Thanks for the post Yournamehere. :D

My response to No 1: He's right about the phew sound and tiny Suppressors being too small for their relative quieting power to a large weapon. But the author is full of shit on the rest.:mad: I've FIRED REAL SILENCERS (actually Suppressors). A LOT. Silenced 10/22 rifles sound like you're racking the action back and forth. Period. There is NO Report. You could dump a 30 round magazine into a stack of phonebooks in your bedroom and all you'd hear is the impact on the phonebooks. (use subsonic 22lr of course)

Also his crack about the decibels is also bullshit. It doesn't go down to just 120 decibels. I've fire MP5s (a full 30 round magazine) through a late model Gemtech suppressor and though I could hear the clackity clack of the bolt moving back and forth, it was pretty damned quiet. If I were firing from inside a car with the windows open, you'd hear NOTHING from 20 or more feet away. With the din of modern traffic or on the freeway, you WOULD hear nothing! And the new model Suppressors are pretty small compared to the monstrous two stage cans we had back in the 1970s/1980s.

Okay. Back to reading the list. Just had to call bullshit on the very first myth.


My Response to number 2: He's mostly right until he gets to this quote "In fact, a U.S. infantryman only carries 210 rounds total, which means a battle conducted with full-auto machine gun fire would be over in less than a minute even if you count the time it takes to switch magazines. Fortunately, they fire on full-auto so rarely that many of the military's rifles don't even have that capability." Well not quite true, at least for LMGs. I guess he also forgot that troops also carry Beta C Mags (which carry 100) if they want (some do but are rare) but back to overall ammo capacity: more commonly, troops have at least one guy carrying an M249 which has either a mini 100 round belt or the original 200 round belt (and another guy as ammo carrier). He also forgot about the M240 (or the M60 in older days) which again had multiple people carrying the ammo and thus would last longer than ONE freaking minute in a battle (not constant fire, but full auto bursts). The biggest problem with this sentence is that he states outright that most militaries of the world don't issue rifles that have full auto capability. WTF? Gee, and all this time I thought that my AR-15 under my bed had one less select fire setting than an M16 or M4, how stupid of me ;) Correct me if I'm wrong, but once the Brits retired their L1A1 SLRs, all the world's major military branches had select fire rifles. Even if he considers 3 round burst to NOT be full auto (the ATF thinks otherwise), he is still wrong for most of the other world's rifles.

Also about saying that most infantry would carry just about 210 rounds isn't always true. From talking to guys I know in the military, they would carry as much ammo as they can carry on top of what they already are carrying. Sure it'll be more weight to carry, but they rather have an extra mag than an extra bag of food. Maybe they guy is not talking about the SAWs that troops would carry around and was referring to the infantryman's rifle. Depending on who, you might be issued with an M4 in burst or M4A1 in full auto and would use auto for suppression. That part was correct from the author.


I was at a range last week and someone showed me his AR-15 with a Gemtech suppressor and using subsonic round. You can still hear it go off, but it still isn't very loud. I've seen an MP5SD fired and it's quiet even when fired full auto.


Well as you know, the Brits are kinda slow when it comes to military technology. They are more conservative when it comes to what they show NOT arm their armed forces.

I carried 330 rounds for my C7 overseas, and I'm not an infantryman. If I was I'd probably have had a belt for a C9 as well.

While there's certainly a measure of conversatism in British arms procurement, I wouldn't say more than any other country. The EM2 could hardly be called conservative... in fact, other than retaining the revolver as long as they did, I'd put them on or ahead of the curve for most of the past 300 years.

I have buddies right now who are still in Iraq and during the HEIGHT of the fighting in Iraq carried more than double that. They were literally carried over 40 extra pounds of just mags and frags in a running gun battle with a bunch of Terrorists around the same time as the battle for Fallujah. Of course they weren't running for MILES, they were actually laying suppressing fire from the rooftops for their buddies in street combat. AIRBORNE troops or long distance Recon may have weight considerations, but troops with ready resupply pack a hellava lot of ammo.

He doesn't mean "the world"; he's referring to the U.S. military only. And he isn't saying we use semi-autos; he means burst capability. Which is true in part - most U.S. infantry rifles are safe-semi-burst. He is forgetting about the M249 and M240, but I guess he is mostly thinking rifles, since that's what most troops carry.

Yeah, I tend to think real world. :D 3 round Burst IS FULL AUTO to the ATF. heck to them even a 2 round 'burst' is full auto, and if done on a weapon that is not papered, you get 10 years in the slammer. I looked at the sentence. He says "many of the military's rifles don't even have that capability." I read it to mean "Military" as an all inclusive word for, well, the military, i.e. people in uniform. But it could be read as exclusively the U.S. Military (only) as well. :D I get what he means, but to gun geeks like myself, if he's not very specific, he sounds like a dork. But that's just me :D

*Shrugs* Sometimes you just gotta try to think like someone who isn't a movie gun geek like us. It's not easy, I admit, but with practice, it is achievable. :D

About the US military not being issued full auto rifles. Then who does get issued M4A1s in full auto. Some of the Marines I know all were issued them.

Ive known several people in army and marines. They wer eissued m16s or m4s depending on their job. All the m4s were full auto capable, but mostly fired in single. Ive never heard of burst fire pre a1 m4 being issued, ever. I think that was more a testing model or something.

That's what I was thinking. The M16s that the Marines I knew were of course the A2s because they didn't get the A4s under after they shipped back home. They all had M4s and they were all full auto capable, but of course trained to fire semi auto.