What Is a "Weapon Of War"?

[ICU 812]

So then, in the context of a discussion about gun control and the Second Amendment:

What IS a "Weapon Of War?"


The meaning of this term may seem clear cut at first, but , much like “Art” and “Pornography”, with a deeper look the meaning can become less well defined.

Many firearms now considered appropriate for civilian use today have deep roots in military usage. Every bolt action hunting rifle has an evolutionary connection to Germany’s Dryese Needle Gun and the French Chassepot Rifle of the 1870s.

However, there is a more direct connection to the Mauser rifles of the 1890s. In fact, the primary rifle of the German army in WW-II was nearly identical to the weapon they adopted in 1898, but with minor changes to barrel length and stock. The US Army adopted the “Springfield ” rifle in 1903. The US government subsequently lost a lawsuit to Mauser over patent infringement. This became moot with the outbreak of WW-I. After WW-II, thousands of these rifles, both Mauser and Springfield, were dumped on the surplus market and converted into hunting rifles.

Today, high end gunsmiths create custom hunting rifles starting with newly manufactured bolt actions identical in most details with the Mauser rifle of 1898.

While the Winchester lever action rifles made iconic in so many cowboy movies were never designed as a military weapon, several thousand were bought for the Ottoman army and used successfully in that role. The Colt Peace Maker revolver seen in so many quick draw gun fights on screen begin as a cavalry side arm but was later embraced by the civilian market.

When the US Marines went “over there” in 1917 to fight in Europ during WW-I they brought pump action shotguns for trench fighting. These were commercially available sporting guns modified with a ventilated hand guard and a bayonet attachment that just bolted onto the barrel. These guns were otherwise mechanically identical to sporting shotguns already in civilian hands. Today, the US Army and Marines use shotguns that are mechanically identical to sporting arms from Mossberg and Remington.

Semi-automatic rifles have their roots in the civilian sporting market. When first introduced in the late 1890s, most armies of the world were cautious about adopting them as a primary weapon of war. Small numbers of a few designs were tried, but not adopted. Semi-automatic rifles were mostly civilian owned firearms. When WW-II broke out in 1939, only the US Army had semi-automatic rifles as general issue weapons for infantry. One was the M-1 Garand, a full power battle rifle. The other was the M-1 Carbine firing a reduced power cartridge. After the war, large numbers of the M-1 Carbine were sold as surplus to the public. A few companies made copies of this gun for the civilian market after the war.

[texassapper]

“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’

’The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.”
― Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass

He was ahead of his time.....

[SpeedRacerXXX]

An interesting related article on a recent decision on 2nd Amendment rights.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-app...an-2023-11-04/

[texassapper]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

An interesting related article on a recent decision on 2nd Amendment rights.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-app...an-2023-11-04/

interesting to you, but meaningless. This case will go to SCOTUS and get overturned.

[Levianon17]

Originally Posted by ICU 812

So then, in the context of a discussion about gun control and the Second Amendment:

What IS a "Weapon Of War?"


The meaning of this term may seem clear cut at first, but , much like “Art” and “Pornography”, with a deeper look the meaning can become less well defined.

Many firearms now considered appropriate for civilian use today have deep roots in military usage. Every bolt action hunting rifle has an evolutionary connection to Germany’s Dryese Needle Gun and the French Chassepot Rifle of the 1870s.

However, there is a more direct connection to the Mauser rifles of the 1890s. In fact, the primary rifle of the German army in WW-II was nearly identical to the weapon they adopted in 1898, but with minor changes to barrel length and stock. The US Army adopted the “Springfield ” rifle in 1903. The US government subsequently lost a lawsuit to Mauser over patent infringement. This became moot with the outbreak of WW-I. After WW-II, thousands of these rifles, both Mauser and Springfield, were dumped on the surplus market and converted into hunting rifles.

Today, high end gunsmiths create custom hunting rifles starting with newly manufactured bolt actions identical in most details with the Mauser rifle of 1898.

While the Winchester lever action rifles made iconic in so many cowboy movies were never designed as a military weapon, several thousand were bought for the Ottoman army and used successfully in that role. The Colt Peace Maker revolver seen in so many quick draw gun fights on screen begin as a cavalry side arm but was later embraced by the civilian market.

When the US Marines went “over there” in 1917 to fight in Europ during WW-I they brought pump action shotguns for trench fighting. These were commercially available sporting guns modified with a ventilated hand guard and a bayonet attachment that just bolted onto the barrel. These guns were otherwise mechanically identical to sporting shotguns already in civilian hands. Today, the US Army and Marines use shotguns that are mechanically identical to sporting arms from Mossberg and Remington.

Semi-automatic rifles have their roots in the civilian sporting market. When first introduced in the late 1890s, most armies of the world were cautious about adopting them as a primary weapon of war. Small numbers of a few designs were tried, but not adopted. Semi-automatic rifles were mostly civilian owned firearms. When WW-II broke out in 1939, only the US Army had semi-automatic rifles as general issue weapons for infantry. One was the M-1 Garand, a full power battle rifle. The other was the M-1 Carbine firing a reduced power cartridge. After the war, large numbers of the M-1 Carbine were sold as surplus to the public. A few companies made copies of this gun for the civilian market after the war.

Tanks, Rocket Launchers, Bazookas, 50 Cal Sniper Rifle, Fully Auto Rifles, ect. Certainly not a Semi Auto Pistol or a Semi Auto AR-15 Rifle that shoots .223 Ammo which is basically a 22cal. a high charge center fire round. If they ban one type of Civilian weapon they'll continue on with other weapons until American Civilians have nothing.

[eyecu2]

223 was selected to be a preferred round by the military for its ability to do 2 things. Larger capacity of rounds carried and less fatal like a 308 round, less catastrophic injuries supposedly. The only difference between an actual military version and civilian version is the full auto seer / bolt combo. Of course you can still buy one if you don't mind paying the tax on it, damn, you can even buy a custom silencer for any AR platform rifle. My friend has one that drops the sound to a subsonic 22 cal bullet or slightly lower.

ARs are a favorite with some hunters but realistically, do you need a 30 round clip or 50 or 100 round drum??

How shitty a shot do you have to be. California and some states have outlawed larger mags than 10 rounds, but you can get around that.

Anyone who doesn't think that that 0.223 or 5.56 round isn't a military round it's fooling themselves. Hell a 308 is an huge round in AR 10. But lugging that around isn't nearly as convenient as the smaller AR 15 style.

I own both styles and honestly am not a huge fan of either. Lots of customizeable features, but my precision Ruger is way more fun for shooting long range. And it's a bolt action. I think semi auto guns should require a class, a full background check, including mental history and then ongoing yearly license. Keep track of who's got a gun that is only a step away from being a military gun.

Nobody needs shit like a .50 BMG or any of itd cousins.

Tell me one reason to have one of those, with a straight face!!

[texassapper]

Originally Posted by eyecu2

Nobody needs shit like a .50 BMG or any of itd cousins.

Tell me one reason to have one of those, with a straight face!!

To kill bad guys at long range.

[Levianon17]

Originally Posted by eyecu2

223 was selected to be a preferred round by the military for its ability to do 2 things. Larger capacity of rounds carried and less fatal like a 308 round, less catastrophic injuries supposedly. The only difference between an actual military version and civilian version is the full auto seer / bolt combo. Of course you can still buy one if you don't mind paying the tax on it, damn, you can even buy a custom silencer for any AR platform rifle. My friend has one that drops the sound to a subsonic 22 cal bullet or slightly lower.

ARs are a favorite with some hunters but realistically, do you need a 30 round clip or 50 or 100 round drum??

How shitty a shot do you have to be. California and some states have outlawed larger mags than 10 rounds, but you can get around that.

Anyone who doesn't think that that 0.223 or 5.56 round isn't a military round it's fooling themselves. Hell a 308 is an huge round in AR 10. But lugging that around isn't nearly as convenient as the smaller AR 15 style.

I own both styles and honestly am not a huge fan of either. Lots of customizeable features, but my precision Ruger is way more fun for shooting long range. And it's a bolt action. I think semi auto guns should require a class, a full background check, including mental history and then ongoing yearly license. Keep track of who's got a gun that is only a step away from being a military gun.

Nobody needs shit like a .50 BMG or any of itd cousins.

Tell me one reason to have one of those, with a straight face!!

The Civilian AR-15 is semi Auto the Military version is capable of Auto Three Shot Bursts. The 223/5.56 are not that big of a deal. So what if the Military uses that round, so what. The following clip is an average dumbass with an AR-15 as he attempts to have a shootout with police. Any Firearm is only as good as the shooter.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4uAT12deGs

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by texassapper

interesting to you, but meaningless. This case will go to SCOTUS and get overturned.

Actually 9 states have bans in affect for the AR-15, many for decades. SCOTUS has for the most part given states the freedom to ban certain types of weapons as they see fit.

https://advocatechannel.com/ar-15s-b...20in%20January.

[Salty Again]

Originally Posted by texassapper

To kill bad guys at long range.

... I'll even go a step further.
Because the police and military have them.

#### Salty

[texassapper]

shit... even a rock can be a weapon of war... See Intifada 1 & 2.

[ICU 812]

Originally Posted by Levianon17

Tanks, Rocket Launchers, Bazookas, 50 Cal Sniper Rifle, Fully Auto Rifles, ect. Certainly not a Semi Auto Pistol or a Semi Auto AR-15 Rifle that shoots .223 Ammo which is basically a 22cal. a high charge center fire round. If they ban one type of Civilian weapon they'll continue on with other weapons until American Civilians have nothing.

Thanks for that. And now off into the high grass . . .

Items such as the Bazooka (and others) are regulated as "Destructive Devices" by the BATFE. A .50 caliber "sniper rifle" may be bought by anyone (with enough money!) and is regulated as just another rifle. A true machine gun is regulated in much the same way as a destructive device and many civilians legally own them.

[Levianon17]

Originally Posted by ICU 812

Thanks for that. And now off into the high grass . . .

Items such as the Bazooka (and others) are regulated as "Destructive Devices" by the BATFE. A .50 caliber "sniper rifle" may be bought by anyone (with enough money!) and is regulated as just another rifle. A true machine gun is regulated in much the same way as a destructive device and many civilians legally own them.

Are you trying to fuck with me? Everything I mentioned is a weapon typically used in War.

[ICU 812]

Fucking with you? No, That is what the law and regulations provide for at this time.

Ok then, lets look at a feew other things:

The current service pistol is essentially and off-the-shelf Sig-Sauer model P320 that was widely available on the civilian market before adoption nu the US Army.

During the Viet Nam War, the US Army and Marines adopted sniper rifles that were essentially off-the shelf hunting rifles; the Winchester Model 70 and the Remmington model 700. These rifles were used for decades by our snipers in hutting calibers such as .308 Winchester and .300 Remmington Magnum.

During WW-I, the Marines used "trench guns" that were Winchester model 1897 shotguns; essentially off-the-shelf sporting shotguns that had a bolted on fixture that combined a hand guard and bayonetr lug.

The "Weapons of War" thing can become a chicken-and-egg thing.

[Levianon17]

Originally Posted by ICU 812

Fucking with you? No, That is what the law and regulations provide for at this time.

Ok then, lets look at a feew other things:

The current service pistol is essentially and off-the-shelf Sig-Sauer model P320 that was widely available on the civilian market before adoption nu the US Army.

During the Viet Nam War, the US Army and Marines adopted sniper rifles that were essentially off-the shelf hunting rifles; the Winchester Model 70 and the Remmington model 700. These rifles were used for decades by our snipers in hutting calibers such as .308 Winchester and .300 Remmington Magnum.

During WW-I, the Marines used "trench guns" that were Winchester model 1897 shotguns; essentially off-the-shelf sporting shotguns that had a bolted on fixture that combined a hand guard and bayonetr lug.

The "Weapons of War" thing can become a chicken-and-egg thing.

It's all semantics. The idea of Banning a particular type of weapon is nothing but a political tool. Government might be able to ban the manufacturing and sale of a particular type of Firearm but they can't ban ownership. So if a particular Firearm is manufactured for civilian use and is legally purchased by an individual before a banning of that firearm goes into affect the owner of such firearm has no legal or moral obligation to destroy or turn firearm into any Government authority.