Yep

---

Having set a couple, I'll take the claymore any day. They work rain, snow or shine for over runs. har...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3mHNHIYbp4
Yep.

At war I think I need 100 rounds or more if possible to defend myself with an automatic rifle:)
No time for reload.

It only takes a few seconds to change magazines.
Being in what is termed a Support Arm, we had to classify on the range. When all soldiers had completed classification, an open shoot was arranged. This was to "burn off" excess ammo due to military budgets having to be maintained.

Every year a competition was set up. Every soldier if wanted to try for the record had to pay to enter. The winner took the kitty, if a tie, a shoot off was done.Those that did were given 25 magazines fully loaded. That' s 500 rounds. The competition had just one rule, the moment any soldier changed magazine & it had any rounds remaining, had to stop firing, then by the number of magazines empty & what rounds remained in the magazine, the total number of rounds fired were totalled.

My personal best was 357 - I miscounted that last mag. Not Once had I had to re-cock the weapon. The weapon used was an SLR. So was it a semi automatic or automatic weapon used?

The weapon used was an SLR. So was it a semi automatic or automatic weapon used?

Hmm... You didn't mention how long time it took to fire the 357 rounds.
Semi automatic has a fire rate less then 2 rounds/second.
Full automatic has a fire rate more then 11 rounds/second.
A SLR can have a 30 round magazine which means that in full auto you can empty it in less then 3 seconds.

Anyway. These types of weapons, semi or full, are not for self-defense by civilians.

The weapon used was an SLR. So was it a semi automatic or automatic weapon used?

Hmm... You didn't mention how long time it took to fire the 357 rounds.
Semi automatic has a fire rate less then 2 rounds/second.
Full automatic has a fire rate more then 11 rounds/second.
A SLR can have a 30 round magazine which means that in full auto you can empty it in less then 3 seconds.

Anyway. These types of weapons, semi or full, are not for self-defense by civilians.

The SLR was semi-automatic with a 20 round magazine.

Its origins are from an FN automatic, in fact the indent for fully auto was still there but blocked by an internal stud to limit the selector/safety switch movement.

I should mention that is was too f___ing long, not realised fully by the powers that be until 1982 in the Falklands.

The SLR was semi-automatic with a 20 round magazine.
Its origins are from an FN automatic, in fact the indent for fully auto was still there but blocked by an internal stud to limit the selector/safety switch movement.

FN FNC automatic from Belgium:)
Swedish AK 5 also originates from that.
This is how they look here now.

I don't think there are any exclusive semi-automatic versions though.
However AR-15 is and also used here in Sweden legally...
Ah, memories:)

'clip' confiscation

many with clips containing 7-16 rounds

{giggle}

---

IE: What is the difference between a person possessing semiautomatic pistols, many with clips containing 7-16 rounds in their homes for self-defense, when compared with a semiautomatic rifle. Excepting that a rife is usually more effective, because of its ammunition, in protecting the life of its owner and loved ones.

But semi automatic pistols are designed for self-defense.
Even in the army and the police force.

'clip' confiscation

many with clips containing 7-16 rounds

{giggle}

Think a picture might be more instuctive,

Since over 99% of semiautomatic rifle owners will not use their guns to murder, rape, mutilate, etc. That you, I and others disagree, is just that, a personal disagreement.

We should allow personal nukes then... I'm sure the vast majority of them will be used defensively by law-abiding citizens.
(Yes, I know I'm exaggerating but there's a point to it.)

As Gary has pointed out, over 99% of legal fully-automatic rifle owners (who are properly vetted) have not used theirs to "murder, rape, mutilate" either. So your argument can be used to claim they they should be allowed without restriction as well. Should they?

---

As Gary has pointed out, over 99% of legal fully-automatic rifle owners (who are properly vetted) have not used theirs to "murder, rape, mutilate" either. So your argument can be used to claim they they should be allowed without restriction as well. Should they?

(no fluff this time)

---

moomin... Both rifles and pistols are used for self defense. Just an individuals choice in the USA what they use both for.

True. But there is big difference between the US and the rest of the civilized world.
We still wonder why so many shootings happen in the US.
Paraphrasing sort of:)
We choose to do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one we intend to win, and the others, too

I meant I am not putting any "fluff" in so that you can evade the question, so I ask again:

Do you support restrictions on fully-automatic firearms or not?

---

What is the life threatening difference between a Clip and a Magazine?

You claim to have been in several career's, all of which require the use of correct terminology. In at least one of those careers it would have been drilled into you so deeply that it would become second nature to always do it. And you would never have referred to a magazine as a clip or vice versa.

Do you support restrictions on fully-automatic firearms or not?

Mr. Kevvy... I answered that and you know that.

If I did, I would not have asked. Perhaps I missed it. So I am asking again.

---

I wonder what type of weapon Cecilia Malmström EU Commissioner with responsibility for trade issues will choose in the upcoming trade war with the US for self-defense.

A M3 Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle propably.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8HOeZpcBYQ
Overkill? Yes:)

You know, you could have just answered it a hundred times by now. And, no, I don't know. And I don't appreciate being told what I do or do not. I read thousands of posts here weekly, so don't take it personally if I don't remember every nuance.

So again, I ask: Do you support restrictions on fully-automatic firearms or not?

---

That is the problem with any 'response' to Trump.

We know. That is the problem:)

What is the life threatening difference between a Clip and a Magazine?

You claim to have been in several career's, all of which require the use of correct terminology. In at least one of those careers it would have been drilled into you so deeply that it would become second nature to always do it. And you would never have referred to a magazine as a clip or vice versa.

+∞

---

Janne is technically correct. It was not widely known or in widespread use, but an SLR could take a Bren L4 LMG 30 round magazine. The SLR was also 331mm longer & weighed 1.4 lbs more that a Lee Enfield .303 rifle which the SLR replaced.

Back in the late 90's had a ex Rhodesian Scout work with us as an agency driver. Spent a week out with him & he found the SLR when used & maintained by a well disciplined force was a deadly accurate & battle proven weapon. What is widely known is a 7.62 from an SLR had a more deadly punch than a 7.62 from an AK47.

Personally, I liked the SLR :-)