Which is more deadly? A fully automatic weapon, or a semi-automatic?

[Lefty48197]

I ask because I've heard a few people, who have fired fully automatice weapons, declare that they're not very accurate. They say that the barrel of the gun tends to wander off away from your target, causing you to shoot things that you're not even aiming at, while missing your target. The machine guns may spray a lot of bullets in a short period of time, but if you want to accurately shoot at individual targets, wouldn't you want a single fire weapon, or at least the weapon that fires the 3 round burst?
Which makes a better weapon for protection, a fully automatic military rifle, or a single fire civilian version?
I mean, if you're going to shoot at a large group of al Qaeda terrorists, for instance, and you aim your fully automatic weapon at them and start shooting, are you going to be able to control the weapon enough to take out all the terrorists, or would a single shot AR-15 be a better weapon? Would the "wandering barrel" of the fully automatic rifle give the enemy too much of an opportunity to shoot back, while the single shot may have given you an opportunity to shoot all of them, before emptying your weapon?
The reason I ask is that when the AWB wasn't being debated by Congress last year, a lot of the pro-rkba crowd was telling us how the semi-automatics weren't anywhere near as deadly as the fully automatic rifles. You can barely get them bullets to come out of your civilian assault weapons, the pro-rkba crowd told me. They fire so slow, that they aren't even a threat to anybody, like those "machine guns" are. In reality, I've found that even the single fire civilian rifles can empty their magazines just as fast as you can pull the trigger. Go ahead and practice right now. you can pull your trigger finger about 20 times in about 5 seconds.
Would the bullets an automatic weapon fires off into outerspace be more effective than the single shots fired directly at their target?

[Vincardog]

1. It depends on the mission. For 1 shot 1 kill go with the Sniper Rifle.

For blind fire anti-personel or defensive circumstance you want the full auto option.

[seriousstan]

2. The one pointed toward you is the most deadly.

[slor]

3. Depends on range...

basically, if you are engaging targets at great distances, you want a rifle, in close quarters, you want a smaller full automatic. Assault rifles have a fire selector switch, to go from full auto or semi, so they can be used both ways.

[illflem]

4. On the military M-16 we used in Vietnam

the difference between emptying a full clip on full auto vs. semi auto was 4 seconds. Big difference on full auto is most people don't aim, they just spray bullets all over the place and run out of ammo sooner.

As far a personal protection most people are better off without a gun, they cause more problems than they solve.
BTW I am not anti-gun by any means.

[vpigrad]

5. Well...

Considering most full-autos are only 22's (like the military caliber 5.56mm NATO) or 9mm pistol, I'd much rather be shot at with a full auto. This is why the next ban should include not only assault weapons, but also their much more powerful counterparts like the military calibers 308 (akak 7.62mm NATO) and 30-06.

[billbuckhead]

6. Terrorists would prefer to use a mixture of both guns

[Torque67]

20. This is true.

I'm sure they would prefer that. I bet they'd prefer to shoot folks who couldn't shoot back, too.

[billbuckhead]

21. I bet terrorists would like to buy their high ouput guns at MegloMart

The Al Queada tells it's followers in the Al Queada 101 handbook to take advantage of America's weak gun regulations. After the Kennedys, MLK, John Lennon, the Beltway snipers, Columbine, Larry Flynt, Vernon Jordan and on and on ad nauseum. Guns have been used for terror many a time in America's recent history.

[Torque67]

22. Meglomart

Yes, they could buy their guns at the Megamart. Same rules as everywhere else, but thrifty to boot. And they could pick up a Dr. Pepper and some new sneakers. High output sneakers.

If they dont get them at meglomart, or bills house o' guns, they'll get em in. Now those of us that lack multimillion dollar international crime conections will be needing something to even things up a little. Thats where the meglomart comes in.

[virginia mountainman]

23. I hope you was just being sarcastic

I can see you have never bought a gun at a store

It is obvious that you have NEVER filled out ALL THE FORMS and went thru all the background checks to buy a gun.

Guns are one of the most HIGHLY regulated industries out their.

And you make a statement like that?!

Bad folks with or without guns is just a fact of life, all you can do is hope to lock them up BEFOUR they hurt anyone

Andrew

[Wonk]

33. "BEFOUR" (sic), 'nuff said. nt

[Retired AF Dem]

7. The 308 and 30-06

are the two most popluar hunting rounds. The true colors come out.

[virginia mountainman]

10. yep,

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Lefty48197]

9. that's not exactly what I was asking

I meant all else being equal, which would be more effective? You know, same caliber, same basic weapon etc.

[Retired AF Dem]

12. In Jan of 85

I attended the old Air Force EST school. (SWAT) One of the courses was police type sniping. I was able to put twenty rounds firing semi auto with an M-16 in the nose area of a facial target at 100 meters in just under two minutes. If I would have fired the weapon on full auto maybe one round would of hit the target and the other 19 would of been misses. The four years I spent in the Army airborne infantry I always had trouble qualifying on the full auto course. Semi auto is always more effective for hitting targets, full auto is great at keeping heads down so the guys that are shooting semi auto can move up and finish off the "targets".

[MrSandman]

14. And you just can't miss fast enough...nt

[MrSandman]

13. Effective for what purpose...

If it is individual defense, I would prefer the semi-auto or other non-automatic repeating rifle.

For squad manuevers, the full-auto(including burst-fire) option may be useful for suppressive fire.

[Torque67]

19. .22's

Yes, they are .22 caliber, but not to be confused with something like a .22 LR as in a kids first squirrel gun. The M16 is chambered in 5.56 nato, and it;s civilian counterpart is the remington .223. The .223 is quite a bit punchier than a .22 LR

By the way, the caliber that the most full auto firearms have been built in is 7.62x39 russian.

3 shot bursts from an m16 in a semi-supported position can be used in aimed fire. I'd rather not be shot with anything, but in the even that one has to, I'd think one hole would be better.

So, you'd like to see the 7.62 and 30-06 banned because they have been used by the military? So, 300 RSAUM, 270 WSM, 338 Lapua Ultramag are all okay? You'll have to keep in mind that your grandaddy's old deer rifle is probably chambered in 30-06, and you wont be getting much love from him and his buddies if you want to ban it.

This is like having me (a computer tech) decide which medical procedures are worthwhile. Youd be better off taking a stand on something you know about.

[Charon]

29. Full Auto

30 and 50 cal machine guns are full auto. Automatic shoulder fired weapons can be obtained in 9 mm, 30 and 45 cal.

[virginia mountainman]

8. info

It depends first and foremost on the skill of the shooter

A person that knows his gun and is practiced with his gun is DEADLY with his gun, no matter the caliber or type.

I have quite a selection of firearms to choose from (I am a collector, of older military rifles) and have a CCW permit.

The rapid firing of a semi automatic rifle can be done, but it cannot be done with accuracy without lots and lots of practice and even then the accuracy is relative to how close to the target you are.

I prefer the older bolt action military rifles myself; I appreciate the POWER and relative skill it takes to work those old war horses well, I am really skilled with the British Lee Enfield .303. I have owned those rifles since I was a boy, and have fired countless hundreds of rounds thru them. I have take the time to learn the proper method of bolt manipulation at speed, and I can fire off its 10 rnd magazine accurately nearly as fast as my uncle can with his M1 Grande, we are talking AIMED FIRE.

I also have several Semi auto AK47’s they can be accurately fired slightly faster due the less powerful cartridge, and much less recoil.

But as for just letting it rip

It is NOT anywhere near as fast as wiggling you finger you must remember the gun is jumping around somewhat, 2 hands are involved, it can be fast, but NOTHING like a machinegun

The AW ban was silly, it even banned a Gun that could ONLY hold 8 bullets.That Rifle was the M1 Grand, no way you could modify it to take any more. That ban needed to die, for all the votes it costed us in 1994

Andrew

[virginia mountainman]

11. A bit more

If you are unskilled, the best you could do with would be an M16, FULLY AUTOMATIC, hardly if any recoil, and lots of lead flying out the barrel.

Those are nearly banned under the 1930’s law.

IF you are unskilled and want an effective firearm, get you a PUMP 12 GAUGE shotgun

Use moderate shot loads, and at close range your would be DEADLY even with no skills

Even semi autos require some skill and knowledge to use effectively, if you pay attention to police reports you will notice lots of reports about the bad guys gun jamming, that is due to them not knowing how to properly care for them and operate them.

A pump shotgun is nearly fool proof, I can literally write instructions for someone that never touched a gun in their lives to use one effectively with only a paragraph

Basically it boils down to this;

Any gun in the hands of a criminal is BAD, any gun in the hands of the law abiding is good.

Andrew

[Maria Celeste]

15. Firepower is rounds on target, not rounds down range

Spray and pray has very limited utility, even in the military. With a semi auto, most people are markedly better at hitting their target.

[virginia mountainman]

16. Well..........

Well…………………….

All the extra rounds going down range in a combat situation does serve a purpose.


If the enemy is keeping his face down and he is hugging the ground, he anit shooting at YOU. And another part of your squad is moving around to the side of his position to KILL the enemy with hand grenades or automatic rifle WHILE the rest of the group is firing madly at the enemy position.

It is called deferent things,

“Scoot and Shoot”

“Fire and maneuver”

Andrew

[aikoaiko]

17. I'm not sure, but I'd like to cover my butt and have a select fire...

.... so that I could choose full auto (or three round burst) or semi-auto.

But thats just me.

Of course, a select fire rifle (like an M16) was put out of my price range because of 1986 gun control legislation. Ronald Reagan, geeeeeeeeesh should have vetoed that one. :grr:

[jody]

18. The answer depends upon context. If I asked what is the best vehicle,

automatic or straight shift, what would be your answer? For hauling tons of cargo, comfort on a vacation, travel off road, racing, etc.? Many automatic firearms can switch between full and semi-auto and a bolt action is best for long range, precision shooting.

One major problem is conservation of ammo because with firearms that have full auto capability, an inexperienced person could exhaust their ammo supply in a few minutes. That was a major problem in Vietnam.

[Billy Ruffian]

24. Given your earlier plea for unity

your post has some inflammatory phrases.
The reason I ask is that when the AWB wasn't being debated by Congress last year, a lot of the pro-rkba crowd was telling us how the semi-automatics weren't anywhere near as deadly as the fully automatic rifles. You can barely get them bullets to come out of your civilian assault weapons, the pro-rkba crowd told me. They fire so slow, that they aren't even a threat to anybody, like those "machine guns" are. In reality, I've found that even the single fire civilian rifles can empty their magazines just as fast as you can pull the trigger.

I'm very certain that other threads in this forum have already discussed the problem with the AWB. All it banned was the new sale of Scary Looking Guns. A perfect example was the ban of the Colt AR-15, and the 'non-ban" of the Ruger Mini-14. Both semi-auto. Both detachable box magazine, both 5.56mm NATO. The Colt is an "Evil, Scary Looking Black" gun. The Ruger is a traditonal looking, wooden stock gun. They are functional equivalent.

Full auto weapons have been strictly regulated since 1934. Few are asking for the overturn of that law. The AWB was ludicrous.

If, however, you feel that semi-auto weapons are so much more deadly than other weapons, then call for an actual ban of all semi-autos, in all calibers.

As far as tactical use of full-auto vs. semi-auto, it depends on the situation. If you need suppressive fire (ie. make them keep their heads down while you or your squadmates are moving, or to prevent an advance across an area) then full auto has its place.

If there are actual targets that can be hit, semi-auto is much more useful. If a rifleman is trying to hit something, he'll choose semi-auto, and put his sights on target before he shoots.

[benEzra]

25. Depends on the range...

aimed full-auto is much more lethal at close range, due to the greater probability of multiple hits (which is why SWAT teams, military entry teams, and so on typically use automatic weapons, and why the submachine gun was invented in the first place). Note--"from the hip" full auto like you see in the movies is pretty much useless; even an automatic weapon needs to be aimed.

Aimed bursts of two to four rounds increase hit probability at intermediate ranges over a single shot, but of course you'll have to change magazines sooner.

At long range, one very carefully placed shot is going to be superior because the dispersion in even a short burst is going to place the other rounds well off target.

That's why modern military rifles have selector switches, so the soldier can switch between automatic and non-automatic modes depending on the need at the moment.

[slackmaster]

26. Both are equally deadly

A weapon is either deadly or not.

Fully automatic weapons are regulated because they are more dangerous to an innocent user and to bystanders, and because they have significantly more potential for abuse. The latter fact was established in the 1920s when fully automatic weapons like the Thompson submachine gun and the Browning Automatic Rifle were being used very effectively by violent criminal gangs. (The BAR was the weapon of choice for Clyde Barrow.)

[MyMouth]

27. Didn't that violence end in '29?

...When prohibition ended?(do I have the year right?)

Of course, they were not banned until 1934....

[slackmaster]

28. The machine gun violence that started in the 1920s never ended

Violent criminal gangs still use automatic weapons. The difference between the '20s and now is that the weapons are possessed illegally.

[MrSandman]

30. Bonnie Parker was proficient, also....

The BAR was the weapon of choice for Clyde Barrow.

[Retired AF Dem]

39. They are only deadly when they are held by human hands

by themselves they just sit around and "look" deadly. Sorry, preaching to the choir.
http://www.assaultweaponwatch.com/

[Mark H]

32. We'll work on getting you up to speed.

Full automatic is for "supressing fire". This is used mostly to get the enemy to keep his head down so A) he's not shooting at you and B) your guys can move without beeing seen or shot at.

Semi automatic fire is for accuracy.

The problem with automatics both semi and full is that there is a whole lot going on with that gun. The bullet is pushing away from the gun. That drives the gun backward and because you are holding it from the bottom the gun also rises at the front. The bolt is also forced back and the spent case is kicked out along with and excess gasses that remain under pressure, the bolt then slams foreward taking a new round and depositing it in the chamber locking the bolt in place.

All of this action moves the gun around.

One inch of movement at the barrel of the gun calculates to 5 feet of movement at 50 yards. Firing a gun a second time before it becomes set sends your bullet off your intended target. Because of the high "cyclic rate" of a full automatic it is going to get more bullets downrange before the gun is fully off target. It doesn't matter how fast you think you are, with a semi auto fired as you describe at the end of your post, your second bullet and all after is a wasted shot.

( Cyclic rate is the number of bullets a gun is hypotheticaly able to fire in a given amount of time, Usually a minute. This is only a theoretical number, kind of like how much bush has spent on no child left behind, in that it only accounts for the speed of the action, the action being what I described in my third paragraph. It does not account for reloads or overheating problems that will occur if the gun is fired at that rate.)

How do you get around all this movement? There are a few ways. For some guns there are "rate reducers". These slow the "cyclic rate" of a gun. They will help on fully automatics, but have no effect on semi's. Flash suppressors help both a little bit. Compensators do as well. Adding weight to a gun helps more that these, but really these are band-aides on a sucking chest wound. For full automatics the only real way to control it is to fix it in place. For the military that means attaching it to a vehicle or some sap has to carry that tripod. For a hand held gun, if you want to put your second bullet close to where the first went, you have to wait until the gun is back in position.

Hope this helps.

[Squatch]

34. Semantics question...

How can something be "more deadly"? It's either deadly or not.

[slackmaster]

35. That's my take on it as well

All or nothing. All firearms are 100% deadly weapons at all times.

A knife is also a deadly weapon.

A Nerf bat is not a deadly weapon.

A fly swatter is deadly if you are a fly. If you are a human, it's not deadly.

[davepc]

36. More deadly? Is that like a woman being more pregnant?

[DoNotRefill]

37. It depends on the gun.

A full auto M-14 is a waste of ammo on full auto. A full auto MP-5 isn't.

What I like about my full auto guns is that they have what's called a "beaten zone"...that's the area that all the bullets will go on full auto if the gun is properly mounted. Once you adjust the T&E, all rounds will go into the beaten zone, so you just have to adjust it to put the bullets where you want them. If there's ever a need to kill an entire crowd, that's a very handy feature. Of course, the odds of that happening are astronomical. I shoot mine for fun, not necessarily for defense.

[MrSandman]

38. This one????

7.62 x 51 NATO

[anonymous44]

40. damn

that's a great gun for zombies lol

[Tinfoil]

41. I gotta

get mahself one of these..


Of course I need, what... $350,000 ? was the last one I saw for sale.. GE I believe, on subguns

[MrSandman]

42. Which mag...

130 lb. or 285 lb.?

Atleast you will put a lot of lead downange before a malf.