/k/ommandos, you are given the option of owning as many automatic, SBR, suppressed, destructive device, or otherwise heavily restricted weapon, but the cost of this is that nothing you own can be chambered in current NATO or Russian military cartridges.
You will have to rechamber or modify all weapons that you own to comply with this restriction. 12 ga. shotguns are the only exception.
Would you do it ?
>>32856084
>you are given the option of
No, no deals, no more "this for that"; either repeal something or fuck off.
>use .223 in everything under .30 cal
>use 6.8 or 6.5 in everything else
ok
>>32856112
HERE, HERE!
>>32856084
.222 Russian instead of 5x45
7.62x45 instead of 7.62x39
.303 British instead of 7.62x54R
6.5 Grendel instead of 5.56
7.5 Swiss instead of .308
.38 Super or .30 luger instead of 9mm Luger
i think I got the important ones
SHALL
Yeah that'd be cool
I'd get a 16 inch naval gun just for the hell of it, and a 20mm bofors on a movable tripod for actual home defense. I'd get one of the old WWII bofors so it wouldn't be a modern NATO round.
>>32856084
30-06 and 45 Auto is enough for me.
>>32857297
>>>/1941/
9mm Glisenti for 9mm would work too if you're feeling trollish
>>32856084
>Pak 40
>STG 44
Done.
I actually could back this only because companies might have to do creative stuff, instead of the same stuff again and again, like 2/3 scale AKs in 30 carbine or full sizers in 8x33 Kurz or a mini in 7.65 tokarev, AR-10s in 7.5 swiss, FAL's in 7.7 jap, pistol carbines in .30 luger, 6mm Lee Navy M14's, etc
>>32856084
Sure. Battle rifle in 300 win mag, anyone?
I believe market forces would dictate massive availability of guns chambered in close but not quite cartridges, so yeah, I would take it