Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
There are many ways to make the conversion. A DIAS, which is made to drop in without any machining of the rifle and a few off the shelf, readily available, unregulated parts might be the best combination of ease of conversion, and dependability of the rifle in use. If you want to get really easy then look at the "lightning link". Super easy, but subject to hang up.it takes more to convert it than that,,Perhaps it would be beyond your ability to fabricate one small part, and purchase the rest. That wouldn't be a big hurdle for many.Like you who thinks that it's soooooo easy to modify an AR 15 into a fully automatic weapon even though no one ever seems to use modified AR 15s to commit crimesThere are always people who live in their own little world, but if disagree with our military's definition, you're pretty much an idiot.Lots of people doubt its an assault rifle so the entire thread is pointless.It's an honest question. All I want is an honest answer.This GOTCHA attempt is so lame, we need to call in a veterinarian and have it put down.
so simple and yet not a single case of it happening,,There are many ways to make the conversion. A DIAS, which is made to drop in without any machining of the rifle and a few off the shelf, readily available, unregulated parts might be the best combination of ease of conversion, and dependability of the rifle in use. If you want to get really easy then look at the "lightning link". Super easy, but subject to hang up.it takes more to convert it than that,,Perhaps it would be beyond your ability to fabricate one small part, and purchase the rest. That wouldn't be a big hurdle for many.Like you who thinks that it's soooooo easy to modify an AR 15 into a fully automatic weapon even though no one ever seems to use modified AR 15s to commit crimesThere are always people who live in their own little world, but if disagree with our military's definition, you're pretty much an idiot.Lots of people doubt its an assault rifle so the entire thread is pointless.It's an honest question. All I want is an honest answer.This GOTCHA attempt is so lame, we need to call in a veterinarian and have it put down.
Most people could make an auto sear in their garage with a grinder and a vice. It wouldn't be legal, but it could be done pretty easily. However, the question was other than full auto, what are the material differences between the two rifles.Well, no, it cannot be "easily" converted-the receiver is different.
Then what makes you think the government can ban them?....if everything can be made in a garage all that will be left with these guns are bad people...and you will be defenseless....why is that so hard for dumb libs to grasp?....
You are certainly free to start a thread on all of that if you want to. This thread is about the differences between two rifles. Try to stay on subject.
I thought this thread was about the ease in making automatic weapons out of semi auto....and how it can be done in a garage....am I wrong...
I have a giant sling shot between 2 trees that can shoot a bowling ball 327 yards. They said I had to stop doing it over the Interstate for some reason.
I tried that with the neighbor's cat. The bastard scratched me up pretty bad, but that has nothing to do with material differences between the two rifles.
That's nice. I guess. Still has nothing to do with this thread though.it doesnt matter cause that type of weapon is covered by the 2nd A,,The M4 most certainly is an assault rifle. It was unfortunate that I used the wrong term in the title. That is a mistake that I acknowledged early in the conversation. (somewhere around #40 or #41) I should have used assault rifle, but as I noted in the acknowledgment I didn't know how to edit the title at that point.It's amusing to see how hard you are trying. No, I don't call my bathroom the Latrine or the Head, but I am aware that those are accepted terms that generally share the same definition. If someone does use those terms, I know what they are talking about. Does this have anything to do with the absurd claim that the term Assault Rifle is undefined?.
You must be an idiot then, because it wasn't that hard to start with.
You are also the one saying that "we can all agree" what you want to call something is what it is, because the military calls it that.
But what we are talking about isn't an assault weapon as it is defined under current law.
I just like watching you crawfish all over the place acting like you might know what the fuck you are talking about.
You can call it whatever you want, but no one should be compelled to agree with your ass.
.
According to the Defense Intelligence Agency, “assault rifles” are “short, compact, selective-fire weapons that fire a cartridge intermediate in power between a submachine gun and rifle cartridges.” All assault rifles are capable of automatic fire.
You are certainly free to use your own definitions if you would like, but your definition might not be as widely accepted as the military Defense Intelligence Agency definitions. You can call a squirrel a fluffy tail tree rat if you want to. I don't care.
we still dont know what this thread is about,,,That's nice. I guess. Still has nothing to do with this thread though.it doesnt matter cause that type of weapon is covered by the 2nd A,,The M4 most certainly is an assault rifle. It was unfortunate that I used the wrong term in the title. That is a mistake that I acknowledged early in the conversation. (somewhere around #40 or #41) I should have used assault rifle, but as I noted in the acknowledgment I didn't know how to edit the title at that point.It's amusing to see how hard you are trying. No, I don't call my bathroom the Latrine or the Head, but I am aware that those are accepted terms that generally share the same definition. If someone does use those terms, I know what they are talking about. Does this have anything to do with the absurd claim that the term Assault Rifle is undefined?.
You must be an idiot then, because it wasn't that hard to start with.
You are also the one saying that "we can all agree" what you want to call something is what it is, because the military calls it that.
But what we are talking about isn't an assault weapon as it is defined under current law.
I just like watching you crawfish all over the place acting like you might know what the fuck you are talking about.
You can call it whatever you want, but no one should be compelled to agree with your ass.
.
According to the Defense Intelligence Agency, “assault rifles” are “short, compact, selective-fire weapons that fire a cartridge intermediate in power between a submachine gun and rifle cartridges.” All assault rifles are capable of automatic fire.
You are certainly free to use your own definitions if you would like, but your definition might not be as widely accepted as the military Defense Intelligence Agency definitions. You can call a squirrel a fluffy tail tree rat if you want to. I don't care.
I understand. Stupid people often have trouble with all but the simplest threads. Keep trying though.we still dont know what this thread is about,,,That's nice. I guess. Still has nothing to do with this thread though.it doesnt matter cause that type of weapon is covered by the 2nd A,,The M4 most certainly is an assault rifle. It was unfortunate that I used the wrong term in the title. That is a mistake that I acknowledged early in the conversation. (somewhere around #40 or #41) I should have used assault rifle, but as I noted in the acknowledgment I didn't know how to edit the title at that point.It's amusing to see how hard you are trying. No, I don't call my bathroom the Latrine or the Head, but I am aware that those are accepted terms that generally share the same definition. If someone does use those terms, I know what they are talking about. Does this have anything to do with the absurd claim that the term Assault Rifle is undefined?.
You must be an idiot then, because it wasn't that hard to start with.
You are also the one saying that "we can all agree" what you want to call something is what it is, because the military calls it that.
But what we are talking about isn't an assault weapon as it is defined under current law.
I just like watching you crawfish all over the place acting like you might know what the fuck you are talking about.
You can call it whatever you want, but no one should be compelled to agree with your ass.
.
According to the Defense Intelligence Agency, “assault rifles” are “short, compact, selective-fire weapons that fire a cartridge intermediate in power between a submachine gun and rifle cartridges.” All assault rifles are capable of automatic fire.
You are certainly free to use your own definitions if you would like, but your definition might not be as widely accepted as the military Defense Intelligence Agency definitions. You can call a squirrel a fluffy tail tree rat if you want to. I don't care.
if its so simple why do yu keep asking the same question after its been answered so many times,,I understand. Stupid people often have trouble with all but the simplest threads. Keep trying though.we still dont know what this thread is about,,,That's nice. I guess. Still has nothing to do with this thread though.it doesnt matter cause that type of weapon is covered by the 2nd A,,The M4 most certainly is an assault rifle. It was unfortunate that I used the wrong term in the title. That is a mistake that I acknowledged early in the conversation. (somewhere around #40 or #41) I should have used assault rifle, but as I noted in the acknowledgment I didn't know how to edit the title at that point.It's amusing to see how hard you are trying. No, I don't call my bathroom the Latrine or the Head, but I am aware that those are accepted terms that generally share the same definition. If someone does use those terms, I know what they are talking about. Does this have anything to do with the absurd claim that the term Assault Rifle is undefined?.
You must be an idiot then, because it wasn't that hard to start with.
You are also the one saying that "we can all agree" what you want to call something is what it is, because the military calls it that.
But what we are talking about isn't an assault weapon as it is defined under current law.
I just like watching you crawfish all over the place acting like you might know what the fuck you are talking about.
You can call it whatever you want, but no one should be compelled to agree with your ass.
.
According to the Defense Intelligence Agency, “assault rifles” are “short, compact, selective-fire weapons that fire a cartridge intermediate in power between a submachine gun and rifle cartridges.” All assault rifles are capable of automatic fire.
You are certainly free to use your own definitions if you would like, but your definition might not be as widely accepted as the military Defense Intelligence Agency definitions. You can call a squirrel a fluffy tail tree rat if you want to. I don't care.
Most people could make an auto sear in their garage with a grinder and a vice. It wouldn't be legal, but it could be done pretty easily. However, the question was other than full auto, what are the material differences between the two rifles.Well, no, it cannot be "easily" converted-the receiver is different.
Then what makes you think the government can ban them?....if everything can be made in a garage all that will be left with these guns are bad people...and you will be defenseless....why is that so hard for dumb libs to grasp?....
You are certainly free to start a thread on all of that if you want to. This thread is about the differences between two rifles. Try to stay on subject.
I thought this thread was about the ease in making automatic weapons out of semi auto....and how it can be done in a garage....am I wrong...
I have a giant sling shot between 2 trees that can shoot a bowling ball 327 yards. They said I had to stop doing it over the Interstate for some reason.
I tried that with the neighbor's cat. The bastard scratched me up pretty bad, but that has nothing to do with material differences between the two rifles.
Great idea. I felt sorry for a feral cat, and started feeding him, until he invited a gazillion of his friends to join him. I might get one of those.
Most people could make an auto sear in their garage with a grinder and a vice. It wouldn't be legal, but it could be done pretty easily. However, the question was other than full auto, what are the material differences between the two rifles.Well, no, it cannot be "easily" converted-the receiver is different.
Then what makes you think the government can ban them?....if everything can be made in a garage all that will be left with these guns are bad people...and you will be defenseless....why is that so hard for dumb libs to grasp?....
You are certainly free to start a thread on all of that if you want to. This thread is about the differences between two rifles. Try to stay on subject.
I thought this thread was about the ease in making automatic weapons out of semi auto....and how it can be done in a garage....am I wrong...
I have a giant sling shot between 2 trees that can shoot a bowling ball 327 yards. They said I had to stop doing it over the Interstate for some reason.
I tried that with the neighbor's cat. The bastard scratched me up pretty bad, but that has nothing to do with material differences between the two rifles.
Great idea. I felt sorry for a feral cat, and started feeding him, until he invited a gazillion of his friends to join him. I might get one of those.
Oh, look. You're not accepting that this thread is over. Imagine my surprise.Yes. Do you have anything other than auto-fire capability, which was noted in the OP (post #1) to add?Yes. AR-15s are substantially cheaper to own for people who want one. Owning one (or a hundred) isn't regulated like owning a select-fire weapon is.Yes, it is a substantial difference that everybody is aware of. That's why I excluded it from the discussion. I'm trying to find any other substantial differences that might exist. You know of any?.Are you still trying to hide that you want the AR banned because "there's no substantial differences between the two"?OK. Since you can't point out any fault in this OP, I assume we are in agreement.Again -- I have no obligation to defend a claim I didn't make.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.Yes. But the AR-15 is not. By the definition you cited.I read the entire thing. You agree the M4 is an assault rifle though, like I said in the OP --- right?You didn't read far enough.Our military and the NRA disagree with youThe 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".
NRA-ILA | Glossary
For definitions of key words related to firearms and the 2nd amendment check out this page.www.nraila.org
- 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.
Looks like this thread is over.
I don't know what's so hard about that to understand.
Because the semi-auto and full-auto thing is a substantial difference.
Thread's over. You need to accept it.
she hasnt got to do her,,Oh, look. You're not accepting that this thread is over. Imagine my surprise.Yes. Do you have anything other than auto-fire capability, which was noted in the OP (post #1) to add?Yes. AR-15s are substantially cheaper to own for people who want one. Owning one (or a hundred) isn't regulated like owning a select-fire weapon is.Yes, it is a substantial difference that everybody is aware of. That's why I excluded it from the discussion. I'm trying to find any other substantial differences that might exist. You know of any?.Are you still trying to hide that you want the AR banned because "there's no substantial differences between the two"?OK. Since you can't point out any fault in this OP, I assume we are in agreement.Again -- I have no obligation to defend a claim I didn't make.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.Yes. But the AR-15 is not. By the definition you cited.I read the entire thing. You agree the M4 is an assault rifle though, like I said in the OP --- right?You didn't read far enough.Our military and the NRA disagree with youThe 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".
NRA-ILA | Glossary
For definitions of key words related to firearms and the 2nd amendment check out this page.
- 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.
Looks like this thread is over.
I don't know what's so hard about that to understand.
Because the semi-auto and full-auto thing is a substantial difference.
Thread's over. You need to accept it.
You are not a Second Amendment proponent.Please show where I said anything about banning AR15s.Will somebody just go ahead and agree with Bulldog's stupid idea that AR's should be banned?
You dishonest piece of shit.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?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?
.
IM GONNA ASK A QUESTION AND I WILL ONLY ACCEPT ONE ANWSER AND IF U DONT GIVE IT TO ME UR DUMBIt was a straight forward question. I didn't make you look like fools by babbling about everything but the subject. You did that all on your own.so this whole thread was a troll and should have been in the rubber room,,I assumed as much from the beginning. I just wanted to know how gun nuts would respond to the question.I guess youre to stupid to know thats the only difference,,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.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.Yes. Rarely used.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.
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?
now why did it matter??
Doesn't have to. It's insanely obvious that's his intention.she hasnt got to do her,,Oh, look. You're not accepting that this thread is over. Imagine my surprise.Yes. Do you have anything other than auto-fire capability, which was noted in the OP (post #1) to add?Yes. AR-15s are substantially cheaper to own for people who want one. Owning one (or a hundred) isn't regulated like owning a select-fire weapon is.Yes, it is a substantial difference that everybody is aware of. That's why I excluded it from the discussion. I'm trying to find any other substantial differences that might exist. You know of any?.Are you still trying to hide that you want the AR banned because "there's no substantial differences between the two"?OK. Since you can't point out any fault in this OP, I assume we are in agreement.Again -- I have no obligation to defend a claim I didn't make.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.Yes. But the AR-15 is not. By the definition you cited.I read the entire thing. You agree the M4 is an assault rifle though, like I said in the OP --- right?You didn't read far enough.Our military and the NRA disagree with youThe 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".
NRA-ILA | Glossary
For definitions of key words related to firearms and the 2nd amendment check out this page.
- 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.
Looks like this thread is over.
I don't know what's so hard about that to understand.
Because the semi-auto and full-auto thing is a substantial difference.
Thread's over. You need to accept it.
AR's are just like M4's and should be banned from civilian ownership rant yet,,
here's the deal you stop making ignorant trollish threads and you will not be viewed as stupid.I understand. Stupid people often have trouble with all but the simplest threads. Keep trying though.we still dont know what this thread is about,,,That's nice. I guess. Still has nothing to do with this thread though.it doesnt matter cause that type of weapon is covered by the 2nd A,,The M4 most certainly is an assault rifle. It was unfortunate that I used the wrong term in the title. That is a mistake that I acknowledged early in the conversation. (somewhere around #40 or #41) I should have used assault rifle, but as I noted in the acknowledgment I didn't know how to edit the title at that point.It's amusing to see how hard you are trying. No, I don't call my bathroom the Latrine or the Head, but I am aware that those are accepted terms that generally share the same definition. If someone does use those terms, I know what they are talking about. Does this have anything to do with the absurd claim that the term Assault Rifle is undefined?.
You must be an idiot then, because it wasn't that hard to start with.
You are also the one saying that "we can all agree" what you want to call something is what it is, because the military calls it that.
But what we are talking about isn't an assault weapon as it is defined under current law.
I just like watching you crawfish all over the place acting like you might know what the fuck you are talking about.
You can call it whatever you want, but no one should be compelled to agree with your ass.
.
According to the Defense Intelligence Agency, “assault rifles” are “short, compact, selective-fire weapons that fire a cartridge intermediate in power between a submachine gun and rifle cartridges.” All assault rifles are capable of automatic fire.
You are certainly free to use your own definitions if you would like, but your definition might not be as widely accepted as the military Defense Intelligence Agency definitions. You can call a squirrel a fluffy tail tree rat if you want to. I don't care.
if it's so easy why don't you try it and make one?There are many ways to make the conversion. A DIAS, which is made to drop in without any machining of the rifle and a few off the shelf, readily available, unregulated parts might be the best combination of ease of conversion, and dependability of the rifle in use. If you want to get really easy then look at the "lightning link". Super easy, but subject to hang up.it takes more to convert it than that,,Perhaps it would be beyond your ability to fabricate one small part, and purchase the rest. That wouldn't be a big hurdle for many.Like you who thinks that it's soooooo easy to modify an AR 15 into a fully automatic weapon even though no one ever seems to use modified AR 15s to commit crimesThere are always people who live in their own little world, but if disagree with our military's definition, you're pretty much an idiot.Lots of people doubt its an assault rifle so the entire thread is pointless.It's an honest question. All I want is an honest answer.This GOTCHA attempt is so lame, we need to call in a veterinarian and have it put down.
It would have been over long ago if you idiots hadn't kept it going. Is someone forcing you to keep posting?Oh, look. You're not accepting that this thread is over. Imagine my surprise.Yes. Do you have anything other than auto-fire capability, which was noted in the OP (post #1) to add?Yes. AR-15s are substantially cheaper to own for people who want one. Owning one (or a hundred) isn't regulated like owning a select-fire weapon is.Yes, it is a substantial difference that everybody is aware of. That's why I excluded it from the discussion. I'm trying to find any other substantial differences that might exist. You know of any?.Are you still trying to hide that you want the AR banned because "there's no substantial differences between the two"?OK. Since you can't point out any fault in this OP, I assume we are in agreement.Again -- I have no obligation to defend a claim I didn't make.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.Yes. But the AR-15 is not. By the definition you cited.I read the entire thing. You agree the M4 is an assault rifle though, like I said in the OP --- right?You didn't read far enough.Our military and the NRA disagree with youThe 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".
NRA-ILA | Glossary
For definitions of key words related to firearms and the 2nd amendment check out this page.
- 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.
Looks like this thread is over.
I don't know what's so hard about that to understand.
Because the semi-auto and full-auto thing is a substantial difference.
Thread's over. You need to accept it.
They matter because I wanted to know if any exist. Evidently, they don't.You are not a Second Amendment proponent.Please show where I said anything about banning AR15s.Will somebody just go ahead and agree with Bulldog's stupid idea that AR's should be banned?
Meanwhile, you keep being asked why the differences matter.
As of page 21, you have not answered.
That's funny. The closest thing I got to an answer to the question was barrel length, but you can get just about any barrel length for both of them. The 2nd isn't an answer to the question, and state laws isn't an answer either.IM GONNA ASK A QUESTION AND I WILL ONLY ACCEPT ONE ANWSER AND IF U DONT GIVE IT TO ME UR DUMBIt was a straight forward question. I didn't make you look like fools by babbling about everything but the subject. You did that all on your own.so this whole thread was a troll and should have been in the rubber room,,I assumed as much from the beginning. I just wanted to know how gun nuts would respond to the question.I guess youre to stupid to know thats the only difference,,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.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.Yes. Rarely used.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.
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?
now why did it matter??
