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

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?
i think you answered your question one is automatic the other is not.
There was more to the question, but don't let that bother you.

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

Go back and reread the OP.
Did I misquote the title?
 
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?

I dont dispute what you say. The weaponry should be exclusive for the military and never allowed for the public use. There is no valid reason for other than an ego builder and a power play by testosterone filled Rambos.
There are so many slaughtered by these that that itself should be prove they should be banned. But no, that 250 year old 2nd amendment says we have a right.
So let the mass murders continue. When it reaches your children or close family, get back to me.


more people are killed every single year by knives, by clubs, and by bare hands than by all rifle types let alone just the AR-15 rifle.....

More people die each year falling off ladders than are killed by mass public shooters in general and by mass public shooters with rifles...

What are you talking about?

The AR-15 is not a military weapon....do you understand that?

There is only one mass public shooting where the rifle had an advantage in the shooting, and that was Las Vegas, where the range was over 200 yards......but he was also firing into a tightly packed crowd of over 22,000 people, at night, from a concealed and fortified position.......with his initial shooting masked by the concert.



And if the crowed wasn't trapped in that concert arena, he wouldn't have been able to kill as many since they would have run away or found cover.....since shooting at moving targets at hundreds of yards is almost impossible for all but expertly trained shooters...



At the range of every other mass public shooting a rifle has no advantage over pistols or shotguns.......



again.....at the range of a mass public shooting the AR-15 is no better than a pump action shotgun....as are 2 handguns......you idiot...



Boulder....used an AR-15 with magazines that held more than 10 bullets.. 10 killed.....



Virginia Tech...2 pistols, one with 10 round magazine..... 32 killed.



Do you see that the AR-15 killed fewer people than the 2 pistols?



Boulder...10 killed with an AR-15 rifle and regular magazines ( holding more than 10 bullets)



Luby's Cafe..... 2 pistols....24 killed.



Do you see that the 2 pistols killed more than the AR-15?



Do you know what the difference was between these attacks?



The cops immediately responded and shot at the attacker in boulder, causing him to stop shooting unarmed victims, and then he shot himself....



Virginia Tech and Luby's Cafe, the police didn't get there, and at Luby's Cafe, the one woman who could have shot and killed the attacker had to leave her gun in her car because of stupid gun free zone laws....



Boulder AR-15 with magazines that hold more than 10 bullets...you know, regular magazines..... 10 killed...



Kerch, Russia, Polytechnic school shooting.... 5 shot, pump action shotgun...which means it had 5 shells which is 5 less than 10........20 killed 70 wounded.



Do you see that the AR-15 killed fewer people than the 5 shot, pump action shotgun?



The difference? The Russian police station was 100 yards away from the school...and it still took them 10 minutes to get to the school...and he managed to kill 20 people with a 5 shot, pump action shotgun....10 more than the Boulder shooter with a rifle and a regular sized magazine...





So again.......in a mass public shooting the number of bullets in the gun magazine don't mean anything......the gun doesn't make the difference....



What makes the difference?



1) if the target is a gun free zone, more people get killed.



2) if someone starts shooting at the attacker, they commit suicide, or surrender, or runaway....



That is what you don't understand and don't care to understand since you simply have a mental issue when it comes to the AR-15 rifle.

That rifle had no special advantage in a mass public shooting.
We're going to have to face one fact the AR 15 may not be used by the military but it is a weapon of war that's what makes it constitutionally protected according to U.S. v. Miller 1939
So you admit it is a weapon of war. Was that so hard?
we've been telling you that for days,,
OK. Then show the post where that was clearly stated, other than when bigreb did.
just check my comments and then show some that proved it wrong,,

or you could prove it wrong,,
You made a statement, "We've been telling you that for days" ( that an AR15 is a weapon of war) , and you want me to find your remark that says it is not? You know that's nuts, right?
 
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?

I dont dispute what you say. The weaponry should be exclusive for the military and never allowed for the public use. There is no valid reason for other than an ego builder and a power play by testosterone filled Rambos.
There are so many slaughtered by these that that itself should be prove they should be banned. But no, that 250 year old 2nd amendment says we have a right.
So let the mass murders continue. When it reaches your children or close family, get back to me.


more people are killed every single year by knives, by clubs, and by bare hands than by all rifle types let alone just the AR-15 rifle.....

More people die each year falling off ladders than are killed by mass public shooters in general and by mass public shooters with rifles...

What are you talking about?

The AR-15 is not a military weapon....do you understand that?

There is only one mass public shooting where the rifle had an advantage in the shooting, and that was Las Vegas, where the range was over 200 yards......but he was also firing into a tightly packed crowd of over 22,000 people, at night, from a concealed and fortified position.......with his initial shooting masked by the concert.



And if the crowed wasn't trapped in that concert arena, he wouldn't have been able to kill as many since they would have run away or found cover.....since shooting at moving targets at hundreds of yards is almost impossible for all but expertly trained shooters...



At the range of every other mass public shooting a rifle has no advantage over pistols or shotguns.......



again.....at the range of a mass public shooting the AR-15 is no better than a pump action shotgun....as are 2 handguns......you idiot...



Boulder....used an AR-15 with magazines that held more than 10 bullets.. 10 killed.....



Virginia Tech...2 pistols, one with 10 round magazine..... 32 killed.



Do you see that the AR-15 killed fewer people than the 2 pistols?



Boulder...10 killed with an AR-15 rifle and regular magazines ( holding more than 10 bullets)



Luby's Cafe..... 2 pistols....24 killed.



Do you see that the 2 pistols killed more than the AR-15?



Do you know what the difference was between these attacks?



The cops immediately responded and shot at the attacker in boulder, causing him to stop shooting unarmed victims, and then he shot himself....



Virginia Tech and Luby's Cafe, the police didn't get there, and at Luby's Cafe, the one woman who could have shot and killed the attacker had to leave her gun in her car because of stupid gun free zone laws....



Boulder AR-15 with magazines that hold more than 10 bullets...you know, regular magazines..... 10 killed...



Kerch, Russia, Polytechnic school shooting.... 5 shot, pump action shotgun...which means it had 5 shells which is 5 less than 10........20 killed 70 wounded.



Do you see that the AR-15 killed fewer people than the 5 shot, pump action shotgun?



The difference? The Russian police station was 100 yards away from the school...and it still took them 10 minutes to get to the school...and he managed to kill 20 people with a 5 shot, pump action shotgun....10 more than the Boulder shooter with a rifle and a regular sized magazine...





So again.......in a mass public shooting the number of bullets in the gun magazine don't mean anything......the gun doesn't make the difference....



What makes the difference?



1) if the target is a gun free zone, more people get killed.



2) if someone starts shooting at the attacker, they commit suicide, or surrender, or runaway....



That is what you don't understand and don't care to understand since you simply have a mental issue when it comes to the AR-15 rifle.

That rifle had no special advantage in a mass public shooting.
We're going to have to face one fact the AR 15 may not be used by the military but it is a weapon of war that's what makes it constitutionally protected according to U.S. v. Miller 1939


It was never used by the military....it therefore has never been a weapon of war....the pump action shotgun is a weapon of war, as is the bolt action rifle..........
What makes a firearm constitutionally protected?





If it is useable for military purpose it is Constitutionally protected.
 
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?

I dont dispute what you say. The weaponry should be exclusive for the military and never allowed for the public use. There is no valid reason for other than an ego builder and a power play by testosterone filled Rambos.
There are so many slaughtered by these that that itself should be prove they should be banned. But no, that 250 year old 2nd amendment says we have a right.
So let the mass murders continue. When it reaches your children or close family, get back to me.


more people are killed every single year by knives, by clubs, and by bare hands than by all rifle types let alone just the AR-15 rifle.....

More people die each year falling off ladders than are killed by mass public shooters in general and by mass public shooters with rifles...

What are you talking about?

The AR-15 is not a military weapon....do you understand that?

There is only one mass public shooting where the rifle had an advantage in the shooting, and that was Las Vegas, where the range was over 200 yards......but he was also firing into a tightly packed crowd of over 22,000 people, at night, from a concealed and fortified position.......with his initial shooting masked by the concert.



And if the crowed wasn't trapped in that concert arena, he wouldn't have been able to kill as many since they would have run away or found cover.....since shooting at moving targets at hundreds of yards is almost impossible for all but expertly trained shooters...



At the range of every other mass public shooting a rifle has no advantage over pistols or shotguns.......



again.....at the range of a mass public shooting the AR-15 is no better than a pump action shotgun....as are 2 handguns......you idiot...



Boulder....used an AR-15 with magazines that held more than 10 bullets.. 10 killed.....



Virginia Tech...2 pistols, one with 10 round magazine..... 32 killed.



Do you see that the AR-15 killed fewer people than the 2 pistols?



Boulder...10 killed with an AR-15 rifle and regular magazines ( holding more than 10 bullets)



Luby's Cafe..... 2 pistols....24 killed.



Do you see that the 2 pistols killed more than the AR-15?



Do you know what the difference was between these attacks?



The cops immediately responded and shot at the attacker in boulder, causing him to stop shooting unarmed victims, and then he shot himself....



Virginia Tech and Luby's Cafe, the police didn't get there, and at Luby's Cafe, the one woman who could have shot and killed the attacker had to leave her gun in her car because of stupid gun free zone laws....



Boulder AR-15 with magazines that hold more than 10 bullets...you know, regular magazines..... 10 killed...



Kerch, Russia, Polytechnic school shooting.... 5 shot, pump action shotgun...which means it had 5 shells which is 5 less than 10........20 killed 70 wounded.



Do you see that the AR-15 killed fewer people than the 5 shot, pump action shotgun?



The difference? The Russian police station was 100 yards away from the school...and it still took them 10 minutes to get to the school...and he managed to kill 20 people with a 5 shot, pump action shotgun....10 more than the Boulder shooter with a rifle and a regular sized magazine...





So again.......in a mass public shooting the number of bullets in the gun magazine don't mean anything......the gun doesn't make the difference....



What makes the difference?



1) if the target is a gun free zone, more people get killed.



2) if someone starts shooting at the attacker, they commit suicide, or surrender, or runaway....



That is what you don't understand and don't care to understand since you simply have a mental issue when it comes to the AR-15 rifle.

That rifle had no special advantage in a mass public shooting.
We're going to have to face one fact the AR 15 may not be used by the military but it is a weapon of war that's what makes it constitutionally protected according to U.S. v. Miller 1939


Heller also states it is protected then Scalia named it, specifically in his opinion in Friedman v Highland Park....
Heller and Scalia notwithstanding, you agree with bigreb that it is a weapon of war?
sweetie,, rocks are weapons of war,,
I'm pretty sure rocks weren't specifically designed for war.
doesnt matter what they are designed for,, if thats all you have and wars what faces you you use it,,
a good deer rifle wasnt designed for war, but some of them make a hell of a good sniper rifle,,
You're stretching now Boo Boo
 
QUOTE="BULLDOG, post: 27101429, member: 49372"]
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?

I dont dispute what you say. The weaponry should be exclusive for the military and never allowed for the public use. There is no valid reason for other than an ego builder and a power play by testosterone filled Rambos.
There are so many slaughtered by these that that itself should be prove they should be banned. But no, that 250 year old 2nd amendment says we have a right.
So let the mass murders continue. When it reaches your children or close family, get back to me.


more people are killed every single year by knives, by clubs, and by bare hands than by all rifle types let alone just the AR-15 rifle.....

More people die each year falling off ladders than are killed by mass public shooters in general and by mass public shooters with rifles...

What are you talking about?

The AR-15 is not a military weapon....do you understand that?

There is only one mass public shooting where the rifle had an advantage in the shooting, and that was Las Vegas, where the range was over 200 yards......but he was also firing into a tightly packed crowd of over 22,000 people, at night, from a concealed and fortified position.......with his initial shooting masked by the concert.



And if the crowed wasn't trapped in that concert arena, he wouldn't have been able to kill as many since they would have run away or found cover.....since shooting at moving targets at hundreds of yards is almost impossible for all but expertly trained shooters...



At the range of every other mass public shooting a rifle has no advantage over pistols or shotguns.......



again.....at the range of a mass public shooting the AR-15 is no better than a pump action shotgun....as are 2 handguns......you idiot...



Boulder....used an AR-15 with magazines that held more than 10 bullets.. 10 killed.....



Virginia Tech...2 pistols, one with 10 round magazine..... 32 killed.



Do you see that the AR-15 killed fewer people than the 2 pistols?



Boulder...10 killed with an AR-15 rifle and regular magazines ( holding more than 10 bullets)



Luby's Cafe..... 2 pistols....24 killed.



Do you see that the 2 pistols killed more than the AR-15?



Do you know what the difference was between these attacks?



The cops immediately responded and shot at the attacker in boulder, causing him to stop shooting unarmed victims, and then he shot himself....



Virginia Tech and Luby's Cafe, the police didn't get there, and at Luby's Cafe, the one woman who could have shot and killed the attacker had to leave her gun in her car because of stupid gun free zone laws....



Boulder AR-15 with magazines that hold more than 10 bullets...you know, regular magazines..... 10 killed...



Kerch, Russia, Polytechnic school shooting.... 5 shot, pump action shotgun...which means it had 5 shells which is 5 less than 10........20 killed 70 wounded.



Do you see that the AR-15 killed fewer people than the 5 shot, pump action shotgun?



The difference? The Russian police station was 100 yards away from the school...and it still took them 10 minutes to get to the school...and he managed to kill 20 people with a 5 shot, pump action shotgun....10 more than the Boulder shooter with a rifle and a regular sized magazine...





So again.......in a mass public shooting the number of bullets in the gun magazine don't mean anything......the gun doesn't make the difference....



What makes the difference?



1) if the target is a gun free zone, more people get killed.



2) if someone starts shooting at the attacker, they commit suicide, or surrender, or runaway....



That is what you don't understand and don't care to understand since you simply have a mental issue when it comes to the AR-15 rifle.

That rifle had no special advantage in a mass public shooting.
[/QUOTE]
I don't care about your typical gun nuts justifications. There is no reason why those weapons are needed in private ownership. The same for the other weapons of mass slaughter.

I've never seen innocent kids been killed by a pump action ladder or a fully automatic knife.

The Quran problem is and will remain so, the gun culture and the pathetic insecure mental state of those proponents is the problem. There is no need for thise weapons other than penile extensions and ego boosters by a bunch of immature cowboys posing as protectors of freedom. What rubbish.
You're as dumb as a stump.
 
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?

I dont dispute what you say. The weaponry should be exclusive for the military and never allowed for the public use. There is no valid reason for other than an ego builder and a power play by testosterone filled Rambos.
There are so many slaughtered by these that that itself should be prove they should be banned. But no, that 250 year old 2nd amendment says we have a right.
So let the mass murders continue. When it reaches your children or close family, get back to me.


more people are killed every single year by knives, by clubs, and by bare hands than by all rifle types let alone just the AR-15 rifle.....

More people die each year falling off ladders than are killed by mass public shooters in general and by mass public shooters with rifles...

What are you talking about?

The AR-15 is not a military weapon....do you understand that?

There is only one mass public shooting where the rifle had an advantage in the shooting, and that was Las Vegas, where the range was over 200 yards......but he was also firing into a tightly packed crowd of over 22,000 people, at night, from a concealed and fortified position.......with his initial shooting masked by the concert.



And if the crowed wasn't trapped in that concert arena, he wouldn't have been able to kill as many since they would have run away or found cover.....since shooting at moving targets at hundreds of yards is almost impossible for all but expertly trained shooters...



At the range of every other mass public shooting a rifle has no advantage over pistols or shotguns.......



again.....at the range of a mass public shooting the AR-15 is no better than a pump action shotgun....as are 2 handguns......you idiot...



Boulder....used an AR-15 with magazines that held more than 10 bullets.. 10 killed.....



Virginia Tech...2 pistols, one with 10 round magazine..... 32 killed.



Do you see that the AR-15 killed fewer people than the 2 pistols?



Boulder...10 killed with an AR-15 rifle and regular magazines ( holding more than 10 bullets)



Luby's Cafe..... 2 pistols....24 killed.



Do you see that the 2 pistols killed more than the AR-15?



Do you know what the difference was between these attacks?



The cops immediately responded and shot at the attacker in boulder, causing him to stop shooting unarmed victims, and then he shot himself....



Virginia Tech and Luby's Cafe, the police didn't get there, and at Luby's Cafe, the one woman who could have shot and killed the attacker had to leave her gun in her car because of stupid gun free zone laws....



Boulder AR-15 with magazines that hold more than 10 bullets...you know, regular magazines..... 10 killed...



Kerch, Russia, Polytechnic school shooting.... 5 shot, pump action shotgun...which means it had 5 shells which is 5 less than 10........20 killed 70 wounded.



Do you see that the AR-15 killed fewer people than the 5 shot, pump action shotgun?



The difference? The Russian police station was 100 yards away from the school...and it still took them 10 minutes to get to the school...and he managed to kill 20 people with a 5 shot, pump action shotgun....10 more than the Boulder shooter with a rifle and a regular sized magazine...





So again.......in a mass public shooting the number of bullets in the gun magazine don't mean anything......the gun doesn't make the difference....



What makes the difference?



1) if the target is a gun free zone, more people get killed.



2) if someone starts shooting at the attacker, they commit suicide, or surrender, or runaway....



That is what you don't understand and don't care to understand since you simply have a mental issue when it comes to the AR-15 rifle.

That rifle had no special advantage in a mass public shooting.
We're going to have to face one fact the AR 15 may not be used by the military but it is a weapon of war that's what makes it constitutionally protected according to U.S. v. Miller 1939
So you admit it is a weapon of war. Was that so hard?
we've been telling you that for days,,
OK. Then show the post where that was clearly stated, other than when bigreb did.
just check my comments and then show some that proved it wrong,,

or you could prove it wrong,,
You made a statement, "We've been telling you that for days" ( that an AR15 is a weapon of war) , and you want me to find your remark that says it is not? You know that's nuts, right?
not as nuts as what you asked of me,,
 
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?

I dont dispute what you say. The weaponry should be exclusive for the military and never allowed for the public use. There is no valid reason for other than an ego builder and a power play by testosterone filled Rambos.
There are so many slaughtered by these that that itself should be prove they should be banned. But no, that 250 year old 2nd amendment says we have a right.
So let the mass murders continue. When it reaches your children or close family, get back to me.


more people are killed every single year by knives, by clubs, and by bare hands than by all rifle types let alone just the AR-15 rifle.....

More people die each year falling off ladders than are killed by mass public shooters in general and by mass public shooters with rifles...

What are you talking about?

The AR-15 is not a military weapon....do you understand that?

There is only one mass public shooting where the rifle had an advantage in the shooting, and that was Las Vegas, where the range was over 200 yards......but he was also firing into a tightly packed crowd of over 22,000 people, at night, from a concealed and fortified position.......with his initial shooting masked by the concert.



And if the crowed wasn't trapped in that concert arena, he wouldn't have been able to kill as many since they would have run away or found cover.....since shooting at moving targets at hundreds of yards is almost impossible for all but expertly trained shooters...



At the range of every other mass public shooting a rifle has no advantage over pistols or shotguns.......



again.....at the range of a mass public shooting the AR-15 is no better than a pump action shotgun....as are 2 handguns......you idiot...



Boulder....used an AR-15 with magazines that held more than 10 bullets.. 10 killed.....



Virginia Tech...2 pistols, one with 10 round magazine..... 32 killed.



Do you see that the AR-15 killed fewer people than the 2 pistols?



Boulder...10 killed with an AR-15 rifle and regular magazines ( holding more than 10 bullets)



Luby's Cafe..... 2 pistols....24 killed.



Do you see that the 2 pistols killed more than the AR-15?



Do you know what the difference was between these attacks?



The cops immediately responded and shot at the attacker in boulder, causing him to stop shooting unarmed victims, and then he shot himself....



Virginia Tech and Luby's Cafe, the police didn't get there, and at Luby's Cafe, the one woman who could have shot and killed the attacker had to leave her gun in her car because of stupid gun free zone laws....



Boulder AR-15 with magazines that hold more than 10 bullets...you know, regular magazines..... 10 killed...



Kerch, Russia, Polytechnic school shooting.... 5 shot, pump action shotgun...which means it had 5 shells which is 5 less than 10........20 killed 70 wounded.



Do you see that the AR-15 killed fewer people than the 5 shot, pump action shotgun?



The difference? The Russian police station was 100 yards away from the school...and it still took them 10 minutes to get to the school...and he managed to kill 20 people with a 5 shot, pump action shotgun....10 more than the Boulder shooter with a rifle and a regular sized magazine...





So again.......in a mass public shooting the number of bullets in the gun magazine don't mean anything......the gun doesn't make the difference....



What makes the difference?



1) if the target is a gun free zone, more people get killed.



2) if someone starts shooting at the attacker, they commit suicide, or surrender, or runaway....



That is what you don't understand and don't care to understand since you simply have a mental issue when it comes to the AR-15 rifle.

That rifle had no special advantage in a mass public shooting.
We're going to have to face one fact the AR 15 may not be used by the military but it is a weapon of war that's what makes it constitutionally protected according to U.S. v. Miller 1939


Heller also states it is protected then Scalia named it, specifically in his opinion in Friedman v Highland Park....
Heller and Scalia notwithstanding, you agree with bigreb that it is a weapon of war?
sweetie,, rocks are weapons of war,,
I'm pretty sure rocks weren't specifically designed for war.
doesnt matter what they are designed for,, if thats all you have and wars what faces you you use it,,
a good deer rifle wasnt designed for war, but some of them make a hell of a good sniper rifle,,
You're stretching now Boo Boo
how is that a stretch?? are you saying a good 300 win mag doesnt make a good sniper rifle?? or a 30-06 either??

sounds like youre the one that doesnt know what theyre talking about,,
 
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?
i think you answered your question one is automatic the other is not.
There was more to the question, but don't let that bother you.

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

Go back and reread the OP.
Did I misquote the title?
No. The title is just a brief description of the thread, and should at least loosely agree with the OP, but the OP defines the subject of discussion.
 
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?

I dont dispute what you say. The weaponry should be exclusive for the military and never allowed for the public use. There is no valid reason for other than an ego builder and a power play by testosterone filled Rambos.
There are so many slaughtered by these that that itself should be prove they should be banned. But no, that 250 year old 2nd amendment says we have a right.
So let the mass murders continue. When it reaches your children or close family, get back to me.


more people are killed every single year by knives, by clubs, and by bare hands than by all rifle types let alone just the AR-15 rifle.....

More people die each year falling off ladders than are killed by mass public shooters in general and by mass public shooters with rifles...

What are you talking about?

The AR-15 is not a military weapon....do you understand that?

There is only one mass public shooting where the rifle had an advantage in the shooting, and that was Las Vegas, where the range was over 200 yards......but he was also firing into a tightly packed crowd of over 22,000 people, at night, from a concealed and fortified position.......with his initial shooting masked by the concert.



And if the crowed wasn't trapped in that concert arena, he wouldn't have been able to kill as many since they would have run away or found cover.....since shooting at moving targets at hundreds of yards is almost impossible for all but expertly trained shooters...



At the range of every other mass public shooting a rifle has no advantage over pistols or shotguns.......



again.....at the range of a mass public shooting the AR-15 is no better than a pump action shotgun....as are 2 handguns......you idiot...



Boulder....used an AR-15 with magazines that held more than 10 bullets.. 10 killed.....



Virginia Tech...2 pistols, one with 10 round magazine..... 32 killed.



Do you see that the AR-15 killed fewer people than the 2 pistols?



Boulder...10 killed with an AR-15 rifle and regular magazines ( holding more than 10 bullets)



Luby's Cafe..... 2 pistols....24 killed.



Do you see that the 2 pistols killed more than the AR-15?



Do you know what the difference was between these attacks?



The cops immediately responded and shot at the attacker in boulder, causing him to stop shooting unarmed victims, and then he shot himself....



Virginia Tech and Luby's Cafe, the police didn't get there, and at Luby's Cafe, the one woman who could have shot and killed the attacker had to leave her gun in her car because of stupid gun free zone laws....



Boulder AR-15 with magazines that hold more than 10 bullets...you know, regular magazines..... 10 killed...



Kerch, Russia, Polytechnic school shooting.... 5 shot, pump action shotgun...which means it had 5 shells which is 5 less than 10........20 killed 70 wounded.



Do you see that the AR-15 killed fewer people than the 5 shot, pump action shotgun?



The difference? The Russian police station was 100 yards away from the school...and it still took them 10 minutes to get to the school...and he managed to kill 20 people with a 5 shot, pump action shotgun....10 more than the Boulder shooter with a rifle and a regular sized magazine...





So again.......in a mass public shooting the number of bullets in the gun magazine don't mean anything......the gun doesn't make the difference....



What makes the difference?



1) if the target is a gun free zone, more people get killed.



2) if someone starts shooting at the attacker, they commit suicide, or surrender, or runaway....



That is what you don't understand and don't care to understand since you simply have a mental issue when it comes to the AR-15 rifle.

That rifle had no special advantage in a mass public shooting.
We're going to have to face one fact the AR 15 may not be used by the military but it is a weapon of war that's what makes it constitutionally protected according to U.S. v. Miller 1939
So you admit it is a weapon of war. Was that so hard?
we've been telling you that for days,,
OK. Then show the post where that was clearly stated, other than when bigreb did.
just check my comments and then show some that proved it wrong,,

or you could prove it wrong,,
You made a statement, "We've been telling you that for days" ( that an AR15 is a weapon of war) , and you want me to find your remark that says it is not? You know that's nuts, right?
All weapons are weapons of war...from a knife to a flame thrower....in War people will use anything to defend themselves.

So not sure your point.

An AR15 however, is merely hunting rifle that has some cosemtics to make it look mean. It's been around since the 60s for civilians
 
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?
i think you answered your question one is automatic the other is not.
There was more to the question, but don't let that bother you.

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

Go back and reread the OP.
Did I misquote the title?
No. The title is just a brief description of the thread, and should at least loosely agree with the OP, but the OP defines the subject of discussion.
i was just trying to answer the question presented. There are a lot of other difference as well....the lengh of the barrel for example.
 
QUOTE="BULLDOG, post: 27101429, member: 49372"]
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?

I dont dispute what you say. The weaponry should be exclusive for the military and never allowed for the public use. There is no valid reason for other than an ego builder and a power play by testosterone filled Rambos.
There are so many slaughtered by these that that itself should be prove they should be banned. But no, that 250 year old 2nd amendment says we have a right.
So let the mass murders continue. When it reaches your children or close family, get back to me.


more people are killed every single year by knives, by clubs, and by bare hands than by all rifle types let alone just the AR-15 rifle.....

More people die each year falling off ladders than are killed by mass public shooters in general and by mass public shooters with rifles...

What are you talking about?

The AR-15 is not a military weapon....do you understand that?

There is only one mass public shooting where the rifle had an advantage in the shooting, and that was Las Vegas, where the range was over 200 yards......but he was also firing into a tightly packed crowd of over 22,000 people, at night, from a concealed and fortified position.......with his initial shooting masked by the concert.



And if the crowed wasn't trapped in that concert arena, he wouldn't have been able to kill as many since they would have run away or found cover.....since shooting at moving targets at hundreds of yards is almost impossible for all but expertly trained shooters...



At the range of every other mass public shooting a rifle has no advantage over pistols or shotguns.......



again.....at the range of a mass public shooting the AR-15 is no better than a pump action shotgun....as are 2 handguns......you idiot...



Boulder....used an AR-15 with magazines that held more than 10 bullets.. 10 killed.....



Virginia Tech...2 pistols, one with 10 round magazine..... 32 killed.



Do you see that the AR-15 killed fewer people than the 2 pistols?



Boulder...10 killed with an AR-15 rifle and regular magazines ( holding more than 10 bullets)



Luby's Cafe..... 2 pistols....24 killed.



Do you see that the 2 pistols killed more than the AR-15?



Do you know what the difference was between these attacks?



The cops immediately responded and shot at the attacker in boulder, causing him to stop shooting unarmed victims, and then he shot himself....



Virginia Tech and Luby's Cafe, the police didn't get there, and at Luby's Cafe, the one woman who could have shot and killed the attacker had to leave her gun in her car because of stupid gun free zone laws....



Boulder AR-15 with magazines that hold more than 10 bullets...you know, regular magazines..... 10 killed...



Kerch, Russia, Polytechnic school shooting.... 5 shot, pump action shotgun...which means it had 5 shells which is 5 less than 10........20 killed 70 wounded.



Do you see that the AR-15 killed fewer people than the 5 shot, pump action shotgun?



The difference? The Russian police station was 100 yards away from the school...and it still took them 10 minutes to get to the school...and he managed to kill 20 people with a 5 shot, pump action shotgun....10 more than the Boulder shooter with a rifle and a regular sized magazine...





So again.......in a mass public shooting the number of bullets in the gun magazine don't mean anything......the gun doesn't make the difference....



What makes the difference?



1) if the target is a gun free zone, more people get killed.



2) if someone starts shooting at the attacker, they commit suicide, or surrender, or runaway....



That is what you don't understand and don't care to understand since you simply have a mental issue when it comes to the AR-15 rifle.

That rifle had no special advantage in a mass public shooting.
I don't care about your typical gun nuts justifications. There is no reason why those weapons are needed in private ownership. The same for the other weapons of mass slaughter.

I've never seen innocent kids been killed by a pump action ladder or a fully automatic knife.

The Quran problem is and will remain so, the gun culture and the pathetic insecure mental state of those proponents is the problem. There is no need for thise weapons other than penile extensions and ego boosters by a bunch of immature cowboys posing as protectors of freedom. What rubbish.
You're as dumb as a stump.
[/QUOTE]






And your opinion doesn't mean shit. Until the COTUS is repealed (after LOTS of bloodshed) your opinion doesn't affect the gun owning community at all.
 
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?

I dont dispute what you say. The weaponry should be exclusive for the military and never allowed for the public use. There is no valid reason for other than an ego builder and a power play by testosterone filled Rambos.
There are so many slaughtered by these that that itself should be prove they should be banned. But no, that 250 year old 2nd amendment says we have a right.
So let the mass murders continue. When it reaches your children or close family, get back to me.


more people are killed every single year by knives, by clubs, and by bare hands than by all rifle types let alone just the AR-15 rifle.....

More people die each year falling off ladders than are killed by mass public shooters in general and by mass public shooters with rifles...

What are you talking about?

The AR-15 is not a military weapon....do you understand that?

There is only one mass public shooting where the rifle had an advantage in the shooting, and that was Las Vegas, where the range was over 200 yards......but he was also firing into a tightly packed crowd of over 22,000 people, at night, from a concealed and fortified position.......with his initial shooting masked by the concert.



And if the crowed wasn't trapped in that concert arena, he wouldn't have been able to kill as many since they would have run away or found cover.....since shooting at moving targets at hundreds of yards is almost impossible for all but expertly trained shooters...



At the range of every other mass public shooting a rifle has no advantage over pistols or shotguns.......



again.....at the range of a mass public shooting the AR-15 is no better than a pump action shotgun....as are 2 handguns......you idiot...



Boulder....used an AR-15 with magazines that held more than 10 bullets.. 10 killed.....



Virginia Tech...2 pistols, one with 10 round magazine..... 32 killed.



Do you see that the AR-15 killed fewer people than the 2 pistols?



Boulder...10 killed with an AR-15 rifle and regular magazines ( holding more than 10 bullets)



Luby's Cafe..... 2 pistols....24 killed.



Do you see that the 2 pistols killed more than the AR-15?



Do you know what the difference was between these attacks?



The cops immediately responded and shot at the attacker in boulder, causing him to stop shooting unarmed victims, and then he shot himself....



Virginia Tech and Luby's Cafe, the police didn't get there, and at Luby's Cafe, the one woman who could have shot and killed the attacker had to leave her gun in her car because of stupid gun free zone laws....



Boulder AR-15 with magazines that hold more than 10 bullets...you know, regular magazines..... 10 killed...



Kerch, Russia, Polytechnic school shooting.... 5 shot, pump action shotgun...which means it had 5 shells which is 5 less than 10........20 killed 70 wounded.



Do you see that the AR-15 killed fewer people than the 5 shot, pump action shotgun?



The difference? The Russian police station was 100 yards away from the school...and it still took them 10 minutes to get to the school...and he managed to kill 20 people with a 5 shot, pump action shotgun....10 more than the Boulder shooter with a rifle and a regular sized magazine...





So again.......in a mass public shooting the number of bullets in the gun magazine don't mean anything......the gun doesn't make the difference....



What makes the difference?



1) if the target is a gun free zone, more people get killed.



2) if someone starts shooting at the attacker, they commit suicide, or surrender, or runaway....



That is what you don't understand and don't care to understand since you simply have a mental issue when it comes to the AR-15 rifle.

That rifle had no special advantage in a mass public shooting.
We're going to have to face one fact the AR 15 may not be used by the military but it is a weapon of war that's what makes it constitutionally protected according to U.S. v. Miller 1939
So you admit it is a weapon of war. Was that so hard?
we've been telling you that for days,,
OK. Then show the post where that was clearly stated, other than when bigreb did.
just check my comments and then show some that proved it wrong,,

or you could prove it wrong,,
You made a statement, "We've been telling you that for days" ( that an AR15 is a weapon of war) , and you want me to find your remark that says it is not? You know that's nuts, right?
not as nuts as what you asked of me,,
You said you've been telling me for days that an AR is a weapon of war, and I asked for one example. That's not nuts.
 
I'm pretty sure rocks weren't specifically designed for war.
.

Ooops ... There It Is ... :auiqs.jpg:
That's a round rock designed specifically as a weapon of war.

1622508937717.png


.
 
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?
i think you answered your question one is automatic the other is not.
There was more to the question, but don't let that bother you.

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

Go back and reread the OP.
Did I misquote the title?
No. The title is just a brief description of the thread, and should at least loosely agree with the OP, but the OP defines the subject of discussion.
i was just trying to answer the question presented. There are a lot of other difference as well....the lengh of the barrel for example.
That has all been covered.
 
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?

I dont dispute what you say. The weaponry should be exclusive for the military and never allowed for the public use. There is no valid reason for other than an ego builder and a power play by testosterone filled Rambos.
There are so many slaughtered by these that that itself should be prove they should be banned. But no, that 250 year old 2nd amendment says we have a right.
So let the mass murders continue. When it reaches your children or close family, get back to me.


more people are killed every single year by knives, by clubs, and by bare hands than by all rifle types let alone just the AR-15 rifle.....

More people die each year falling off ladders than are killed by mass public shooters in general and by mass public shooters with rifles...

What are you talking about?

The AR-15 is not a military weapon....do you understand that?

There is only one mass public shooting where the rifle had an advantage in the shooting, and that was Las Vegas, where the range was over 200 yards......but he was also firing into a tightly packed crowd of over 22,000 people, at night, from a concealed and fortified position.......with his initial shooting masked by the concert.



And if the crowed wasn't trapped in that concert arena, he wouldn't have been able to kill as many since they would have run away or found cover.....since shooting at moving targets at hundreds of yards is almost impossible for all but expertly trained shooters...



At the range of every other mass public shooting a rifle has no advantage over pistols or shotguns.......



again.....at the range of a mass public shooting the AR-15 is no better than a pump action shotgun....as are 2 handguns......you idiot...



Boulder....used an AR-15 with magazines that held more than 10 bullets.. 10 killed.....



Virginia Tech...2 pistols, one with 10 round magazine..... 32 killed.



Do you see that the AR-15 killed fewer people than the 2 pistols?



Boulder...10 killed with an AR-15 rifle and regular magazines ( holding more than 10 bullets)



Luby's Cafe..... 2 pistols....24 killed.



Do you see that the 2 pistols killed more than the AR-15?



Do you know what the difference was between these attacks?



The cops immediately responded and shot at the attacker in boulder, causing him to stop shooting unarmed victims, and then he shot himself....



Virginia Tech and Luby's Cafe, the police didn't get there, and at Luby's Cafe, the one woman who could have shot and killed the attacker had to leave her gun in her car because of stupid gun free zone laws....



Boulder AR-15 with magazines that hold more than 10 bullets...you know, regular magazines..... 10 killed...



Kerch, Russia, Polytechnic school shooting.... 5 shot, pump action shotgun...which means it had 5 shells which is 5 less than 10........20 killed 70 wounded.



Do you see that the AR-15 killed fewer people than the 5 shot, pump action shotgun?



The difference? The Russian police station was 100 yards away from the school...and it still took them 10 minutes to get to the school...and he managed to kill 20 people with a 5 shot, pump action shotgun....10 more than the Boulder shooter with a rifle and a regular sized magazine...





So again.......in a mass public shooting the number of bullets in the gun magazine don't mean anything......the gun doesn't make the difference....



What makes the difference?



1) if the target is a gun free zone, more people get killed.



2) if someone starts shooting at the attacker, they commit suicide, or surrender, or runaway....



That is what you don't understand and don't care to understand since you simply have a mental issue when it comes to the AR-15 rifle.

That rifle had no special advantage in a mass public shooting.
We're going to have to face one fact the AR 15 may not be used by the military but it is a weapon of war that's what makes it constitutionally protected according to U.S. v. Miller 1939
So you admit it is a weapon of war. Was that so hard?
we've been telling you that for days,,
OK. Then show the post where that was clearly stated, other than when bigreb did.
just check my comments and then show some that proved it wrong,,

or you could prove it wrong,,
You made a statement, "We've been telling you that for days" ( that an AR15 is a weapon of war) , and you want me to find your remark that says it is not? You know that's nuts, right?
not as nuts as what you asked of me,,
You said you've been telling me for days that an AR is a weapon of war, and I asked for one example. That's not nuts.
are you saying I havnt told you that at least a dozen times on this thread??
 
QUOTE="BULLDOG, post: 27101429, member: 49372"]
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?

I dont dispute what you say. The weaponry should be exclusive for the military and never allowed for the public use. There is no valid reason for other than an ego builder and a power play by testosterone filled Rambos.
There are so many slaughtered by these that that itself should be prove they should be banned. But no, that 250 year old 2nd amendment says we have a right.
So let the mass murders continue. When it reaches your children or close family, get back to me.


more people are killed every single year by knives, by clubs, and by bare hands than by all rifle types let alone just the AR-15 rifle.....

More people die each year falling off ladders than are killed by mass public shooters in general and by mass public shooters with rifles...

What are you talking about?

The AR-15 is not a military weapon....do you understand that?

There is only one mass public shooting where the rifle had an advantage in the shooting, and that was Las Vegas, where the range was over 200 yards......but he was also firing into a tightly packed crowd of over 22,000 people, at night, from a concealed and fortified position.......with his initial shooting masked by the concert.



And if the crowed wasn't trapped in that concert arena, he wouldn't have been able to kill as many since they would have run away or found cover.....since shooting at moving targets at hundreds of yards is almost impossible for all but expertly trained shooters...



At the range of every other mass public shooting a rifle has no advantage over pistols or shotguns.......



again.....at the range of a mass public shooting the AR-15 is no better than a pump action shotgun....as are 2 handguns......you idiot...



Boulder....used an AR-15 with magazines that held more than 10 bullets.. 10 killed.....



Virginia Tech...2 pistols, one with 10 round magazine..... 32 killed.



Do you see that the AR-15 killed fewer people than the 2 pistols?



Boulder...10 killed with an AR-15 rifle and regular magazines ( holding more than 10 bullets)



Luby's Cafe..... 2 pistols....24 killed.



Do you see that the 2 pistols killed more than the AR-15?



Do you know what the difference was between these attacks?



The cops immediately responded and shot at the attacker in boulder, causing him to stop shooting unarmed victims, and then he shot himself....



Virginia Tech and Luby's Cafe, the police didn't get there, and at Luby's Cafe, the one woman who could have shot and killed the attacker had to leave her gun in her car because of stupid gun free zone laws....



Boulder AR-15 with magazines that hold more than 10 bullets...you know, regular magazines..... 10 killed...



Kerch, Russia, Polytechnic school shooting.... 5 shot, pump action shotgun...which means it had 5 shells which is 5 less than 10........20 killed 70 wounded.



Do you see that the AR-15 killed fewer people than the 5 shot, pump action shotgun?



The difference? The Russian police station was 100 yards away from the school...and it still took them 10 minutes to get to the school...and he managed to kill 20 people with a 5 shot, pump action shotgun....10 more than the Boulder shooter with a rifle and a regular sized magazine...





So again.......in a mass public shooting the number of bullets in the gun magazine don't mean anything......the gun doesn't make the difference....



What makes the difference?



1) if the target is a gun free zone, more people get killed.



2) if someone starts shooting at the attacker, they commit suicide, or surrender, or runaway....



That is what you don't understand and don't care to understand since you simply have a mental issue when it comes to the AR-15 rifle.

That rifle had no special advantage in a mass public shooting.
I don't care about your typical gun nuts justifications. There is no reason why those weapons are needed in private ownership. The same for the other weapons of mass slaughter.

I've never seen innocent kids been killed by a pump action ladder or a fully automatic knife.

The Quran problem is and will remain so, the gun culture and the pathetic insecure mental state of those proponents is the problem. There is no need for thise weapons other than penile extensions and ego boosters by a bunch of immature cowboys posing as protectors of freedom. What rubbish.
You're as dumb as a stump.






And your opinion doesn't mean shit. Until the COTUS is repealed (after LOTS of bloodshed) your opinion doesn't affect the gun owning community at all.
[/QUOTE]

If course it means nothing to an intellectual cripple like you but that doesn't mean it isn't fact. Look at your reply. Exactly the dismissals and stupidity I spoke of. Youll say and do anything to protect your ego.
Every time there is talk of gun restriction, you all go out and buy more if that will alter the conversation. Then you complain to the government you can't get ammo. Duuuuh. Talk about dumb.
You take the new weapons home, kill a deer or something then put it away with the other 6 or 9 guns. That stopped those pesky democrats.
Then the cycle is repeated again.
The slaughters continue and you believe it's collateral damage for the price of freedom.

I don't care if you've got six of those slaughter machines. My point is you have no need for them.
 
QUOTE="BULLDOG, post: 27101429, member: 49372"]
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?

I dont dispute what you say. The weaponry should be exclusive for the military and never allowed for the public use. There is no valid reason for other than an ego builder and a power play by testosterone filled Rambos.
There are so many slaughtered by these that that itself should be prove they should be banned. But no, that 250 year old 2nd amendment says we have a right.
So let the mass murders continue. When it reaches your children or close family, get back to me.


more people are killed every single year by knives, by clubs, and by bare hands than by all rifle types let alone just the AR-15 rifle.....

More people die each year falling off ladders than are killed by mass public shooters in general and by mass public shooters with rifles...

What are you talking about?

The AR-15 is not a military weapon....do you understand that?

There is only one mass public shooting where the rifle had an advantage in the shooting, and that was Las Vegas, where the range was over 200 yards......but he was also firing into a tightly packed crowd of over 22,000 people, at night, from a concealed and fortified position.......with his initial shooting masked by the concert.



And if the crowed wasn't trapped in that concert arena, he wouldn't have been able to kill as many since they would have run away or found cover.....since shooting at moving targets at hundreds of yards is almost impossible for all but expertly trained shooters...



At the range of every other mass public shooting a rifle has no advantage over pistols or shotguns.......



again.....at the range of a mass public shooting the AR-15 is no better than a pump action shotgun....as are 2 handguns......you idiot...



Boulder....used an AR-15 with magazines that held more than 10 bullets.. 10 killed.....



Virginia Tech...2 pistols, one with 10 round magazine..... 32 killed.



Do you see that the AR-15 killed fewer people than the 2 pistols?



Boulder...10 killed with an AR-15 rifle and regular magazines ( holding more than 10 bullets)



Luby's Cafe..... 2 pistols....24 killed.



Do you see that the 2 pistols killed more than the AR-15?



Do you know what the difference was between these attacks?



The cops immediately responded and shot at the attacker in boulder, causing him to stop shooting unarmed victims, and then he shot himself....



Virginia Tech and Luby's Cafe, the police didn't get there, and at Luby's Cafe, the one woman who could have shot and killed the attacker had to leave her gun in her car because of stupid gun free zone laws....



Boulder AR-15 with magazines that hold more than 10 bullets...you know, regular magazines..... 10 killed...



Kerch, Russia, Polytechnic school shooting.... 5 shot, pump action shotgun...which means it had 5 shells which is 5 less than 10........20 killed 70 wounded.



Do you see that the AR-15 killed fewer people than the 5 shot, pump action shotgun?



The difference? The Russian police station was 100 yards away from the school...and it still took them 10 minutes to get to the school...and he managed to kill 20 people with a 5 shot, pump action shotgun....10 more than the Boulder shooter with a rifle and a regular sized magazine...





So again.......in a mass public shooting the number of bullets in the gun magazine don't mean anything......the gun doesn't make the difference....



What makes the difference?



1) if the target is a gun free zone, more people get killed.



2) if someone starts shooting at the attacker, they commit suicide, or surrender, or runaway....



That is what you don't understand and don't care to understand since you simply have a mental issue when it comes to the AR-15 rifle.

That rifle had no special advantage in a mass public shooting.
I don't care about your typical gun nuts justifications. There is no reason why those weapons are needed in private ownership. The same for the other weapons of mass slaughter.

I've never seen innocent kids been killed by a pump action ladder or a fully automatic knife.

The Quran problem is and will remain so, the gun culture and the pathetic insecure mental state of those proponents is the problem. There is no need for thise weapons other than penile extensions and ego boosters by a bunch of immature cowboys posing as protectors of freedom. What rubbish.
You're as dumb as a stump.






And your opinion doesn't mean shit. Until the COTUS is repealed (after LOTS of bloodshed) your opinion doesn't affect the gun owning community at all.
[/QUOTE]
Many in the gun owning community do want some weapons banned. The numbers fluctuate some, but basically, much more than half of the country wants limits. No reason why Constitutional laws cant be fashioned to limit the sale of guns. I don't advocate out right banning, but if something isn't done to reduce the sales of guns to known criminals, a ban might be in our future.

Two-thirds of Americans support assault weapons ban: Fox News poll
 
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?

I dont dispute what you say. The weaponry should be exclusive for the military and never allowed for the public use. There is no valid reason for other than an ego builder and a power play by testosterone filled Rambos.
There are so many slaughtered by these that that itself should be prove they should be banned. But no, that 250 year old 2nd amendment says we have a right.
So let the mass murders continue. When it reaches your children or close family, get back to me.


more people are killed every single year by knives, by clubs, and by bare hands than by all rifle types let alone just the AR-15 rifle.....

More people die each year falling off ladders than are killed by mass public shooters in general and by mass public shooters with rifles...

What are you talking about?

The AR-15 is not a military weapon....do you understand that?

There is only one mass public shooting where the rifle had an advantage in the shooting, and that was Las Vegas, where the range was over 200 yards......but he was also firing into a tightly packed crowd of over 22,000 people, at night, from a concealed and fortified position.......with his initial shooting masked by the concert.



And if the crowed wasn't trapped in that concert arena, he wouldn't have been able to kill as many since they would have run away or found cover.....since shooting at moving targets at hundreds of yards is almost impossible for all but expertly trained shooters...



At the range of every other mass public shooting a rifle has no advantage over pistols or shotguns.......



again.....at the range of a mass public shooting the AR-15 is no better than a pump action shotgun....as are 2 handguns......you idiot...



Boulder....used an AR-15 with magazines that held more than 10 bullets.. 10 killed.....



Virginia Tech...2 pistols, one with 10 round magazine..... 32 killed.



Do you see that the AR-15 killed fewer people than the 2 pistols?



Boulder...10 killed with an AR-15 rifle and regular magazines ( holding more than 10 bullets)



Luby's Cafe..... 2 pistols....24 killed.



Do you see that the 2 pistols killed more than the AR-15?



Do you know what the difference was between these attacks?



The cops immediately responded and shot at the attacker in boulder, causing him to stop shooting unarmed victims, and then he shot himself....



Virginia Tech and Luby's Cafe, the police didn't get there, and at Luby's Cafe, the one woman who could have shot and killed the attacker had to leave her gun in her car because of stupid gun free zone laws....



Boulder AR-15 with magazines that hold more than 10 bullets...you know, regular magazines..... 10 killed...



Kerch, Russia, Polytechnic school shooting.... 5 shot, pump action shotgun...which means it had 5 shells which is 5 less than 10........20 killed 70 wounded.



Do you see that the AR-15 killed fewer people than the 5 shot, pump action shotgun?



The difference? The Russian police station was 100 yards away from the school...and it still took them 10 minutes to get to the school...and he managed to kill 20 people with a 5 shot, pump action shotgun....10 more than the Boulder shooter with a rifle and a regular sized magazine...





So again.......in a mass public shooting the number of bullets in the gun magazine don't mean anything......the gun doesn't make the difference....



What makes the difference?



1) if the target is a gun free zone, more people get killed.



2) if someone starts shooting at the attacker, they commit suicide, or surrender, or runaway....



That is what you don't understand and don't care to understand since you simply have a mental issue when it comes to the AR-15 rifle.

That rifle had no special advantage in a mass public shooting.
We're going to have to face one fact the AR 15 may not be used by the military but it is a weapon of war that's what makes it constitutionally protected according to U.S. v. Miller 1939
So you admit it is a weapon of war. Was that so hard?
we've been telling you that for days,,
OK. Then show the post where that was clearly stated, other than when bigreb did.
just check my comments and then show some that proved it wrong,,

or you could prove it wrong,,
You made a statement, "We've been telling you that for days" ( that an AR15 is a weapon of war) , and you want me to find your remark that says it is not? You know that's nuts, right?
not as nuts as what you asked of me,,
You said you've been telling me for days that an AR is a weapon of war, and I asked for one example. That's not nuts.
are you saying I havnt told you that at least a dozen times on this thread??
Perhaps you have, and I didn't see it. Where did you specifically say an AR15 is a weapon of war?
 
Now that's funny. I'm not sure I've ever heard of that being used to shoot up any schools, but I would certainly want a background check for anyone openly carrying one of those.
.

A trebuchet is not very precise, and during bombardment didn't discriminate between targets.
Facilities of learning where never exempt from fire.


However ... It does bring up another point, in that it is not a firearm.
I have said it before ... You cannot effectively ban assault weapons, until you ban anything that shoots a projectile.

Innovation and Adaptation ... Always are the keys to success.
You are still there buying the con-job about Universal Background Checks ...
And someone is thinking about how they are going to produce what they want.

If for one second you think humans cannot figure out how to effectively and efficiently kill each other, then you are just stupid.

.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top