Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Waitone on February 10, 2014, 09:30:11 PM
-
Happened much faster than I thought. =D
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/370733/manufacturers-change-look-ar-15-rifle-now-legal-new-york-state-charles-c-w-cooke
-
That funny-looking stock was originally developed to comply with California's gun laws, which is why New York got theirs so quickly.
-
http://www.timesunion.com/local/article/Gun-design-legal-deadly-4549130.php#ixzz2UaU8rVAW
-
I saw a comment elsewhere that this gun ought to be available only in pastels. No black or cammo allowed. =D
-
Quoted for epic stoopidness.
Long Island Democratic Assemblywoman Michelle Schimel said that following the 1994 federal assault weapons ban — which expired a decade later — gunmakers developed "AB" or "After-Ban" models of military-style weapons.
Schimel disagreed with McLaughlin on the significance of the modifications. She said the banned features, including pistol grips, are designed to increase a weapon's effectiveness, or killing power.
"A pistol grip helps you keep firing on a target," she said. "Each characteristic has a specific battle component."
Because holding a rifle like a pistol is exactly how you make precise shots on a difficult target. ;/ :laugh:
-
Hey guys, can you help me with my AR build? How do I make sure that all my characteristics have the Specific Battle Component?
-
They have to be sprinkled with Eugene Stoner's ashes.
The only thing a pistol grip ever did for me was to make my right wrist sore from carrying the rifle around all day.
-
I never could figure out how a pistol grip was more comfortable for firing from the hip ???
<smirk>
-
I kind of like the looks of that stock. Not sure how effective it is, but it has a real Star Wars look to it...
see the same problem with the war on drugs...every time they ban one of the designer drugs, someone alters the formula and it becomes legal again.
-
I never could figure out how a pistol grip was more comfortable for firing from the hip ???
<smirk>
It's incrementally more comfortable by a few degrees since the natural resting position of the palm is at 90 degrees more or less to the wrist, but the real reason of course is to get a straight-line stock to remove as much leverage from the muzzle as possible for full-auto/burst controlability and reduce climb, and the wrist/grip area would be nowhere near the trigger in such a configuration so the second pistol grip is needed.
-
It's incrementally more comfortable by a few degrees since the natural resting position of the palm is at 90 degrees more or less to the wrist, but the real reason of course is to get a straight-line stock to remove as much leverage from the muzzle as possible for full-auto/burst controlability and reduce climb, and the wrist/grip area would be nowhere near the trigger in such a configuration so the second pistol grip is needed.
But if you are literally holding a rifle/shotgun at hip level, then your wrist is going to be cramped 90 degrees to hold a pistol grip.
With a normal stock, your wrist and hand would hang naturally.
-
Hip firing is another example of liberal stupidity. Far less accurate. We all know this. Pistol grips suck at hip firing. Even PGO shotguns aren't really meant for hip firing.
-
Quoted for epic stoopidness.
Long Island Democratic Assemblywoman Michelle Schimel said that following the 1994 federal assault weapons ban — which expired a decade later — gunmakers developed "AB" or "After-Ban" models of military-style weapons.
Schimel disagreed with McLaughlin on the significance of the modifications. She said the banned features, including pistol grips, are designed to increase a weapon's effectiveness, or killing power.
"A pistol grip helps you keep firing on a target," she said. "Each characteristic has a specific battle component."
Because holding a rifle like a pistol is exactly how you make precise shots on a difficult target. ;/ :laugh:
Is "After-Ban" a phrase they just made up or is that something that I somehow haven't ever heard before?
-
"Post-ban" was definitely a thing, never heard anyone say "after-ban" though.
-
Uh, guys, I wouldn't argue with a firearms expert like Michelle Schimel. She obviously has her trigger finger right on the pulse of the gun culture.
-
Hip firing is another example of liberal stupidity. Far less accurate. We all know this. Pistol grips suck at hip firing. Even PGO shotguns aren't really meant for hip firing.
Ever see WW2 footage of soldiers with Thompson SMGs? Many times (not all times) they fire from the hip in Close Quarter work. Actually, perhaps a bit above the hip.
The ergos of the Thompson work out such that it is very comfortable to use this weapon in this way.
Putting the gun to shoulder sticks the rear sight almost into my eye.
The AR-15/M-4 platform, although ostensibly similar in layout as the Thompson is a better all around design and much better ... primarily because of the way the stock is designed. The way the Thompson's stock attaches to the lower and "droops" is a detriment, IMO.
You are right though about hip firing being inaccurate -- most of the time I've seen Tommys used this way in WW2 were in streetfighting where distances were pretty close a lot of the time. Aiming instinctively works pretty well that close.