Mainstream media journalists try to never let the facts get in the way of a good story.

Did you catch this quote from the article?

"Designed to be fired from the hip, assault rifles such as the AK-47 can spray at a rate of up to 600 rounds a minute in full automatic mode. It is the weapon of choice for guerillas and gangsters."

There's never been an "assault rifle" designed to be fired from the hip. I think our intrepid reporters got that tidbit from too many Scarface reruns on AMC. Oh, and they misspelled "guerrillas."

Just another example of a media outlet only telling people what they want them to hear. After all they're only journalists, why bother with things like the truth, or facts.

Sadly, Son of Bob, that doesn't even constitute a good story. At least not the AW Ban tie-in. So their breaking even their own rules.

Man, I miss the era in which the print and news media wasn't headed by the Chicken Little cabal.

Well, as along as they don't have those 22mm pistols, the cops should be okay.

but is it even possible to fire a fully-auto assault rifle without bracing it against your shoulder?

Yes you can but the weapon has a tendency to climb. However, if the rate of fire is 600 rounds per minute, this means that in one second it fires 10 rounds. Since the largest capacity magazine is 30 rounds this means that firing fully auto allows you spray for a full 3 seconds.

The article didn't mention this because giving people the idea that hordes of gun nuts were hosing down the area with 600 bullets from the hip is scarier. It also strikes a chord with those whose only contact with weapons is via Hollywood's infinite capacity magazine machine guns.

[I thought they had a tendency to climb even when braced. I would assume firing it at your hip is just a random spray... and certainly not what it's "designed" for. -Ed.]

In this case, "shooting from the hip" is a figure of speech. Meaning the gun is designed to deploy large amounts of death at the slightest twitch of a finger.

[Yes, their extremely factual article made that very clear.

How come whenever Former Hostage posts, this trolls tends to show up? -Ed.]

Regarding your update...

You can fire an automatic rifle from the hip, but hitting anything in that manner is just a matter of blind luck. You're better off squeezing off one well-aimed round from the shoulder rather than frying off a 30-round magazine from the hip.

Keep in mind that there's a huge difference from the proverbial assault rifle and a belt-fed machine gun, like an M-60. If you're forced to fire a 60 from a standing position, you almost have to fire it from the hip. It's too heavy and awkward to do otherwise. All you're really doing though is laying down suppressive fire. You're not going to be particularly accurate, but it helps that you've got a couple of hundred rounds to be inaccurate with...

I have to agree with FormerHostage on this one. I've never shot a fully automatic rifle (nor do I really need to, just to be honest with you), but from what I understand, if you're shooting from your right hip, the rifle will go up and to the right. Yeah, you might hit somebody with it, but it's an accident, not the result of well performed marksmanship.

The representatives of the Brady organization make my blood boil. The article says they support law enforcement officers carrying semi-automatic assault rifles...right. Truth be known, they'd like to make firearms illegal for everyone, and do away with our law enforcement and military communities so we can all be part of one big happy world family, sitting in a circle, smoking grass, and singing "Kumbaya."

the largest capacity magazine is 30 rounds this means that firing fully auto allows you spray for a full 3 seconds.
I have a 75 round magazine for my WASR-10 (semi-auto AK) and a 40 rounder. Cheaper than Dirt is your friend. Of course, I got the 75 rounder when it was $89 and not the $149 it is now.
As for climb, I've fired my WASR-10 in full jihadi mode (from the hip, pulling the trigger like mad) and it climbed up like crazy. I was shooting at a computer (long story), and by the time my 30 rd mag was empty, I was shooting the top of the tree next to it.

You'll hear "spray and pray", that's how jihadis (and hopefully, criminals) shoot. Have you seen Blackhawk Down? They could be so blase about the jihadis shooting at them because they fired from the hip and the only thing you'll hit in fully-auto mode from the hip is Allah.

FormerHostage is right about the abilit to fire from the hip and the tendency to climb. However, weapons such as the SAW use magazines or drums, which can extend your round count well beyond 30.

If you're firing from the hip, you are most definitely "spraying and praying." Suppressive fire, as we called it in the Army.

In this case, "shooting from the hip" is a figure of speech.

I didn't get that from the article. "Designed to shoot from the hip" sounds a lot different than something like: it would allow someone to fire up to 600 rounds per minute from the hip. And if they really did inted it to be a figure of speech, that is yet another example of poor journalism in this article.

To answer your question about reporters using Hollywood movies as references, why, yes they do.

A full auto or semi-auto rifle fired rapidly will climb. I've fired both. You do need to brace the gun to maintain some semblance of control but I can tell you, you will be shooting at the sky by the 3rd or 4th round unless you are using controlled bursts. And even then, keeping the rifle pointed in the general direction of the target will take effort.

Why don't guns do this in the movies? Simple: They are modified to fire blanks and can't fire regular ammunition.

Blank ammunition in many semi and fully automatic rifles don't produce enough gas to cycle their actions. They require the use of a "blank firing adapter" to constrict the end of the barrel and keep the gas pressure high enough for them to work. Look at videos of US Army troops on training exercises with the red blocks on the end of their M16s. That's a BFA.

Obviously, Hollywood can't have this. It ruins the effect. So the rifles themselves are modified internally with constricted barrels and modified bolts and can only fire blanks. If you tried to fire regular ammo through them, the gun would destroy itself.

This also has another side effect: reduced recoil and muzzle climb. Since far less gas is making it out of the muzzle, these fully automatic Hollywood machine guns have the magical ability to be held on target far easier than the real rifle fired the same way. They are much more controllable.

But since people don't know this, they assume the real gun does the same thing and it is so easy to fire any automatic weapon by spraying away.

If you actually tried to fire a full-auto AK-47 from the hip using Hollywood as your only guide, the gun would fly out of your hands after the first few shots. Or shoot your ear off or your buddy next to you as it climbed away and you held on in a panic as Hollywood reality and real reality collide.

But since reporters aren't interested in the technical details as to why and how guns works and the difference between the real world and Hollywood, they just print what they believe and call it facts.

Matt

"designed to be spray fired from the hip" is a direct quote from the Brady website. It's no wonder what source this "journalist" used.

Frank, rent the gun. Send the bill to me, and I'll send you $25.

For SunnyJ's edification, the original term "Shoot from the hip" referred to a gunslinger firing just as his pistol cleared the holster.

In the modern lexicon it means to wing it/fake it. It also does mean to literally fire a weapon with the stock against one's hip. This is, in fact, soviet doctrine and the doctrine that many Middle Eastern military organizations follow. I think the last time the US military endorsed anything similar for rifles was the "mad minute" in VietNam. For shotguns, with a folded stock, it used to be doctrine to tuck the handgrip tight against your hip (this was for close combat or to clear a room).

BTW - back in the late 70's I was going through a training program that had us at a combat course range. At the end of the day we had several hundred rounds left that we "had" to get rid of (it was easier than doing the paperwork to turn them in). At that time M-16's still fired fully-automatic instead of the 3 round burst they were redesigned to fire. Sooooo we loaded up a bucketload of magazines and got to rock 'n roll at water jugs we had with us. We didn't hit anything except a level of Nirvana that I've never been able to reach again.

One other note: if you DO get to fire full auto (from the hip), rotate the position of your left hand so that instead of supporting the barrel from the bottom, you are "pushing" it down from the top. This gives you a bit more control against the climb. This works for the M-16 because the guard completely encases the barrel. The AK's barrel is "naked" on top so you might get a booboo if you try it.

We didn't hit anything except a level of Nirvana that I've never been able to reach again.

That was beautiful.

You nice taxpayers funded some of my firearms experiments back in the mid-80's when I was in the infantry.

Firing and M16 on full automatic with ball ammo generates a recoil experience roughly equivalent to having a fit, 180 lb. man grab the barrel with both hands and vigorously push back and up as you try to resist.

Even braced against the shoulder, it is dificult to get more than about 5 rounds on target, even a large target like a dumpster at 25 meters, with an M16 on full auto. The rest of the rounds go high and right (and the ones that do hit tend to ricochet, don't shoot at dumpsters at 25 meters.)

If you hold an AK47 at the right hip and place your left hand across the top of the stubby little handguard hoping to keep the barrel from climbing too much while firing a long burst on automatic, you will burn the shit out of your left hand on the gas tube (and still not hit anything.)

An M-16 will fire several times while submerged under water but only in semi-auto. The empty casings will not eject quickly enough to allow full-auto fire under water. That doesn't have anything to do with recoil but if my test results can keep even one firearm from being fired underwater, it will have been worthwhile.

In summary:
Automatic can be used to intimidate and gain fire superiority but it's aiming that makes the M.I.L.E.S.* go beeeeep.

*Multiple intergrated laser engagement system, Army version of laser-tag, I was a peace-time paratrooper and my hat is off to the real vets.)

Ron Paul could make a 30-round magazine fire 600 times, and put all 600 rounds through the same spot on full auto! He is a gawd! No, he's better than a gawd! HE IS RON PAUL, MASTER OF THE INFINITE MULTIVERSE (and its suburbs)!

The Thunder Run has linked to this post in the - Web Reconnaissance for 11/07/2007 A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day...so check back often.

I've fired a full auto rifle and accuracy goes to hell, it equates to cover fire---We must again thank the Communist News Network for their dedication to the MFL's and hatred of being American. And Frank, you need to spend the $25, it makes you feel Fred Thompson-ish.

They have an MP3 for rent at my range. Firing it will be my Christmas present to me.

If I'm not mistaken, real machine guns meant for sustained full auto fire, have a thicker barrel than the typical 'assault' rifle. Even if you could sustain a 600 round a minute stream, the barrel would overheat in short order and jam up. And likely blow up in your face.

Someone should explain the difference between theoretical cyclic rates and realistic capabilities.

Oh wait, there's that mystery word that confuses anti-gun loons. Realistic.

Ha! Typo! MP5

"Firing and M16 on full automatic with ball ammo generates a recoil experience roughly equivalent to having a fit, 180 lb. man grab the barrel with both hands and vigorously push back and up as you try to resist."

As Lumberg would say,.. Ya,...I'm gonna go ahead and have to, disagree with ya there.

I was in the Marines and carried the S.A.W. (Squad Automatic Weapon) It shoots the same round as the m16 and can fire 750 to 1,000 rounds per minute, and was quite controlable. When you first start firing, the weapon has a tendincey to climb, but can easily be corrected. It also has a 200 round "magazine" if you will, more like a small box of ammo attached to the bottom of the rifle. Out of all the weapons I got to shoot while I was in, that one was the most fun.

Clay...ooooohhhh yeah! The SAW was fun! I also got to fire the M-60 once and the semi-auto grenade launcher (M-19?). Does anyone remember the nomenclature for the replacement for the M-79, the one that hung underneath the M-16? Has anyone here ever fired a Ma-Duce?

Semper Fi, Clay. I was in the Marine Corps when they first came out with the SAW. I thought it was OK but underpowered. The biggest thing I remember about it was that the barrel release. On the old M-60, you had a lever and a release button. You had to push the lever and the button both to release the barrel. On the SAW, it only had a lever. I was about 500 feet up the side of a muddy hillside in triple canopy, when a tree branch hit the barrel release. I stood there and watched my barrel go end over end about 150 down the mountain. I got to slog back down the mountain (with 100 pounds of combat gear), collect the SAW, clean the mud out of the barrel that was packed about six inches inside it, reassemble my weapon, and slog back up the damned mountain with the aforementioned 100 pounds of crap. Needless to say, I turned my SAW back into the armory and got my old 60 back.

FormerHostage

M-203

The automatic grenade launcher is a Mark-19

FmrH - To reinforce your comment that the article attempts to "scare" with the 600rpm assault weapons: the paragraph immediately prior to that 600rpm reference unfairly juxtaposes the cops' use of 20-30 rd mags. How could 20 rd mags compete w/ 600 rpms? They at least could have said that the cyclic rate of an M16 equals/exceeds that of an AK47. But that would be comparing apples to apples.

Matt - I thought it also very amusing that, despite internal BFA's, some Hollywood guys still couldn't get away from using the dorky-looking blank ammo with belt-fed M60-type weapons.

Mike - As you said, there is a big difference btwn a machine gun, like an M60, and an M16, which not meant to be used exactly like an M60. An M60 was ideally placed on a fixed tripod to keep its fire going across a desired frontage. A bipod was an expedient. From the shoulder was not encouraged (w/o bi-/tripod). Plus, although its max rate of fire was close to an AK, if you didn't fire at about 1/5th the max rate of fire, the barrel would heat up and the gun would stop firing. budda-budda-click! Plus, you needed an assistant gunner to help man the M60.

Also, I understand the purpose of an assault rifle is to carry a lightweight weapon capable of shooting a bunch of rounds without resupply, which ostensibly favors the M16 over its competitors -- not that I'm trying to start a 5.56 vs 7.62 foodfight. :)

Mike II,

I never had a 60 quit firing on me from the barrel overheating, but I've burned the rifling out of a barrel or two. It's pretty cool watching your tracers do curlicues in the sky, but it kind of defeats the purpose...

Oh, and 5.56 is a weenie round ;)

Mike,

I humbly bow to your M60 prowess, and agree somewhat with your 5.56 assessment. Which is partly why I much preferred 155mm HE with my morning coffee.

You are 100% correct. CNN & CBS news should start out every story with the following advisory: "Warning - you are about to be assaulted by left wing liberal bias, propaganda, and outright lies carefully crafted to confuse & mislead. Viewer discretion is advised. Viewers will be assimilated. Resistance is futile."

Resistance is futile.

No, resistance is current over voltage

No, resistance is current over voltage

Ohm my god, but can he quote Kirchoff / Khrushchev ?!

I thought all the military guys here (big salute to all of you) would get a kick out of this article:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main.LawOfInverseRecoil

Law Of Inverse Recoil

My favorite quote:

"Naturally, this makes Guns Akimbo with automatic weapons wholly impractical in real life.

On the flip side, shoulder fired rocket and grenade launchers have very little recoil at all due to the comparatively low velocity at which the projectile leaves the weapon (rockets reach top speed long after leaving the barrel). Yet, when used by a fictitious character, they somehow pack enough force to violently push back the wielder. Presumably, this is due to the erroneous belief that anything that dangerous has to have a powerful kick."

A lot of the gun related tvtropes are worth reading and laughing. =)

Ah, here's the list of all the TV Gun Tropes
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GunsAndGunplayTropes

Quote of the day:
"In real life, guns are carefully designed, well-constructed weapons of death that -- provided they are well maintained -- can last a lifetime. On TV, they're apparently filled with Meccano and loose change, and stuck together with Pritt Sticks."

Actually, I'm an ME major, FrankJ is the EE guy.

I'll give you an ME joke (I think I told it here years ago).

Anybody can build a bridge that stands. It takes an engineer to build a bridge that barely stands.

[LOL. I'll have to remember that one. -Ed.]

And 5 our of 4 engineers have a problem with statistics.

I would like to point out that assault rifles have a stock for a reason: to be fired from the shoulder. Not the hip.

This article obviously confuses AR's with submachineguns (SMGs). Weapons like the Uzi, MP5, Thompson, MP-40, MAC-10...those are submachine guns, intended for close quarters fighting and generally fired from the hip. They also differ from AR's in that they fire a pistol cartridge (9mm Parabellum for most, .50 ACP in the case of the Thompson and the Grease Gun). ARs are rifles, and thus fire a rifle cartridge, .223 in the case of the M-16, 7.62mmX59 in the case of the AK-47.

Two totally, completely different, classes of firearms.

Oh, and the obvious reason the recoil isn't as bad with an SMG is the lower-powered pistol round.

I had to laugh when I got into editing my config.sys file in Half-Life and the MP-5 was labeled as a "9mmAR." Anyone who tells you that a 9mm weapon is an assault rifle is an idiot.

9mm Para is a pistol round. A fully automatic weapon with that chambering is an SMG.

Resistance is voltage over current. Just sayin...

A pessimist looks at a glass and says, "It's half empty."
An optimist looks at a glass and says, "It's half full."
An ME looks at a glass and says, "That needs to be redesigned."

".50 ACP in the case of the Thompson and the Grease Gun)." Er, 45ACP

"7.62mmX59 in the case of the AK-47." 7.62x39

M1928 and M1A1 TSMG's are both quite controllable from the "hip". IMO, the Mac10 and M3/M3A1 are not. The M16, CAR15 can also be fired fairly accurately from down low.
My opinion comes from personal experiance.

I just thought it was fun reading the Real Gun Guys Post "The Journalist's Guide to Gun Violence Coverage". Then reading CNN two days later!!!.
Just made me laugh.

I wonder if there is a "The Journalist's Guide to Political Coverage"???

The Journalist's Guide to Illegal Immigrants Coverage???

The Journalist's Guide to Global Warming Coverage???

The Journalist's Guide to The Economy Coverage???

The Journalist's Guide to the Iraq War Coverage???

The Journalist's Guide to President Bush Coverage???

Maybe these Journalist's Guides, are like Cliff Notes???

Maybe this is all that is taught in Journalism school, and they don't know any better???

I sending Frank J. a note now. He could have some fun with this.

Guy22

Re # 45:

"M1928 and M1A1 TSMG's are both quite controllable from the "hip"."

Controllable but inaccurate, which is the point.

"IMO, the Mac10 and M3/M3A1 are not."

Goes without saying

"The M16, CAR15 can also be fired fairly accurately from down low."

At what range? 10 feet?

My opinion comes from personal experiance."

Really? That's a broad range of weaponry for "personal experience."

Mac 10's, M-16's and Tommy Guns occupy different periods in time and different levels of combat usage.

The Thompson is a WWII area submachine gun, the M-16 is a 60's to 90's infantry rifle, and the Mac-10 is a Miami Vice era ghetto gun.

Are you claiming actual real world experience with all of these?

Are you talking about fiddling around in the cow pasture or going house to house in Fallujah?

Do you think I'm being harsh? If you've been there and done very much of that and tend to literally shoot from the hip, then it is a miracle that you are here with us and able to post comments.

The media keeps talking about "assault weapons" as if this is an actual class of firearm. The assault weapon ban that expired had to do with the cosmetic add-ons of a rifle, and nothing to do with it's rate of fire. A semi-automatic rifle with a pistol grip and a folding stock and an extended magazine was as illegal as an MP-5. All the antigun nuts need to learn to shut up unless they actually know what they're talking about.

I can't believe I said .50 ACP. Thank you for the correction. As for the 7.62X39 v 7.62x59...I totally blew that as well.

God, I look stupid now.

#47 "Are you claiming actual real world experience with all of these?"
Absolutely, otherwise I would not have made the comment.

"Controllable but inaccurate, which is the point."
Weeell, Don't bet on that. Granted, they are not tack drivers, but ou can prett much put rounds where you want.

"At what range? 10 feet?"
Will you settle for 50 meters?

"Really? That's a broad range of weaponry for "personal experience."
Yup It's called being a combat vet. (Nam)

Sorry Mike, I do have experience with all those, and others. Hope that answers your questions. Skul

Should mention, the MAC-10 time came twenty years ago. I thought it to be piece of crap.

Hey Jackass!!! Use some commen sense. Of course you can fire an assault rifle from the hip. You probably won't hit anything because you're an idiot (like the terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan). How about you get off your a$$ for once (like all of our nation's Veteran's have) and do something useful with your life besides talk trash about issues that you have no clue about.

So, to answer your question (since you are obviously too ignorant to think for yourself), YES you can in fact fire an automatic weapon from the hip!

- Combat Veteran! (The men who don't NEED large guns to compensate!)

You're barking up the wrong tree Infantry.

#52 infantry

I was going to just let this die, but changed my mind.
I can only conclude that you have very little to no experience with the weapons I mentioned. I suspect the latter. I suggest you beg, borrow or rent an M1A1 and fire a couple thousand rounds before spouting off about something you know nothing about.
Secondly young man, I was in combat before your parents were even married. Probably before they were old enough to drive. I didn't spend five months in Fitzsimons Army hospital from wounds just for you to spew your ignorant garbage.
You want to see a jacka$$ sonny, go look in a mirror.

Have a nice day you miserable piss-ant.