On the one hand, as noted above, the movie has to have a plot, the plot needs to be interesting, and it needs to tell the beginning, middle and end within the space of around two hours. Some parts need to be left out, some parts need to be exaggerated to make them interesting, and some parts need to be invented from whole cloth so that the average dweeb on the street will like it. The film, after all, is marketed to the general population, not just military personnel.

On the other hand, I often find it interesting that no one seems to complain overmuch that Tony Stark, for example, can somehow wear a heatless, wasteless nuclear reactor embedded in his chest, but plenty of people will go to great lengths to point out that the tank round could not have possibly struck Iron Man in midair like that. Apparently there are limits to the level of disbelief we are willing to suspend- though I fully admit that a “gritty, realistic” movie like Locker is supposed to require considerably less suspension.

On the third hand, I also know full well how hard it is for someone who is not part of a “scene” to grasp it. I’m a paintball enthusiast- among other things- and I’ve been watching the media’s portrayal of our sport since very early on. Everything from an early episode of LA Law (roughly 1991) to “King of the Hill” (about 2000) to whatever late-night blabbermouth needs a quick skit that involves “guns”.

They have never once, not ONCE, gotten it right. Whether it’s something simple like masks (which I can understand since they think we gotta see the actors’ faces) or more complex like the dynamics of the game, they will NOT get it right- and that’s assuming they even try, since more often than not, they’re playing for a gag or trying to pass it off as a “violent” sport.

We “know” that Top Gun wasn’t realistic, but we give it a pass because hey, Kelly McGillis and warplanes shooting at things. We know James Bond isn’t realistic, but it’s supposed to be escapism, not a documentary. It’s more fun to imagine ourselves at the baccarat table casually dropping ten thousand pounds on a hand, then knocking back a martini just before bedding the hot supermodel who also just happens to be the brilliant kung-fu master henchman, than it is to try and imagine how Bond manages to escape fifteen kinds of STDs and half a dozen paternity suits.

Bottom line? Hurt Locker, errors and all, is still miles better than that Matt Damon piece of shit about to come out.

Doc.

Most police forces are untrained, unprepared an generally unequipped, the Federal police is nicely equipped, though, nothing more outstanding that the average U.S. Citizen. I respect most forces except the ones at the municipal level, those are more of a problem than a solution.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jO-4-YYQUPs

Random video to compensate for the vagueness of this post. an actual Mexican Army on budget training, perhaps to many video games? I don’t know, the back to back seems stupid to me, I think they where using CO2 guns, at some point I see a CO2 discharge.

The police, no matter how they are armed, cannot be everywhere at once.

Hmmh.

LOL

The mail does go in the end, though the final door setup hadn’t been finished at time of installation. Instead it has a plate bolted on, rendering this 1911 a fine work of gun art

Here we go, found them:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fspZibuzMcY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPHgzjRtzEs&feature=related

I haven’t seen Blind Side or Precious, but I really enjoyed Inglorious Basterds!

Seems to me that it would be a more realistic scenario if the trainer went down range and fired back.

hahahha no kidding. They are blanks right? What could possibly go wrong?

hehe Iraqi biathon is definitely an event I would watch

But on a more serious note, you all have it wrong, this video is actually training for the Iraqi Biathlon.

Stupid ideas, granted, but still ideas.

But nothing like this, which is insane.

The Special Forces are too professional (as are the conventional forces) and training like that is just asking for a mishap.

That has got to be one of the cowboy training outfits that have popped up. I can’t believe anyone would consider that useful. Like I said before that’s just harassment, pure and simple.

I haven’t seen a movie this full of holes since my dad shot a VHS with a 12 gauge. It wasn’t until a day later that I realized that if that fictional idiot had done everything according to army regs, it would have been a very boring movie.

I assumed the video was dealing with ‘combat stress’…

I’m talking about stress as the term is used in the Marines or Army. When you talk about the stress of combat it has nothing to do about being nervous about being late for work or if you paid the gas bill.

What disappointed me deeply was how horribly insulting it was to soldiers (sailors, marines, et. al.). It depicted all officers as one of two caricatures, either “John Wayne” or an absolute idiot. There were a couple of scenes that, I felt, portrayed US soldiers as oppressors, and lacking even basic human decency. More-over, it was clear these scenes had no value to the basic story.

Still, go see it. It was a good movie, all things considered, and you can overlook most of the annoying things. I didn’t get up and walk out or anything. I probably would not have picked it for Best Picture. Having seen all 10 nominees, I have to say that “The Blind Side” stuck with me and made me think more than any of the others, and I don’t watch or understand football. “Precious” probably had the best acting, over all, and “Inglorious Basterds” was the most fun.

This looks extreme, undoubtedly, but I wouldn’t consider it so extreme as to be “over the top,” or that it doesn’t have some useful value. When I was in the Army a few years ago we did training on the range that involved distracting/stressful elements like blank firing very close, artillery simulators, and yelling and screaming while we fired. None of the physical elements of pushing, shoving, kicking, etc. though.

I researched because the report said that the batfe goon said it can be transformed into a machinegun.

http://www.airsplat.com/Manuals/GR-WE-M4-GBB-4.jpg

on that page you can see it has the milled hole at the 12′o clock of the safe, in an AR lower, if you mill that little hole, you are making a machinegun, because that’s where the sear retent pin goes (or something like that), even if the parts still don’t fit, that hole alone makes it a machinegun.

The only thing I can see that could defend the WE M4 CQB, is that the stock threading on the lower is not compatible with a stock threading of an actual AR stock, If there’s no stock tube, no action spring can be put, and there won’t be a buffer to be returned, hence, it WONT cycle on it’s own, making it a bolt action 80% lower.

http://www.tacticalinc.com/ar15-lower-receiver-forging-p-1108.html

As you can see, it appears to be nothing more than a very rough forging of a lower receiver with NO machining done to it. It seems that there may not be a precise definition of what an 80% receiver is, but the ATF has ruled that machine work such as drilling holes would “designate its purpose” and push it past the 80% threshold. Obviously this airsoft gun is going to have had more work done to it than that to make it usable even as a toy. So it doesn’t appear to qualify as an 80% receiver, and it hasn’t been properly imported as a firearm component.

In which case, taking an airsoft receiver and MODIFYING it to accept firearm trigger parts (and presumably uppers, etc.) is, or should be, a legally identical action. Meaning that, if it’s legal for you to own the finished firearm, then doing the mod to the airsoft receiver should be legal.

Also I was told that you only need to apply for a manufacturing license if you made more than 20 guns a year. I don’t know why 20 but that’s the number. Also I was told you only have to put a serial number and get a tax stamp on it if you want to sell it.

I’m not a lawyer though so I wouldn’t really listen to me.

The gunsmith who checked the compatibility of the replicas is quoted as saying: “The trigger pack of an AR15 appears to be able to fit onto the lower receiver of a WE TTI M4, one of the AR15 trigger pack retaining pins is impossible to insert without major modification, and the hammer isn’t operable with the WE TTI lower.”.

He uses the term “major modification” which is subject to interpretation. But with that said, I’ll add a couple more comments.

The “trigger pack” referred to (never heard that term before) is a trigger and disconnector assembly, presumably. It is held in position with one pin that is driven in from the right side of the lower receiver. The hammer and spring are held in place with one more pin, also drive in from the right side of the lower receiver. If you drill the holes for the pins in the right place, you can install these parts and you’ve got a working trigger, assuming of course that the lower receiver casting has the right dimensions to hold these components. From what I’ve seen in print, I can’t tell if this is the case or not.

I think you can understand that putting an AR-15 together is not terribly difficult, and that the BATF thinks that this unregistered receiver is close enough to the real thing to pose a risk.

What puzzles me is why the people who make these airsoft rifles go to such lengths to make them close enough internally to the real thing to get themselves or their dealers (in this case) in such trouble. I mean, why bother? When they designed the thing, didn’t they realize that the lower receiver is the one single part in the whole (semi-auto version) of the rifle that is really governed, and that to make a near-duplicate was going to cause a controversy?

To go much further with this would involve getting one of these lower receivers and trying to make it a functional weapon. I have no interest in doing that (and it might just be illegal), so my participation in this conversation has come to and end.

Wolf

Wasn’t the whole point of this story originally that they were importing “firearms” without the required licenses? So… you can’t import firearm receivers without being licensed to do so. You can build your own from scratch without a license and you can assemble one from parts without a license, but I think what the law is saying is that those firearm components can not be manufactured and sold by someone without a license. And I think the point about someone helping you is that if you don’t do all of the manufacturing work yourself then someone else is also a manufacturer, therefore it’s not being done by one individual for their own use, and so requires registration.

There is no law against building your own. Only law that exists against building a firearm,, is building a machinegun. And in some weird governmental way… a machinegun is a machinegun, not a firearm.

on board here yet?

You can take and buy a parts kit AK, assuming that owning such a normal firearm is allowed to you by the local gods… er… officials, and bend your own receiver. Or, buy a receiver, just a receiver, because in ATF land, that metal flat that can accept all the parts and has a serial number is a firearm, not the sum of the parts.

Bottom line, you can roll your own, as long as you dont do it in certain ways.

What Mike is gettign at is an 80% receiver. Its the beginnings of a receiver, but only has about 80% of the work done, so it is not yet serialed and finished, and cannot be readily made into a working rifle or pistol.

I’ll try to look for some references for that thought, but it seems like, based on what I read, legally manufacturing your own firearm without a license requires far more than putting parts together or simply machining an existing part. It has to be essentially from scratch. From materials or parts not resembling a firearm in any way. So, while toaster-to-gun may very well be legal, I don’t think a toy gun-to-gun would ever fly with the ATF.

Looks like a real pain in the ass there. I definitely wouldn’t want to live there for anything but the nice weather.

If it takes a machine shop to convert the receivers then that’s not fair.

Exactly! Whats next? Charging someone for possession of full auto lowers for owning some billet aluminum?