# SOF Weapons question pt 2



## bison11 (Jan 16, 2008)

hey guys...the other day i posted a question regardeing SOF operators and their weapons. I got some good answers, and kept diggin around.....this is what i came up with....
http://law.justia.com/us/codes/title10/10usc2574.html

This makes it sound like you could, under certain circumstances (say the weapon was being decomissioned (the wepon family, like if they decide to replace all the M-16s/M-4s in the military with, say a 416, not just the individual weapon) actually buy weapons, and for that matter maybe some other basic gear from the military. I know its not an every day occurence, in fact im sure rare, but if a family of weapons is being decomissioned, what use could the military have for them any more....dont they get destroyed or sold off to other countries(not sure if my facts are right on that....)? i cant see much harm in an operator buying it off the military if they so choose to do so...i mean, they are more qualified than ANYONE to hand said weapon, right?

Any info on the subject or thoughts on the posted link are much appreciated, as always.


----------



## The91Bravo (Jan 16, 2008)

Bison,

My opinion is this:
Most weapons in the category you mention would be Class III under the NFA standards.  As such, they would (if transferred to civilians) need to be transferred to a Class III dealer, and then individuals would have to do the ATF two step to get one to purchase.

Therefore I feel this would not be a prudent was to remove the weps from the DoD inventory.

I believe they are first handed down to US Reserves and National Guard units until they are worn to an inch of their lives then DEMIL'ed.

The possibility of selling to an ally country would be a more prudent measure to dispose of the weps.

Just my .02

Steve


----------



## rangerpsych (Jan 16, 2008)

We blew shit up when it wasn't servicable.

example: I was a demolitions instructor and was handed 20 M4 barrels that were no longer servicable. I then got to show the students effective means of weapon destruction vs ineffective, so when they had to destroy captured weapons that were on an objective, they would know how to do so efficiently and effectively...

Running det cord through a barrel won't damage it enough to make it no longer function... we tried that, and could still fire reliably however inaccurately.


----------



## The91Bravo (Jan 16, 2008)

rangerpsych said:


> We blew shit up when it wasn't servicable.



I call BULLSHIT!!!


I would be willing to bet you have blown up some perfectly serviceable shit, too.
:confused:;)


----------



## x SF med (Jan 16, 2008)

bison11 said:


> hey guys...the other day i posted a question regardeing SOF operators and their weapons. I got some good answers, and kept diggin around.....this is what i came up with....
> http://law.justia.com/us/codes/title10/10usc2574.html
> 
> This makes it sound like you could, under certain circumstances (say the weapon was being decomissioned (the wepon family, like if they decide to replace all the M-16s/M-4s in the military with, say a 416, not just the individual weapon) actually buy weapons, and for that matter maybe some other basic gear from the military. I know its not an every day occurence, in fact im sure rare, but if a family of weapons is being decomissioned, what use could the military have for them any more....dont they get destroyed or sold off to other countries(not sure if my facts are right on that....)? i cant see much harm in an operator buying it off the military if they so choose to do so...i mean, they are more qualified than ANYONE to hand said weapon, right?
> ...





1. Why are you asking these questions?
2. What is your need to know this?
3. Think before you post.
4. search all avenues before asking inanne and possibly dangerous questions.


----------



## phridum (Jan 16, 2008)

rangerpsych said:


> Running det cord through a barrel won't damage it enough to make it no longer function... we tried that, and could still fire reliably however inaccurately.


Wow, that really surprises me! A ruptured case can be lethal to the operator, so I only assumed detcord would do the trick. Perhaps it's because the barrel is more or less sealed? I don't have much playing experience with detcord, but NEAT! 

xSF med,
I am not trying to make this personal, but you lack some tact. He's just a kid.

1. Is genuine curiosity not enough? The internet was designed to be a tool for the spreading of knowledge wealth, especially through forums.

2. In his other thread you made it clear you thought he was a dumb ass piece of shit putting his nose where it didn't belong and then told him to search before asking dumb ass piece of shit questions. I agreed with you. That question is incredibly stupid and most cannot trouble their time to consider the answer. However...

3. He did a search, like you told him in the other thread, and came up with this info he linked to. If the information is reliable and accurate, the story of the Air Force gift rifle is plausible (however unlikely). One would have to procure an ATF permit (expensive and not worth it...to me), and perhaps he did.

While all of us suspect that said story is loaded with BS, I think you are being a little bit zealous in your witch hunt. His posts are well thought out and grammatically correct.

4. I would consider searching and asking on some internet forum an avenue he is exhausting before he calls the local SF unit commander or his senator. This forum, as wise as we all are, is not the be all end all of information portals.

Also, I don't see how the knowledge of whether it's possible the government could give their property away is dangerous knowledge. To be perfectly honest, I think the idea of what the government can or cannot do being "protected" from the public is dangerous.


----------



## 8'Duece (Jan 16, 2008)

bison11 said:


> hey guys...the other day i posted a question regardeing SOF operators and their weapons. I got some good answers, and kept diggin around.....this is what i came up with....
> http://law.justia.com/us/codes/title10/10usc2574.html
> 
> This makes it sound like you could, under certain circumstances (say the weapon was being decomissioned (the wepon family, like if they decide to replace all the M-16s/M-4s in the military with, say a 416, not just the individual weapon) actually buy weapons, and for that matter maybe some other basic gear from the military. I know its not an every day occurence, in fact im sure rare, but if a family of weapons is being decomissioned, what use could the military have for them any more....dont they get destroyed or sold off to other countries(not sure if my facts are right on that....)? i cant see much harm in an operator buying it off the military if they so choose to do so...i mean, they are more qualified than ANYONE to hand said weapon, right?
> ...



First, per Federal law, the only machines guns and select fire weapons that are sold to the public through a Class III transfer are manufactured prior to May19th, 1986. 

If a weapon where decommissioned after that date, then it either destroyed or most likely still in government keeping or used for parts.  I don't know what the Government does with such weapons, but they ARE NOT sold to the public/transferred under Class III protocol. 

This the reason that a fully auto M16 cost's as much $15,000-$24,000. Same is true of MP5 varients, Mac's, Uzi's, etc.  There's only so much supply of full auto and select fire weapons in circulation that where manufactured before May 19th 1986. 

I have one Colt Car-15 model 733 that costs me $12,500, and that was this past year. It required two stamps, the lower select fire and the upper SBR stamp. I currently run the lower with new LMT MRP carbine upper with a 10.5" bbl, which required another SBR stamp from the BATFE. I also had the lower refinished with Mil Spec'd anododizing for cosmetic purposes. 

I honestly don't know what protocol the Government has for releasing weapons to the public for sale under the current system. I've shot M60's FA .50's, Stermgywhers, etc that others have purchased through the Class III protocol. 

Point being that if an M4 manufactured in 2001 that is now reached it's service life is either upgraded with new parts or destroyed not put out into circulation for sale to the public.


Also see "National Firearms Act of 1934" 

HERE:http://www.keepandbeararms.com/laws/nfa34.htm


----------

