Full Auto - of any real use?

[AK103K]

They are simply a weapon, like any other, and used both offensively and defensively. If youre being assaulted, and its what you have, its a defensive weapon.

For what a registered gun goes for these days, I doubt the owner would risk using it, unless it was all that was available.

If I had a valid reason for using deadly force, the weapon is meaningless, except maybe in a civil case and public opinion. Criminally, a good shoot is a good shoot.

[tangolima]

Originally Posted by AK103K

If I had a valid reason for using deadly force, the weapon is meaningless, except maybe in a civil case and public opinion. Criminally, a good shoot is a good shoot.

A case of self defense must meet 5 criteria simultaneously; innocence, imminence, avoidance, proportionality, and reasonableness. A full auto may have a bit of hard time meeting the last one or two.

You will be charged criminally if you fail to make a case of self defense. Failing to meet any one of the above 5 criteria that is.

-TL



Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

[AK103K]

If I shoot someone in self defense three times with a handgun or three times with a SMG, whats the difference?

[ClaymoreAKM]

If you are laying down suppressive fire it is of use.

Otherwise, semi-automatic is much more accurate and useful.

[45_auto]

Originally Posted by ak103

If I shoot someone in self defense three times with a handgun or three times with a SMG, whats the difference?

Somewhere between 0 years and life, depending upon whether your lawyer or the prosecutor is better in the criminal trial, and somewhere between 0 and several million dollars depending upon whether your lawyer or the plaintiff's is better in the civil trial.

[AK103K]

Right. So either way, youre not in a good spot, and either way, its the same thing.

[Bourbon Fan]

If I shoot someone in self defense three times with a handgun or three times with a SMG, whats the difference?

To a juror, it can make ALL the difference (right or wrong)

About 30 years ago, my father was on a criminal jury that involved a homeowner that shot a burglar. There were a lot of nuances in the case that I won't bore anyone with, but in summary, it appeared to the prosecutor that the homeowner had ample chance to flee/retreat the home and didn't 'need' to shoot the burglar. In fact, according to my father, the evidence suggested that the homeowner actually went out of his way to shoot the burglar.
One detail that several of the jurors took notice of was the .44 mag with an 8" barrel the homeowner used during the incident. The jurors felt that the choice of weapon made the homeowner look like a guy that 'wanted' to shoot someone. It made him look like a Dirty Harry Wannabee in their eyes. These jurors were actually more compelled by the choice of gun, than they were by the 'actual' evidence that suggested the shooting was unnecessary.

Anyway, after many hours of deliberation, they acquitted the homeowner. Not because he was innocent. My father said he was clearly guilty by the letter of the law. However, their consensus was that the scumbag burglar deserved to be shot........and thus he got shot. So the homeowner was the lucky recipient of a jury nullification. (rightfully so IMO)

However, if you shoot someone with an SMG- you could find yourself at the tender mercies of a less sympathetic jury that will look at your 'evil gun' as an indicator that you were drooling for the day that you got to shoot someone.

A 5 shot snubby won't have that effect on a jury.

[AK103K]

I understand the horrors of going through our legal system and have been a juror a couple of times myself. The thing I learned the most by being involved with it is, 99% of those there dont want to be there and are doing their best to get out of it and go home. So you REALLY dont want to be there, no matter what the reason.

I do find it somewhat entertaining though, that so many will basically tell you to its better to do nothing because you "might" get in trouble.

Im in no way saying I want to go through the system just to prove a point, but if the gun I have is the gun I have, Im damn sure using it to protect myself, and not worrying about who it might offend down the road.

Then again, suggesting you "might" choose to actually defend yourself is another off topic around here, so probably best not to go there either.

I still feel that if you have acted in self defense, with a handgun, rifle, SMG, whatever, if you were justified in your actions, it likely wont even get to court, at least not criminally. I understand the civil cases are a whole other matter, but I believe in many places, if you arent charged criminally, the matter is basically stopped right there.

But of course, this is really a moot point anyway, as the majority of people dont have access to full auto weapons anyway, and as I said before, I doubt those who do have them, would risk losing them, if for nothing more, than the thought of losing the equity in them.

[P5 Guy]

I vaguely remember a case where gun store owner thwarted a robbery with a S&W 76. I think it was a Mas Ayoob article.

[Tinbucket]

Necessary? That is the same argument the anti gunners fling on the wall on all firearms.
I wouldn't hesitate to grab my Uzi, if an unknown number of Felons are trying to break into my home.
Better dead than able to sue.
Duty to retreat is passe, in most states. Pity those in the noth east.
Duty to retreat and proportional response are not logical.
The perpetrator does not have a right to declare the ruels, of Hoyle, is in effect, for the victim, and that he be given a fair fight or fair chance to rob, rape and kill you.
Yes the Uzi is useful if that is what you want, or a shotgun, or rifle or pistol or revolver, or baseball bat, of your world heavy weight champion wife of husband.

[ShootistPRS]

If lethal force is required or assumed to be warranted then it really shouldn't matter what is used to apply that force. Dead is dead and it doesn't matter if a 22LR was used or a 50 BMG. You have the right to defend your person and your property. If someone is on your property without permission you have the right to remove them. If they are trespassing and have a gun they are a threat to you. They have deadly force available to them and you should have the same force for yourself.
A court can decide if there was a threat in legal terms but only you can decide if you feel threatened. Then you have to be able to explain the threat you felt. For an old man who is partially disabled it might be nothing more than a man entering his home or a group of teens taunting him.
If a person feels his life or wellbeing is in jeopardy he has every right to act against that threat. Will a jury make that call? I don't know but if I am on that jury and I believe the defendant was in fear then he will walk.

[K_Mac]

I do not own an automatic weapon. Whether one would be of value in a real life situation depends entirely on the circumstances of that situation. I do think that in most self-defense situations an automatic would not be desirable.

We often get caught up in the discussion of need. The Feds clearly think we don't really need automatic weapons, but will allow it if we have the money and are willing to jump through the proper hoops. My state has determined I don't need one, period. To paraphrase another member, if need is the requirement, and government is the arbiter of that need, we are in real trouble. I also believe that in a fight against tyranny an automatic weapon might be very useful.

[ShootistPRS]

It is my considered opinion that in order for a full auto weapon to be of any use one must have a nearly inexhaustible supply of ammunition. The military establish support for full auto weapons but as an individual I think it would be useless or worse to have one for any use other than the shear enjoyment of a once a year no holds barred group shoot. I can see more need or use for a 50 BMG bolt gun as it would allow targeting vehicles and individuals at a very long range. Machine guns are used for cover fire or to defend a location from mass attacks. They are typically not as accurate as a bolt gun

[Tinbucket]

This why we have Dillon 1050s and 650s. It takes about twice as long to load as to shoot but I have plenty of time. With Ponsess Warren motor, on the 1050, I can eat supper while it works. Lots, of fresh ammo, for the next war.
Still, primers a 32.00 a thousand powder, at 228.00 eight pounds, and bullets at 110.00 a thousand it gets expensive.
Wife might have to go to work.

[James K]

Considering only a simple defense question (are they ever simple?) the more rounds on target the better. And full auto capability allows the shooter to put more rounds on the target in the shortest possible time.

The horrible fact is that most folks shooting full auto will put bullets just about everywhere but the target; but that is a matter of training and skill, not the weapon.

Jim

P.S. Can we do without the photograph of a black man as the criminal? Why inject race into the discussion? In a couple of "interactions" in my time as a deputy sheriff, the bad boys were definitely white. And in a whole bunch of wars, the only black people on the battlefield were Americans.

JK

[armoredman]

Anyone remember the guy who used an AC 556 in a road rage defense situation?

Found a link that had a written account...

From sufficientvelocity.com

The Incident

Sunday, February 24, 1984, approximately 2 PM. Gary Fadden, 26, and his lovely 22 year old fiancee are driving from a birthday party in Martinsburg, WV, into Virginia to look at some property for what they hope will be their starter home after their marriage. It's a bitterly cold day, and with the winter coats in the back of a new '84 Ford F-250 supercab 4WD diesel pickup, the Pendleton-clad Fadden looks from a distance like a harmless Yuppie. That means he and the pretty brunette look like prey to another kind of person.

Heading east on Rt. 50, they are passed by a Harley-Davidson motorcycle with two people astride, the operator cutting in front of him so sharply that he has to brake suddenly. Gary comments to his fiancee how cold they must be riding a bike on a low 30s day, and that driving as carelessly as he is, the cyclist needs to worry about sudden patches of ice.

A few minutes later, he spots a Chevy pickup in his rearview mirrors. It contains three people. One passenger is gesturing to him to pull over. Gary doesn't know what these scruffy guys want and he ignores them. But then he sees the passenger waving a knife, and the driver bringing up a revolver.

Gary says to his fiancee, in what will probably be the understatement of his life, "We've got a bit of a problem here."



Pursuit

It is 1984, long before the universal coming of cell phones, and there is no other communications in the vehicle. They are entering Middleburg, a town of perhaps 800, and stop at a red light. Behind them, Gary can see both males exit their truck and run toward him. The driver's hand is actually on Gary's door handle when he pops the clutch and sends his new truck screeching through the intersection against the light. The two men run back to their older pickup, and the chase is on.

They're almost on his bumper. Gary accelerates, hitting open road now, zig-zagging between reaching 95 miles an hour when the speed governor cuts in. Not only are the pursuers keeping pace but he sees the driver aiming a revolver at him out his window. Honking his horn and flashing his lights when he runs into a cluster of automobiles, passing them sometimes on the shoulder of the road and spraying rooster-tails of gravel, Gary still cannot elude the truck behind him.

Gary is desperately looking for a police car he can flag down. He doesn't see one. The chase has gone for 22 miles now and they're getting into a more compact area again. Coming up is an intersection tic knows well: he goes through it every day on his way to work. Even on Sunday it will be clogged. He forms a plan quickly: if the light is in his favor, he'll go through it and keep going, hoping to find police in a more populated area. If the light is against him, he'll turn right, and make for the plant where he works on Chantilly Road.

The light stays red. Gary cuts hard right, heading for what he hopes will be the sanctuary of the workplace. Behind him, he can see that the pursuers haven't given up an inch. "I've got my pass card through the gates and the front door," he tells his fiancee urgently. "We'll get into the building and we can hide. They can't find us. We'll call the cops from there."

He pulls into the front area of the plant, the automatic mechanism taking an achingly long time to raise the gate. As the gate opens, the pursuing truck comes to a stop behind his, both men jumping out and running to Gary's Ford, their hands clawing at his door handles. He guns the engine and gels away from them, sweeping up to the front door and locking up the brakes in a skid.

The plant is Heckler and Koch.

Gary Fadden is a salesman for HK, and among the rest of their firearms, he sells machine guns. In the truck with him is a competitor's weapon he has acquired to test, a Ruger AC556, the selective-fire assault version of the .223 Mini-14. He grabs it now as he throws open the truck door, hoping to hold them off at gunpoint. lie knows his fiancee can't make it to the building's door now, and he screams to her to get down on the floor of the Ford.



The Shooting

The passenger is running toward him, an average size man in ratty clothes with stringy hair, a long beard, and an expression of absolute rage.

The selector switch and manual safety of the AC556 are in two different locations. Gary has not yet fired this weapon and, though he has taken off the safety, he doesn't know whether the switch is set for semi, three-shot burst, or full auto. He yells "Stop or I'll shoot," points the muzzle upward, and pulls the trigger for a warning shot.

The weapon is set on full automatic. Everything is going into deep slow motion, and Gary is aware that the Ruger spits a burst of nine shots before he can get his finger back off the trigger.

There is no effect whatsoever. The attacker is still running at him, perhaps ten yards away and closing fast, reaching for knives at his belt with each hand. The assailant screams, "F*** you and your high powered rifle! I'm gonna kill you motherf***ers!"

And Gary Fadden has run out of time. He lowers the Ruger, points it at the charging knifer, and pulls the trigger one more time. in the ethereal slow motion of profound tachypsychia, Gary can see the spent .223 shells arcing lazily out of the mechanism. He stops the burst, aware that six shots have been fired, as the man in front of him falls heavily to the ground.

Gary moves quickly, putting a big brick planter between himself and the onrushing pickup as cover. The truck stops and the driver, the larger of the two bearded men, shrieks. "F*** you! You killed one of the brothers! You shot him, you motherf***er!" Gary's weapon is level and ready, but this time instead of waving the revolver, the man looks as if he's trying to hide it in the cab of his truck. Gary can see now that the third person in the truck, the one who has always stayed in the cab, is a woman.

And then, the police are there. "They've got guns," Gary shouts to the officers disgorging from two patrol cars. He sets his rifle down and steps back as the officers swarm the pickup truck, taking the surviving man and woman into custody. In a moment, a cop is standing with Gary. "I did it," Gary says. The cop answers, "Did what?" "I shot that man." The officer picks up the AC556. "It's loaded," Gary warns, "Do you want me to unload it'?" The policeman answers. "No, I'll do it. Why don't you sit down?"

Gary Fadden sits on the curb. For a moment, it seems as if the whole bizarre nightmare is over. Unfortunately, it has only begun.



Aftermath

The man he had shot. Billy "Too Loose" Hamilton, was dead. He had been hit by all six rounds of Winchester 55 grain FMJ, headstamped "'WCC81." One bullet had struck behind the lateral midline in the instant that he turned away from the gunfire, taking out a chunk of his spine as is skidded across his back from side to side. This would be interpreted later by the prosecutor as having been "shot in the back."

The partner, who went by the name of "Papa Zoot," had gotten his weapons out of his hands by the time police arrived. In the front of the five-year-old Chevy pickup that had chased Fadden for more than 20 miles, police found a .22 auto pistol and a four-inch Smith & Wesson L-frame .357 Magnum. The revolver had three live and three empty cartridges in the cylinder. More fired brass was on the floor, and a plastic bag with more live amino was open on the seat. Though Fadden heard no shots and no bullets hit his truck, he was convinced then and now that they were shooting at him during the chase.

Hamilton's two knives, a Schrade folding hunter and a nondescript fixed blade, were found with his corpse.

Gary Fadden was arrested that night and charged with 1st degree murder. His family raised $60,000 bail. He hired DC attorney Gerry Treanor to defend him. Treanor, at Gary's request, retained John Farnam and I as expert witnesses. Today, Gary remembers, "Two prosecutors wouldn't touch it until the third took it. It was all political because of the automatic weapon."

The weeklong trial took place in October of 1984. Word had reached Gary that Papa Zoot had bought a .30/06 rifle and sworn a "blood oath" to kill him. I was driving toward Fairfax County when I got the message from Gary's lawyer that John and I wouldn't be needed because the prosecution had self-destructed.

On the stand, Papa Zoot and the woman had testified that Gary had tried to run their biker brother off the road, and they had just followed 22 miles to get his license tag. Defense lawyer Treanor took them apart on cross-examination. An undercover detective broke his cover to testify that the deceased and Papa Zoot "put a bomb in my car. They like to rough people up." The prosecutor made such a show of waving the machine gun that the judge made a point of instructing the jury that the death weapon had nothing whatsoever to do with whether or not the shooting was self-defense. The jury learned that Gary purchased the AC-556 personally and that it was perfectly legal to possess the weapon.

By the start of trial, the charge had been dropped to second-degree murder, and as the trial collapsed around the prosecutor's ears, he offered a plea to manslaughter, which Gary flatly rejected. At the end, when it was announced that the jury had found Gary Fadden Not Guilty on all counts, Fadden recalls that the self-same prosecutor snapped--in open court, in front of Gary's mother--"'You've let a murderer loose!"

"'H&K protected me," says Gary. "They picked up the tab for about half of my legal bills, and got all the publicity for it, until I quit a few years later. Florian Deltgen (at that time CEO at HK) told me after an argument with the vice president that one or the other of us probably had to go, and the vice president wasn't going anywhere. I accepted a job offer from Beretta USA and then resigned from H&K. Deltgen stuck me with the remaining bill, which I paid off at 10% interest." The bill had amounted to more than $45,000. Gary was 34 years old before he had paid everything back.

Dr. Deltgen is no longer with Heckler and Koch.



Lessons

Have communication. In 1984, only the rich had phones in their cars. Today, Gary Fadden is never without a charged-up cell phone. He knows that if he'd had one that day he could have called the police, who would have been able to interdict his pursuers before the thing became a killing situation.

Flight can trigger pursuit. Prey that flees inflames the pursuit instinct of predators. This is why we teach our children never to run from snarling dogs. Gary Fadden did what society told him to do when facing criminals: he ran. They chased. By the time they caught up with him, Billy Hamilton was in such a rage to kill that he could not be deterred.

Understand how deterrence really works. Papa Zoot and Too Loose had guns and amino and knives in their truck with them. In Gary's truck were a Remington Nylon 66.22 rifle (for plinking, and never touched during the incident), a 9mm HK VP70Z pistol, and the AC556 with enough amino for perhaps tour full magazines. None were loaded at the start. The pistol was loaded and placed in the console during the chase, and the rifle was at that point loaded and placed conspicuously on the dashboard by Gary in hopes that it would deter file pursuit. It did not.

When Gary Fadden stepped out of his new Ford at the climax of the chase, most of us would have seen him as an intimidating presence. The man stands six feet eight and weighed 260 pounds at the time, and he was holding a machine gun. His pursuers were unimpressed.

Later identified as belonging to one of the "big four" outlaw motorcycle clubs, Too Loose and Papa Zoot were members of an armed subculture themselves. They did not fear guns. Zoot was about 6'4" and 240 himself, and neither man feared big guys dressed like something off the cover of an L.L. Bean catalog. It is critical to understand this: Criminals don't fear guns. Criminals fear resolutely armed men or women they believe will actually shoot them.

22 miles of running away from them had left these wolves convinced that they were dealing with a large sheep, not the sharp-fanged sheepdog Gary Fadden turned out to be. Testimony that "they liked to rough people up" shows that they had a lot of ego invested in brutalizing others. Perhaps Hamilton, in his last moment on earth, took Fadden's warning burst as an indication of unwillingness to shoot him. Toxicology screen after death showed Hamilton to have a .19% blood alcohol content. This is a level of intoxication consistent with inhibitions being at their lowest. Gary Fadden sums it up today, "The mouse had run, and the cat was loose. Physical size was no deterrent. The gun was no deterrent with these people. If you pull a gun, you'd better be ready to use it."

Politically incorrect "assault weapons" make politically incorrect defendants. Though he didn't say it in so many words, prosecutor Jack Robbins' case against Fadden seemed to be, "I say, Muffy, people of breeding simply don't shoot criminals with machine guns in Fairfax County! Now, had he used a civilized weapon like a Browning Superposed ... and preferably shot him on the rise ... "

You and I know that Class III holders are the ultimate "card carrying good guys and gals." That particular card says they have been investigated for six months by the Federal government and been found trustworthy to possess machine guns. Unfortunately, most of the public in the jury pool, and most politically motivated prosecutors, don't know that. Every self-defense shooting I've run across with a Class III weapon, however justified, has at the very least ended with the shooter facing a grand jury. Asked what he thinks would have happened if he'd shot Hamilton with a Remington 870 Wingmaster instead, Fadden replies with certainty, "I would have gone home that night. I've told dozens of people since, 'Do not use a Class III weapon for personal defense."' Today, the guns Gary is likely to have in his car have neutral images: an M-1 .30 carbine, and a 10mm Glock 20 pistol.

Be there for your friends. It was stunning how many people he had trusted shunned Gary after the shooting, and particularly, after his indictment. He cherishes those who stood beside him through the ordeal, particularly Jim Stone and Rick DeMilt and, most particularly, knife-maker Al Mar.

Much later, after his AC556 had been returned to him by the courts, Gary gave that gun to Al Mar, another man who appreciated a fine weapon of any kind. On its stock was a brass plate engraved "To Al Mar, Because You Understand."

Gary says, "For twenty years now, I've cherished every morning I've gotten up, because I earned every moment of my life. I fought for it."

After Al Mar's death, Gary Fadden scraped up the money to buy his knife business, and he is CEO of Al Mar Knives to this day. One good man carrying on the work of another. It seems fitting.

[armoredman]

The Beckwith incident, from the Ayoob files.

http://www.afn.org/~guns/ayoob.html

[Deaf Smith]

Full auto fire is usefull when you want to cross the street without the opposition being able to fire upon you. It's also usefull if you what to interrupt a conference and total the confers.

Deaf

[Double Naught Spy]

Well, if the Fadden case demonstrates that we should not use full auto for self defense because it might look bad to the jury, then do we apply the same logic that we can't use 10mm revolvers with hollowpoint ammunition like Harold Fish because it may look bad to the jury, or any other firearm for that matter because some over zealous prosecutor vilified something about it in court - too big, too powerful, too many rounds, etc.?

Just like with any other gun, pick your full auto carefully and learn to use it properly. Nowadays there are plenty of suppressors and compensators that will help control recoil and muzzle climb quite well on various calibers and 3 round burst is a nice feature on many as well.

[DMK]

Well, if the Fadden case demonstrates that we should not use full auto for self defense because it might look bad to the jury, then do we apply the same logic that we can't use 10mm revolvers with hollowpoint ammunition like Harold Fish because it may look bad to the jury, or any other firearm for that matter because some over zealous prosecutor vilified something about it in court - too big, too powerful, too many rounds, etc.?

Yes.

Whatever you use, you need to be able to articulate your use of the weapon as a reasonable citizen to a layman jury. A weapon or ammunition widely used by your local police and/or many private citizens may help you with that justification.


Ayoob on machine guns, SBRs, silencers and inflamatory markings on guns.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5mjqLmffWY


.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

If I had a valid reason

That won't be know until the jury speaks. If they are influenced by the gun type - surprise, your reason isn't valid. Go to jail.

Why don't people get this?

[Mainah]

Wow, that Fadden case study was great. Ayoob is a great writer and instructor. Full-auto clearly played a role in the trial, but I'm not at all convinced that the same result couldn't have been achieved with a revolver.

What really caught my attention was Ayyob's assertion that fleeing road rage escalated the situation. That's a reaction that I've believed in, and even advocated for here. Does anyone know if Ayoob recommends a specific alternative response?

[DMK]

What really caught my attention was Ayyob's assertion that fleeing road rage escalated the situation. That's a reaction that I've believed in, and even advocated for here. Does anyone know if Ayoob recommends a specific alternative response?

He talks a little bit about that in this video (all audio actually):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ntvW1t9Bkk

I think the standard advice is to call 911 and follow their directions to drive to your local police station.

Wow, that Fadden case study was great. Ayoob is a great writer and instructor. Full-auto clearly played a role in the trial, but I'm not at all convinced that the same result couldn't have been achieved with a revolver

You don't want to give a prosecutor with an agenda free ammunition.

However, you can look at the Zimmerman trial to see how the prosecution came up with ridiculous attacks. They said he carried his gun with a round in the chamber "just looking for someone to shoot". They claimed he disabled the safety so his gun had a "hair trigger". He carried a Keltec that was designed with no safety (it was double action or striker fired, not sure which).


I highly recommend that anyone who cares about these things read Ayoob's most recent book on the subject (where he describes a number of trials including Zimmerman's in detail):

Deadly Force: Understanding Your Right to Self Defense

https://www.amazon.com/Deadly-Force-...keywords=ayoob

[jmorris]

Every year we have a big 4th of July cookout/fireworks show, the next day we play. Some years ago my mother in law stayed over and came to out machine gun shoot. After she gave one a try she asked what they were good for?

I told her the 4 hours we had been at it so far was still a lot cheaper than the 45 minutes of fireworks the not before and asked her if she thought people were having more fun or not. She understood at that point, lots of folks shoot all the time without ever having any intention of harming anything or knocking out the center of a bullseye at any given distance.

Same as there are lots of people that like to cook with no intention of getting fat.

[BearBrimstone]

I don't personally have much of a use for full auto but to each their own. Some people love full auto guns at the range.