Nobody doubts the M4 is an assault weapon. Are there any material differences between an M4 and an AR15?

[RetiredGySgt]

Really? That's the only thing you can think of? Unless you can come up with something else, I'll put you on the same list as that other idiot who has no answers to the question.

I've answered your question, you ignorant fuck. You just don't like the answer because your only counter to it is to suggest that the ability to toggle from semi-auto fire (or what liberal dipshits call "multi fire") is a minor one when in fact, it's a monumental difference. I've fired both, little boy. I know the difference. You don't.

Look, it's not my fault that you're ignorant and stupid. I wish you were smarter, I really do. But you're not, so all that's left for intelligent people to do is mock your idiocy...

Of course it is a notable difference. That's why it was addressed in the OP, and excluded from the thread. I'm looking for differences other than the one main one. If you don't know of any other differences, then you are like every other poster here who had nothing else to add.

why does it matter??

Obviously it matters to you, or you wouldn't have such a high post count in this thread. It matters to me because I'm really curious as to what more differences there might be. So far, you as a group have nothing.

so you cant explain why it matters to you??

the differences have been explained to you so many times it boring to read,,,

Nobody has explained any differences other than select fire, which was noted in the OP.

so what? that is a CRITICAL and MASSIVE difference,

 

[BULLDOG]

I already acknowledged my mistake in using the term Assault weapon instead of assault rifle in the OP, and would have edited the title if I knew how. I have used the term assault rifle since then (see #41)

.

If it helps, in the current Federal firearms statute, an AR-15 would be referred to as a Long-Arm.
Would it surprise you that there is no age requirement in the Federal statutes regarding the owning or possessing of a Long-Arm and Ammunition?

You see ... If there was, that would be a violation of the Second Amendment, because we are born with our Constitutionally Protected Rights.

.​

.

Interesting, but hardly relevant in a hands on, head to head comparison between the two rifles, is it?

 

[BULLDOG]

Will somebody just go ahead and agree with Bulldog's stupid idea that AR's should be banned?

I think Bulldog should be banned...

Really? That's the only thing you can think of? Unless you can come up with something else, I'll put you on the same list as that other idiot who has no answers to the question.

I've answered your question, you ignorant fuck. You just don't like the answer because your only counter to it is to suggest that the ability to toggle from semi-auto fire (or what liberal dipshits call "multi fire") is a minor one when in fact, it's a monumental difference. I've fired both, little boy. I know the difference. You don't.

Look, it's not my fault that you're ignorant and stupid. I wish you were smarter, I really do. But you're not, so all that's left for intelligent people to do is mock your idiocy...

Of course it is a notable difference. That's why it was addressed in the OP, and excluded from the thread. I'm looking for differences other than the one main one. If you don't know of any other differences, then you are like every other poster here who had nothing else to add.

why does it matter??

Obviously it matters to you, or you wouldn't have such a high post count in this thread. It matters to me because I'm really curious as to what more differences there might be. So far, you as a group have nothing.

It's been explained to you.

You're just too fucking stupid to comprehend it. The one difference you mentioned in the OP is sufficient enough to render the two weapons dissimilar...

Yes. That's why it was mentioned in the OP. Obviously, there are no other differences. At least after more than 400 posts, nobody could come up with any more differences.

 

[BlackSand]

​

Interesting, but hardly relevant in a hands on, head to head comparison between the two rifles, is it?​

.

Well ... Considering that question has already been asked, comparisons made, and pretty much universally answered ...
If there is something you may actually want to discuss ... Get to it ...

.​

 

[progressive hunter]

Will somebody just go ahead and agree with Bulldog's stupid idea that AR's should be banned?

I think Bulldog should be banned...

Really? That's the only thing you can think of? Unless you can come up with something else, I'll put you on the same list as that other idiot who has no answers to the question.

I've answered your question, you ignorant fuck. You just don't like the answer because your only counter to it is to suggest that the ability to toggle from semi-auto fire (or what liberal dipshits call "multi fire") is a minor one when in fact, it's a monumental difference. I've fired both, little boy. I know the difference. You don't.

Look, it's not my fault that you're ignorant and stupid. I wish you were smarter, I really do. But you're not, so all that's left for intelligent people to do is mock your idiocy...

Of course it is a notable difference. That's why it was addressed in the OP, and excluded from the thread. I'm looking for differences other than the one main one. If you don't know of any other differences, then you are like every other poster here who had nothing else to add.

why does it matter??

Obviously it matters to you, or you wouldn't have such a high post count in this thread. It matters to me because I'm really curious as to what more differences there might be. So far, you as a group have nothing.

It's been explained to you.

You're just too fucking stupid to comprehend it. The one difference you mentioned in the OP is sufficient enough to render the two weapons dissimilar...

Yes. That's why it was mentioned in the OP. Obviously, there are no other differences. At least after more than 400 posts, nobody could come up with any more differences.

now that youve come to that conclusion,, why does it matter??

 

[BULLDOG]

The M4 is the main rifle used by the US military, and no one could question that it is an assault rifle. The M4 is capable of full automatic fire, and 3 round burst, and the AR15 is not. Of course, it would be illegal, but the AR15 can easily be converted to allow those types of fire. Other than that difference, what makes an M4 an assault weapon, and an AR15 not?

Another Democrat spewing Hitler's propaganda.

The M4 is a carbine rifle, not an "assault rifle". "Assault rifle" is just a ridiculous term that the Nazi's made up out of thin air when they renamed the MP 43 to make it sound scary for propaganda purposes.

Only Nazis call any rifle an "assault rifle".

Our military and the NRA disagree with you

NRA-ILA | Glossary

For definitions of key words related to firearms and the 2nd amendment check out this page.

www.nraila.org

You didn't read far enough.

• Assault Rifle
  By U.S. Army definition, a selective-fire rifle chambered for a cartridge of intermediate power. If applied to any semi-automatic firearm regardless of its cosmetic similarity to a true assault rifle, the term is incorrect.

I read the entire thing. You agree the M4 is an assault rifle though, like I said in the OP --- right?

Yes. But the AR-15 is not. By the definition you cited.

Looks like this thread is over.

I never said the AR was. I did say that other than the multi-fire capability, there were no substantial differences in the two. That is, unless you can name those substantial differences.

Again -- I have no obligation to defend a claim I didn't make.

I don't know what's so hard about that to understand.

OK. Since you can't point out any fault in this OP, I assume we are in agreement.

Typical progressive, you lose, so you lie.

I'm sorry you think that. I have no intention to lie. Perhaps , if you can show where you or anybody else has shown any substantial difference between how the two rifles are used, except as noted in the OP, I can understand where the confusion might be, and I will understand why you think I am lying. As always, I'm willing to admit that I am wrong when shown proof.

Yes, you did have intent to lie. You couldn't make the point that you wanted, because it is erroneous, so you misrepresented what another poster said. That is called a LIE. You might be an unethical, lying piece of crap, but we aren't.

I misrepresented nothing

The M4 is the main rifle used by the US military, and no one could question that it is an assault rifle. The M4 is capable of full automatic fire, and 3 round burst, and the AR15 is not. Of course, it would be illegal, but the AR15 can easily be converted to allow those types of fire. Other than that difference, what makes an M4 an assault weapon, and an AR15 not?

Another Democrat spewing Hitler's propaganda.

The M4 is a carbine rifle, not an "assault rifle". "Assault rifle" is just a ridiculous term that the Nazi's made up out of thin air when they renamed the MP 43 to make it sound scary for propaganda purposes.

Only Nazis call any rifle an "assault rifle".

Our military and the NRA disagree with you

NRA-ILA | Glossary

For definitions of key words related to firearms and the 2nd amendment check out this page.

www.nraila.org

You didn't read far enough.

• Assault Rifle
  By U.S. Army definition, a selective-fire rifle chambered for a cartridge of intermediate power. If applied to any semi-automatic firearm regardless of its cosmetic similarity to a true assault rifle, the term is incorrect.

I read the entire thing. You agree the M4 is an assault rifle though, like I said in the OP --- right?

Yes. But the AR-15 is not. By the definition you cited.

Looks like this thread is over.

I never said the AR was. I did say that other than the multi-fire capability, there were no substantial differences in the two. That is, unless you can name those substantial differences.

Again -- I have no obligation to defend a claim I didn't make.

I don't know what's so hard about that to understand.

OK. Since you can't point out any fault in this OP, I assume we are in agreement.

Typical progressive, you lose, so you lie.

I'm sorry you think that. I have no intention to lie. Perhaps , if you can show where you or anybody else has shown any substantial difference between how the two rifles are used, except as noted in the OP, I can understand where the confusion might be, and I will understand why you think I am lying. As always, I'm willing to admit that I am wrong when shown proof.

Yes, you did have intent to lie. You couldn't make the point that you wanted, because it is erroneous, so you misrepresented what another poster said. That is called a LIE. You might be an unethical, lying piece of crap, but we aren't.

He agreed the M4 was an assault rifle, but the AR15 wasn't. That is exactly what I have said from the first. Where was the misrepresentation?

You can't even define what an "assault rifle" is...

I don't have to. The military took care of that for me.

 

[BULLDOG]

The M4 is the main rifle used by the US military, and no one could question that it is an assault rifle. The M4 is capable of full automatic fire, and 3 round burst, and the AR15 is not. Of course, it would be illegal, but the AR15 can easily be converted to allow those types of fire. Other than that difference, what makes an M4 an assault weapon, and an AR15 not?

Another Democrat spewing Hitler's propaganda.

The M4 is a carbine rifle, not an "assault rifle". "Assault rifle" is just a ridiculous term that the Nazi's made up out of thin air when they renamed the MP 43 to make it sound scary for propaganda purposes.

Only Nazis call any rifle an "assault rifle".

Our military and the NRA disagree with you

NRA-ILA | Glossary

For definitions of key words related to firearms and the 2nd amendment check out this page.

www.nraila.org

You didn't read far enough.

• Assault Rifle
  By U.S. Army definition, a selective-fire rifle chambered for a cartridge of intermediate power. If applied to any semi-automatic firearm regardless of its cosmetic similarity to a true assault rifle, the term is incorrect.

I read the entire thing. You agree the M4 is an assault rifle though, like I said in the OP --- right?

Yes. But the AR-15 is not. By the definition you cited.

Looks like this thread is over.

I never said the AR was. I did say that other than the multi-fire capability, there were no substantial differences in the two. That is, unless you can name those substantial differences.

Again -- I have no obligation to defend a claim I didn't make.

I don't know what's so hard about that to understand.

OK. Since you can't point out any fault in this OP, I assume we are in agreement.

Typical progressive, you lose, so you lie.

I'm sorry you think that. I have no intention to lie. Perhaps , if you can show where you or anybody else has shown any substantial difference between how the two rifles are used, except as noted in the OP, I can understand where the confusion might be, and I will understand why you think I am lying. As always, I'm willing to admit that I am wrong when shown proof.

Yes, you did have intent to lie. You couldn't make the point that you wanted, because it is erroneous, so you misrepresented what another poster said. That is called a LIE. You might be an unethical, lying piece of crap, but we aren't.

I misrepresented nothing

The M4 is the main rifle used by the US military, and no one could question that it is an assault rifle. The M4 is capable of full automatic fire, and 3 round burst, and the AR15 is not. Of course, it would be illegal, but the AR15 can easily be converted to allow those types of fire. Other than that difference, what makes an M4 an assault weapon, and an AR15 not?

Another Democrat spewing Hitler's propaganda.

The M4 is a carbine rifle, not an "assault rifle". "Assault rifle" is just a ridiculous term that the Nazi's made up out of thin air when they renamed the MP 43 to make it sound scary for propaganda purposes.

Only Nazis call any rifle an "assault rifle".

Our military and the NRA disagree with you

NRA-ILA | Glossary

For definitions of key words related to firearms and the 2nd amendment check out this page.

www.nraila.org

You didn't read far enough.

• Assault Rifle
  By U.S. Army definition, a selective-fire rifle chambered for a cartridge of intermediate power. If applied to any semi-automatic firearm regardless of its cosmetic similarity to a true assault rifle, the term is incorrect.

I read the entire thing. You agree the M4 is an assault rifle though, like I said in the OP --- right?

Yes. But the AR-15 is not. By the definition you cited.

Looks like this thread is over.

I never said the AR was. I did say that other than the multi-fire capability, there were no substantial differences in the two. That is, unless you can name those substantial differences.

Again -- I have no obligation to defend a claim I didn't make.

I don't know what's so hard about that to understand.

OK. Since you can't point out any fault in this OP, I assume we are in agreement.

Typical progressive, you lose, so you lie.

I'm sorry you think that. I have no intention to lie. Perhaps , if you can show where you or anybody else has shown any substantial difference between how the two rifles are used, except as noted in the OP, I can understand where the confusion might be, and I will understand why you think I am lying. As always, I'm willing to admit that I am wrong when shown proof.

Yes, you did have intent to lie. You couldn't make the point that you wanted, because it is erroneous, so you misrepresented what another poster said. That is called a LIE. You might be an unethical, lying piece of crap, but we aren't.

He agreed the M4 was an assault rifle, but the AR15 wasn't. That is exactly what I have said from the first. Where was the misrepresentation?

Assault rifle as defined by Germany was a weapon that allowed use in close quarters and long range. The M4 is not an assault rifle since it can not reach long range. The AR15 is not an assault rifle because it doesn't have any auto fire capability.

Interesting. Now check how the Us military defines it.

 

[BlackSand]

I don't have to. The military took care of that for me.

.

Well ... If you were in the military, that might make a difference.
As far as the current Federal Statute (that's a law), the AR-15 is referred to as a Long-Arm.

.​

 

[Carl in Michigan]

The M4 is the main rifle used by the US military, and no one could question that it is an assault rifle

I dont even know what an "assault weapon" is. Define this liberal term please

 

[BULLDOG]

Auto fire from rifleman is for final fire in an emergency usually when being assaulted and the enemy has closed to danger close, as in in threat of being over run.

Yes. Rarely used.

which has nothing to do with the fact it has the ability and the AR15 does not making them critically different, there is no difference between an AR15 and any other semi automatic rifle especially those with detachable magazines.

Amusing but not surprising that after 400 posts, so many are struggling with the question in the OP, and the purpose of the thread. I'll type slowly so it will be easier for you to understand.

We all know the M4 is capable of select fire. We also know the AR15 is not.
Are there any other significant (that means big) differences between the two rifles?

I guess youre to stupid to know thats the only difference,,

now why did it matter??

I assumed as much from the beginning. I just wanted to know how gun nuts would respond to the question.

 

[progressive hunter]

Auto fire from rifleman is for final fire in an emergency usually when being assaulted and the enemy has closed to danger close, as in in threat of being over run.

Yes. Rarely used.

which has nothing to do with the fact it has the ability and the AR15 does not making them critically different, there is no difference between an AR15 and any other semi automatic rifle especially those with detachable magazines.

Amusing but not surprising that after 400 posts, so many are struggling with the question in the OP, and the purpose of the thread. I'll type slowly so it will be easier for you to understand.

We all know the M4 is capable of select fire. We also know the AR15 is not.
Are there any other significant (that means big) differences between the two rifles?

I guess youre to stupid to know thats the only difference,,

now why did it matter??

I assumed as much from the beginning. I just wanted to know how gun nuts would respond to the question.

so this whole thread was a troll and should have been in the rubber room,,

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Auto fire from rifleman is for final fire in an emergency usually when being assaulted and the enemy has closed to danger close, as in in threat of being over run.

Yes. Rarely used.

which has nothing to do with the fact it has the ability and the AR15 does not making them critically different, there is no difference between an AR15 and any other semi automatic rifle especially those with detachable magazines.

Amusing but not surprising that after 400 posts, so many are struggling with the question in the OP, and the purpose of the thread. I'll type slowly so it will be easier for you to understand.

We all know the M4 is capable of select fire. We also know the AR15 is not.
Are there any other significant (that means big) differences between the two rifles?

I guess youre to stupid to know thats the only difference,,

now why did it matter??

I assumed as much from the beginning. I just wanted to know how gun nuts would respond to the question.

If all you wanted was a simple answer while ignoring the glaring difference congratulations you succeed. If that was all you wanted why are you still here?

 

[BULLDOG]

Auto fire from rifleman is for final fire in an emergency usually when being assaulted and the enemy has closed to danger close, as in in threat of being over run.

Yes. Rarely used.

which has nothing to do with the fact it has the ability and the AR15 does not making them critically different, there is no difference between an AR15 and any other semi automatic rifle especially those with detachable magazines.

Amusing but not surprising that after 400 posts, so many are struggling with the question in the OP, and the purpose of the thread. I'll type slowly so it will be easier for you to understand.

We all know the M4 is capable of select fire. We also know the AR15 is not.
Are there any other significant (that means big) differences between the two rifles?

there doesn't have to be just like with ak47 semi auto rip offs.

Never said there had to be. I just asked if there were any.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Auto fire from rifleman is for final fire in an emergency usually when being assaulted and the enemy has closed to danger close, as in in threat of being over run.

Yes. Rarely used.

which has nothing to do with the fact it has the ability and the AR15 does not making them critically different, there is no difference between an AR15 and any other semi automatic rifle especially those with detachable magazines.

Amusing but not surprising that after 400 posts, so many are struggling with the question in the OP, and the purpose of the thread. I'll type slowly so it will be easier for you to understand.

We all know the M4 is capable of select fire. We also know the AR15 is not.
Are there any other significant (that means big) differences between the two rifles?

there doesn't have to be just like with ak47 semi auto rip offs.

Never said there had to be. I just asked if there were any.

and we answered numerous times and you ignored it why is that?

 

[BULLDOG]

Really? That's the only thing you can think of? Unless you can come up with something else, I'll put you on the same list as that other idiot who has no answers to the question.

I've answered your question, you ignorant fuck. You just don't like the answer because your only counter to it is to suggest that the ability to toggle from semi-auto fire (or what liberal dipshits call "multi fire") is a minor one when in fact, it's a monumental difference. I've fired both, little boy. I know the difference. You don't.

Look, it's not my fault that you're ignorant and stupid. I wish you were smarter, I really do. But you're not, so all that's left for intelligent people to do is mock your idiocy...

Of course it is a notable difference. That's why it was addressed in the OP, and excluded from the thread. I'm looking for differences other than the one main one. If you don't know of any other differences, then you are like every other poster here who had nothing else to add.

why does it matter??

Obviously it matters to you, or you wouldn't have such a high post count in this thread. It matters to me because I'm really curious as to what more differences there might be. So far, you as a group have nothing.

so you cant explain why it matters to you??

the differences have been explained to you so many times it boring to read,,,

Nobody has explained any differences other than select fire, which was noted in the OP.

because there isnt any real differences,,

of course the military version is made with better materials but you cant see those,,

now why does it matter??

It matters because I wanted to know if there were any other differences. Seems we all agree that there aren't.

 

[progressive hunter]

Really? That's the only thing you can think of? Unless you can come up with something else, I'll put you on the same list as that other idiot who has no answers to the question.

I've answered your question, you ignorant fuck. You just don't like the answer because your only counter to it is to suggest that the ability to toggle from semi-auto fire (or what liberal dipshits call "multi fire") is a minor one when in fact, it's a monumental difference. I've fired both, little boy. I know the difference. You don't.

Look, it's not my fault that you're ignorant and stupid. I wish you were smarter, I really do. But you're not, so all that's left for intelligent people to do is mock your idiocy...

Of course it is a notable difference. That's why it was addressed in the OP, and excluded from the thread. I'm looking for differences other than the one main one. If you don't know of any other differences, then you are like every other poster here who had nothing else to add.

why does it matter??

Obviously it matters to you, or you wouldn't have such a high post count in this thread. It matters to me because I'm really curious as to what more differences there might be. So far, you as a group have nothing.

so you cant explain why it matters to you??

the differences have been explained to you so many times it boring to read,,,

Nobody has explained any differences other than select fire, which was noted in the OP.

because there isnt any real differences,,

of course the military version is made with better materials but you cant see those,,

now why does it matter??

It matters because I wanted to know if there were any other differences. Seems we all agree that there aren't.

and now???

keep in mind the 2nd is specific for military weapons so choose your next words wisely,,

 

[progressive hunter]

 

[BULLDOG]

Please list those differences. We already know about the select fire.

.

It is a website where we discuss the issues and our ideas.

That being understood, how many people need to give you the same answer before you are satisfied?
How many times do you need to hear the same answer before you are willing to discuss anything even vaguely associated with the question or the answer given?

.​

I didn't receive any answers. Everybody kept repeating what was already noted in the OP. Did you expect me to not respond to so many posts directed directly to me? I didn't keep this thread going. Gun nuts who were too stupid to understand the OP did. I had one question, and didn't intend the thread to degenerate to unrelated crap. That's the way it's supposed to be, isn't it? I think we have finally determined that there are no substantial differences between the M4 and the AR15 other than select fire capability, unless someone cares to add something. Agreed?

 

[progressive hunter]

Please list those differences. We already know about the select fire.

.

It is a website where we discuss the issues and our ideas.

That being understood, how many people need to give you the same answer before you are satisfied?
How many times do you need to hear the same answer before you are willing to discuss anything even vaguely associated with the question or the answer given?

.​

I didn't receive any answers. Everybody kept repeating what was already noted in the OP. Did you expect me to not respond to so many posts directed directly to me? I didn't keep this thread going. Gun nuts who were too stupid to understand the OP did. I had one question, and didn't intend the thread to degenerate to unrelated crap. That's the way it's supposed to be, isn't it? I think we have finally determined that there are no substantial differences between the M4 and the AR15 other than select fire capability, unless someone cares to add something. Agreed?

youre the one thats been slow to conclude that,,,

 

[BULLDOG]

Really? That's the only thing you can think of? Unless you can come up with something else, I'll put you on the same list as that other idiot who has no answers to the question.

I've answered your question, you ignorant fuck. You just don't like the answer because your only counter to it is to suggest that the ability to toggle from semi-auto fire (or what liberal dipshits call "multi fire") is a minor one when in fact, it's a monumental difference. I've fired both, little boy. I know the difference. You don't.

Look, it's not my fault that you're ignorant and stupid. I wish you were smarter, I really do. But you're not, so all that's left for intelligent people to do is mock your idiocy...

Of course it is a notable difference. That's why it was addressed in the OP, and excluded from the thread. I'm looking for differences other than the one main one. If you don't know of any other differences, then you are like every other poster here who had nothing else to add.

why does it matter??

Obviously it matters to you, or you wouldn't have such a high post count in this thread. It matters to me because I'm really curious as to what more differences there might be. So far, you as a group have nothing.

so you cant explain why it matters to you??

the differences have been explained to you so many times it boring to read,,,

Nobody has explained any differences other than select fire, which was noted in the OP.

so what? that is a CRITICAL and MASSIVE difference,

Not sure those are terms I brought into the conversation, but substantial is pretty much explanatory. The 2nd amendment poses no substantial difference between the two any more than what the stock is made of. Are you gonna start trying to nit pick now?