like that guy is about to get a nice gash when he lights that thing off.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:23:46 AM EDT
Perhaps someone should tell this guy that these rifles are just
a LITTLE on the heavy and awkward side.

What do they weigh like 65 pounds without a mag ?

I don't see many drivebys happening with this piece.

Besides that ,at $7,000 dollars for just the initial purchase of
the rifle (let alone ammo,scope ETC.) anyone who needs money
enough to commit armed robbery isn't going to have the cash
in the first place !

Other than just a step in the direction of banning all guns,I see
no valid point in the Libtards efforts to ban these.
Especially since any terrorist attacks with this kind of weapon
will most probably be by a weapon that's smuggled in accross
the border with Mexico.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:27:41 AM EDT



What sets it apart from other .50 caliber rifles is the fact that it is not bolt action, but semiautomatic with a ten round clip.


So, will this slam you thumb as hard as a garand?
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 12:24:55 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Silesius:
All stories like that make me want to do is buy an M82A1 from Mr. Barret.



Amen.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top