Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [aarondb4] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It's actually pretty difficult to purchase a full auto fire arm today.

I have a buddy that owns one legally and I've shot it. It's a Krinkov AK74. After shooting it I know you couldn't hit the broad side of a barn with anything after the 2nd bullet. This to me is a novelty to own from a practical point of view.

After shooting it I did some research and about 5 years ago this same rifle could be purchased for roughly $19,000 if you could go through all the paperwork and transfer. Way too far out of my price range but for some people I guess not. The one for sale was pre-ban so it has been in the US for many years and who knows if it's changed hands.

People say it's easy to buy one which is not exactly correct. Getting the tax stamp requires you to go through an extensive background check beyond a standard fire arm purchase including finger printing and what can be months of waiting. The other factor that most don't think of is the seller of this weapon has to file paperwork as well and transfer it through a Federal Fire Arms License holder. Lots of trace ability on these.

So it can be done but there is a lot of hoops to jump through in order to purchase one legally.

To modify one is already against the law and the chance of getting caught is high unless you own the equipment to do it. I'm not aware of any gun smith that would do this under the table although I'm sure they exist. Any machinist wouldn't touch this either as it would raise a lot of questions. Not to say it can't be done but not everyone can do it either.

I'm sure we will find this guy had deep mental health issues. I don't have a solution for that but critical thinking drives to the root cause of the issue and I don't believe the fire arm chosen addresses the root cause.

Just my 2 cents and this is truly a sad day.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [aarondb4] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
aarondb4 wrote:

Yep, I had heard of the bump fire stock before, but not the crank trigger until this morning. After watching some vids on it, the vids from Vegas definitely sound like a crank trigger. The rate of fire is not consistent or fast enough to be a full auto weapon.

I disagree. Listen to the rate of fire from Vegas:





Now listen to the rate of fire on a SAW:



If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [GreenPlease] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
GreenPlease wrote:

It's rare. Spend any time around "gun enthusiasts" if that's how you want to term them and you'd quickly realize nobody would ever fathom the conversion.

I grew up around gun enthusiasts. My dad was an amateur gunsmith and I was his primarily hand-loader. I manufactured more rounds than some small countries. :)

My father being dead, the statute of limitations is up, right? I remember talking with his buddies about selling most of his stuff after he died, and was told, "Don't try to sell it. Destroy it." If you get my drift.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [j p o] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I disagree with anyone that says Class III firearms or fully automatic firearms are hard to obtain for the average citizen. Not sure if it is still there but there was a shop next to the gun club in Scottsdale that specialized in selling these out of a strip mall. If I wanted one it would just be a matter of the money, time, and paperwork. Since they have to be manufactured before 1986, there are no new ones being made, so many people buy them as investments....there are better places to put investment money.

There is a tiny town out in the desert half-way between Phoenix and Vegas called Wikieup where they hold the annual Big Sandy Machine Gun Shoot. Check out some youtube videos or the home page if you want to see the type of weapons (and people) that show up for this type of thing.

http://mgshooters.com/

There are, however, very few cases of a legally owned NFA-registered Class III rifle used for a crime....like maybe two.

Anyway, reports are the Vegas shooter used a modified weapon. Assuming an AR-15 or AK-47 type weapon...after a couple hundred rounds he would have very little accuracy due to barrel heating...not that AK's are accurate to begin with.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [JSA] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JSA wrote:
aarondb4 wrote:


Yep, I had heard of the bump fire stock before, but not the crank trigger until this morning. After watching some vids on it, the vids from Vegas definitely sound like a crank trigger. The rate of fire is not consistent or fast enough to be a full auto weapon.


I disagree. Listen to the rate of fire from Vegas:





Now listen to the rate of fire on a SAW:


Close, although even in that video right at the beginning the rate of fire seems to go up then down just a tad before it settles on a consistent rate.

Here is the video I mentioned, clearly not a full auto rate of fire. Of course, with 8+ guns in the room it is possible he had a full auto as well as a modified semi of some sort.

https://twitter.com/...s/914735456943607808
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [aarondb4] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Interesting. You are right, that is an inconsistent rate of fire that may suggest a crank fire or bump fire.

Of course it is hard to tell with cell phone video from different angles. However, like you said, he had 10 guns, so there could be multiple variants.

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [JSA] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JSA wrote:
Interesting. You are right, that is an inconsistent rate of fire that may suggest a crank fire or bump fire.
This. The variation in cyclic rate makes it pretty clear that it wasn't a "real" automatic weapon. Likely an illegal mod like several here have suggested.

Whole thing is tragic.

Books @ Amazon
"If only he had used his genius for niceness, instead of Evil." M. Smart
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [big kahuna] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
big kahuna wrote:
dave_w wrote:
Wanted to do a gun thread distinct of the other. In talking with co-workers, I was surprised at how many agreed with me that a full auto ban is reasonable. Not at all looking to withdraw carry rights or anything else, just don't see enough "need" for the avg citizen to own a fully auto piece for fun, vs the carnage that can ensue if that weapon gets used in anger.


Fully automatic rifles and handguns have been illegal in the United States for decades. You have to go through an inordinate amount of investigation and paperwork to get a federal firearms license to possess such weapons, though there are some folks who have been grandfathered into the system prior to its implementation.

This shooter in Las Vegas is old enough to have benefited from that, of course, but reports are sketchy as to whether he had an ability to acquire fully automatic weapons on his own. There is of course a black market for such weapons, and perhaps he availed himself of that route?

Also, it is possible to modify semi automatic rifles so that they can fire fully automatic, but it's neither as easy as television makes it nor can you just go out and do it without attracting no small amount of attention.

Depends on your definition of easy. If you have rudimentary gunsmithing skills, depending on the weapon, it's not that difficult. Maybe a seven on a scale of one to ten for an AR type weapon if you can source the sear for the trigger group. If you have to make the sear yourself the difficulty scale goes way up. A semi-auto sear is easy enough. A full-auto sear, if not made correctly (which is tough), will likely fail in short order.

IMO, it's more likely this was a black market purchase. Even that's tough to comprehend though given that the ATF sets up honey-pot stings for full auto weapons all the time.

Maybe we'll find out this guy had some sort of drug cartel connection.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [GreenPlease] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
not that difficult. Maybe a seven on a scale of one to ten for an AR type weapon if you can source the sear for the trigger group.

Not sure how you consider a 7 on a scale of 10 not that difficult, particularly when that's only possible after acquiring a full auto sear, which itself would be incredibly difficult.

All speculation, but the easiest way to go about something like this would be to buy one of those crank fire triggers or something similar. There aren't that many people with even rudimentary gunsmithing skills, even among shooting enthusiasts.









"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [trail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
trail wrote:
GreenPlease wrote:


It's rare. Spend any time around "gun enthusiasts" if that's how you want to term them and you'd quickly realize nobody would ever fathom the conversion.


I grew up around gun enthusiasts. My dad was an amateur gunsmith and I was his primarily hand-loader. I manufactured more rounds than some small countries. :)

My father being dead, the statute of limitations is up, right? I remember talking with his buddies about selling most of his stuff after he died, and was told, "Don't try to sell it. Destroy it." If you get my drift.

An improperly manufactured full auto sear will fail in short order.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [vitus979] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
vitus979 wrote:
not that difficult. Maybe a seven on a scale of one to ten for an AR type weapon if you can source the sear for the trigger group.

Not sure how you consider a 7 on a scale of 10 not that difficult, particularly when that's only possible after acquiring a full auto sear, which itself would be incredibly difficult.

All speculation, but the easiest way to go about something like this would be to buy one of those crank fire triggers or something similar. There aren't that many people with even rudimentary gunsmithing skills, even among shooting enthusiasts.

That's true. IMO, it's more likely this was a black market purchase.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [RangerGress] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
The variation in cyclic rate makes it pretty clear that it wasn't a "real" automatic weapon.

I'll defer to the experts, although I will say that the acoustics associated with shooting from a hotel room in that hotel with the angled shape between the wings, and taking audio all the way down at the concert area with a cell phone and who knows what other sound equipment still going, might make it difficult to rely on the sound as a certain indicator.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Only time a real automatic weapon sounds like that is when it's so dirty it's having a hard time operating.

BTW, in reference to the post on the first page, and it's not a big deal, but the M60 does not fire the same round as a AK47. Same diameter bullet, but the AK round is lighter and slower. It's like comparing a 357 Magnum to a .38.

There's been several comments in this thread that an M16/14 is pretty uncontrollable in full auto. +1 from me. I joined up in '82 and the Marines still had the M16A1. It would happily do full-auto if you flicked the selector switch all the way. Maybe with enough practice folks can be effective with that sort of thing, but I couldn't have hit a barn at 10 paces. The recoil knocked the weapon all over the place.

Books @ Amazon
"If only he had used his genius for niceness, instead of Evil." M. Smart
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The acoustics do make it tough to tell but I'm inclined to say it's a crank trigger. There's irregularity at the beginning of each string of fire and the cyclic rate is quite low for an automatic weapon.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [GreenPlease] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
GreenPlease wrote:
The acoustics do make it tough to tell but I'm inclined to say it's a crank trigger. There's irregularity at the beginning of each string of fire and the cyclic rate is quite low for an automatic weapon.

I agree. Twitter video in post 55 is why I feel that way
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [ironmayb] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ironmayb wrote:
GreenPlease wrote:
The acoustics do make it tough to tell but I'm inclined to say it's a crank trigger. There's irregularity at the beginning of each string of fire and the cyclic rate is quite low for an automatic weapon.


I agree. Twitter video in post 55 is why I feel that way

It's impossible to count, but that sounded like way more than 30 shots (which is standard magazine size for those who don't know).

I miss YaHey
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [justgeorge] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
justgeorge wrote:
ironmayb wrote:
GreenPlease wrote:
The acoustics do make it tough to tell but I'm inclined to say it's a crank trigger. There's irregularity at the beginning of each string of fire and the cyclic rate is quite low for an automatic weapon.


I agree. Twitter video in post 55 is why I feel that way


It's impossible to count, but that sounded like way more than 30 shots (which is standard magazine size for those who don't know).

Easily could have had a 40, 45, 60, or 100 round mag. This is why having 10 guns was ridiculous. You can only fire 1 at a time, can have oversized mags, and can reload a mag quite quickly and easily.

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [RangerGress] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
BTW, in reference to the post on the first page, and it's not a big deal, but the M60 does not fire the same round as a AK47. Same diameter bullet, but the AK round is lighter and slower. It's like comparing a 357 Magnum to a .38.

Thanks. I remember them both being 7.62, but it's been a long time since I had any reason to fire an M60.

Quote:
There's been several comments in this thread that an M16/14 is pretty uncontrollable in full auto. +1 from me. I joined up in '82 and the Marines still had the M16A1. It would happily do full-auto if you flicked the selector switch all the way. Maybe with enough practice folks can be effective with that sort of thing, but I couldn't have hit a barn at 10 paces. The recoil knocked the weapon all over the place.

Yep. Very light weapon compared to the kick. That's why I suggested he might have used a bipod or something like that to steady whatever weapon he did use.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [justgeorge] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
justgeorge wrote:
ironmayb wrote:
GreenPlease wrote:
The acoustics do make it tough to tell but I'm inclined to say it's a crank trigger. There's irregularity at the beginning of each string of fire and the cyclic rate is quite low for an automatic weapon.


I agree. Twitter video in post 55 is why I feel that way


It's impossible to count, but that sounded like way more than 30 shots (which is standard magazine size for those who don't know).

I would say 40-50 and I don't know if they started before the video did.

I know someone who possesses a fair number of firearms including ones like I believe this one is (or pretty close to it). I don't think standard magazines are SOP for those who would chose to own this type of firearm. I could be wrong.

The firearms in my life are for specific purposes (sporting clays and protection). As such I don't see the need or attraction of these firearms. But in my limited experience those that do have that interest/attraction are not interested in "standard" anything as it relates to their firearms.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [ironmayb] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ironmayb wrote:
justgeorge wrote:
ironmayb wrote:
GreenPlease wrote:
The acoustics do make it tough to tell but I'm inclined to say it's a crank trigger. There's irregularity at the beginning of each string of fire and the cyclic rate is quite low for an automatic weapon.


I agree. Twitter video in post 55 is why I feel that way


It's impossible to count, but that sounded like way more than 30 shots (which is standard magazine size for those who don't know).


I would say 40-50 and I don't know if they started before the video did.

I know someone who possesses a fair number of firearms including ones like I believe this one is (or pretty close to it). I don't think standard magazines are SOP for those who would chose to own this type of firearm. I could be wrong.

The firearms in my life are for specific purposes (sporting clays and protection). As such I don't see the need or attraction of these firearms. But in my limited experience those that do have that interest/attraction are not interested in "standard" anything as it relates to their firearms.

That is a pretty broad brush you have out there. I know lots of people who own AR's or AK's, none of them have more than the standard 30 round mag. The drum stuff is known for being unreliable, pointless, and expensive to shoot, so most people avoid them.

Not all AR owners are wearing camo and prepping for the government showdown.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [aarondb4] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
aarondb4 wrote:
ironmayb wrote:
justgeorge wrote:
ironmayb wrote:
GreenPlease wrote:
The acoustics do make it tough to tell but I'm inclined to say it's a crank trigger. There's irregularity at the beginning of each string of fire and the cyclic rate is quite low for an automatic weapon.


I agree. Twitter video in post 55 is why I feel that way


It's impossible to count, but that sounded like way more than 30 shots (which is standard magazine size for those who don't know).


I would say 40-50 and I don't know if they started before the video did.

I know someone who possesses a fair number of firearms including ones like I believe this one is (or pretty close to it). I don't think standard magazines are SOP for those who would chose to own this type of firearm. I could be wrong.

The firearms in my life are for specific purposes (sporting clays and protection). As such I don't see the need or attraction of these firearms. But in my limited experience those that do have that interest/attraction are not interested in "standard" anything as it relates to their firearms.


That is a pretty broad brush you have out there. I know lots of people who own AR's or AK's, none of them have more than the standard 30 round mag. The drum stuff is known for being unreliable, pointless, and expensive to shoot, so most people avoid them.

Not all AR owners are wearing camo and prepping for the government showdown.

you did read the part that said "i could be wrong" and the part that said "in my limited experience" right?
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
slowguy wrote:
Quote:
BTW, in reference to the post on the first page, and it's not a big deal, but the M60 does not fire the same round as a AK47. Same diameter bullet, but the AK round is lighter and slower. It's like comparing a 357 Magnum to a .38.


Thanks. I remember them both being 7.62, but it's been a long time since I had any reason to fire an M60.

Quote:
There's been several comments in this thread that an M16/14 is pretty uncontrollable in full auto. +1 from me. I joined up in '82 and the Marines still had the M16A1. It would happily do full-auto if you flicked the selector switch all the way. Maybe with enough practice folks can be effective with that sort of thing, but I couldn't have hit a barn at 10 paces. The recoil knocked the weapon all over the place.


Yep. Very light weapon compared to the kick. That's why I suggested he might have used a bipod or something like that to steady whatever weapon he did use.


NYT says 19 weapons, and "two rifles with scopes were mounted on tripods and positioned in front of the two windows in the hotel room." maybe they don't know the difference between bipods and tripods, but this confirms what you're suspecting.

EDIT: correction: 19 rifles in the hotel room.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Last edited by: Slowman: Oct 2, 17 13:43
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Very strange.

This was clearly pre-meditated but why so many guns? Surely he tested whatever device he used (likely a crank trigger) and the rifles he chose to mount on tripods. A couple of backups would be understandable but after maybe four rifles or so he was increasing the chances he would draw suspicion (it's not like he could fit them all in a couple of bags). I suppose he could have moved the cache into the hotel piecemeal from his car.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [GreenPlease] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
I suppose he could have moved the cache into the hotel piecemeal from his car.

Extremely likely, he was checked in for several days.
Quote Reply
Re: Full-Auto weapons, Time to Ban? [GreenPlease] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
GreenPlease wrote:
Very strange.

This was clearly pre-meditated but why so many guns? Surely he tested whatever device he used (likely a crank trigger) and the rifles he chose to mount on tripods. A couple of backups would be understandable but after maybe four rifles or so he was increasing the chances he would draw suspicion (it's not like he could fit them all in a couple of bags). I suppose he could have moved the cache into the hotel piecemeal from his car.

Yeah, very weird. The only thing I can think of is that perhaps he was expecting others to follow and grab a weapon? Or maybe there was somebody else in the room reloading for a while and then booked before the cops got there? Other wise it makes no sense.

___________________________________________________
Taco cat spelled backwards is....taco cat.
Quote Reply

Prev Next