What kind of rifle might a National Guard (or regular) soldier be issued?
817224
This is for a novel and you came to this forum for research?\n\nNot a good idea.\n\nSeriously though, the rifle issued would be an M-16. he would\nalso carry a Beretta 9mm sidearm.\n\nThank you very much, while you're up.
275824
None that I know of make direct comparisons/contrasts.\n\nI can help you out a lot more than TheWiseOne, as his answer contains many inaccuracies.\n\nContrary to what the WiseOne stated, the M1 Garand was adopted as the standard US Army infantry rifle in 1936 and was standard issue when we entered the war.  The USMC still had a predominance of '03 Springfields, as they didn't receive new equipment until after the Army.  I find it odd that the WiseOne denigrates the Springfield for being "obviously dated and had been used in World War I.".  That's funny, because the standard infantry rifle the Germans used during WWII, the K98k, was simply a newer, shorter version of the Gewehr 98, the Model 1898 Mauser rifle, developed before and used during WWI (the Springfield used the same action as the Mauser by the way).  Both were fine bolt-action weapons, but couldn't compare with the M1 because of their slow rate of fire (the US was the only army in WWII to have a semi-automatic rifle as it's standard infantry weapon).\n\nThe primary sub-machine gun of the US Army during WWII was the M1928A1, M1, and M1A1 versions of the Thompson sub-machine gun.  A fairly heavy weapon, accurate at short ranges, and it had a lot of stopping power due to the fact it was chambered for the .45ACP round.  From 1944 onwards it was slowly phased out and replaced by the M3 Grease Gun.  It was cheaper and far simpler to mass produce than the Thompson.  Contrary to what the WiseOne states, both used 30 round box magazines (although 20 round was available for the Thompson).  The German MP-40 (the famed Schmeisser, although Schmeisser had no part in it's design) was chambered for 9MM Parabellum.  It was lighter and had a slightly lower cyclic rate than the Thompson (but a bit higher than the M3).\n\nComparing the MP-44 and the BAR is like comparing apples and oranges.  The MP-44 is the ancestor of the modern assault rifle, and was used as such.  The BAR is analagous to the M249 SAW that the US Army currently uses.  The MP-44 was a good weapon, with decent accuracy and range, and a cyclic rate high enough to provide fairly heavy firepower.  Very useful in urban fighting.\n\nThe BAR was a great weapon, heavy, but provided very good, accurate firepower for platoons.\n\nI don't know what "tiny Walther pistols" WiseOne is speaking about.  The standard German sidearms of WWII were the Parabellum-Pistole (popularly known as the Luger) and the Walther P-38.  Both were chambered for the 9MM Parabellum round, and both were fairly accurate.  The P-38 was easier and cheaper to make, and more tolerant of various environmental conditions.  The M1911A1 Colt .45 was a fairly good pistol, not particularly accurate, but the .45 ACP round provided good stopping power, and it was fairly reliable.\n\nThe German MG-42 was an excellent weapon, the best of its' class during the war.  It was the basis for the postwar design of the US M-60 machine gun.  I don't know what the WiseOne is speaking of when he mentions "and other lamer machine guns" when speaking of the US.  The primary US light machine gun was the .30 Browning.  It's sustained fire rate wasn't as good as the MG-42, but nevertheless the air-cooled version was a more than competent, if not very good weapon.  The standard heavy machine gun of the US was the Browning M2 .50.  This was an excellent weapon, best in it's class, and is still in use today by many countries. The M2 was just as accurate as the MG-42, and had greater power and ranger. Then again, pretty much any weapon designed by John Browning turned out to be excellent.\n\nThis following statement is absolutely wrong:\n\n"American planes were better than German planes by the time we entered the war, as the RAF killed off many of their better planes."\n\nThe best American fighters of the war at the time of our entry were the P-40 and F4F.  Neither one was anywhere near as good as the
111001
The U.S. Army's pursuit of a weapon to replace the aging M-16 rifle is still on track despite a failed congressional attempt to pump nearly $26 million into the federal budget to manufacture the weapon in 2005.\n\nMilitary and legislative officials said development and testing of the new XM8 assault rifle will run through December. It is the second round of tests for the highly anticipated rifle, with evaluations taking place in the hot, gritty desert near Yuma, Ariz., the tropical jungles of Panama, and the arctic climate of Alaska, said Col. Mike Smith, who oversees the XM8 testing program at Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey.\n\n"After this round of testing, we will present our findings and our ability to meet the requirements, which are developed at Fort Benning, to the Army leadership, which should be in the late February time frame," Smith said.\n\n"Then they'll make a decision on how to go forward on the program, and how fast to go forward on the program."\n\nGerman gunmaker Heckler & Koch, which has a U.S. site in Sterling, Va., is working with the military on the prototype rifle. It would be mass-produced by H&K at a 150,000-square-foot plant the company plans to build in Columbus, Ga.\n\nH&K spokeswoman Jimmi Clifton said initial work could mean about 200 jobs, although more could be added as production ramps up. The company has said a contract with the government could be very lucrative, perhaps worth up to $1 billion over 10 years.\n\nClifton said the company remains in a testing mode and is hoping to begin plant construction soon and have at least part of the facility up and running by early 2005. But it's unlikely the entire factory will be built until H&K receives some signal that federal funding for mass production of the XM8 is forthcoming, she said.\n\n"There's no way I can put a time on that," Clifton said of a production contract. "It could be tomorrow. It could be a year away."\n\nIt appeared funding was on the way in July when U.S. Rep. Phil Gingrey's office said $25.9 million had been tucked into a $417.5 billion House appropriations bill for the XM8.\n\nThe Georgia Republican, whose district includes a portion of Columbus, backed off that assertion after learning the money had been squeezed out of the budget to make room for additional funding for the war on terrorism.\n\nThe next chance for the XM8 program to receive money for manufacturing and procurement will be when Congress reconvenes Sept. 7, said Brian Robinson, communications director for Gingrey.\n\n"We're going to do everything we can to get this into the next supplemental budget," Robinson said.\n\n"We understand what happened and we want to fix it as soon as we can."\n\nShould funding come through this year, Smith said the XM8 could be in soldiers' hands as soon as summer 2005. If not, the weapon would be in the 2006 budget and make its way into the ranks by that spring.\n\nThe $26 million in funding that was shot down by Congress would have outfitted about two combat brigades, or about 8,000 soldiers, Smith said.\n\nAlthough Army leadership could decide in February to put a final approved version of the XM8 assault rifle out for competitive bidding, Smith said that's unlikely.\n\n"I can't make promises for senior Army leadership," he said. "But assuming H&K is successful testing against the requirements, it would be unusual" to take the production contract away from the company.\n\nThe weapon is getting high marks from troops during evaluations, said Smith.\n\nObservations include:\n\n• It's more versatile than the old M-16 rifle it will replace and should fire thousands of rounds before jamming, rather than the few hundred shots before the M-16 typically jams.\n\n• It's much easier to clean and maintain.\n\n• Training time is reduced since it's a single weapon that can be modified to fire short distances, long
970766
when i was in the military i carried a m9 (beretta 92fs 9mm). some complianed that they didn't care for them for varies reasons. i didn't mind it though. if i could carry anything it would be a .45 (colt). really i think its all about preference (kick, weight, etc..) and utilization (what are you using it for). \nlike the pp said, i would do some research first. maybe take a trip to the range before making a final decision. good luck!
823947
Fabrique Nationale, the Belgin national firearms group produced dozens of different military and civillian weapons from the late 1800's to this day.\nDe Guerre, means "for war" indicating that yes, this is a military weapon. \nThe caliber .30-06 narrows things down a bit. While F.N.       MAY have produced Mauser rifles in that caliber for some contracts, The definitly produced a semi-automatic rifle in that caliber, and It has considerable collector and shooter interest.\nIf you can't find it on the gunbroker page someone else suggested, Try going to security arms photo archive and scrolling down to F.N. guns and looking for one like yours.\nHollar back and let us know what you found!
423480
The RUGER 10/22 is one of the most common rifles around. Some look different than others because of all the kits you can buy to spruce it up. Trust me- all those 10/22's are the same.\nYou will be able to spit in the direction of ANY gun store and find one.\nI gave mine up when I was 15.....it's kind of a kiddie gun.
658324
A gun that doesn't look like a gun is classified by the BATFE as an AOW, or Any Other Weapon. In order to purchase an AOW, you must fill out some ATF paperwork, get the chief law enforcement officer to sign off on the paperwork, submit fingerprints and 2 photographs, submit to a criminal background check, wait for the ATF to approve the purchase, and pay for a special tax stamp that must be affixed to the paperwork. Furthermore, you really should have the paperwork with the AOW at all times to prove its legality.\n\nAre you really sure you want to go through all that?
739548
The receiver is the only part needing an ffl for legal transfer, since it's not a class 3 weapon the sear isn't registered, ANYONE who can legally buy, own and operate a firearm in the USA can own a Steyr Aug(semi only) If it is in fact the full auto(select fire) version of the steyr aug, then the sear is registered and a class 3 tax stamp and cerification is required to legally transfer it.
852138
If it fires a rifle grenade, yes...that's classified as a grenade launcher. Check the new Federal and your state laws, though. I've been out of touch for a while.
135535
easy, move to a state where it is legal to own one, and buy one that is legally registered as a full auto weapon, that would be a class 3 weapon and its going to cost you
855902
Bound's hubby here:\n\nThe AR-15 Service Rifle is available in two configurations: rifle (20 in+ barrel) or carbine (under 20 in barrel). The carbine may have a collapsible stock. As a rule of thumb, the longer the barrel, the more accurate the rifle. Both are chambered for the .223 Remington round so the amount of damage either rifle causes will be comparible. Look at NRA Service Rifle competition and CMP matches (President's 100 and National Trophy Matches) and the competitors on all of these events use the rifle version with fast twist barrels (1:7 or 1:8) to stabilize the heavier bullets at longer ranges (600  yards). \n\nWhat you buy should be determined by your intended use for the rifle. Buy the rifle and add $400 worth of parts and you have a rifle competitive with any other match rifle. A chrome lined barrel will not affect match accuracy. My AR has a Colt chrome lined 1:7 barrel and I can shoot in the high 90% averages with it. \n\nI suggest you go with the rifle which gives you more flexibility and more legitimate use. \n\nGood luck.
910298
Lee-Enfield P17. originally the standard issue for the british, but when the US entered the war, there was a shortage of Springfield rifles, the standard American military rifle, so our troops were issued P17s. They ended up as the most common issue.\n\nadded note: the standard issue german rifle was a Gewehr 98 Rifle, originally manufactured in1898. Source for this was a google search\n\nBoth of these are bolt-action rifles
652960
While I would like to own a class three weapon, I wouldn't ask such a question in an open forum.  Currently, the convenience store (BATF) is pursuing several legal gunsmiths for various reasons.  If they found out you did this they would be at your door.
72073
A good place to start would be the Society of the Military Horse forums.\nhttp://www.militaryhorse.org/forum/\n\nRifle saddle "holsters" are usually called rifle or carbine scabbards.
43235
Check with the NRA, Second Amendment Foundation, or Citizens' Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.
967331
You don't.\nIf you want one legally, you have to apply\nfor a special permit from the ATF.\nI doubt very highly that you'll get one.\nIf you do get one, don't get caught.\nA air gunner had one on his air rifle, it got confiscated,\nhe got arrested, went to court after over a year in prison,\ngot a very, very big fine, and went back prison. \nDon't screw with the ATF. \nIf you don't know what that is, Alcohol, Tabbaco, and Firearms.\nIt's the Feds.\nGo ahead, try it, I love it when I hear of people in the news for trying stupid things like that, I laugh my azz off.
789899
50, 200, 300 and 500 yards.  The M16A2 service rifle is the weapon that is used on the range.  The civilian equivilent is the AR-15.  It is an identical rifle except the fact that it does not have a three-round burst option.  \n\nDuring recruit training, all recruits are taught not only to shoot with deadly accuracy, but to clean and care for the rifle as well.  It is not unusual for a recruit to be asked for his rifle's serial number during an inspection.\n\nRecruits are taught the philosophy of "One Shot, One Kill"\n\nThe three rifle badges that can be earned are marksman, sharpshooter, and rifle expert in that order.