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

[BULLDOG]

the law makes a difference between the M4 and the AR15 a law that I believe has been approved by the supreme court. So the law determines that while the AR15 is fine for civilian use the M4 requires a special license to own and keep and use. WHY, you ask? Because auto fire is covered by that law but NOT semiauto fire. Again there is NO difference between the functioning of the AR15 and any other semiauto rifle in civilian hands.

.

The Law limits the M4 by function, not necessarily nomenclature.
Any firearm with the full auto function is prohibited without a specific license, regardless of nomenclature, but civilians can still own them.

The Powers that Be, wouldn't give up their ability to own one if they wanted one.
Law-abiding citizens that can afford the cost of the license, and don't mind going through the hassle, can have them under current law.
Kind of like a Noble, with a horse and a decent sword in the olden days ...

.​

.

All true, but doesn't make much difference in a direct functional comparison between the two.

 

[BULLDOG]

​

Sure, but I don't think you would want to go make me a sammich and bring me a beer.

.

Shit, I could work out a cold duck or lamb sandwich and a warn beer ... But that's another story ... Next.

.​

Mmmmm Belgian Dubbels 55 degrees
Sounds good.

 

[BlackSand]

I believe that there are 13 States that outright ban automatic weapons

.

State Law isn't Federal Law, and doesn't concern me.

The State where I live, has it's own protections against the desire to infringe upon the Right to Bear Arms in our State Constitution.
That Amendment prevents our State Legislature from totally banning automatic weapons, or screwing with our Right to Bear Arms.

Not my problem if other people decided to piss their rights away.
The US Constitution has a Tenth Amendment, and they can do that if you let them.

.​

 

[BlackSand]

​

Mmmmm Belgian Dubbels 55 degrees
Sounds good.

.

Pretty sure it's a bottle of Belikin, but it could be Wadadli ... Not sure, the label faded in the sun over the years ... Next.

.​

 

[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,

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?

the law makes a difference between the M4 and the AR15 a law that I believe has been approved by the supreme court. So the law determines that while the AR15 is fine for civilian use the M4 requires a special license to own and keep and use. WHY, you ask? Because auto fire is covered by that law but NOT semiauto fire. Again there is NO difference between the functioning of the AR15 and any other semiauto rifle in civilian hands.

Not sure what the law has to do with the actual functioning of any gun. That's more of a mechanical thing.

the point is the only difference between a rifle with auto fire and semiauto fire is just that EVERY single semiauto functions EXACTLY the same. there is nothing other then looks that differentiate the AR15 from any other semiauto rifle.

 

[Canon Shooter]

the law makes a difference between the M4 and the AR15 a law that I believe has been approved by the supreme court. So the law determines that while the AR15 is fine for civilian use the M4 requires a special license to own and keep and use. WHY, you ask? Because auto fire is covered by that law but NOT semiauto fire. Again there is NO difference between the functioning of the AR15 and any other semiauto rifle in civilian hands.

.

The Law limits the M4 by function, not necessarily nomenclature.
Any firearm with the full auto function is prohibited without a specific license, regardless of nomenclature, but civilians can still own them.

The Powers that Be, wouldn't give up their ability to own one if they wanted one.
Law-abiding citizens that can afford the cost of the license, and don't mind going through the hassle, can have them under current law.
Kind of like a Noble, with a horse and a decent sword in the olden days ...

.​

.

All true, but doesn't make much difference in a direct functional comparison between the two.

You're a fucking retard...

 

[Rigby5]

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?

Conversion from AR-15 to M-4 is VERY difficult.
You have to add things like a sear to be activated by the bolt closing and allowing the trigger mechanism to toggle.
It takes a machine shop.

 

[Rigby5]

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?

the law makes a difference between the M4 and the AR15 a law that I believe has been approved by the supreme court. So the law determines that while the AR15 is fine for civilian use the M4 requires a special license to own and keep and use. WHY, you ask? Because auto fire is covered by that law but NOT semiauto fire. Again there is NO difference between the functioning of the AR15 and any other semiauto rifle in civilian hands.

Not sure what the law has to do with the actual functioning of any gun. That's more of a mechanical thing.

the point is the only difference between a rifle with auto fire and semiauto fire is just that EVERY single semiauto functions EXACTLY the same. there is nothing other then looks that differentiate the AR15 from any other semiauto rifle.

Full auto fire requires lots of machining so that the firing pin is not released until the bolt is fully closed.
Or else the gun will blow up.
Full auto is very hard to do in some guns, like the ARs.

 

[justinacolmena]

I's not hard or expensive to convert an AR15 to full auto capability. It's illegal as hell, and you should be ready to spend a lot of time in prison, but it's not that hard to do.

Why should you go to prison for that? Unless your finger is on the trigger, and you shoot and kill someone, you should be allowed to do whatever you want with your own gun, same as everyone else outside of prison.

 

[Rigby5]

Full auto is very expensive, like $4k, and allows the BATF access to your storage location whenever they want.

 

[Rigby5]

I'm not seeing your point.

What is the material difference between this military issue M24 sniper rifle...

View attachment 489683

...and this extremely popular Remington 700 deer rifle...?


View attachment 489684

Remington Model 700 - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

You should start a thread if you are looking for that answer. This thread is about the M4 and the AR15.

Figure it out, Einstein

AR-15 Vs. M4: Which Weapon Is More Formidable? AR-15 vs M4

AR-15 vs. M4 are two varying rifles with striking similarities. AR-15 is easily accessible to civilians. Whereas, the M4 is fully automatic.

www.custom-ar15.com

That is the only attempt at an answer in the entire thread.
1. Barrel - The M4 has a shorter barrel, and is shaped to receive a grenade launcher.
2 Ammo. - The Ar15 can be chambered for several different shells, but the M4 is only capable of 5.56.
3 Automation - Until 1986, both rifles were legally capable of full automatic fire, but the AR15 was modified in 1986. Conversion back to auto fire is neither hard or expensive, but is illegal. ------------this was noted in the OP.
4 manufacturer
5. legality. This has been discussed, but is not a material difference in the guns, or the way they work. other than the already mentioned full auto capability.
6 Category. This is how they are referred to on paper, and has nothing to do with material differences between the rifles, other than the auto capability.

You did point out that the barrel is shaped a little different, but the purpose of that was to attach grenade launcher. Hardly a material difference in the accuracy, speed, or capability of long term continuous use. You got anything else to add to your list? The rest of the differences in your link are really just distinctions without any real differences.

Yeah...other rifles are also convertible to full automatic fire....

See the North Hollywood shootout where the rifles were converted to fully automatic fire...yet, in the shootout...the two robbers, firing fully automatic at the police didn't manage to kill anyone.....both, however, were killed by police using semi-automatic weapons...

So again, it isn't the weapon, it is the target location...in the North Hollywood shootout, the people they shot at were in the open, not in a building, and were behind cover.....so no one was killed by the fully automatic rifle fire.....however, again, both perps, even with their fully automatic rifles, were killed by police with semi-automatic weapons....

It isn't the weapon, it is the target location that makes all the difference....

Case in point...the 1984 FBI shooting, the two criminals had a mini-14 rifle, a semi-automatic rifle, and a pump action shotgun.....they managed to kill 2 FBI agents and wounded 5 others......

Again, it isn't the weapon, it is the target location.....in this case, the shooters were good shots.......the FBI weren't so good...

I am curious as to your point...where you would like to go with this....

The point is to find the material differences between the two rifles. In this thread I have learned the M4 has a shorter barrel, and is shaped so a grenade launcher can attach to it. Other than the auto capability, that is the only difference anybody has been able to mention.

well and the whole auto fire thing that you keep ignoring

I's not hard or expensive to convert an AR15 to full auto capability. It's illegal as hell, and you should be ready to spend a lot of time in prison, but it's not that hard to do.

It is not at all easy.
Making an AR full auto take incredible expertise, time, machining, and more components.
And it is not at all illegal, as along as you are willing to pay.

 

[justinacolmena]

It takes a machine shop.

No it doesn't.
It may require machinery, power metalworking tools such as a milling machine or lathe, but that professional-ass labor union closed shop attitude won't work for anything when it comes to guns.

 

[justinacolmena]

Full auto is very expensive, like $4k, and allows the BATF access to your storage location whenever they want.

How much BATF is CIA? I keep thinking of a guy around the corner with some sort of concealed weapon in a trench coat smoking a Cuban cigar and acting as an enforcer for Fidel Castro or Raúl Castro's Communist Party Gun control regime in America.

 

[justinacolmena]

substantial time in the slammer

Well gee whiz, motherfuckrrs! If you can't tinker with, improve it, do whatever you want with it as long as you don't kill anybody else with it, -- guns are banned and it never was yours to begin with. Get our handcuffs off. Get us out of prison. Stop bullshitting us in a court of law. Give us our guns back, or you're all a bunch of liars and thieves to boot.

 

[BULLDOG]

I's not hard or expensive to convert an AR15 to full auto capability. It's illegal as hell, and you should be ready to spend a lot of time in prison, but it's not that hard to do.

Why should you go to prison for that? Unless your finger is on the trigger, and you shoot and kill someone, you should be allowed to do whatever you want with your own gun, same as everyone else outside of prison.

Because that is the law.

 

[justinacolmena]

Because that is the law

Not without the Second Amendment, it isn't law in the U.S.

It's mob rule, enforced by drug cartels, MS-13 gangsters, corrupt cops, and bribed judges in a collective bargaining plea-deal system of crime and punishment without justice.

 

[2aguy]

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.

.​

Interesting, but I was being asked about the definition of an assault rifle. See what I mean when I say gun nuts keep trying to change the subject? Federal statutes have nothing to do with the definition of assault rifle

Your question was answered by page 2......

 

[2aguy]

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?

No. You didn't. As a group, you often mentioned select fire, to which I responded that was explicitly mentioned and excluded from the conversation in the OP. Many wanted to bring in the 2nd amendment, or state rulings, but that has nothing to do with the guns or their practical use. One even mentioned barrel length, and I was going to give that to you until another said it wasn't a substantial difference. You can get just about any barrel length for just about any rifle. Not sure why it was so hard for you to admit there are no substantial differences between the two rifles other than select fire, but that's for you to figure out.

Select fire is the difference that makes them 2 completely different rifles.

 

[Canon Shooter]

Not sure why it was so hard for you to admit there are no substantial differences between the two rifles other than select fire, but that's for you to figure out.

You ignorant, brainless fuck.

How many differences need there be?

Your position seems to be that, since that's the only difference, then both should be banned because no one can come up with other differences.

That is, and you are, stupid...

 

[Jarlaxle]

@Rigby5
It is not at all easy.
Making an AR full auto take incredible expertise, time, machining, and more components.
And it is not at all illegal, as along as you are willing to pay.

Yes, it is...Hughes Amendment, 1986. It's illegal unless you can build it yourself.