CDZ If weapons of war need to be banned, should this weapon be banned as well?

[2aguy]

2aguy won't tell the reader that SCOTUS per Heller reserved the right to further rule on matters 2dA.

Of course they did. And should Trump get another pick or two, they will likely further rule in opposition to your skewed thinking.

And if he does not, and the Dems take the presidency, the ruling will be the other way, to your disappointment.

Thank you, Billy, for pointing out the Living Document theory being a fact.

No...that is left wing activists pretending to be Justices making it up as they go along......vs......actual Justices who understand the Constitution and uphold their oath to protect and defend the constitution....

 

[JakeStarkey]

^^^ OK, that lunacy was worth waiting for.

 

[there4eyeM]

Photos of an AR 15 and an M 16
"The United States Army adopted the AR-15 after some modifications as the M16. Colt didn't bury the AR-15 brand, and nowadays they are semi-automatic modern sporting rifles made for civilians, mostly for recreational shooting." https://www.quora.com/Whats-the-difference-between-an-AR15-M4-and-M16

 

[rightwinger]

The anti gun movement has started using the term Weapon of War, in order to frighten uninformed people into banning guns the anti gunners don't like. The AR-15 is not a weapon of war, it has never been used by the military and yet they keep calling it a weapon of war. The anti gunners say no one needs a semi auto rifle, and that we should be happy with guns that aren't semi autos....this is, of course, an unConstitutional position to take, but they don't care about that.

Now....here is an actual weapon of war, should it be banned? It is the pump action shotgun, used by 13 countries as military weapon....

If you insist

I guess we can ban it

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Yup. They are against the Geneva convention anyway so nobody should be using them in wa either.

Why on earth are they against the convention?

Have you ever seen the wound a close range load of buckshot leaves?

Of course we have,we hunt.
And we've seen the damage a high powered rifle can do as well.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Yup. They are against the Geneva convention anyway so nobody should be using them in wa either.

You will need to provide a link, I am pretty sure you don't know what you are talking about.

Pretty sure I do but can't find a link. the reasons are the same for not using expanding/fragmenting rounds.

Than why did our government buy billions of hollow point rounds and disperse them to fed agencies around the country?
Their claim was they're for target practice....even though they cost more than ball ammo.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Yup. They are against the Geneva convention anyway so nobody should be using them in wa either.

You will need to provide a link, I am pretty sure you don't know what you are talking about.

Pretty sure I do but can't find a link. the reasons are the same for not using expanding/fragmenting rounds.

Yeah, I looked too and couldn't find a ban in the conventions...and considering how fast we bend to the Convention I don't think you are correct.....

They used them in Vietnam. Nothing illegal about them.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Yup. They are against the Geneva convention anyway so nobody should be using them in wa either.

You will need to provide a link, I am pretty sure you don't know what you are talking about.

Pretty sure I do but can't find a link. the reasons are the same for not using expanding/fragmenting rounds.

Yeah, I looked too and couldn't find a ban in the conventions...and considering how fast we bend to the Convention I don't think you are correct.....

I couldn't find one way or the other, nor in the Hague conventions either. If I'm wrong I'm wrong. Doesn't happen often but it does happen.

You're wrong.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Just a little gun porn...

So, Russians can have full auto Glocks with 50 round mags, but Americans cannot?

There's a message there ...

He's not really Russian.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Just a little gun porn...

So, Russians can have full auto Glocks with 50 round mags, but Americans cannot?

There's a message there ...

He's not really Russian.

Sounds regional to me. Wants Moose and Squirrel.

 

[opinionator]

Weapons of war are the actual point. The military and police should not have power over the people. The founders would have been utterly appalled and what we have today. They feared a standing army. But now our police have more power than armies did back then.

 

[2aguy]

Photos of an AR 15 and an M 16
"The United States Army adopted the AR-15 after some modifications as the M16. Colt didn't bury the AR-15 brand, and nowadays they are semi-automatic modern sporting rifles made for civilians, mostly for recreational shooting." https://www.quora.com/Whats-the-difference-between-an-AR15-M4-and-M16

Yes.......the key point...

after some modifications as the M16

They changed the internal workings of the rifle to change it from the semi automatic AR-15 rifle to the select fire, fully automatic capable M16.....

You guys, do you ever think before you post?

 

[Pop23]

The anti gun movement has started using the term Weapon of War, in order to frighten uninformed people into banning guns the anti gunners don't like. The AR-15 is not a weapon of war, it has never been used by the military and yet they keep calling it a weapon of war. The anti gunners say no one needs a semi auto rifle, and that we should be happy with guns that aren't semi autos....this is, of course, an unConstitutional position to take, but they don't care about that.

Now....here is an actual weapon of war, should it be banned? It is the pump action shotgun, used by 13 countries as military weapon....

If you insist

I guess we can ban it

What public health reason can you cite that would lead to such a ban?

 

[Brian Blackwell]

The anti gun movement has started using the term Weapon of War, in order to frighten uninformed people into banning guns the anti gunners don't like. The AR-15 is not a weapon of war, it has never been used by the military and yet they keep calling it a weapon of war. The anti gunners say no one needs a semi auto rifle, and that we should be happy with guns that aren't semi autos....this is, of course, an unConstitutional position to take, but they don't care about that.

Now....here is an actual weapon of war, should it be banned? It is the pump action shotgun, used by 13 countries as military weapon....

You do phenomenal work - top notch - and I sincerely thank you for it. I only wish that your quasi pro-freedom position was rooted deeper - in fundamental truth, rather than an ancient document. I'm sure you understand that gun ownership is a basic, self-evident, God-given, unalienable human right (the right of defense), and that the Constitution is not the source of this right, but merely a protective measure to (purportedly) ensure that right. However, if you had a full understood of that principle, you would understand that precisely the same arguments used to defend gun rights can be validly made in defense of ALL liberties.

You could not possibly support the Constitution or the government it creates, as this represents an inequality of rights, and a denial of man's inherent freedom. You would understand that rights, being unalienable, cannot be ceded or exchanged. Taxation alone is absolutely unacceptable for the very same reason that gun confiscation is unacceptable - because it is invalid and immoral. To abide the deplorable notion that any man can have rightful authority over any other, regardless of consensus, political ritual, or any perceived "need", is an act of immorality in itself. If you understood why this is undeniably so, given your dedication and aptitude, you would be a champion among freedom advocates.

 

[Dan Stubbs]

The anti gun movement has started using the term Weapon of War, in order to frighten uninformed people into banning guns the anti gunners don't like. The AR-15 is not a weapon of war, it has never been used by the military and yet they keep calling it a weapon of war. The anti gunners say no one needs a semi auto rifle, and that we should be happy with guns that aren't semi autos....this is, of course, an unConstitutional position to take, but they don't care about that.

Now....here is an actual weapon of war, should it be banned? It is the pump action shotgun, used by 13 countries as military weapon....

They have been using every stupid statement to try to blow smoke from day one. The one that I liked was any Cal used in a military weapon. Well that would be everythings made. from 22 cal to 55 cal. Never trust a Progressive.

 

[pismoe]

and thats a 'mexican' and probably others way of doing things DStubbs .

 

[Dan Stubbs]

The anti gun movement has started using the term Weapon of War, in order to frighten uninformed people into banning guns the anti gunners don't like. The AR-15 is not a weapon of war, it has never been used by the military and yet they keep calling it a weapon of war. The anti gunners say no one needs a semi auto rifle, and that we should be happy with guns that aren't semi autos....this is, of course, an unConstitutional position to take, but they don't care about that.

Now....here is an actual weapon of war, should it be banned? It is the pump action shotgun, used by 13 countries as military weapon....

That would cover Rocks, Crossbows, knifes, shovels, p-wire, shotguns, black powder guns, and the list goes on and on.

 

[Pellinore]

No, because the term "Weapons of War" was never intended to be technically accurate (if they wanted technically accurate, they'd say "Semi-automatic rifle"). It is a Scary Political Term. The Republicans are masters of this, with invented frighteners like "death panel."

Besides, weapons such as the Mossberg in the video are invaluable in home defense. Joe Biden was the one who correctly pointed out that there is no more frightening noise for a burglar to hear than the racking of a shotgun.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Photos of an AR 15 and an M 16
"The United States Army adopted the AR-15 after some modifications as the M16. Colt didn't bury the AR-15 brand, and nowadays they are semi-automatic modern sporting rifles made for civilians, mostly for recreational shooting." https://www.quora.com/Whats-the-difference-between-an-AR15-M4-and-M16

Yes.......the key point...

after some modifications as the M16

They changed the internal workings of the rifle to change it from the semi automatic AR-15 rifle to the select fire, fully automatic capable M16.....

You guys, do you ever think before you post?

So you move your dog and pony act to another place. Here we go again.

In 1964, the USAF purchased a new gun from colt. They wanted a gun that was simple to use, easy to clean and was very light. The purchased 4000 AR-15 Model 601s. These had a brand new style breach like nothing ever had before. The traditional wood was replaced by Space Age Plastic. Many of the parts that were traditionally steel were replaced by Aluminum in the less wear areas. From 1964 to 1967, these were AR-15s, not M-16s. In the end, USAF had purchased over 9000 of these guns. This is the Daddy of ALL AR-15s, M-4s and M-16s.

I won't bore anyone else the minor differences between the M-16 and the Model 601 but had it not been for the Model 601 there would have been NO AR-15 nor M-16 at all. In fact, the weapon I first fired at Basic was an AR-15 Model 601 Mod 16. It wasn't until years after I retired that I learned the difference. The charging handle on the M-16 is a T-handle while the charging handle on a Model 601 is a triangle. Looking back, the one I fired the most had a triangle handle. But I did use both throughout 20 years of service. The AR-15 Model 601 Mod 16 was finally retired around 1992. It lasted in service much longer than I did. And you can own one if you have right around 3 to 7000 bucks and have the proper FFL license. Making it an even rarer find than a M-16 and even cheaper than the M-16 starting out at about 15,000 for a basket case. Own a real AR-15 Model 601 and own a piece of History.

The AR-15 full auto dates back to about 1959 and was sold to 3rd world nations who loved the daylights out of them. Malaysia for instance. The stock on the original AR-15 was traditional wood.

The only difference between a semi auto AR-15 and the M-16 is the ability to accept a full auto receiver. They changed to frame just a bit to not allow the interchange and then clamped down on the sale of the full auto frame. That's it. Almost all parts interchange. The Semi Auto fire rate is exactly the same since the bolt and gas system is the same. And they have removed the full auto feature from the M-16 as of the Model 604 and replaced it with a 3 shot burst. Today, most shots in combat are made in the single shot setting because of the single shot speed and accuracy of the M-16. Meaning, in Combat, there is little difference at all between a Civilian AR-15 or a M-16 in practical use.

Let's not waste anyone elses time on this and let them get back to discussing what they really want to discuss.

 

[there4eyeM]

Photos of an AR 15 and an M 16
"The United States Army adopted the AR-15 after some modifications as the M16. Colt didn't bury the AR-15 brand, and nowadays they are semi-automatic modern sporting rifles made for civilians, mostly for recreational shooting." https://www.quora.com/Whats-the-difference-between-an-AR15-M4-and-M16

Yes.......the key point...

after some modifications as the M16

They changed the internal workings of the rifle to change it from the semi automatic AR-15 rifle to the select fire, fully automatic capable M16.....

You guys, do you ever think before you post?

So you move your dog and pony act to another place. Here we go again.

In 1964, the USAF purchased a new gun from colt. They wanted a gun that was simple to use, easy to clean and was very light. The purchased 4000 AR-15 Model 601s. These had a brand new style breach like nothing ever had before. The traditional wood was replaced by Space Age Plastic. Many of the parts that were traditionally steel were replaced by Aluminum in the less wear areas. From 1964 to 1967, these were AR-15s, not M-16s. In the end, USAF had purchased over 9000 of these guns. This is the Daddy of ALL AR-15s, M-4s and M-16s.

I won't bore anyone else the minor differences between the M-16 and the Model 601 but had it not been for the Model 601 there would have been NO AR-15 nor M-16 at all. In fact, the weapon I first fired at Basic was an AR-15 Model 601 Mod 16. It wasn't until years after I retired that I learned the difference. The charging handle on the M-16 is a T-handle while the charging handle on a Model 601 is a triangle. Looking back, the one I fired the most had a triangle handle. But I did use both throughout 20 years of service. The AR-15 Model 601 Mod 16 was finally retired around 1992. It lasted in service much longer than I did. And you can own one if you have right around 3 to 7000 bucks and have the proper FFL license. Making it an even rarer find than a M-16 and even cheaper than the M-16 starting out at about 15,000 for a basket case. Own a real AR-15 Model 601 and own a piece of History.

The AR-15 full auto dates back to about 1959 and was sold to 3rd world nations who loved the daylights out of them. Malaysia for instance. The stock on the original AR-15 was traditional wood.

The only difference between a semi auto AR-15 and the M-16 is the ability to accept a full auto receiver. They changed to frame just a bit to not allow the interchange and then clamped down on the sale of the full auto frame. That's it. Almost all parts interchange. The Semi Auto fire rate is exactly the same since the bolt and gas system is the same. And they have removed the full auto feature from the M-16 as of the Model 604 and replaced it with a 3 shot burst. Today, most shots in combat are made in the single shot setting because of the single shot speed and accuracy of the M-16. Meaning, in Combat, there is little difference at all between a Civilian AR-15 or a M-16 in practical use.

Let's not waste anyone elses time on this and let them get back to discussing what they really want to discuss.

All the petulant foot stamping about their differences is just an attempt to side track discussion. Of course everyone who buys an AR does so because they know it is an M16 in drag.
Thanks for validating with intelligence what some of us have always maintained.