|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
Army, Marines Want New Machine Guns to Replace the M240 and 'Ma Deuce'
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://libertyparkpress.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The Army and Marine Corps are both looking at new medium and heavy machine gun technology to replace the venerable 7.62mm M240 and the .50 caliber "Ma Deuce" M2. "Based on the success of the Next Generation Squad Weapons (NGSW), we are interested in learning more about the possibilities in the state of technology for next-gen medium and next-gen heavy machine guns that would be used to potentially replace our legacy systems," David Oatley, product director for crew served weapons at the Army's Program Executive Office Soldier, said Friday at the National Defense Industrial Association's Armaments, Robotics and Munitions conference. |
| Comment by:
MarkHamTownsend
(11/9/2020)
|
| Biden will be president. The army will be lucky if Biden scrounges up a handful of Civil War era Gatlings guns out of museums to give to the military. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| For, in principle, there is no difference between a law prohibiting the wearing of concealed arms, and a law forbidding the wearing such as are exposed; and if the former be unconstitutional, the latter must be so likewise. But it should not be forgotten, that it is not only a part of the right that is secured by the constitution; it is the right entire and complete, as it existed at the adoption of the constitution; and if any portion of that right be impaired, immaterial how small the part may be, and immaterial the order of time at which it be done, it is equally forbidden by the constitution. [Bliss vs. Commonwealth, 12 Ky. (2 Litt.) 90, at 92, and 93, 13 Am. Dec. 251 (1822) |
|
|
