What is an "assault rifle"?

[iceberg]

It's the same weapon except that one can fire full auto

The gun-grabbers KNOW this, but it doesn't serve their purpose so they ignore it. It's easier to raise public fear by comparing cosmetic features rather than actual function. It's a very dishonest approach, but one that is very normal for them.

Know what?

That an AR-15 is just as deadly as an M-4/M-16? That they are essentially the same weapon?

no they're not. the M16 can do full auto. the AR cannot.

now if you tell me it can still fire fast, great. most guns can.

 

[martybegan]

It's the same weapon except that one can fire full auto

The gun-grabbers KNOW this, but it doesn't serve their purpose so they ignore it. It's easier to raise public fear by comparing cosmetic features rather than actual function. It's a very dishonest approach, but one that is very normal for them.

Know what?

That an AR-15 is just as deadly as an M-4/M-16? That they are essentially the same weapon?

no they're not. the M16 can do full auto. the AR cannot.

now if you tell me it can still fire fast, great. most guns can.

An M16/M4 is also usually in the hands of a trained infantryman/rifleman, thus increasing the lethality exponentially.

 

[iceberg]

It's the same weapon except that one can fire full auto

The gun-grabbers KNOW this, but it doesn't serve their purpose so they ignore it. It's easier to raise public fear by comparing cosmetic features rather than actual function. It's a very dishonest approach, but one that is very normal for them.

Know what?

That an AR-15 is just as deadly as an M-4/M-16? That they are essentially the same weapon?

no they're not. the M16 can do full auto. the AR cannot.

now if you tell me it can still fire fast, great. most guns can.

An M16/M4 is also usually in the hands of a trained infantryman/rifleman, thus increasing the lethality exponentially.

the M16 is also "military grade" and if that needs to be explained, it's about pointless to do so.

i know of no military in the world using the AR15. for such a "military" rifle, you'd think some country would adopt it. but no. none have that i am aware of.

 

[progressive hunter]

WRONG



.

Is it? They sure have proven capable of killing lots of people really fast. Call them what you want, but semi auto rifles which can use large capacity magazines must be banned.

thats exactly what every dictator in history said and did right before they killed millions of people

And? We have checks and balances. You think our military would throw out the constitution and follow a dictator? You insult them.

You think the military would throw out the Constitution and enforce a ban of firearms ? Because it would take the military to enforce such a ban.

The Military would do nothing. You keep thinking the Military, one day, will rise up and do your bidding. Turn that damned TV off.

youre the only one saying it would be the military,,,there are other agencies in the government,,,

 

[M14 Shooter]

So, lets rethink the necessity of the 2nd Amendment.

Given what the Democrats want to do with out gun laws, its plain to any t hiking person the 2nd Amendment is MORE necessary today then in 1791.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The second amendment isn't so much about weapons, but a well regulated militia's right to protect themselves. Perhaps we should make gun ownership contingent on being a member of a militia. So sign me up. NO problem there. So where do we sign up? What Militia do you recommend?

You are apparently unaware of current 2A jurisprudence:

The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.

So, no.

 

[M14 Shooter]

It's the same weapon except that one can fire full auto

You say that like it doesn't make all the difference.

 

[M14 Shooter]

It's the same weapon except that one can fire full auto

The gun-grabbers KNOW this, but it doesn't serve their purpose so they ignore it. It's easier to raise public fear by comparing cosmetic features rather than actual function. It's a very dishonest approach, but one that is very normal for them.

Know what?
That an AR-15 is just as deadly as an M-4/M-16?

I -love it- when you put your ignorance in display for everyone to see.

That they are essentially the same weapon?

Except that one is a machine gun and the other is not, sure.

 

[iceberg]

It's the same weapon except that one can fire full auto

The gun-grabbers KNOW this, but it doesn't serve their purpose so they ignore it. It's easier to raise public fear by comparing cosmetic features rather than actual function. It's a very dishonest approach, but one that is very normal for them.

Know what?
That an AR-15 is just as deadly as an M-4/M-16?

I -love it- when you put your ignorance in display for everyone to see.

i'd love it if i could be there for the one time he DOESN'T do this.

 

[Lesh]

Except that one is a machine gun and the other is not, sure.

Yup. The military version has the ability to fire full auto and the civilian version does not.

In every other way they are the same weapon. And as we have seen in Vegas and elsewhere...they fire VERY rapidly with little loss of accuracy.

this will of course be followed by Trumper/Gun Nut/Republicans engaging in personal attacks

 

[M14 Shooter]

Except that one is a machine gun and the other is not, sure.

Yup. The military version has the ability to fire full auto and the civilian version does not.

And so, one is a machine gun, and the other has the same rate of fire as every other semi-automatic weapon known to mankind.
You say that like it doesn't make all the difference.

 

[iceberg]

Except that one is a machine gun and the other is not, sure.

Yup. The military version has the ability to fire full auto and the civilian version does not.

In every other way they are the same weapon. And as we have seen in Vegas and elsewhere...they fire VERY rapidly with little loss of accuracy.

this will of course be followed by Trumper/Gun Nut/Republicans engaging in personal attacks

most semi-automatic guns do.

and shit dude, you are 100% on the attack anyway. stop whining when it comes back to you.

 

[BlindBoo]

Depends on who is holding it and what their intent is.

Both could be used in a mass shooting of unsuspecting civilians.

So what you're saying is that the REAL "assault weapon" is the human being.

Till they start building Terminators, yes.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Fuck yourself then jerk off and explain the difference between a military assault rifle and a civilian one

One shoots full-auto, or "select fire."

The capability of burst and fully automatic fire

That's it folks.

It's the same weapon except that one can fire full auto

Neither one can fire full auto. In reality, it's the same weapon.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

It's the same weapon except that one can fire full auto

The gun-grabbers KNOW this, but it doesn't serve their purpose so they ignore it. It's easier to raise public fear by comparing cosmetic features rather than actual function. It's a very dishonest approach, but one that is very normal for them.

The Gun Grabbers know there isn't one bit of difference. It's the same weapon. Neither on can fire full auto. And even in combat, the Military version is still used in the semi auto setting almost all the time. Pure Hell is when you run out of ammo before the battle is over.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

It's the same weapon except that one can fire full auto

The gun-grabbers KNOW this, but it doesn't serve their purpose so they ignore it. It's easier to raise public fear by comparing cosmetic features rather than actual function. It's a very dishonest approach, but one that is very normal for them.

Know what?

That an AR-15 is just as deadly as an M-4/M-16? That they are essentially the same weapon?

no they're not. the M16 can do full auto. the AR cannot.

now if you tell me it can still fire fast, great. most guns can.

The M-16 CANNOT do full auto and hasn't bee able to for a few decades. A three shot burst it can do but it's rarely used. It's been found that for the same reason that they did away with the full auto (a lot of spray and pray and wasted ammo where you run out of ammo in the middle of the battle) the 3 shot will put the first one on target and the other two off the target. You just wasted 66% of your ammo. The Deadliest sin in battle is running out of ammo.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

It's the same weapon except that one can fire full auto

The gun-grabbers KNOW this, but it doesn't serve their purpose so they ignore it. It's easier to raise public fear by comparing cosmetic features rather than actual function. It's a very dishonest approach, but one that is very normal for them.

Know what?

That an AR-15 is just as deadly as an M-4/M-16? That they are essentially the same weapon?

no they're not. the M16 can do full auto. the AR cannot.

now if you tell me it can still fire fast, great. most guns can.

An M16/M4 is also usually in the hands of a trained infantryman/rifleman, thus increasing the lethality exponentially.

the M16 is also "military grade" and if that needs to be explained, it's about pointless to do so.

i know of no military in the world using the AR15. for such a "military" rifle, you'd think some country would adopt it. but no. none have that i am aware of.

The M-16 is just the Military Designator for the AR. In reality, the real Colt designation for the M-16 is AR-15 Model 604. The Colt Disignation for the Civilian AR-15 is either the AR-15 Model 750 or the Colt model LE6920. All use all but 3 parts from the same parts bin. There are some LE690s (AR-15) that are currently in the US Army that are single shot only. What is stamped on the side? It isn't LE6920 or AR-15, it's M-16. All Military Rifles will have an M designator. Even when they were using the Remington Model 700 as a sniper rifle for awhile.

So, in effect, the AR was adopted in 1959 by the Malaysians and the US Air Force in 1962 by the United States Air Force. The Air Force didn't have an M desginator requirement at the time so they called theirs by the Colt AR-15 Model 601. Later, in 1969, the M designator was adopted, the Air Force restamped theirs to read AR-15 Model 601 (M-16). The Air Force had over 14,000 of these weapons and didn't retire them until 1992. These were full auto even AFTER the Army went to the 3 shot burst. If you want a surplus Army M-16 that's been rode hard and put away wet, you can buy one starting at $15,000. But if you want a good quality Air Force AR-15 full auto Model 601 (M-16) you can purchase one for about $3000. Of course, FFL laws do apply.

 

[rightwinger]

Any semi auto rifle which can use large capacity magazines.

WRONG



.

Is it? They sure have proven capable of killing lots of people really fast. Call them what you want, but semi auto rifles which can use large capacity magazines must be banned.

thats exactly what every dictator in history said and did right before they killed millions of people

And? We have checks and balances. You think our military would throw out the constitution and follow a dictator? You insult them.

You think the military would throw out the Constitution and enforce a ban of firearms ? Because it would take the military to enforce such a ban.

Once those firearms are used against them......the military will gladly enforce the ban

Are you willing to fire on US Soldiers in order to keep your guns?

 

[Hale]

The M-16 is just the Military Designator for the AR. In reality, the real Colt designation for the M-16 is AR-15 Model 604. The Colt Disignation for the Civilian AR-15 is either the AR-15 Model 750 or the Colt model LE6920. All use all but 3 parts from the same parts bin. There are some LE690s (AR-15) that are currently in the US Army that are single shot only. What is stamped on the side? It isn't LE6920 or AR-15, it's M-16. All Military Rifles will have an M designator. Even when they were using the Remington Model 700 as a sniper rifle for awhile.

So, in effect, the AR was adopted in 1959 by the Malaysians and the US Air Force in 1962 by the United States Air Force. The Air Force didn't have an M desginator requirement at the time so they called theirs by the Colt AR-15 Model 601. Later, in 1969, the M designator was adopted, the Air Force restamped theirs to read AR-15 Model 601 (M-16). The Air Force had over 14,000 of these weapons and didn't retire them until 1992. These were full auto even AFTER the Army went to the 3 shot burst. If you want a surplus Army M-16 that's been rode hard and put away wet, you can buy one starting at $15,000. But if you want a good quality Air Force AR-15 full auto Model 601 (M-16) you can purchase one for about $3000. Of course, FFL laws do apply.

^ Absolute Truth ^

In fact, I recently purchased a Colt AR15A4, and it even has the M16 style bolt group. It's only a few parts away from being fully automatic, but that would not only be a Federal Felony it would be completely senseless.

Why did I buy one? Because it's the ideal centerfire target/plinking rifle, and is totally usable for self-defense in some situations. 223 Remington is the cheapest centerfire rifle cartridge on the market (20 cents/round), and I also bought a conversion bolt group so it can fire 22LR (4 cents/round).

As a veteran, it's a very familiar platform. And being a genuine Colt, it will hold its value - unlike cheap clones.

This is what the gun-grabbers don't even want to understand. They like pretending that anyone who owns an AR15 is likely a mass murderer - and that's just a lie from the depths of Hell.

 

[Siete]

What is an "assault rifle"?


Trumps iPhone & 100 rounds of twitter ...