Firearms XII; Because Merica - General

[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;48748553]Well to be frank it does fit the actual legal definitions of what those items are, unlike the sig brace where they just kind of made it up as they went a long. The Barrel length isn't long enough for it to be considered a Rifle under the legal definition, and as a pistol since it's smooth bore that's automatic grounds for an AOW. Bare in mind when these laws were written there was no such thing as soda cans, and nobody wants to touch NFA stuff with a 10 foot pole because of the possible legal ramifications involved with it.[/QUOTE] Oh, I understand [i]how[/i], it's the why that's the problem; the NFA is arbitrary and capricious. In this past year, the ATF has been giving us the finger harder than they have in the past 7 years other than Gunwalker; banning 7n6, trying to ban M855, the sig brace, re-designating 40mm chalk rounds as explosives, this can cannon crap. Not to mention the sanctions against Kalashnikov Concern and trying to make discussion of firearms subject to ITAR (not by the ATF but by the same administration). It's been made up as they went along from the start! Why does 16" constitute the legal length for a rifle and 18" for a shotgun?

[QUOTE=MAC21500;48748787]Oh, I understand [i]how[/i], it's the why that's the problem; the NFA is arbitrary and capricious. In this past year, the ATF has been giving us the finger harder than they have in the past 7 years other than Gunwalker; banning 7n6, trying to ban M855, the sig brace, re-designating 40mm chalk rounds as explosives, this can cannon crap. Not to mention the sanctions against Kalashnikov Concern and trying to make discussion of firearms subject to ITAR (not by the ATF but by the same administration). It's been made up as they went along from the start! Why does 16" constitute the legal length for a rifle and 18" for a shotgun?[/QUOTE] Those definitions were made at a time where crime was rampant thanks to prohibition. It originally was going to state 18" for both, and handguns were also on the chopping block to make you pay the tax stamp. While I do believe machine guns should be regulated as they are, the rest was a band-aid solution for a greater problem. That was prohibition, and once that was repealed crime dropped but the laws weren't adjusted. Honestly I feel like everything under NFA save machine guns do stand a fair chance of being deregulated. We just need to wait and see how the elections go. I just wish they'd open the registry for MG's again.

[QUOTE=MAC21500;48747529]Oh, by the way, NO FUN ALLOWED: [url]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2015/09/22/can-cannon-b-a-t-f-e-determination-letter/[/url] [url]http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2015/09/foghorn/breaking-atf-declares-soda-can-launcher-an-aow-all-owners-now-possibly-felons/[/url] I didn't want one before, but I do now... I wish I had money to buy silly things like the arm brace or can cannon before they banned them... Next up, bump fire stocks...[/QUOTE] I expected them to go DD. I didn't realize they were short barreled. wouldn't it be an SBS being smoothbore? then just give it some rifling and make it 16 inches.

I took my girl friend shooting today. It was fun. I got to show off and stuff and she liked it. She could only really get into the .22's I had. She fired a shot of 5.56, 30 Carbine and a 380 Auto but only one shot of each. She didn't like it. It was cool.

Baby steps. Mine loves shooting ARs, but having not shot competition in a few years now I haven't had the gumption to build one. :/

[QUOTE=butre;48749273]I expected them to go DD. I didn't realize they were short barreled. wouldn't it be an SBS being smoothbore? then just give it some rifling and make it 16 inches.[/QUOTE] Actually, they may be able to skirt this by drilling a hole in it: "Specifically, the first machined hole in the 'barrel' is 1.05" from the chamber, and this length without holes constitutes a barrel and makes the can cannon a rifle or AOW depending on what flavor of lower it is attached to. What they're doing, apparently, is drilling a small hole in their diffusor tube right at the end of the chamber, so that it can not be classified as a smoothbore barrel at all. That should take care of it, along with making the set screw at the end of the cup non-removable."

or you could set it on the ground and muzzleload it, then its a cannon and not regulated at all. Seriously, if my uncle can legally get drunk and shoot off his 2" cannon, blowing out windows and eardrums with the shockwave, then I should be able to screw a tube with holes in it onto my gun to make it not terribly annoying. Yay for consistent federal laws!

[QUOTE=MAC21500;48749460]Actually, they may be able to skirt this by drilling a hole in it: "Specifically, the first machined hole in the 'barrel' is 1.05" from the chamber, and this length without holes constitutes a barrel and makes the can cannon a rifle or AOW depending on what flavor of lower it is attached to. What they're doing, apparently, is drilling a small hole in their diffusor tube right at the end of the chamber, so that it can not be classified as a smoothbore barrel at all. That should take care of it, along with making the set screw at the end of the cup non-removable."[/QUOTE] That's not what does it. The closes thing that it would fall under is a smooth bore rifle, or something of that nature. The legal definition of a shotgun says smooth or rifled bore designed to use a "shotgun" shell, which is not defined but in general can be assumed to be a plastic shell with a smaller brass base with uniform diameter. Since a .223/5.56 blank is not a shotgun shell, it falls under that smooth bore rifle category thingy.

Couldnt those nailguns that use .22lr blanks be considered AOWs then?

We need a new specification of AR-15 lower receivers specifically for items like the can cannon, from the way they're talking. Maybe one with a magazine well that is only long enough to chamber blanks? Of course, this would require a new magazine, too. [editline]24 Sep 2015[/editline] I don't even know the tolerances between 5.56 cartridges and 5.56 blanks.

[QUOTE=Icy Fire;48751526]We need a new specification of AR-15 lower receivers specifically for items like the can cannon, from the way they're talking. Maybe one with a magazine well that is only long enough to chamber blanks? Of course, this would require a new magazine, too. [editline]24 Sep 2015[/editline] I don't even know the tolerances between 5.56 cartridges and 5.56 blanks.[/QUOTE] It would be about a 1/4" shorter than normal rounds.

[QUOTE=Lone_Star94;48752131]It would be about a 1/4" shorter than normal rounds.[/QUOTE] and unreliable as fuck seriously, I had 3 out of 5 of those damn things jam up my weapon of course, this was right after crawling across 300 meters of wet sand, so that might have had something to do with it

Blanks with crimped necks won't expand the crimp so much as to mar the barrel lining or bore, right? I've only fired 22LR blanks, like the kind used in construction/carpentry. Those alway extracted fine, but .223, etc? [editline]24th September 2015[/editline] In a couple weeks I'm supposed to go with my dad and grandfather-in-law to the range and fire his old Colt 32ACP. Haven't seen it yet, but I'm gonna wager a guess and say its a model 1903, but I won't know until I see it in person. I hope I can bring my savage to the range, I haven't put anything but Hoppe's through it in almost 5 years.

The bolt arrived for my Lee Enfield. It dropped right in and feels fine, so I'm gonna go ahead and shoot it this weekend. Exciting... and worrying. [editline]24th September 2015[/editline] [t]http://i.imgur.com/mjcDnn6.jpg[/t] [t]http://i.imgur.com/3rGUrgJ.jpg[/t] [t]http://i.imgur.com/9YmUbUz.jpg[/t]

That breech looks incredibly dirty.

[QUOTE=Icy Fire;48751526]We need a new specification of AR-15 lower receivers specifically for items like the can cannon, from the way they're talking. Maybe one with a magazine well that is only long enough to chamber blanks? Of course, this would require a new magazine, too. [editline]24 Sep 2015[/editline] I don't even know the tolerances between 5.56 cartridges and 5.56 blanks.[/QUOTE] Edited: The whole point was to make it interchangeable between AR lowers, not to mention that they would probably regulate it anyway, since you could still fire live ammo through it. As far as blanks go, they make blank guns out of real guns for movies all the time and there is actually a Sons of Guns episode about them doing that. The only "barrel" in the upper is the bit that protrudes into to can tube, and I don't believe that it's rifled: [img]https://dsgarms.com/content/images/thumbs/0017988_x-products-can-cannon.png[/img]

[QUOTE=Icy Fire;48754851]That breech looks incredibly dirty.[/QUOTE] It's surface rust, I'll be scrubbing it out. It scrubs away without pitting but the finish is ruined. Right now the CLP is soaking in to make it easier.

[QUOTE=Psychokitten;48752808]and unreliable as fuck seriously, I had 3 out of 5 of those damn things jam up my weapon of course, this was right after crawling across 300 meters of wet sand, so that might have had something to do with it[/QUOTE] Surprisingly, I fired hundreds of those through my M249 in basic without issue (unless the BFA loosened up); I figured they would jam the M249 or the M249 would jam just because it sucks.

[QUOTE=Birdman101;48751429]Couldnt those nailguns that use .22lr blanks be considered AOWs then?[/QUOTE] they would be if they were serialed

[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;48750743]That's not what does it. The closes thing that it would fall under is a smooth bore rifle, or something of that nature. The legal definition of a shotgun says smooth or rifled bore designed to use a "shotgun" shell, which is not defined but in general can be assumed to be a plastic shell with a smaller brass base with uniform diameter. Since a .223/5.56 blank is not a shotgun shell, it falls under that smooth bore rifle category thingy.[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2015/09/robert-farago/theres-a-major-flaw-in-the-legal-reasoning-behind-the-atfs-recent-can-cannon-letter-and-i-doubt-that-it-was-accidental/[/url]

What do you guys think about these? Also was looking at the 380's. [url]http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php/products_id/59362/Bersa+6+%2B+1+Round+40+S%26W+Concealed+Carry+w2+MagsMatte+Fini[/url]

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;48754857]It's surface rust, I'll be scrubbing it out. It scrubs away without pitting but the finish is ruined. Right now the CLP is soaking in to make it easier.[/QUOTE] soak it in vinegar. it'll get rid of the rust and leave a black oxide coating

better than what he's got.

Yeah this rifle will never be pretty again. I'll try vinegar if CLP can't get the job done and might just have it reblued, even if it was pristine in its current form it will never be worth more than $150 since it's a sporter. I'm saving it for sentimental reasons as it's the first gun I ever bought and what got me into guns, yet I've never actually shot it.

[QUOTE=agentfazexx;48754957]What do you guys think about these? Also was looking at the 380's. [url]http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php/products_id/59362/Bersa+6+%2B+1+Round+40+S%26W+Concealed+Carry+w2+MagsMatte+Fini[/url][/QUOTE] I wouldn't get a small gun chambered for .40, that will be very snappy. I haven't seen a review on that particular pistol yet though. If you're going single stack, get a 9mm. This video is full of suggestions for other 9mm and .380 pistols: [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbS0jM3VG0o[/media]

[QUOTE=MAC21500;48755109]I wouldn't get a small gun chambered for .40, that will be very snappy. I haven't seen a review on that particular pistol yet though. If you're going single stack, get a 9mm. This video is full of suggestions for other 9mm and .380 pistols: [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbS0jM3VG0o[/media][/QUOTE] These have decent weight I've heard. I referenced the 380 since a guy I work with has several. Just curious if anyone else has had experience with this vendor or not.

[QUOTE=PrusseLusken;48755008]...the vinegar will remove bluing[/QUOTE] Enfields weren't blued to begin with, they were painted.

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;48755057]Yeah this rifle will never be pretty again. I'll try vinegar if CLP can't get the job done and might just have it reblued, even if it was pristine in its current form it will never be worth more than $150 since it's a sporter. I'm saving it for sentimental reasons as it's the first gun I ever bought and what got me into guns, yet I've never actually shot it.[/QUOTE] Try a green scotch pad with the oil of your choice. Removes the finish and rust, but doesn't smell like shit.

[QUOTE=butre;48754958]soak it in vinegar. it'll get rid of the rust and [B]leave a black oxide coating[/B][/QUOTE] Wait, so could this be done to black oxide coat firearms?

[QUOTE=purvisdavid1;48756047]Wait, so could this be done to black oxide coat firearms?[/QUOTE] sure could. I do it with knives all the time. it doesn't penetrate very deep and provides no (or minimal at best) wear resistance but it'll keep it from rusting for sure. [editline]25th September 2015[/editline] [img]http://imgkk.com/i/c6og.jpg[/img] the whole thing has to be very controlled to come out even, but uneven patterns can look very nice too