Colt Forum banner

What is a "machine gun?"

2K views 31 replies 14 participants last post by  Colt-SL 
#1 ·
I know that there are different agencies that define what class a certain firearm falls into. But I'm from old school US Army. From my days, a machine gun was a full automatic weapon, usually crew served and fired from a mount, that was self feeding. Feed was from a belt or feed strip. Weapons that were fed by magazine (which contained the follower and follower spring) were designated as automatic rifles or the archaic term machine rifle.

This prompted by the post of firing 43 different "machine guns."

Bob Wright
 
#2 ·
Technically, I believe "machine gun" covers all fully automatic guns shooting a full power rifle cartridge, and I believe they should also be capable of sustained fire. It's an old and somewhat generic term though, and to me it gets blurrier with every new gun type that's introduced. It's easier if you're a politician, then it's a machine gun if it resembles a military firearm.
 
#3 ·
Gotta agree...there are various definitions thrown around. To me, a machine gun is a weapon that fires more than one full-power rifle round when the trigger is squeezed and held. A submachine gun definition is pretty much defined the same with the differences of being hand-held and firing a pistol round. A machine gun may or may not be hand held.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Matchlock and ei8ht
#4 ·
From my days, a machine gun was a full automatic weapon, usually crew served and fired from a mount, that was self feeding. Feed was from a belt or feed strip. Weapons that were fed by magazine (which contained the follower and follower spring) were designated as automatic rifles or the archaic term machine rifle.
That is exactly how I define them as well. An M2 .50BMG is a machine gun, an M16 is an automatic rifle.
 
#5 ·
I know that there are different agencies that define what class a certain firearm falls into. But I'm from old school US Army. From my days, a machine gun was a full automatic weapon, usually crew served and fired from a mount, that was self feeding. Feed was from a belt or feed strip. Weapons that were fed by magazine (which contained the follower and follower spring) were designated as automatic rifles or the archaic term machine rifle.
.





Correct.

SMG's , assault rifles, main battle rifles with a 3d selector position are not MG's.

Semiautomatic rifles with box magazine are not assault rifles.They are semiauto rifles.

"Silencers" are not silencers, they are suppressors/mufflers.

"Assault weapons" do not exist, this is a political term.
 
#10 ·
At the gun club a machinegun is the one that leaves the biggest smile on your face when you shoot it.:D


"In United States gun law, "machine gun" is a legal term for any weapon able to fire more than one shot per trigger pull regardless of caliber, the receiver of any such weapon, any weapon convertible to such a state using normal tools, or any component or part that will modify an existing firearm such that it functions as a "machine gun" such as a drop-in auto sear.[1] Civilian possession of such weapons is not prohibited by any Federal law and not illegal in many states, but they must be registered as Title II weapons under the National Firearms Act and have a tax stamp paid. The Hughes Amendment to the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986 banned new production of firearms classified as machine guns for most civilian applications, however, so only "grandfathered" weapons produced before this date are legally transferable."
 
#15 ·
I was just giving the government standards for what is a machinegun when it comes to the laws. Technically I believe each machine has its own operation that puts it in one class or the other. A BAR is an automatic rifle as classed by the military but is a machinegun to the government. A full auto 40 milimeter grenade launcher isn't a machinegun but operates the same. Yet a minigun with an electric motor and 3,000 rounds a minute is called a machinegun even though it operates different.

I really can't explain how so many guns are covered under the same heading but they are.
 
#22 ·
Are these machine guns? ---


Full auto conversions of 1911 types ----->

Under correct firearms terminology, [NOT arbitrary terms under US -only laws or regulations, post -1934]---

the bottom 1911-patterm would be a machine pistol, as 459459 notes.
the top one ,with stock for shouldering , could be considered an SMG if select fire, a carbine if not.
 
#18 ·
If the politicians got involved with mathematics they'd probably pass a law making 2+2=5. They use the same thought processes when it come to firearms.
 
#20 ·
Site won't let me type under reply and it has other problems but I have no agenda other than to say how much I have enjoyed FA for many years. There is a number of makes and models but they all fall under how many shots will they fire with one pull of the trigger.

Jim
 
#23 · (Edited)
Now there's another rub:

the top one ,with stock for shouldering , could be considered an SMG if select fire, a carbine if not.
By strictest definition under most classifications, it would be a "light rifle" since it does not fire the infantry rifle cartridge. Knowing I'll draw flak here, the US M-1, and M-2 carbines would actually be classed as "light rifles" in that they fire what is truly a pistol cartridge.

I understand that there are many different nomenclatures applied by different agencies, and I'm splitting hairs here. I've studied many different sources from US Army Ordnance Technical Manuals and foreign publications, so the bottom line is actually a firearm is whatever a body wants to call it.

As to electric driven mini-guns, they will not fall into the "machine gun" classification since they do not derive their power from the firing of the cartridge.

Bob Wright
 
#24 ·
....
I understand that there are many different nomenclatures applied by different agencies, and I'm splitting hairs here. I've studied many different sources from US Army Ordnance Technical Manuals and foreign publications, so the bottom line is actually a firearm is whatever a body wants to call it.
..
This is indeed the bottom line.

It's like that in a lot of topics: the aficionado and the (real or self-appointed) expert will lecture you for hours on all the ways there are differences, the practical person (and in this case surprisingly the law, as quoted by 459459) focuses on what the important commonality is, the fact that these guns fire more than one round when you pull the trigger. So for once the snide remarks about politicians seem misplaced, as this makes a lot more sense than all the esoteric distinctions.

And since legal restrictions are the only reason this even matters, that's the definition we'll have to live with.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top