Anyone know where to find one of these?

[yanhchan]

Originally Posted by JanusDP

As cool as it would be to actually have the 8mm M82A1....$2800 is a LOT of money. I could build....like...a couple airsoft cruise missiles and a mobile launcher or something for $2800.

LOL PMed for cruise missile...LOL

[Combine]

Originally Posted by 362304

i know this is airsoft, but who shoots 50cal rifles at people? its...overkill.

Why? to make 100% absolute fucking sure they aren't going to get back up

[Greylocks]

Because it can hit a target 12 inches across, or less, at over 2 km, and still be effective?

Or it's better than blowing up an entire village to get one guy?

Or simply because Mr Browning designed extremely accurate and stable calibers of ammunition that have far more uses than he imagined?

[Goldman]

Originally Posted by Dracheous

Actually alot of my family on my dad side is in the states. I've two sorta close relatives in the American Army, one is an instructor at Top Gun Academy (flies a whicked F-16) and his brother is an instructor at the Sniper Academy ((I don't remember the name for this one? Anyone got that handy?)) Anyway, he was the one that was telling me that its against Geneva to use the Berret M82A1 because of the rounds destructive ability.


Now, I didn't really say that ALL .50 cal's were against Geneva, else those fun .50's mounted on Humvee's would be getting alot of people in some deep shit. And that itself blows away your "As long as its not automatic fire.

And like I said thats just what I was told, I didn't see it written down on some UN written report. But, because it was my cousin and his creditials, I beleived him with out question.




OH, and my referal to the .308 round wasn't trying to say because of the caliber, it was just the destructive power behind the round. Mind you, I guess the .50's would set a few holes in you too.

Thats why the M82 and the .50 MG are "Anti-Material" or "Air Defense" or "Anti-Vehicle" weapons by designation.... Use is a different matter...

[Sniper1111]

http://www.alphecca.com/mt_alphecca_...es/000869.html

A .50-caliber sniper rifle can hit a target at 4,500 feet, shatter bulletproof limousines, penetrate sandbags, earth berms, armored vehicles, commercial planes, and drill through the walls (and living rooms) of 10 suburban houses lined up one after another. The Geneva Conventions don't prohibit .50-caliber weapons' use against military personnel, and army manuals describe its usefulness in battle. But the weapon's use on civilians and in civilian areas is prohibited.

[Oz]

I was under the impression that the .50 fell under the section prohibiting the use of weapons that caused injuries that could not be healed, or something to that effect. Under the geneva convention .50's couldnt be used against human targets. I remember some story about the US in vietnam gettin flack about them and their defence was that they were shooting at the soldiers MG's. Either way, the US never signed that convention, its just understood that they (usually) play by the rules.

But thats just what I can remember from previous .50 topics in various other military forums, no idea if any of it is true.

[Skippy]

Come on, if the US followed the Geneva convention rules, they wouldn't be dumping white phosphorous on people.

They preatty much tell anyone who pulls up the Geneva convention where to stick it.

[Gryphon]

This "no .50 cal against personnel" is a common myth. The Geneva Convention does not deal with munitions but with the treatment of prisoners and the rules of war. It's the Hague Accord that prohibits the use of munitions which are excessively injurious, or expand or flatten in the body. It does NOT state that the .50 caliber is prohibited for use on personnel.

See http://www.au.af.mil/au/cpd/jagschoo...pters/loac.doc