Are full autos useless or is it just deflection cause no one can afford transferable machine guns

Are full autos useless or is it just deflection cause no one can afford transferable machine guns

  1. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    There's an element of cope, because everyone would have it if they could. But in a rifle, full auto is really barely ever useful.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      100% deflection. See:

      full auto is of limited utility for things like an assault rifle but it is useful if you have a LMG or GPMG.
      30 rounds at 600rpm means you go dry in 5 seconds, so it's generally more useful to take aimed shots.
      3 round burst is specifically useless, though.
      doctrinally speaking full auto is most useful for suppressive fire and area targets.

      Full auto in a rifle is of limited but very specific utility. The big "FULL AUTO IS USELESS" meme came out of a Vietnam double-whammy, between the M14 being particularly uncontrollable, combined with draftee troops with M16s tending to panic and mag dump at nothing when coming under fire. In more practical approaches, it allows the average rifleman to transition into a limited LMG role if the normal gun is unavailable, such as when reloading or if the gunner goes down and someone has to recover it, as well as in indoor combat, where it can be used both to spray the fuck out of a room, or to rapidly place a whole lot of hate on one target, minimizing the possibility that he's going to pull some "moron on crack" shit.

      [...]
      Nobody but you even mentioned Home Defense. Even then, ripping 13 rounds through your fucking drywall to get at a burglar is a stupid fucking idea.

      And judging by your multi-tag, I can guess you're also the type of person to magdump onto a target and miss every single fucking shot.

      Full-auto is perfectly capable of being accurate and useful. The reason select fire is a prerequisite to an assault rifle is because it gives infantry the range and power of a rifle with the close range killing power of an SMG.

      Within 50 yards, you're hitting way more shots than "muh well aimed semi-auto". Within 20 yards, you're hitting the majority of your shots, and in your average indoor gunfight situation under 15 yards, you're more than able to hit every single shot in a mag on a target. Your average SMG or assault rifle is an incredibly potent and effective weapon within typical civilian self defense range.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Have you ever done an automatic qualification shoot in the military? You are dropping shots at 50yrds, and the spread is everywhere, you shouldn't be missing any in semi at that range and should have a good group. The target is also huge.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Now do it when the target is moving. Even when you're missing 20% of your shots on a stationary target, you're still hitting way more frequently than in semi.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            So if your missing in semi why would you switch to auto thats even more inaccurate, and takes longer to get sights back on target. Our yearly rifle qualification doesn't even have any automatic shoots in it as standard, automatic quals are only done before deployments or live fire excerises.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              If each aimed shot on semi takes, say, half a second and has a 20% chance of hitting and each shot on FA takes 0.086 seconds and has a 5% chance of hitting, which firing mode is statistically likely to score a hit first?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It's partly cope of course, but full auto is pretty useless for rifles in most settings.
        Now MGs are a completely different can of worms.

        FIGHT!

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Back in the late 00s we still used the vz.58 on full auto for most standard fire drills at 100-500m, the directions were to use "short bursts".
          Even at 100m only the first round out of a burst ever went into a man sized target. Switching to semi always resulted in more targets hit in the same time limit, with less ammo expended.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Yeah, auto on a rifle is not practical at 100+ yards. It's for things you could hit with a rock.

            >Within 50 yards, you're hitting way more shots than "muh well aimed semi-auto"
            >has clearly never shot any fa gun
            You could have said that its more controllable and useful than most people think but you went complete mongoloid.

            The average person never having shot FA can hit all shots at 15 yards in their second mag (like I did). At 25, a well-practiced shooter can hit every shot on a man-sized stationary target. Again, if you're hitting 20% of your shots at 50 yards, that's about 3 hits per second. You would be hard pressed to do that on semi.

            So if your missing in semi why would you switch to auto thats even more inaccurate, and takes longer to get sights back on target. Our yearly rifle qualification doesn't even have any automatic shoots in it as standard, automatic quals are only done before deployments or live fire excerises.

            >if your missing in semi why would you switch to auto thats even more inaccurate
            My former point is that Full-auto is better on moving targets, which is undeniable within 50 yards. My latter is that you're getting more hits on target in less time even if semi is getting perfect accuracy. 3 hits per second is an absolute feat on semi at 50 yards, but it's the minimal expected hit rate on FA.
            >Our yearly rifle qualification doesn't even have any automatic shoots in it as standard
            Ammo is expensive. It's also not really in the US battle doctrine for a wide variety of reasons; mostly due to the last 20 years of combat not particularly benefitting from it.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Within 50 yards, you're hitting way more shots than "muh well aimed semi-auto"
        >has clearly never shot any fa gun
        You could have said that its more controllable and useful than most people think but you went complete mongoloid.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          You are hitting more shots. It depends whether you measure more shots per shot fired or more shots per unit of time. The latter matters a lot more than the former in the conventional close fight. Line infantry adopting SWAT single fire drills by way of SF cross training for hostage rescue with police was a mistake.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            What the fuck are you on about. Your aren't hitting more shots, you're wasting more ammunition. Moving target shoots are usually done in semi.
            Just say your a no guns or a civilian range shooter and have no idea what your on about.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              K. You're talking to two different people and I only don't have cross rifles because I was in garbage units so I couldn't reshoot within the time frame after getting first class, but I'm sure you're an absolute jet with tonnes of trigger time.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                *Crossed

                Phonefagging.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            If each aimed shot on semi takes, say, half a second and has a 20% chance of hitting and each shot on FA takes 0.086 seconds and has a 5% chance of hitting, which firing mode is statistically likely to score a hit first?

            If there existed such an advantage from fa then all the militaries of the world would have kept it as standard operating procedure from when it was the norm (e.g. 20rnd bars used as pseudo-lmg in WW2).

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              If and only if said militaries were seeing regular high intensity conflict. If, instead, the only units that saw regular deployments with a lot of combat were SF units who also trained for hostage rescue then the cult of cool would decree that single shot was the way to go. You'd also see things like instinctive fire training go out the window. And hey, what do you know, that's what's happened.

  2. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    full auto is of limited utility for things like an assault rifle but it is useful if you have a LMG or GPMG.
    30 rounds at 600rpm means you go dry in 5 seconds, so it's generally more useful to take aimed shots.
    3 round burst is specifically useless, though.
    doctrinally speaking full auto is most useful for suppressive fire and area targets.

  3. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I can afford one

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I own 14.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I own 14.

      post them

  4. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I would buy full auto, but I'm pretty sure gun manufacturers are not allowed to make new ones for civilian use so I don't. I don't buy used guns.

  5. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I always thought full auto was good for trench clearing

  6. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Full auto in a rifle is of limited but very specific utility. The big "FULL AUTO IS USELESS" meme came out of a Vietnam double-whammy, between the M14 being particularly uncontrollable, combined with draftee troops with M16s tending to panic and mag dump at nothing when coming under fire. In more practical approaches, it allows the average rifleman to transition into a limited LMG role if the normal gun is unavailable, such as when reloading or if the gunner goes down and someone has to recover it, as well as in indoor combat, where it can be used both to spray the fuck out of a room, or to rapidly place a whole lot of hate on one target, minimizing the possibility that he's going to pull some "moron on crack" shit.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Full auto is for soldiers
      Semi is for larpers

  7. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I haven't killed people for a living but I'd imagine in assault rifles it's mostly useful when you don't have 5-10 seconds for the guy 3 feet away to bleed out before he takes you with him.

  8. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    For civvies, practical uses are limited since we have time to autistically train for accuracy, and will rarely be in a frantic "oh shit oh fuck" moment that truly requires full auto.

    For the military, rate of fire can be a big game changer.

    One bullet hole? A problem, but it's solvable.
    Two? Bigger problem, seek medical attention.
    Three? Seek IMMEDIATE medical attention.
    Four? Hope you can make it to the medics before you pass out from bloodloss.
    Five? Hope and pray that whoever has to deal with your unlucky ass is sent from god, if you can even make it far enough to be treated.
    Six? You're fucking dead, and probably died somewhere around bullet Four.

    Plus, being able to rattle off bullets solves the whole "give a dipshit farmer an assault rifle and make them fight for the country" situation where you can't train EVERYONE to have good accuracy, so you use the firerate as a crutch.

  9. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    I didn't say home defense, fag, I said trench clearing.

    Jesus, Glowies are getting worse by the day

  10. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Nobody but you even mentioned Home Defense. Even then, ripping 13 rounds through your fucking drywall to get at a burglar is a stupid fucking idea.

    And judging by your multi-tag, I can guess you're also the type of person to magdump onto a target and miss every single fucking shot.

  11. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's pretty useless on something like a FAL or G3. Otherwise it has its uses

  12. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's partly cope of course, but full auto is pretty useless for rifles in most settings.
    Now MGs are a completely different can of worms.

  13. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's good for close range and really fun

  14. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    I mean I would probably never use it except for fun, but if you're kicking down doors and don't know what's on the other side its probably nice to have.

  15. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    The idea of trying to breach a home where the homeowner has a mounted belt fed MG set up scares the shit out of feds and that's why they want to keep them banned.

  16. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Its both. Sports cars are useless, but people who shit on them are just coping and would still own one if they had the sufficient disposable income.

  17. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    volume matters when it is not the time to aim. Too many enemies, too little time, too little room. The task of suppression to force them duck down and get out of your eye sight or spraying down a packed group doesn't require accuracy either.
    The weight and dimension needed to fire a shell is the same, higher rate of fire itself barely adds much weight. Going high rof can achieve very high fire power per second with the same weight.
    It can be even better with smaller caliber, but speed loss, low penetration and magazine can only go so wide all limits the return. In the extream end its an unreliable sand blaster.
    The extra weight to the barrel and the gun are needed to lengthen the time before overheating and reduce the kick. In the end weight catches up to sustained capacity and follow up time.

  18. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    it's cope, despite the fact that I could only ever realistically see myself using full-auto outside the range if SHTF. would never use it for home defense. everyone and their mother would have a full-auto rifle if the government wasn't gay

  19. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Even If I had full auto, I would probably only fire in 2-5 round bursts in a real gun fight. Binary triggers seem pretty cool.
    It's still infringement to keep full auto sears from us.

Your email address will not be published.