Personally, I would argue that the definition of "arms" does not extend to anything outside of the widely accepted rules of warfare, hence my refusal to use hollowpoint ammunition (which is completely legal for civilians/police, but illegal for military use). But anything that could be legally found on a modern battlefield should be fair game for law-abiding civilians to own and maintain. The government should not have a monopoly on power.

I should have access to what our military and police have; no more, no less.

SWAT has hollow point rounds do they not?

Depending on the firearm, yes. Police normally carry hollowpoint, but I do not. Hollowpoint causes unnecessary pain and suffering, so it's against the Hague Convention.

"Personally, I would argue that the definition of "arms" does not extend to anything outside of the widely accepted rules of warfare"

100 years ago, just pre-WWI, we had vastly different rules of warfare...

So does that mean we have to wait 100 years to have our very own personal chemical weapons caches?

Careful, Gunfighter...

You'll get people like Alex Jones and krellin here lining up to have themselves cryogenically frozen Philip J. Fry-style so they can wait it out...

AND *WHAT* WOULD SOCIETY DO WITHOUT THEM IN THE MEANTIME??? :O

@gf, regarding hollowpoints and pain and suffering ... Aren't hollowpoints designed to kill more efficiently? They cause more internal damage, so they have better stopping power. Stopping power to me means they kill with fewer rounds, therefore quicker. Isn't that less pain and suffering? A FMJ to the mid section, can cause a stomach wound that takes hours to kill like Tim rot in reservoir dogs, but a hollowpoint, would have expanded and probably taken out some vitals causing a more immediate death. Bad for tarantino, but good for the person trying to save their own life or the lives of their loved ones.

My position is relatively straight forward. There shouldn't be a "red-line" on what anyone can purchase. I believe everyone should have those freedoms.

However. I would personally choose to live in a society were people voluntarily gave up some of those freedoms.

In summary, I'm against the use of force to remove the freedoms of others, but would gladly join a society were I forfeit some of those freedoms. (What is presently problematic is that we are unable to form/leave societies because of the structured nature of the nation-state world in which we live. However ignoring this issue, this is my ideal solution.)

Admittedly I'm extremely uncomfortable with nuclear bombs in general, but the idea exists now, so we can hardly return to the pre-nuclear era. :/

"Hollowpoint causes unnecessary pain and suffering, so it's against the Hague Convention"

But it also has better penetration than traditional rounds, which is why police use it. Now incendiary and depleted rounds, yeah, those have no police use and probably minimal military use for that matter. I know depleted uranium has better penetration , but if it doesn't kill immediately, it can cause extreme pain and suffering and kill long term. I really think it should be considered in the same realm as chemical weapons.

@draug, it doesn't have better penetration, that's the "point" (haha gun humor) of hollowpoints, the don't penetrate, they expand so as not to leave the body. Better penetration is not a good thing in situations where there is only one bad guy and many innocents.

I thought hollow points were better against body armor... That was the penetration to which I was referring. If not, then I am mistaken.

Oh, I think those are the bullets with the X carved in the top. They call them cop killers, I believe and they are illegal.

@ philcore

It depends on what you call "stopping power". Hollowpoints perform very well against unarmored targets, but what if the bad guy has a vest or many layers of clothes? I want the penetration of full metal jacket. I'd rather take my chances with overpenetration than take my chances with no penetration. Also, I carry an M1911-derived pistol (Colt's Mfg Mark IV/Series 70 to be exact) in .45 ACP, and .45 ACP FMJ will stop anything on two legs in one round no matter what. My rifle is a modernized/custom USGI M14, and it's the same story. 7.62x51mm NATO FMJ will stop anything on two legs no matter what. Basically, the advantage of hollowpoint does not outweigh its disadvantages considering the types of firearms I own, and as stated above I disagree with their use in principle. They were banned from warfare for a very good reason.

@ Draugnar

"But it also has better penetration than traditional rounds, which is why police use it."

Nah, police use 'em because there's much less risk of over-penetration, which is the only advantage of hollowpoint in my book. Also, police generally (and stupidly) use 9mm pistols, so they need to use hollowpoints to squeeze a little more stopping power out of that round. However, I'd rather take my chances with over-penetration than under-penetration. I don't know if the bad guy has a vest or not, but I'm erring on the side of my safety. Also, as mentioned above, .45 ACP can stop anything no matter what load I use.

@ philcore

"Oh, I think those are the bullets with the X carved in the top. They call them cop killers, I believe and they are illegal."

Bullets with an X carved on top are hollowpoints, or bullets that are designed to expand. They are completely legal for civilian use in the United States and they are not widely considered to be specialist ammunition. Many private citizens and police officers use it for its increased stopping power against unarmored targets and its reduced risk of over-penetration.

It is NOT referred to as a "cop-killer" round. In fact, most hollowpoints would be easily stopped by police body armor. The alleged "cop-killer" round is the 5.7mm pistol round developed by FN for their newish Five-SeveN pistol and P90 PDW. The 5.7mm is basically a miniature rifle round and is specifically designed to penetrate body armor, even better than conventional FMJ pistol rounds. This round and that pistol are not illegal in the United States at present, but the wackos at the Brady Campaign are trying to get them banned (they coined the false "cop-killer" phrase)

@ Draugnar

"Now incendiary and depleted rounds, yeah, those have no police use and probably minimal military use for that matter. I know depleted uranium has better penetration"

DU is way too expensive to use as anything other than subcaliber sabot anti-tank ammunition for use in our M1 Abrams tanks against enemy tanks. It is WAY too expensive (and probably too heavy) to use in standard rifle/pistol rounds. DU would have insane penetration and wouldn't cause any more suffering than FMJ, but DU is really toxic to the environment. The biggest factor against DU is cost, especially when FMJ works fine against anything that anyone would shoot at with a rifle. DU is not currently used in rifle ammunition the best of my knowledge, but I know it's being researched extensively. Should be an interesting development that I will be following closely.

Incendiary ammunition is legal for use in warfare. It's not widely or commonly issued because it's not necessary in most military contexts. It's a logistics headache. Ordinary tracer ammunition works just fine for spotting and aiming, and if you're trying to set stuff on fire, you're better off calling in a napalm or a WP airstrike or artillery fire mission. Because the military does have access to incendiary and they can use it legally, civilians should have access to it as well.

@gun, the x carved bullets aren't really hollowpoint as their point isn't well, you know ... Hollow. But it is something I saw on some old movie or cop show or something, and the point was expansion, not penetrating bullet proof vests (i just Google it to see what I was thinking about) modern hollowpoints are way more effective expanders than these homemade predecessors were.

The cop killer I was thinking about are teflon coated bullets. (i Google that too when I was wrong about the x)

But I have to disagree on preferring over penetration in a self defence round.I too cary a .45ACP (Glock 30) and I would worry about over penetration going through my intended target, and hitting an innocent. I would rather that Hydroshock round expand inside the dirtbag and stay there.

Hollow point to the head. no over penetration and not likely well protected. Oh, and no suffering as probably instantly dead or at least veggie tales for life. Call it the poor man's lobotomy.

"Arlene, grab my weapon, I'm just about to shoot"

@ philcore

I respect your use of hollowpoint but I disagree with its use personally on principle. I am concerned about hitting innocents (know your target and what's behind your target) but .45 isn't a really fast round to begin with. Over-penetration won't happen in most cases if I shoot for center-of-mass (which is where I have trained myself to aim)

Also, most standard 1911s can't accept hollowpoint without modifications/enhancements to the feed ramp. After all, the M1911 is a military handgun and Browning designed it specifically for full metal jacket .45 ACP, which he also designed.

Including mine. The Mark IV/Series 70 doesn't load hollowpoint as reliably as full metal jacket.

I don't think my para has a problem with them, although to be fair, I don't carry that one, its more of a range gun, so I haven't put many rounds through it other than FMJ. But the hollowpoints I use (hydroshock) are jacketed. Does that make a difference with the feeding?

It depends on the shape of the round more than anything. Jacketed or unjacketed hollowpoint doesn't make much difference; either way it can get stuck on the feed ramp designed for smooth-nose full metal jacket.

I didn't read any of the posts prior to this besides the main post, so bear with me.

Bump fire isn't anything new. There's dozens of videos showing it on youtube. As far as this particular thing goes, the fact that it uses a belt isn't relevant. They're heavy and difficult to transport.

Look, fact is, the people who we want these guns to be restricted from (criminals, gangs, etc.) already have the real mccoy (fully automatic weapons). Gangs use automatics in drive-by shootings all the time. Banning them from ordinary citizens isn't going to stop that.

Exactly, Chaqa.

Luckily, I took it up the rear and jumped through all of the bullshit hoops and I have my FFL. Unfortunately, there are a lot of qualified law-abiding citizens who are actively being denied their most important right.

Also, if anyone cares, my new goal in life is to own an M134 Minigun. 100 rounds per second, bitch.

@gun, what caliber is a minigun? .30-06, .308, or 7.62 x 51? Either way, at about 75 cents a round, that's $75 per second! You've gotta be rich to really enjoy shooting that one!

But I wouldn't mind coming along along, if you're paying for the ammo! That would be a blast!

Miniguns are 7.62x51mm NATO. I'd blow through most of my yearly ammunition budget (and I shoot a LOT) in a minute or two.

A more realistic goal would be for me to own an M60 or maybe an M1919. I really need to add a belt-fed to my arsenal.

Just saw the watercooled 1917 next to the aircooled 1919 on a military channel show yesterday. They measured the barrel temperature after cooking off 100 rounds in each. the 1917 water cooled was 160 degrees F while the 1919 was 347 degrees F. Browning was such a total genius as a designer.

Browning is the greatest gun designer who ever lived, hands down. He makes Garand and Kalashnikov (numbers two and three) look like amateurs.

The US military used old M1917s well into the 1980s for basic training (the event where recruits have to crawl under barbed wire with machine guns shooting over them) because 1917s can literally shoot all day. I think one time they shot an M1917 on full auto for four consecutive hours.

I'd go with an M1919 personally. I'll happily sacrifice practical rate-of-fire for the much lighter weight of an air-cooled barrel.