Red Lobster me on Full Auto

SHANT BE IMPEDED

Full auto is overrated. I'm not saying that it's useless, but it's not a critical feature in a personal firearm.

>>33851154
Shiggles is the main draw, but full auto or burst fire 22LR's could have plenty of use in pest control, and full auto events for shooting competitions would be fucking amazeballs.

Mainly it enables autists like me to buy more modern military rifles directly from the manufacturer.

I don't think I'll ever use a firearm in anger, but they're fascinating pieces of history and engineering, and civilian monkey model semi-autos don't have the same appeal to me.

File: :k: has a conversation.gif (3MB, 300x168px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 300x168px

>>33851154
There isn't one, beyond entertainment for a select few people.

That's part of why the militia failed as an institution for national defense - even though citizens had the right to own any combat weapons which would be useful for militia service, there was little incentive to actually invest heavily in your own personal combat armory, and when it came time for the militia to be called to service (1812, and a few revolts prior to that), they were woefully under-equipped. They even tried passing various directives and incentives to encourage militia to procure their own minimum standardized armament, but it still wasn't enough. So a standing army with publicly-funded armories became a military necessity.

But at least with FA, if you remove all the legal hurdles, there's not much reason NOT to have select-fire on your otherwise semi-auto firearms. Most of the mechanical essentials are already there.

File: 1493624114109.jpg (192KB, 600x377px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 600x377px

Fun mostly. Also I really want to buy a Boeing MD500c and mount 2x 7.62 M1919s or M60s on it. Also when the ATF raids your house, you can mow them down from your sandbagged MG position.

Squad heavy machine guns are legit.

M-16 and Sub-guns (and related sears) are for investment purposes.

/thread

>>33852107
>namefag
>trying to make a point that was already addressed and negated in thread premise
>threading own post
3 strikes and you're a moron

>>33851154
>If all the NFA stuff and Hughes were repealed tomorrow, what would be the draw?
Novelty, outside of some historic examples.
>Once everyone finishes buying new pants after creaming all their existing pairs, how long until the sheer novelty of being able to own FA wears off?
However long it takes the owner to realize how ungodly expensive it would be to feed them regularly.

Hogs would be pretty much the only thing you could realistically use auto fire for, and I would expect that like many other things that are legal to own, they would still be prohibited from hunting use on ethics grounds (and rightfully so).

File: f365bdb8095f6953ab3ce18a02a2c892.jpg (186KB, 500x995px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 500x995px

>>33851853
You clever asshole >:]
>>33851885
>>33851978
>>33852107
>>33852232
I would not mind carrying pic related, putting couple 9mm bursts when at a good angle is gonna ruin any assailants day.

Repealing the ban on open bolt weaponry and making suppressors a non NFA item would also open up some interesting options for the hobbyist gunsmith.
It would also allow access to accurate replicas of open bolt weapons which appeals to autists like me.

>>33852232
The only thing keeping most guns from being FA is a hole and a couple of parts. I'd gladly pay for 20 bucks worth of extra parts to have the ability to shoot them FA, even if I mostly shoot them on semi.