Category talk:Machine Pistol

Should the Kimmel AP-9 and Wilkinson Arms pistol be counted as machine pistols? From what i can find those are semiauto pistols (Although in some films they are modified to fire full auto). FriendlyHornet 18:02, 28 january 2024 (BRT)

As the page states "I'll know it when I see it" and I feel it applies here. Though in a opposite manner: Where machine pistols would mean a-bit-more pistol-form firearms that are select-fire, I would argue that firearms that fit that and/or a bit of a submachine-gun factor regardless of fire mode qualify as such also. Especially when they try to aesthetically emulate other such weapons that are select-fire, in the case of the AP-9. The Wilkinson might be a bit more hazy. But as you said they are often portrayed as full auto - and despite the fact they aren't in base form, to classify them as semiautos would I think be more confusing and arbitrary rather than less.

Bottom-line, they fit best in this category. We'll put it this way - I wouldn't lump either one with the typical semiautos nor the 'legal' pistols. StanTheMan (talk) 01:21, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Eh, I'd dispute that - by this logic, for example, the Beretta 92FS and Glock 17 would belong here, since they're guns with a similar form-factor to actual machine pistols which are often converted to full-auto and used as stand-ins for them in media (the Beretta 93R and Glock 18, respectively). Any self-loading handgun has the potential to be a machine pistol; classifying semi-auto handguns as machine pistols simply because they look similar would be akin to, say, calling the Beretta Rx4 Storm and Kel-Tec RDB as assault rifles because they're self-loading intermediate-caliber rifles with an assault rifle-like form factor. I'd say that anything that isn't capable of full-auto or burst fire as-is shouldn't be in this category. Pyr0m4n14c (talk) 01:27, 30 January 2024 (UTC)