Gun control harming US troops?

[Jimbo 0]

Story here.

Is it the AWB harming US troops, or is it simply a supply problem in the US military?

Personally, I think that this is a bit of a leap; it's as shameful a tactic as the ones that brought us the AWB in the first place.

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[PhillyKev 0]

You know my feelings about the AWB, but that articles crap. There's plenty of full capacity magazines manufactured both for the military and law enforcement as well as for every other country where those weapons are sold. Hell, I bought brand new, in the packaging full cap mags for my Glock 6 months ago. They were manufactured before the ban but the excess stock is still around.

[jakee 1,565]

At least your guys never had to deal with the SA-80.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[nanook 1]

I thnk that article lost its credibility by using SOF as a reference.

_____________________________

"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln

[Skyrad 0]

Ah, nothing a elastic band couldn't cure. (So long as you're left handed and kept it away from your body while running and didn't want to fire more than one shot at a time)

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[Tonto 1]

Quote

At least your guys never had to deal with the SA-80.

There are times being a leftie are a good thing...

t

It's the year of the Pig.

[kiltboy 0]

Ahh yes memories.

I ended up keeping the bottom of the mag on my right hip so I knew it was there.

David

[AndyMan 7]

Does the prohibition against Americans buying F-16 fighters hinder the airforce's ability to supply those planes in adequate quantities?

Manufacturers have always, and will always be drooling over the prospects of selling their wares to the military.

The availability of items outside the population at large does not affect the availbility or the price paid by the military. Take for example the iconic $300 toilet seats...

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[Kennedy 0]

The difference here is that companies are not designing new firearms for the military. The military is terrible at designing them for themselves. Without private drive for new guns, the military is SOL. And firearms manufacturers are not going to bother with the military because it's just not enough revenue without the prospect of civilian sales.

However, the rest of the article, specifically the magazine thing, is a bunch of horse apples. The magazine problem is due to poor choice of purchases and SNAFU distribution.

Quote

Does the prohibition against Americans buying F-16 fighters hinder the airforce's ability to supply those planes in adequate quantities?

No, but it does ensure that there will be fewer improvements and that things will cost more. There is no better way to induce product improvement and cost effectiveness than to put it on the free market.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[billvon 3,080]

> The difference here is that companies are not designing new firearms for
>the military. The military is terrible at designing them for themselves.

?? I worked for the company that designed the F-14 and the A-6 for the navy. We found that you can make quite a profit designing weapons for the military even if there is no commercial use for them whatsoever.

[Kennedy 0]

We are discussing firearms, not multimillion dollar vehicle weapons systems.

Look at what a failure the OICW has been and continues to be.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*