pa2a.org


Share Thread:  
Marines Disarmed for Obama's Second Inaugural Parade
#11
JustinHEMI;78784 Wrote:So, then it's meaningless. If it isn't loaded vs unloading, then I fail to see the bitch.

Justin

In my opinion only, if they are now being required to make the firearm inoperable when in the past they haven't it is a valid gripe. IIRC in the past they've actually had loaded magazines on their person but not in the weapon but that could be wrong.
[Image: member955.png]
USAF (1976 -1986) NRA, GOA Anim_sniper2
"The problems we face today are there because the people who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living." Dan Cofall
Reply
#12
JustinHEMI;78784 Wrote:So, then it's meaningless. If it isn't loaded vs unloading, then I fail to see the bitch.

The issue is that IF this is a change required by this administration, then it demonstrates an obvious lack of trust.

If I have a bolt locked back on an M1, I can insert a clip and have it loaded is seconds. Same with an M14; throw in a mag, release the bolt, and you're ready to rock. Both were unloaded but capable of being loaded in seconds. But if I remove the bolt, that's a whole different story.

So the question is, if the bolt removal is a new thing required by the Obama administration, why was it required all of a sudden?
Reply
#13
So no one really knows the actual truth.

I bet POTUS had nothing to do with it.

Besides, unloaded is unloaded.

Justin
[Image: pafoasig.png]
Reply
#14
JustinHEMI;78792 Wrote:So no one really knows the actual truth.

I bet POTUS had nothing to do with it.

Besides, unloaded is unloaded.

Justin

I never said anything about POTUS. The inference, across the board, was that the Secret Service passed that order along. Of course that order would still have had to have come from higher authority so at the very least you'd be looking at Sec. Panetta, aka a member of this administration. Wink
[Image: member955.png]
USAF (1976 -1986) NRA, GOA Anim_sniper2
"The problems we face today are there because the people who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living." Dan Cofall
Reply
#15
JustinHEMI;78792 Wrote:So no one really knows the actual truth.

I bet POTUS had nothing to do with it.

Which is why I said "if". Of course I can't imagine why the Marines would decide to voluntarily remove bolts, so I'd take that bet.

Quote:Besides, unloaded is unloaded.

So removing the firing pin from your carry piece and leaving it at home is exactly equal to dropping the mag and locking the slide back? Gotcha.
Reply
#16
billamj;78796 Wrote:
JustinHEMI;78792 Wrote:So no one really knows the actual truth.

I bet POTUS had nothing to do with it.

Besides, unloaded is unloaded.

Justin

I never said anything about POTUS. The inference, across the board, was that the Secret Service passed that order along. Of course that order would still have had to have come from higher authority so at the very least you'd be looking at Sec. Panetta, aka a member of this administration. Wink

That's why I didn't quote you as to saying POTUS. However, you and I both know that there are people posting in this thread that thinks something like this comes directly from him.

thebearpack;78800 Wrote:
JustinHEMI;78792 Wrote:So no one really knows the actual truth.

I bet POTUS had nothing to do with it.

Which is why I said "if". Of course I can't imagine why the Marines would decide to voluntarily remove bolts, so I'd take that bet.

Quote:Besides, unloaded is unloaded.

So removing the firing pin from your carry piece and leaving it at home is exactly equal to dropping the mag and locking the slide back? Gotcha.

That's also why I didn't directly quote you. However, again, there are people in this thread saying that this IS, in fact, a deliberate move out of mistrust.

My point about unloaded is unloaded is that in my opinion, locking the bolt vs taking it out, in no way, shows an elevation of mistrust on the part of "the administration." Especially since no one here can say for sure if this is a new practice.

Justin
[Image: pafoasig.png]
Reply
#17
I like this comment;

"These are "parade rifles". The bolts, ammunition, and often times the entire trigger mechanism is removed to make the rifle lighter. Also they are also cleaner as no oil and powder residue means no stains on those pretty dress uniforms. It appears you have NEVER been in the military and had to march in parade. Every ounce counts and in this case it is actually a few pounds. I have seen this posted all over the interwebs and it is frankly a little concerning. Those of us that are really in support of our 2A rights are looking like idiots. I think we all need to take a deep breath and put a stop to these MYTHS and RUMORS. It surely is not helping our cause. I do not support Obama and these libs any more than the next guy here, but we at least have to deal in facts. If not we are just as bad as they are."

From this forum;

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showth...ral-Parade


That seems much more plausible than an elevation of mistrust..., which removing the bolt doesn't demonstrate, anyway.


Justin
[Image: pafoasig.png]
Reply
#18
JustinHEMI;78824 Wrote:I like this comment;

"These are "parade rifles". The bolts, ammunition, and often times the entire trigger mechanism is removed to make the rifle lighter. Also they are also cleaner as no oil and powder residue means no stains on those pretty dress uniforms. It appears you have NEVER been in the military and had to march in parade. Every ounce counts and in this case it is actually a few pounds. I have seen this posted all over the interwebs and it is frankly a little concerning. Those of us that are really in support of our 2A rights are looking like idiots. I think we all need to take a deep breath and put a stop to these MYTHS and RUMORS. It surely is not helping our cause. I do not support Obama and these libs any more than the next guy here, but we at least have to deal in facts. If not we are just as bad as they are."

From this forum;

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showth...ral-Parade


That seems much more plausible than an elevation of mistrust..., which removing the bolt doesn't demonstrate, anyway.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drill_Purpose_Rifle

Justin

I wasn't in the Corps, in the AF those few times that I paraded with a weapon it was with an M-16A2 and nothing was removed from them. Most of the time though we didn't parade with weapons.
[Image: member955.png]
USAF (1976 -1986) NRA, GOA Anim_sniper2
"The problems we face today are there because the people who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living." Dan Cofall
Reply
#19
I always thought it was the marines that went into a country, killed the enemies and then army comes along and throws a parade?
Reply
#20
billamj;78828 Wrote:
JustinHEMI;78824 Wrote:I like this comment;

"These are "parade rifles". The bolts, ammunition, and often times the entire trigger mechanism is removed to make the rifle lighter. Also they are also cleaner as no oil and powder residue means no stains on those pretty dress uniforms. It appears you have NEVER been in the military and had to march in parade. Every ounce counts and in this case it is actually a few pounds. I have seen this posted all over the interwebs and it is frankly a little concerning. Those of us that are really in support of our 2A rights are looking like idiots. I think we all need to take a deep breath and put a stop to these MYTHS and RUMORS. It surely is not helping our cause. I do not support Obama and these libs any more than the next guy here, but we at least have to deal in facts. If not we are just as bad as they are."

From this forum;

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showth...ral-Parade


That seems much more plausible than an elevation of mistrust..., which removing the bolt doesn't demonstrate, anyway.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drill_Purpose_Rifle

Justin

I wasn't in the Corps, in the AF those few times that I paraded with a weapon it was with an M-16A2 and nothing was removed from them. Most of the time though we didn't parade with weapons.

Yeah, there is a lot of anecdotes in that thread as well, even one confirming the removal of bolts.

In other words, like I said, no one really knows. I agree with the guy I quoted, the myths and rumors are not helping our cause.

Justin
[Image: pafoasig.png]
Reply








Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Software by MyBB, © 2002-2015 MyBB Group.
Template by Modogodo Design.