Awesome answer to b.s. question "why someone needs ar-15"

clandestine · Mar 2, 2018

TexDefender said:
I would prefer, it has a similar look. But it's design has some important differences; it is Semi-Automatic only, and doesn't have full automatic fire or a three round burst function. These are important differences. I'm not going to give the left any leverage.

The fella in the video was not wrong. The military adopted the Colt/Armalite AR15. They simply changed the name when it was adopted. The AR15 was a machinegun or a semi auto.

The AR15 can be a Title 1 Semi Auto, or Title 2 Select Fire.

Jim12 · Mar 2, 2018

protegeV said:
what sarcasm? He's right. It's the same gun, with a different name and select-fire capability.

An H1 hummer was the civilian/consumer version of the HUMVEE. Same basis, different application and trim.

A. Dillon drove a Chevrolet Camaro in the Daytona 500.

It's a Chevy Camaro. Is it the same car you or I would buy as a daily driver? Is it street legal?

protegeV · Mar 2, 2018

Jim12 said:
A. Dillon drove a Chevrolet Camaro in the Daytona 500.

It's a Chevy Camaro. Is it the same car you or I would buy as a daily driver? Is it street legal?

No, it's not street legal. It has the thing that make it not street legal. Full auto M4s have the thing that make them not civilian legal even though they are basically an AR. Are you trying to say that ARs should be made illegal because they are a watered down version of an M4? Like a street car is a watered down version of a racecar?

Mark75H · Mar 2, 2018

Jim12 said:
A. Dillon drove a Chevrolet Camaro in the Daytona 500.

It's a Chevy Camaro. Is it the same car you or I would buy as a daily driver? Is it street legal?

The NASCAR spec chassis is nothing close to the street Camaro - this is an apples and raisins comparison. NASCAR to street car is name only.

Nothing close to civilian vs military AR. A civilian AR can be worked up to function equivalent to military - the street Carmaro can't

Jim12 · Mar 2, 2018

protegeV said:
No, it's not street legal. It has the thing that make it not street legal. Full auto M4s have the thing that make them not civilian legal even though they are basically an AR. Are you trying to say that ARs should be made illegal because they are a watered down version of an M4? Like a street car is a watered down version of a racecar?

No, maybe I wasn't clear. I was trying to make the point that they're not the same. Semi-auto vs. select fire is the big difference we're hanging our hat on. Does the military use the semi version? Not that I'm aware of, but educate me if I'm wrong. Does the military take a semi AR15 to war? Would A. Dillon drive your Camaro at Daytona? No. His has a thingy that goes up.

Jim12 · Mar 2, 2018

Mark75H said:
The NASCAR spec chassis is nothing close to the street Camaro - this is an apples and raisins comparison. NASCAR to street car is name only.

Nothing close to civilian vs military AR. A civilian AR can be worked up to function equivalent to military - the street Carmaro can't

Well, what has to be done to the civilian AR to work it up to military? Select fire? Anything else?

If it isn't military "as is," then why on earth are we letting anti's call them "military," "weapons of war," "designed only to kill as many in as short a time as possible," "assault weapons," etc., etc., without challenging them?

To do all that and to be what the anti's say they are, they would have to actually be "worked up" to function equivalent to military, right? And unless they are, they aren't all those "evil" things, are they?

So why are we going along with the anti's propaganda, thereby shooting ourselves in the foot?

press1280 · Mar 2, 2018

One reason I oppose this is because each time we give up something it'll be pointed to as justification for the next ban.
Just see how the Federal courts are treating it.

TexDefender · Mar 2, 2018

clandestine said:
The fella in the video was not wrong. The military adopted the Colt/Armalite AR15. They simply changed the name when it was adopted. The AR15 was a machinegun or a semi auto.

The AR15 can be a Title 1 Semi Auto, or Title 2 Select Fire.

There are differences in the design. This is important. And we need to point those out those differences, because the average person that doesn't know the differences, is going to assume that they are indeed Military Rifles. Then we play into their argument. Granted many military rifles come from a civilian sport design.

mvee · Mar 2, 2018

clandestine said:
It's not sarcasm. It's the truth.

I’ve seen a military owned m4 that was was built on a receiver I believe was marked “colt AR-15 m16a1”. I guess it was an old Vietnam era rifle that was rebuilt into an M4 carbine.

It was similar to this photo.

eurocarnut · Mar 2, 2018

clandestine said:
It's not sarcasm. It's the truth.

If you tell someone with zero gun knowledge that the military is using the same weapons you can buy in a gun store they're going to get the wrong idea. Hell, the vast majority of the country seems to think machine guns are already illegal. A lot of gun owners think this too. Blows my mind.

CombatAK · Mar 2, 2018

Oh no, they are going to go after my M96, it was used in WW1. It is a true military battle rifle. It also shoots a much larger round than 5.56mm. Mine is 6.5x55. Maybe if I make a reading lamp out of it and they will leave me alone.

TexDefender · Mar 2, 2018

mvee said:
I’ve seen a military owned m4 that was was built on a receiver I believe was marked “colt AR-15 m16a1”. I guess it was an old Vietnam era rifle that was rebuilt into an M4 carbine.

It was similar to this photo.

That picture looks like it is marked as a Military Field Test weapon with the "X" in front of M-16 or one of the early batches. Great piece of history there.

fidelity · Mar 2, 2018

For current service M4/M16 rifles, is the third position more likely to be a burst mode (3 rd) or continuous?

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

eurocarnut · Mar 2, 2018

Burst

TexDefender · Mar 2, 2018

secretsquirrel35 said:
Burst

Burst, unless it's a AF Frankenstein gun then it may have a full auto. The AF tends to hold on to them as long as possible. My first duty rifle was a old M-16, it even had the three prong flash hider. Firing it at the range in the prong position left you with some dirt in your face some times. LOL

clandestine · Mar 2, 2018

secretsquirrel35 said:
If you tell someone with zero gun knowledge that the military is using the same weapons you can buy in a gun store they're going to get the wrong idea. Hell, the vast majority of the country seems to think machine guns are already illegal. A lot of gun owners think this too. Blows my mind.

I'm pretty sure I know what I'm taking about.

I explained it pretty clearly above. You don't win arguments with "antis" by being dishonest and trying to split hairs over the guns original designation. Its not a winning argument.

The original gun was the AR15. It was available in select fire and semi-auto. The military adopted the AR15 in a format that had select fire capabilities and had various model designations for it until it was adopted as the M16.

Same gun.

7 parts in the lower and one hole is the only difference between the semi-auto variant and the select fire variant (with the exception to burst models which have more parts)

mopar92 · Mar 2, 2018

fidelity said:
For current service M4/M16 rifles, is the third position more likely to be a burst mode (3 rd) or continuous?

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

If you pick up a military rifle out of the armory it is likely to be a burst fire weapon. However, IIRC the Armed Forces are incurring a running change to make them to the M4A1 spec which includes true full auto capability.

It's also important to note that the AR-15 is NOT designed to be a full auto gun. It just has the capability. The military predominately teaches and trains the use of semi automatic fire with burst and full auto to be used only in specific circumstances such as gaining fire superiority.

clandestine · Mar 2, 2018

mvee said:
I’ve seen a military owned m4 that was was built on a receiver I believe was marked “colt AR-15 m16a1”. I guess it was an old Vietnam era rifle that was rebuilt into an M4 carbine.

It was similar to this photo.

Yep. I have a receiver chunk like that one.

Jim12 · Mar 2, 2018

clandestine said:
I'm pretty sure I know what I'm taking about.

I explained it pretty clearly above. You don't win arguments with "antis" by being dishonest and trying to split hairs over the guns original designation. Its not a winning argument.

The original gun was the AR15. It was available in select fire and semi-auto. The military adopted the AR15 in a format that had select fire capabilities and had various model designations for it until it was adopted as the M16.

Same gun.

7 parts in the lower and one hole is the only difference between the semi-auto variant and the select fire variant (with the exception to burst models which have more parts)

If anti's think the military and civilian versions are identical "assault weapons," designed only to kill as many people as possible in as short a time as possible, isn't it useful to point out the differences between the two, to educate them and set them straight?

TexDefender · Mar 2, 2018

clandestine said:
7 parts in the lower and one hole is the only difference between the semi-auto variant and the select fire variant (with the exception to burst models which have more parts)

This is the design difference, therefore if the lower of one has it and the other does not, they cannot be consider to be the same.

Awesome answer to b.s. question "why someone needs ar-15"

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

AR-15 Savant

Let Freedom Ring

Ready to go

MD Wear&Carry Instructor

Let Freedom Ring

Let Freedom Ring

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Attachments

Active Member

Hooligan #12

Ultimate Member

piled higher and deeper

Active Member

Ultimate Member

AR-15 Savant

Official MDS Court Jester

AR-15 Savant

Let Freedom Ring

Ultimate Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics