Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 9/23/2005 12:03:04 PM EDT
Military guns too accessible to public

By Adam Slingwein / Columnist

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.


In other words, "It looks scary!!!!!" "It's too easy to shoot."

Link Posted: 9/23/2005 12:05:45 PM EDT

there is another thread about this here somewhere.

it looks like quite a few people registered over on that site just to rip that kid on the related forum.

i suggest you do the same.

Link Posted: 9/23/2005 12:13:16 PM EDT
Wait a second, when was the last time a .50 cal was used in a crime?
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 12:13:26 PM EDT
That is exactly the kind of 2nd Amendment supporter we DON'T need. Kick his little pansy ass and send him to his room.
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 12:15:24 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 12:16:00 PM EDT
All you need is one 50 caliber and Iran is yours, nukes or no.
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 12:16:59 PM EDT
Well.. hell... if its that easily accessible... send me one!
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 12:17:32 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/23/2005 12:17:49 PM EDT by mjohn3006]
I want to see a 10 round 50 cal clip!
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 12:19:20 PM EDT
What a douchebag.
He throws out "hunting" and "need" and then proclaims his support for The Second Ammendment.
He clearly has no idea what RKBA is about.
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 12:21:58 PM EDT
I hate anti gun tards that dont know what they are talking about. I wish i could easlily buy a 7000 dollar rifle.
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 12:24:22 PM EDT

Originally Posted By jquillen1985:
Wait a second, when was the last time a .50 cal was used in a crime?

I do believe the answer to that question is ...... never.
okay, so if we ban or outlaw this weapon then only the outlaws and badguys have them, just the people you don't want to have them. remember it's not the weapon, it's the person behind it. some people are just idiots!
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 12:28:35 PM EDT

Originally Posted By jquillen1985:
Wait a second, when was the last time a .50 cal was used in a crime?

I think an immigrant was once convicted of illegally using one to hunt.

But the argument that it's never been used in a crime is a poor argument. If it's out there, it will be used in a crime someday. ARs have been used in crimes and so have Glocks, so they have automatically lost any magical status we've granted them as "crime free".

The real argument starts at the other end; by what authority does the government ban weapons in lieu of The Second Ammendment. Wether or not they've been used in crime is inconsequential.
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 12:29:50 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/23/2005 12:30:53 PM EDT by thedoctors308]

Originally Posted By jquillen1985:
Wait a second, when was the last time a .50 cal was used in a crime?

Wait a second, since when does it matter if the type of gun was used in a crime?
Second Amendment right bitches - non-negotiable.
Bill of Rights trumps everything else.

ETA: Damn, beat by 15 seconds on those sentiments.
Glad to see we are on the same page SJSAMPLE.
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 12:30:06 PM EDT
Seven thousand dollars may not be a huge sum of money

To who?!?!?!

Link Posted: 9/23/2005 12:42:07 PM EDT

From Discussion Forum:
In order, yes, yes, yes, and I have been using firearms since I was in my early teen years (I am 29 now). I prefer handguns, I am better shot with them.

Most people I know who have been around guns for that long are better shots with rifles. Smells like liberal bullshit to me.
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 12:53:55 PM EDT
Adam Slingwein, sounds like one of those ultra liberal Jews who believes only the oppressors should have firearms. What a turd. He clearly doesn't have a clue! I hope sales of the M82A1 increase by 1000%!
Top Top