How many guns is too many?

[InfantryNCO]

The number of tools one owns doesn't meant sh*t if one doesn't have the ammo, spare parts, and technical and tactical knowledge to support them.

Take that pretty gun collection on way back at the beginning of the thread, for instance. That guy should have literally millions of rounds in a buttload of calibers to support that arsenal.

Without the rounds, it's nothing more than a museum. Worthless tools.


Now. Does anyone want to seriously answer the OP's question?

I will. Each person in your group should have the following:

2x MBR, same caliber, same model gun, 7.62 for males/ 5.56 for females
1x 12 guage shotgun, semiauto or pump. Model should be standard across the group.
1x .22lr rifle, semiauto, also standard across the group
2x pistols, member choice, same model and caliber, not less than .40 for males and 9mm for females.
1x accurized bolt gun w/ quality scope, same caliber as MBR.

Ammo:

5k per MBR = 10k/member
500 OO buck, 500 #6, 250 slug per 12ga.
10k per .22lr rifle
1k per pistol = 2k/member
500 per bolt gun

Parts/cleaning equip./manuals for each weapon.


Oh, hey. First post. Hi everyone!

 

[DrBart2]

The number of tools one owns doesn't meant sh*t if one doesn't have the ammo, spare parts, and technical and tactical knowledge to support them.

Take that pretty gun collection on way back at the beginning of the thread, for instance. That guy should have literally millions of rounds in a buttload of calibers to support that arsenal.

Without the rounds, it's nothing more than a museum. Worthless tools.


Now. Does anyone want to seriously answer the OP's question?

I will. Each person in your group should have the following:

2x MBR, same caliber, same model gun, 7.62 for males/ 5.56 for females
1x 12 guage shotgun, semiauto or pump. Model should be standard across the group.
1x .22lr rifle, semiauto, also standard across the group
2x pistols, member choice, same model and caliber, not less than .40 for males and 9mm for females.
1x accurized bolt gun w/ quality scope, same caliber as MBR.

Ammo:

5k per MBR = 10k/member
500 OO buck, 500 #6, 250 slug per 12ga.
10k per .22lr rifle
1k per pistol = 2k/member
500 per bolt gun

Parts/cleaning equip./manuals for each weapon.


Oh, hey. First post. Hi everyone!

LOL, your putting waaay too much thought into this!!! Besides, my wife would object to you restricting her to a 9mm. She happens to love to shoot our 1911s.

 

[Texan2]

The number of tools one owns doesn't meant sh*t if one doesn't have the ammo, spare parts, and technical and tactical knowledge to support them.

Take that pretty gun collection on way back at the beginning of the thread, for instance. That guy should have literally millions of rounds in a buttload of calibers to support that arsenal.

Without the rounds, it's nothing more than a museum. Worthless tools.


Now. Does anyone want to seriously answer the OP's question?

I will. Each person in your group should have the following:

2x MBR, same caliber, same model gun, 7.62 for males/ 5.56 for females
1x 12 guage shotgun, semiauto or pump. Model should be standard across the group.
1x .22lr rifle, semiauto, also standard across the group
2x pistols, member choice, same model and caliber, not less than .40 for males and 9mm for females.
1x accurized bolt gun w/ quality scope, same caliber as MBR.

Ammo:

5k per MBR = 10k/member
500 OO buck, 500 #6, 250 slug per 12ga.
10k per .22lr rifle
1k per pistol = 2k/member
500 per bolt gun

Parts/cleaning equip./manuals for each weapon.


Oh, hey. First post. Hi everyone!

I tend to think that you made a good choice as far as how many and what calibers and its great to have that truckload of ammo, although most never will. I believe that you should always have enough ammo to last you 5 years. That will be a different amount for everyone.
As far as how many is too many??? I will never know....no matter how many I have, there will always be one more that I want....

 

[InfantryNCO]

Besides, my wife would object to you restricting her to a 9mm. She happens to love to shoot our 1911s.

The above calibers were minimums. If a female can't handle a 9mm, then... Well, I wouldn't want her with me.

The ammo amts. were also bare minimums. More is better, especially with the newly elected administration.

Expect military caliber ammo to be severely regulated/taxed in '09, if not banned as part of AWB II.

 

[lonewolf23c]

InfantryNCO.

Alright very funny. At least someone actually thought through that question and made some sort of effort to answer it.

Although I like the rest of the posts on here believe you can never have too many guns. I'm just starting my collection (with ammo by the way).

I've been in the Idaho Army National Guard for almost 7 years now, did 18 months in Iraq, and believe me some of the weapons we had over there are a bit overwhelming for some of the younger soldiers. Personally some of those weapons are a bit dated, and could be easily upgraded to newer more useful models. I still have the fun and enjoyment of tearing them down and rebuilding them though.

 

[InfantryNCO]

InfantryNCO.

I've been in the Idaho Army National Guard for almost 7 years now, did 18 months in Iraq,

No need to qualify yourself to me, troop. But since we're playing the "my d*ck is bigger than yours" game, I'm back from my third and final tour from this conflict and will retire after just over 21 in June '09. But hey, thanks for your service.

and believe me some of the weapons we had over there are a bit overwhelming for some of the younger soldiers.

BS. They haven't been properly trained on the weapon system if they're that overwhelmed by what's issued over there. The word "Soldiers" is capitalized, by the way.

Not trying to get in a pissing contest with you here, troop. But I really don't like it when someone is condescending towards me.

 

[kville79]

I concur on the "They haven't been properly trained on the weapon system if they're that overwhelmed by what's issued over there" comment by "InfantryNCO"

With the exception that it's my personal belief that the 5.56mm NATO is a bit dated, but I'm not a ballistics expert, just expressing my personal opinion. Otherwise I have a tendency to agree with "InfantryNCO" on that point and the amount of weapons that would be good for an individual to have (inclusive with ammo).

which of course reminds me I need more ammo.... and possibly some spare parts.

 

[lonewolf23c]

I concur on the "They haven't been properly trained on the weapon system if they're that overwhelmed by what's issued over there" comment by "InfantryNCO"

With the exception that it's my personal belief that the 5.56mm NATO is a bit dated, but I'm not a ballistics expert, just expressing my personal opinion. Otherwise I have a tendency to agree with "InfantryNCO" on that point and the amount of weapons that would be good for an individual to have (inclusive with ammo).

which of course reminds me I need more ammo.... and possibly some spare parts.

After about 300 meters the .223 (5.56mm) round starts to tumble, so it causes a few issues with accuracy. Other than that its not that bad of a round.

I personally enjoy firing the M-16/M-4.

 

[lonewolf23c]

No need to qualify yourself to me, troop. But since we're playing the "my d*ck is bigger than yours" game, I'm back from my third and final tour from this conflict and will retire after just over 21 in June '09. But hey, thanks for your service.



BS. They haven't been properly trained on the weapon system if they're that overwhelmed by what's issued over there. The word "Soldiers" is capitalized, by the way.

Not trying to get in a pissing contest with you here, troop. But I really don't like it when someone is condescending towards me.

Who said I was trying to qualify myself???????? I was just stating where I'm coming from as to the dating of some of these weapon systems. I've been using them long enough to know what works, and what doesn't. And also what other fellow soldier's ideas of some of these weapon systems are.

On the talk about not being properly trained on the weapons. Its very true. I have new soldiers coming right out of basic training that haven't the slightest clue how to disassemble and re-assemble some of the weapons. Here's what I'm being told by new soldiers. "Oh our drill sergeants told us we would learn all of that at our unit" "We are rushed through basic training and they don't really show us much". I believe it. seems the basic training units are getting a little too relaxed in some training tactics. I know how it is I was there myself a few years ago and while being an Abrams Tank crewman we got told a lot that "you will learn that at your unit". That seems to be the new slogan in basic training now.

Wow 21 years, hope you enjoy your retirement. You've been a few more years than me LOL and served your time. Thank you so much for your service. Guess after you retire you'll have plenty of extra time for the range LOL.

 

[DirtyD]

After about 300 meters the .223 (5.56mm) round starts to tumble, so it causes a few issues with accuracy. Other than that its not that bad of a round.

I personally enjoy firing the M-16/M-4.

Not trying to start a debate, but accuracy is not an issue with the 5.56, USMC Rifle Qualification standards shoot out to 500 yards, and I easily put 10 out of 10 center mass at that range with iron sights, the "new" M-16 A4 is accurate on point targets out to 800 meters with an ACOG. The issue at these distances is not accuracy, but penetration....

 

[DrBart2]

Not trying to start a debate, but accuracy is not an issue with the 5.56, USMC Rifle Qualification standards shoot out to 500 yards, and I easily put 10 out of 10 center mass at that range with iron sights, the "new" M-16 A4 is accurate on point targets out to 800 meters with an ACOG. The issue at these distances is not accuracy, but penetration....

Getting off the original subject here, but my recent experience with the .223 has been an eye opener. Last summer my family went to the NRA Whittington Center ( NRA Whittington Center ) and did some silhouette shooting. One of the rifles we shot was a Browning A-bolt in .223. We found that it was very accurate out to the 500 meter metal rams, but did not have enough energy to knock them down. The rams weighed somewhere (I am guessing) between 40 and 50 pounds. At that distance, when the bullet struck it would move or wobble the ram, but never knocked it down. Now the turkey target (weighed 30 to 40 pounds) was knocked right off when hit with the .223. The turkey was 385 meters away.
http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h25/Chaos_l2eaper/IMG_1032.jpg

http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h25/Chaos_l2eaper/IMG_1033.jpg

http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h25/Chaos_l2eaper/IMG_0865-2.jpg

http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h25/Chaos_l2eaper/IMG_0870.jpg

http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h25/Chaos_l2eaper/IMG_0871-1.jpg

 

[eriadoc]

0 / x

 

[lonewolf23c]

Not trying to start a debate, but accuracy is not an issue with the 5.56, USMC Rifle Qualification standards shoot out to 500 yards, and I easily put 10 out of 10 center mass at that range with iron sights, the "new" M-16 A4 is accurate on point targets out to 800 meters with an ACOG. The issue at these distances is not accuracy, but penetration....

What ammo do you guys shoot? They give us that cheap wolf ammo for range targetry. Its never consistant. Course we have the M-4's now so they don't have as long of a range as the M-16's. Personally I like the M-16's better. We don't have ACOG's anymore we are back to iron sights. We had ACOG's for a week while in Iraq, and the morons that never left base complained until they were taken from us and given to the babies that never left the comfort of the base.

See your talking about the M-16, and I was actually (probably my dumb a** forgot to mention I was talking about the M-4). LOL.

I've heard rumors about going to a heavier round but haven't heard anymore on what round and what weapon system yet though. And who knows when that will happen anyhow. LOL.

 

[InfantryNCO]

They give us that cheap wolf ammo for range targetry.

What? That, and the statement that M855 or M193 starts tumbling after 300m is untrue.

1. Post a scan of the ammo dodic from your last qual.
2. RBI FM 3-23.9, chapters 2 and 5 (28 APR 05)

The statements that you are issued wolf brand ammo, that you used acogs on M-4's, and the fact that you are unaware that the max effective ranges for both the M-4 and M-16A4 (both point and area targets) are the same makes me seriously doubt you are military, whether it be National Guard or Active.

 

[lonewolf23c]

What? That, and the statement that M855 or M193 starts tumbling after 300m is untrue.

1. Post a scan of the ammo dodic from your last qual.
2. RBI FM 3-23.9, chapters 2 and 5 (28 APR 05)

The statements that you are issued wolf brand ammo, that you used acogs on M-4's, and the fact that you are unaware that the max effective ranges for both the M-4 and M-16A4 (both point and area targets) are the same makes me seriously doubt you are military, whether it be National Guard or Active.

Ok you moron, you have absolutely no brains apparently. The M4 and M16 DO NOT have the same effective ranges, when did I say that?

I've deployed for 18 months to Iraq, been in the National Guard for 7-1/2 years.

During every qualification we have when targets out past 300M are checked we have tons of Silhouetted bullet holes where the bullets were in fact going through the targets in a vertical fashion. This happens all the time due to the cheap low grain ammo being used. You can buy heavier grain ammo and have better results and yes in fact be able to hit targets farther out than 300M, I'm just saying I won't trust it past a 200M, and that is pushing it.

As for having ACOGs on M4's yes we did, but I was never issued one. We had a few EOTECHS and had one of those on my M-4 for a while. We now have Aimpoints and their pure junk.

No we weren't using wolf ammo, however with the low grain bullets that are used, it kind of makes a person wonder.

M-4 Carbine:
Max. Effective Range: 600 m (area target) 500 m (point target)

M-16
Max. Effective Range: 800 meters for an area target / 550 meters for a point target
http://www.army.mil/factfiles/equipment/individual/m16.html


Show me where you came up with they have the same effective ranges.

 

[Jeff B]

Was that an Anniversary bitch slap?



Jeff B.

There were some great pictures and snappy lines in that thread.

 

[ZX9RCAM]

 

[Wolfwood]

Love it!