I have somebody here that wants to know that when he joins the marines if he is able to buy machine guns like M16's or MP5's for
department LEO or military prices?


He actually wants to know if the privileges of joining if he can even purchase a sub-gun?



I told him that he has to go through the same hoops that we all have to take to get a legal licensed MG,
Who's right and wrong. hug.gifhug.gifhug.gif

You are. He would have to buy one just like everyone else. $200 stamp, etc....

You're right....

As a soldier charged with defending our liberty, he cannot be trusted with inexpensive machine guns manufactured after 1986. He has to take his enlisted pay, and fork over thousands like the rest of us peons.

I'm in a foul mood today.

dont worry brother, take a break outside or have a smoke.

Quoted: As a soldier charged with defending our liberty, he cannot be trusted with inexpensive machine guns manufactured after 1986. He has to take his enlisted pay, and fork over thousands like the rest of us peons. I'm in a foul mood today.

Wow Subnet - did somebody move your bit boundary into the wrong octet? Sounds like you woke up on the wrong side of the default gateway this morning.

Wasn't it Rusted Ace who took his combat pay and bought his own M-16? Good to know the troops are being smart with their bonuses.

Quoted: As a soldier charged with defending our liberty, he cannot be trusted with inexpensive machine guns manufactured after 1986. He has to take his enlisted pay, and fork over thousands like the rest of us peons. I'm in a foul mood today.

Sorry about your foul mood.  

I don't think GI's should be able to buy MG's just because they are military.  Granted I have been out of the .mil for a while, but I think of all the idiots, fuckoffs, jerkoffs, no load and dip dunks in my company alone, I shudder to think of them being able to carry full auto that wasn't checked out of the Arms Room.  Even then I was scared shitless going to the range with most of them.

Wow Subnet - did somebody move your bit boundary into the wrong octet? Sounds like you woke up on the wrong side of the default gateway this morning.

Quoted: Wow Subnet - did somebody move your bit boundary into the wrong octet? Sounds like you woke up on the wrong side of the default gateway this morning.

I have no idea what you're talking about, but it still sounds pretty nasty.....

Quoted: Quoted: As a soldier charged with defending our liberty, he cannot be trusted with inexpensive machine guns manufactured after 1986. He has to take his enlisted pay, and fork over thousands like the rest of us peons. I'm in a foul mood today. Wow Subnet - did somebody move your bit boundary into the wrong octet? Sounds like you woke up on the wrong side of the default gateway this morning.

Ok, that cheered me up!

Ummm, no.  Out.

Quoted: Quoted: As a soldier charged with defending our liberty, he cannot be trusted with inexpensive machine guns manufactured after 1986. He has to take his enlisted pay, and fork over thousands like the rest of us peons. I'm in a foul mood today. Wow Subnet - did somebody move your bit boundary into the wrong octet? Sounds like you woke up on the wrong side of the default gateway this morning.

Ok, that shit was funny!

Quoted: I have somebody here that wants to know that when he joins the marines if he is able to buy machine guns like M16's or MP5's for department LEO or military prices? He actually wants to know if the privileges of joining if he can even purchase a sub-gun? I told him that he has to go through the same hoops that we all have to take to get a legal licensed MG, Who's right and wrong.

He can buy a pre86 transferrable just like everyone else.

However with respect to modern (post 86) MGs nobody in the military or even law enforcement (not even Federal level) can own them. The agency owns them and issues them or signs them out accordingly. Those SWAT guys do NOT own their MP5s or M4s, unless they paid the prices for a pre 86 transferrable.

Quoted: As a soldier charged with defending our liberty, he cannot be trusted with inexpensive machine guns manufactured after 1986. He has to take his enlisted pay, and fork over thousands like the rest of us peons. I'm in a foul mood today.

You know there is some merit to this post.  I mean.. I am trusted with intimate knowledge of many things government and things that go BOOM.  But damned if I cant get a full auto without going thru hell and high water.

Quoted: Wow Subnet - did somebody move your bit boundary into the wrong octet? Sounds like you woke up on the wrong side of the default gateway this morning.

I tried to buy C3 when I was on active duty and my COC would not approve it.

I lived in the barracks and we had to store our privately owned weapons in an armory. When they found out what I wanted to get it wasn't no, but... HELL NO. Probably could have told them it was a semi but it wasn't worth the UCMJ/BATF hassle if I would have been caught.

Glad I asked first.

Quoted: I tried to buy C3 when I was on active duty and my COC would not approve it. I lived in the barracks and we had to store our privately owned weapons in an armory. When they found out what I wanted to get it wasn't no, but... HELL NO. Probably could have told them it was a semi but it wasn't worth the UCMJ/BATF hassle if I would have been caught. Glad I asked first.

Not only that, but troops living in the barracks are generally not allowed (read 'not a chance') to possess personally-owned weapons in the barracks. Generally personally-owned weapons must be kept in the unit arms room and signed out (after you beg and wheedle someone to open the arms room) whenever you want to go shooting or whatever.

That means that anyone with access to the arms room can finger fuck YOUR personally-owned weapon at their leisure. This also means that you would not be in sole control of the weapon, and that's a big no-no.

So while being the military infers no special priveleges towards owning your own fully-automatic weapon, I supposed it could be done if the stars/moon/planets aligned correctly. Ironically, it's probably generally harder for a servicemember to own a full auto than John Q. Public. Ironic, don't ya think?

Quoted: Quoted: As a soldier charged with defending our liberty, he cannot be trusted with inexpensive machine guns manufactured after 1986. He has to take his enlisted pay, and fork over thousands like the rest of us peons. I'm in a foul mood today. Sorry about your foul mood.   I don't think GI's should be able to buy MG's just because they are military.  Granted I have been out of the .mil for a while, but I think of all the idiots, fuckoffs, jerkoffs, no load and dip dunks in my company alone, I shudder to think of them being able to carry full auto that wasn't checked out of the Arms Room.  Even then I was scared shitless going to the range with most of them.

I was agreeing with subnet until I got to this one... then I flip flopped. I worked with some complete retards who I wouldn't trust with a dull spoon, let alone their very own full-auto.

Soldier are citizens, no different than anyone else. And for that matter, cops are too, but somehow cops are given extra priveldges that .mil guys don't have even though there are probably just as many retard cops that shouldn't be allowed to handle a firearms either.

It's best to think of it like this. .mil doesn't = infantry. Yeah, ideally it should... every soldier should be an infantryman first.... but tell that to the slacks that join the clerk corps to avoid doing any kind of physical "army" stuff (beyond morning PT), get a steady paycheck, and reap the perks of being called a soldier. I never had a clerk in any of my units who shot worth a shit.

Same goes for cops. Not every cop is out there chasing down criminals or getting into Hollywood-style shootouts. There are pogues just in the .mil.

Can't buy one but they can lease one for 3-20+ years, the only thing they have to do is sign on the dotted line!!

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: As a soldier charged with defending our liberty, he cannot be trusted with inexpensive machine guns manufactured after 1986. He has to take his enlisted pay, and fork over thousands like the rest of us peons. I'm in a foul mood today. Sorry about your foul mood.   I don't think GI's should be able to buy MG's just because they are military.  Granted I have been out of the .mil for a while, but I think of all the idiots, fuckoffs, jerkoffs, no load and dip dunks in my company alone, I shudder to think of them being able to carry full auto that wasn't checked out of the Arms Room.  Even then I was scared shitless going to the range with most of them. I was agreeing with subnet until I got to this one... then I flip flopped. I worked with some complete retards who I wouldn't trust with a dull spoon, let alone their very own full-auto. Soldier are citizens, no different than anyone else. And for that matter, cops are too, but somehow cops are given extra priveldges that .mil guys don't have even though there are probably just as many retard cops that shouldn't be allowed to handle a firearms either. It's best to think of it like this. .mil doesn't = infantry. Yeah, ideally it should... every soldier should be an infantryman first.... but tell that to the slacks that join the clerk corps to avoid doing any kind of physical "army" stuff (beyond morning PT), get a steady paycheck, and reap the perks of being called a soldier. I never had a clerk in any of my units who shot worth a shit. Same goes for cops. Not every cop is out there chasing down criminals or getting into Hollywood-style shootouts. There are pogues just in the .mil.

Don't forget there are guys here that can't be trusted with a dull spoon .  

idiots, fuckoffs, jerkoffs, no load and dip dunks that matches what I was thinking but I doubt I would have matched the eloquence.  That begs to be nominated for avatar signature of the year.  Or a nomination for Nobel Prize for Literature.