Okay, I really need some help, guys. My country, Norway, is

1. No, not really but a version of the mini 14 is selective fire ( AC-556 ) But it is based on the M14 / M1 Garand action which was designed as a military weapon. (This also answers number 2 as it is a completely different reciever / trigger group required for selective fire.)

>>35047180
On point two:

I hate when people use terms like "readily" and "easily" and other relative terms in laws.

An average firearm owner is not capable of making any firearm fully automatic. This is because it requires more than just drilling away parts, it requires adding on features to parts or fabricating new ones. I will post it when I get to my desktop but there are cutaway gifs of a full auto M16 vs a civi AR15 that show they are entirely different beasts that a normal gun owner couldn't replicate with even a fairly well furnished home workshop.

The skill required to convert a firearm like that is that of somebody who could make their own gun from scratch /anyways/ which really just calls into question if gun control is effective to begin with.

>>35047212
>>35047245
I'd appreciate the Gif, and any other input from other anons.

BTW, the AC-556 looks like a new model, not the original model.

1) no, it was designed for civilian use as it was AWB compliant (also one of the reasons why Ruger backed the AWB)
2) no, but then again gun grabbers wouldn't know that as they get their facts from Hollywood
3) completely different trigger groups and bolts, but again see point number 2 as to why gun grabbers wouldn't care and ban civilian stuff anyway

they're trying to go the way of Bongistan and Ausfailia, you better stock up on cosmoline and PVC pipes and get ready to protest the law, maybe start a gun rights advocacy group if there already isn't one in your country

File: 1503021336778.gif (3MB, 376x278px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 376x278px

>>35047180
>Europe
The only thing Brevik did wrong was not having sleeper cell buddies.

>>35047180
>Mini-14
>Breivik
>Norway
I'm flat-out going to tell you that you're not going to win this one. Those three plot points alone tell me that your gun grabbers are going to get away with their thieving bullshit, partly because Norwegian gun culture has had a massive stick up it's ass about how awesome Norwegian laws are compared to ours. Well, now that stick is being ripped out for the purposes of being a bludgeon and this is precisely the kind of shit American gun owners have been screeching about for decades.

Yeah, I hate to be that guy because there's a good chance that you weren't one of the many "oh it's fine" people, but, uh, thanks for being a recent example we can use in internet debates.

I really hope I'm wrong, but I don't really think I'm far off on this one.

>>35047397
>>35047494
>>35047571
I guess we'll find out what's what when the final draft of the legal text is in place.

File: semiauto.gif (928KB, 400x320px) Image search: [Google]

928KB, 400x320px

>>35047396
Sorry, work ran long.

Semi auto

File: rimg.gif (812KB, 275x250px) Image search: [Google]

812KB, 275x250px

>>35047396
Full fun.

Also this>>35047571, you guys are fucked probably because conceited old timers scared away new gun owners so nobody is invested in this debate, and the old timers think black guns kill kids. At least that's what happened in our ban states like Massachusetts and California.

At least now you can share guns with you Australian buddies.

File: BCGs_redbox.jpg (121KB, 800x508px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 800x508px

>>35047808
Also to clarify the moving parts and what's happening. The buffer tube is preventing the hammer from falling in the second gif, and the buffer tube is also knocking the blue/purple bit that's not part of the trigger (auto seer) back and forth to allow the hammer to drop when the bolt is back in place, ready to be struck.

Pictured here are semi auto buffer tube/bolt carrier things and the bottom one is a full auto one. The filled in part is so it can knock the auto seer around to allow for full auto firing.

Or something, I don't own an AR15, I like the AK platforms more and have put off buying one but I intend on getting one sometime this winter.

Details comparing the two are avalible online, there is also a gun taking apart game on Steam. http://store.steampowered.com/app/262410/World_of_Guns_Gun_Disassembly/ This will answer your questions a LOT better than I ever could.

>>35047799
>>35047808
>>35047823
cool stuff, anon. Thanks.

File: anters apustaja.png (72KB, 652x528px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 652x528px

>>35047180
>terrorist
patriot

>>35048141
Giving the enemy of freedom a brilliant reason to collectively attack the law abiding citizens rather than going after mudshit and hard core gangs, yeah... Real patriotic.

File: DSC_8963.jpg (597KB, 1536x1024px) Image search: [Google]

597KB, 1536x1024px

>>35047180
>1.) was the mini-14 ORIGINALLY MANUFACTURED for military/police use?

It was designed in the '70s for the civilian market as semi-auto only. Ruger pretty quickly sold them as police weapons too. They were used by police and prisons back in the days when the cops didn't want to use military-looking firearms. The French licensed them for their national police force, too.

I have one from the US prison system that was made with a bayonet mount. It was called the Mini-14GB. It's still semi auto.

Ruger tried to go after military sales in the 1980s with the full auto AC556 but it never really caught on with the US. I think a lot of smaller countries bought them for their forces.

>2.) was/is it very easy to convert to fully auto?

Not really. Guns that the government decides can be easily converted to full auto aren't legal in the US. You'd need complex machining skills to make the right parts and modifications.

>3.) how far away (in case of one or more of the above) is the current civilian rifle in production from the original version?

The current civilian rifles are basically identical to the civilian semi-auto Mini-14 from 1980. Only real differences are a heavier barrel and worse iron sights.

>>35047397
>1) no, it was designed for civilian use as it was AWB compliant (also one of the reasons why Ruger backed the AWB)

The Mini-14 came out in 1976. The AWB was 1994.

>>35049511
hmmmm...

Guess there is hope yet.

>>35049521
my bad, I worded it badly
still, one of the reasons Bill Ruger supported the AWB was that he was hoping to increase Mini-14 sales

>>35049967
dick move from a gun owner POW

smart move from a businessman POW

Just got an m1 after they changed the law in Norway to allow them FOR HUNTING, which is fucking retarded but why not.

There is no problem in Norway, guns are fine and the EU semi auto fuckery will be told to suck a dick.

Our cities are not big enough or retarded enough for no fun majorities.

Everyone has a gun here, and our laws are loose and the politburo and statsi love guns and are chill AF.

Brevik had the opposite reaction here, gun laws have got looser since then as response to 'not reacting to the terrorists'.

That said I bought the Garand full expecting it to be struck from the legal hunting list...but fuck that the collector scene here is awesome with good value and plenty options to actually use guns on full giggle if so inclined...op put the tinfoil hat away for now.

>>35049643
Woah. Don't say that.

Just because it factually is something doesn't mean the government will subscribe to that reality.

>>35047180
>1.) was the mini-14 ORIGINALLY MANUFACTURED for military/police use?
No, but it's roughly patterned after the M14 and Garand which were military service rifles from the get-go. If they're extra faggy about it they could interpret it as a "variant" of one of the aforementioned rifles, even though not a single part is interchangable.