• Liz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Which arguably makes the AR-15 one of the most protected guns, if we’re using the wording of the second amendment as the only justification for firearms rights.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      You can do a lot of damage with medium caliber rifles running internal clips. Such a limit would be more than enough for a militia unless everyone is practicing their tactical magazine changes and fireteam movement drills.

      • Liz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        What? No it wouldn’t? They hand grunts 30 round magazines for a reason. They used to give them 20 round magazines for the same rifle. Minimizing administrative tasks is good for your soldier.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Soldiers are also trained in several different firing modalities that depend on teamwork. Those 30 rounds aren’t there just because “it’s easier”. I would sooner hand a militiaman a bolt action than a 30 round semi/burst capable weapon. They’d be less likely to blow through significant portions of their ammo load just because the wind made a tree creak. And before you say no, remember the cop that unloaded on his own car because of an acorn. We don’t arm units for their best person, we give them the gun that’s good enough for the lowest common denominator. The 2nd amendment doesn’t make everyone a line Infantryman.

          • Liz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            The US military would one million percent prefer the population be trained and familiar on the standard issue rifle than on any other platform. (Arguments of the quality training put aside)

            • Maggoty@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              Then we better start giving everyone burst fire weapons.

              No?

              The military is just fine with its irregulars using something else. We worked alongside locals running AK platforms for 20 years.

              • Liz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                Nobody actually uses burst fire. Does the Spear have burst fire? I haven’t looked too closely because I seriously doubt they’re ever actually going to make it the standard issue rifle.

                • Maggoty@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  We absolutely used burst fire in Iraq. The M7 is also capable of burst or auto depending on what they put in the trigger group.

                  • Liz
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    5 months ago

                    Aight, I’ve been told different from other folks who have deployed.

                    Anyway, this conversation is way off the rails. The point being that, if you consider the original intent of the 2nd amendment to be the only thing protecting a citizen’s access to firearms, it would be much more correct to say the standard issue rifle would be the most protected firearm than any other.