What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

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

2aguy

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2014
Messages
88,815
Reaction score
28,392
Points
2,250
I have plenty of rifles and shotguns for hunting and a couple of pistols. I'm good.
.

Shit ... I'll hunt deer with a Patriot-Vortex .308 bolt action, but the Custom AR-15 style 7.62 x 39 with a infa-red scope is a hell of a lot better for hunting hogs.
Not to mention I wouldn't want to be on the bleeding end of either one of them in a tactical combat situation.

But screw it ... If you are happy with what you have, and don't have any concerns about what I have, then we are good to go ... :thup:

.
I live in east Texas, so I usually use a Winchester 30-30, but I have a .270 for the few times I have been able to go to west Texas. Deer meat is waaaaaay too expensive on those hunting leases. A 12 gauge 870 Remington, and an 8gauge that was my grandfathers with a barrel that looks to be about 5 ft long for geese (really 36"), and a 410 that I got for Christmas when I was about 8 or 9. A 32 pistol that I am afraid to shoot, and a 38 snub nose Rossi.
I don't have a problem with guns. I have a problem with idiots that oppose reasonable regulation of guns.
Wonderful. But many have a problem with those idiots who do not understand enough to know what is/is not reasonable regulation of guns. I imagine everyone here has no problem with reasonable regulation such as restrictions on violent felons. But many have a very substantial problem giving up civil rights because of the paranoia of those who are unwilling to inform themselves. In my opinion Your rifles and shotguns are every bit as deadly as any assault rifle ever made.
Are background checks reasonable? Do you think you should be able to sell a gun to a stranger without a background check, and not even know his name, much less whether he can legally own a gun?





I have no problem with a background check so long as there is no gun information involved. Want to make it happen. Pass a law that absolves any seller of any crime done with a weapon they sell so long as a background check is done.


There is a simple solution....open up the background check system to private citizens.....gun dealers, stores, the average gun owner.....then, all they have to do is go on to their IPhone, laptop, punch in the name and birthday of a potential gun buyer and see if they have any of the categories that ban them from owning a gun...

Easy Peazy, lemon squeezee.........

Have a buyer....get their name, birthday, punch it in, and just like a cop at a vehicle stop, any convictions or outstanding warrants would pop up....and you can deny a sale without any record keeping and in seconds...not hours, or days..

But bulldog and the other anti-gun extremists don't want that.....they want the red tape, fees and penalties...and in particular....the punishment and destruction of normal gun owners when they don't cross the "T" or dot the "i"............
 

2aguy

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2014
Messages
88,815
Reaction score
28,392
Points
2,250
I have plenty of rifles and shotguns for hunting and a couple of pistols. I'm good.
.

Shit ... I'll hunt deer with a Patriot-Vortex .308 bolt action, but the Custom AR-15 style 7.62 x 39 with a infa-red scope is a hell of a lot better for hunting hogs.
Not to mention I wouldn't want to be on the bleeding end of either one of them in a tactical combat situation.

But screw it ... If you are happy with what you have, and don't have any concerns about what I have, then we are good to go ... :thup:

.
I live in east Texas, so I usually use a Winchester 30-30, but I have a .270 for the few times I have been able to go to west Texas. Deer meat is waaaaaay too expensive on those hunting leases. A 12 gauge 870 Remington, and an 8gauge that was my grandfathers with a barrel that looks to be about 5 ft long for geese (really 36"), and a 410 that I got for Christmas when I was about 8 or 9. A 32 pistol that I am afraid to shoot, and a 38 snub nose Rossi.
I don't have a problem with guns. I have a problem with idiots that oppose reasonable regulation of guns.
Wonderful. But many have a problem with those idiots who do not understand enough to know what is/is not reasonable regulation of guns. I imagine everyone here has no problem with reasonable regulation such as restrictions on violent felons. But many have a very substantial problem giving up civil rights because of the paranoia of those who are unwilling to inform themselves. In my opinion Your rifles and shotguns are every bit as deadly as any assault rifle ever made.
Are background checks reasonable? Do you think you should be able to sell a gun to a stranger without a background check, and not even know his name, much less whether he can legally own a gun?
I'm all for background checks if they are accurate, conducted in a timely manner, and do not disqualify people without good reason. Also they provide no deterrent if those who attempt to fraudulently buy guns are not prosecuted and that is often lacking. The only problem I have with background checks is that they can disqualify people without good cause if they are allowed to do so and that must not be allowed.
Do you think background checks from FFL sellers are mostly accurate, conducted in a timely manner? We both know there will be an occasional fuck up, but lets not nit pick it.
It's my understanding that the FFL sellers do not do the actual check but that it is done using a government database by government for a fee. I am OK with it as it stands in my area. But there is nothing to stop government from suddenly demanding a hugh increase in fee that the average person could not afford. Or disqualifying people for frivolous reasons.
You are correct. Dealers don't do the actual check.
There's not a lot to prevent a lot of bad stuff that we might think of, but there is no reason to believe those things will actually happen.
If you are OK with the way background checks work, why wouldn't you think background checks conducted through licensed dealers for individual sales would be OK? Same checks conducted the same way.


Hey....Bulldog...Let's play...

All we need to do is open the background check system to civilians..instead of just government agencies...

Allow gun stores, gun dealters, and private citizens to use the same data base and system as law enforcement...where they can punch in the name and birthday of a person, and their entire history pops up......any arrests, warrants or other criminal information pops up...in seconds....

You don't need anything else....

If I have a gun, and you want to buy it...you give me your Drivers License, with your name and birthday....I punch it into my Iphone, laptop, and if you have felonies, or warrants, it will simply pop up.....

No felonies or warrants and I can sell you the gun.

If you are a criminal...no gun for you.

That is all we need.......

No records kept, no need to register guns, no need to license owners...no fees, no taxes...........easy peasy...

You in for that?
 

2aguy

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2014
Messages
88,815
Reaction score
28,392
Points
2,250
I have no problem with a background check so long as there is no gun information involved. Want to make it happen. Pass a law that absolves any seller of any crime done with a weapon they sell so long as a background check is done.
.

Where I may not agree with everything you posted, I can at least give you credit for thinking about things rationally.
I also have to thank you for actually thinking of a compromise where the gun control advocates would actually have something to bring to table in a compromise.
It's usually difficult to discuss things with gun control advocates, because they hardly ever have anything worthwhile to barter with in a compromise.

Good job ... :thup:

.

Watch how bulldog reacts to this idea.....

Hey....Bulldog...Let's play...

All we need to do is open the background check system to civilians..instead of just government agencies...

Allow gun stores, gun dealters, and private citizens to use the same data base and system as law enforcement...where they can punch in the name and birthday of a person, and their entire history pops up......any arrests, warrants or other criminal information pops up...in seconds....

You don't need anything else....

If I have a gun, and you want to buy it...you give me your Drivers License, with your name and birthday....I punch it into my Iphone, laptop, and if you have felonies, or warrants, it will simply pop up.....

No felonies or warrants and I can sell you the gun.

If you are a criminal...no gun for you.

That is all we need.......

No records kept, no need to register guns, no need to license owners...no fees, no taxes...........easy peasy...

You in for that?
 

bigrebnc1775

][][][% NC Sheepdog
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
80,473
Reaction score
11,072
Points
2,070
Location
Kannapolis, N.C.
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?
So if it's so easy to convert an Armalite Rifle 15 into an automatic Rifle explain how it's done?
Most information on conversion has been removed from the internet, but I believe a lightning link is the quickest and easiest way. An auto sear is pretty straight forward too, but a little harder to make in your garage.
you didn't read your source, did you?
"With fewer than 900 manufactured and registered in the NFA registry"
I posted that there are over 600 thousand automatic firearms in the public just like this they are all registered and limited access. So what is your gripe now?
Legality hasn't been part of the conversation from the start. Of course it's illegal to modify to fully automatic except under specific conditions with specific permissions. Ignoring legal concerns, the lightning link is nothing more than a couple of small pieces of relatively thin plate that could be shaped with a Dremel in a couple of hours at your kitchen table. I would call that an easy conversion.
they are already registered that's what you wanted
other than that pound sand
 

bigrebnc1775

][][][% NC Sheepdog
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
80,473
Reaction score
11,072
Points
2,070
Location
Kannapolis, N.C.
Ok. I guess nobody can tell of any material differences, other than full auto/ 3 round burst, between the two rifles. In a heads up comparison, the AR shows to be better in a wide range of tactical shooting tests.
FYI the supreme court has already ruled that a weapon must be of use to a militia in order for it to be protected by the second amendment.
True, but as I have said many times, this thread has nothing to do with the 2nd amendment.
AR15'S are protected by the second amendment
OK.
and your false pretenses is over
STOP WITH THE GASLIGHTING
 

BlackSand

Nobody
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
16,541
Reaction score
6,154
Points
380
Location
Wherever I May Roam
There is a simple solution....open up the background check system to private citizens.....gun dealers, stores, the average gun owner.....then, all they have to do is go on to their IPhone, laptop, punch in the name and birthday of a potential gun buyer and see if they have any of the categories that ban them from owning a gun...

Easy Peazy, lemon squeezee.........

Have a buyer....get their name, birthday, punch it in, and just like a cop at a vehicle stop, any convictions or outstanding warrants would pop up....and you can deny a sale without any record keeping and in seconds...not hours, or days..

But bulldog and the other anti-gun extremists don't want that.....they want the red tape, fees and penalties...and in particular....the punishment and destruction of normal gun owners when they don't cross the "T" or dot the "i"............
.

Pfft ... Bulldog doesn't understand that although he posted a link to a video of someone doing it ...
A lower receiver is nothing more than a chunk of metal someone can send you in the mail.
With the proper tools and knowledge, anyone can tool it into a part that will work.

It doesn't make a damn bit of difference what law anyone writes, because people are smart and can figure out how to make what they want without breaking the law.
It's like suggesting you can get rid of outlaw drag racing if you ban tires or put a traceable serial number on every fucking lug nut or screw.

As I told him earlier ... They cannot stop us from making whatever they are scared of until they ban anything that shoots a bullet.
All they can accomplish is pissing off and making it harder for people who want to obey the law, and exercise their Constitutionally Protected Rights to start with.

Firearms are nothing more than an assortment of parts, assembled in a configuration that will effectively fire a bullet.
It just doesn't matter how freaking scary someone may think they are ... The pile of parts doesn't give a shit about that.

.
 
Last edited:

2aguy

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2014
Messages
88,815
Reaction score
28,392
Points
2,250
There is a simple solution....open up the background check system to private citizens.....gun dealers, stores, the average gun owner.....then, all they have to do is go on to their IPhone, laptop, punch in the name and birthday of a potential gun buyer and see if they have any of the categories that ban them from owning a gun...

Easy Peazy, lemon squeezee.........

Have a buyer....get their name, birthday, punch it in, and just like a cop at a vehicle stop, any convictions or outstanding warrants would pop up....and you can deny a sale without any record keeping and in seconds...not hours, or days..

But bulldog and the other anti-gun extremists don't want that.....they want the red tape, fees and penalties...and in particular....the punishment and destruction of normal gun owners when they don't cross the "T" or dot the "i"............
.

Pfft ... Bulldog doesn't understand that although he posted a link to a video of someone doing it ...
A lower receiver is nothing more than a chunk of metal someone can send you in the mail.
With the proper tools and knowledge, anyone can tool it into a part that will work.

It doesn't make a damn bit of difference what law anyone writes, because people are smart and can figure out how to make what they want without breaking the law.
It's like suggesting you can get rid of outlaw drag racing if you ban tires or put a traceable serial number on every fucking lug nut or screw.

As I told him earlier ... They cannot stop us from making whatever they are scared of until they ban anything that shoots a bullet.
All they can accomplish is pissing off and making it harder for people who want to obey the law, and exercise their Constitutionally Protected Rights to start with.

.


Bulldog knows this......he doesn't care because the focus isn't on stopping criminals, but in turning law abiding Americans into criminals if they own guns..........create red tape, fees, taxes.....and at any step when a normal American fails to cross the "T" or dot the " i " then bulldog and the anti-gun extremists can crush them........scaring others into not taking on the liability of owning guns....
 

9thIDdoc

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2011
Messages
7,361
Reaction score
2,641
Points
325
I have plenty of rifles and shotguns for hunting and a couple of pistols. I'm good.
.

Shit ... I'll hunt deer with a Patriot-Vortex .308 bolt action, but the Custom AR-15 style 7.62 x 39 with a infa-red scope is a hell of a lot better for hunting hogs.
Not to mention I wouldn't want to be on the bleeding end of either one of them in a tactical combat situation.

But screw it ... If you are happy with what you have, and don't have any concerns about what I have, then we are good to go ... :thup:

.
I live in east Texas, so I usually use a Winchester 30-30, but I have a .270 for the few times I have been able to go to west Texas. Deer meat is waaaaaay too expensive on those hunting leases. A 12 gauge 870 Remington, and an 8gauge that was my grandfathers with a barrel that looks to be about 5 ft long for geese (really 36"), and a 410 that I got for Christmas when I was about 8 or 9. A 32 pistol that I am afraid to shoot, and a 38 snub nose Rossi.
I don't have a problem with guns. I have a problem with idiots that oppose reasonable regulation of guns.
Wonderful. But many have a problem with those idiots who do not understand enough to know what is/is not reasonable regulation of guns. I imagine everyone here has no problem with reasonable regulation such as restrictions on violent felons. But many have a very substantial problem giving up civil rights because of the paranoia of those who are unwilling to inform themselves. In my opinion Your rifles and shotguns are every bit as deadly as any assault rifle ever made.
Are background checks reasonable? Do you think you should be able to sell a gun to a stranger without a background check, and not even know his name, much less whether he can legally own a gun?
I'm all for background checks if they are accurate, conducted in a timely manner, and do not disqualify people without good reason. Also they provide no deterrent if those who attempt to fraudulently buy guns are not prosecuted and that is often lacking. The only problem I have with background checks is that they can disqualify people without good cause if they are allowed to do so and that must not be allowed.


I agree with you on almost everything but I respectively disagree with you on this. I am against all background checks for the following three reasons:

1. They simply don't work. Past behavior doesn't predict future behavior. For instance, several of the more recent mass shooters have passed background checks.

2. The background check only becomes a burden for law abiding citizens. People wanting to use a firearm for crime will simply ignore the background check process and get a firearm through other means. The more strict the background check the more back market in firearms.

3. (Most important) Having background checks circumvents the Bill of Rights. Americans should not have to get government permission to enjoy a right that is guaranteed in the Bill of Rights and clearly says that the right cannot be infringed. A background check is nothing more than getting government permission and it is wrong. If you have to get government permission to enjoy a right that is guaranteed in the Bill of Rights then the BOR isn't worth the parchment it is written on.
We agree on all the points you mentioned. I am only OK with background checks at present because they are usually conducted in a timely manner and replace a system that could and often did require waiting weeks for the County sheriff to sign off on the deal before you could pick up the handgun you had just purchased and paid for. Yes, I agree it is a system that could easily be used in a tyrannical fashion and criminals can easily circumvent it but should that happen I have no problem becoming a criminal myself. I know no allegiance to any government that stands in violation of the Constitution. Governments exist to serve the People; not the other way round.
 

HereWeGoAgain

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2010
Messages
71,034
Reaction score
20,452
Points
2,210
Location
Fuck Y'all I'm From Texas!
Aren't there any smart gun enthusiasts that can answer my question?
The select-fire option is the basic difference. You seem to be trying to make the case that the average AR-owner is capable of the gunsmithing necessary to create a full-auto weapon. The truth is that these rifles are used in fewer killings than hammers or knives, or fists and feet, for that matter.

Here's a question right back atcha -
Is THIS an "assault weapon"?
View attachment 489862
It's a Ruger mini-14. It fires the same rounds as the AR and just as rapidly - one round for every pull of the trigger. The gaslighting bullshit about AR or AK-styled weapons is just that. When the government comes for the guns, they won't be stupid enough to try to grab them all at once. They take the AR/AK platform first, wait a while then come for all semi-autos of a certain caliber range, THEN they'll get around to the serious business of collecting the true tool of slaughter - semi-auto handguns.
*SPOILER ALERT* IT DOESN'T END WELL FOR THE DOOR KICKERS.
Yes, I know about the select fire option. That is why I excluded that from the discussion. I'm trying to find out differences other than the obviously main difference.
I have specifically refrained from making any case for anything. I just asked the question, and perhaps lightly discussed some of the answers.
I've shot a mini-14. but don't know enough about it to comment.
I see you have concerns about the government taking our guns, but that has nothing to do with my question.


These are the words we should be focusing on......

"I've shot a mini-14. but don't know enough about it to comment."
And?

And you dont know shit about firearms.
I'm no expert, but it's not hard to know at least as much as many here who portray themselves as experts.

I'm no expert either but I know far more than you.
My knowledge comes from shooting for the last 48 years.
Cool. 48 years ago I was spending as much time as possible at my families deer camp, getting it ready for the season. We had owned it about ten years at that time if I remember right. Might have been 9 years instead.

And you haven't shot a gun since.....
 

daveman

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
65,815
Reaction score
16,840
Points
2,180
Location
On the way to the Dark Tower.
Aren't there any smart gun enthusiasts that can answer my question?
The select-fire option is the basic difference. You seem to be trying to make the case that the average AR-owner is capable of the gunsmithing necessary to create a full-auto weapon. The truth is that these rifles are used in fewer killings than hammers or knives, or fists and feet, for that matter.

Here's a question right back atcha -
Is THIS an "assault weapon"?
View attachment 489862
It's a Ruger mini-14. It fires the same rounds as the AR and just as rapidly - one round for every pull of the trigger. The gaslighting bullshit about AR or AK-styled weapons is just that. When the government comes for the guns, they won't be stupid enough to try to grab them all at once. They take the AR/AK platform first, wait a while then come for all semi-autos of a certain caliber range, THEN they'll get around to the serious business of collecting the true tool of slaughter - semi-auto handguns.
*SPOILER ALERT* IT DOESN'T END WELL FOR THE DOOR KICKERS.
Yes, I know about the select fire option. That is why I excluded that from the discussion. I'm trying to find out differences other than the obviously main difference.
I have specifically refrained from making any case for anything. I just asked the question, and perhaps lightly discussed some of the answers.
I've shot a mini-14. but don't know enough about it to comment.
I see you have concerns about the government taking our guns, but that has nothing to do with my question.


These are the words we should be focusing on......

"I've shot a mini-14. but don't know enough about it to comment."
And?

And you dont know shit about firearms.
I'm no expert, but it's not hard to know at least as much as many here who portray themselves as experts.

I'm no expert either but I know far more than you.
My knowledge comes from shooting for the last 48 years.
Cool. 48 years ago I was spending as much time as possible at my families deer camp, getting it ready for the season. We had owned it about ten years at that time if I remember right. Might have been 9 years instead.

And you haven't shot a gun since.....
You don't have to shoot guns to get a deer camp ready.
 

ding

Confront reality
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
84,332
Reaction score
8,633
Points
2,070
Location
Houston
Well, no, it cannot be "easily" converted-the receiver is different.
Most people could make an auto sear in their garage with a grinder and a vice. It wouldn't be legal, but it could be done pretty easily. However, the question was other than full auto, what are the material differences between the two rifles.
That's a machined part. You think you can manufacture a machined part in your garage with a grinder and a vice? Seriously?
 

ding

Confront reality
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
84,332
Reaction score
8,633
Points
2,070
Location
Houston
I'm not seeing your point.

What is the material difference between this military issue M24 sniper rifle...

View attachment 489683

...and this extremely popular Remington 700 deer rifle...?


View attachment 489684

You should start a thread if you are looking for that answer. This thread is about the M4 and the AR15.
Figure it out, Einstein

That is the only attempt at an answer in the entire thread.
1. Barrel - The M4 has a shorter barrel, and is shaped to receive a grenade launcher.
2 Ammo. - The Ar15 can be chambered for several different shells, but the M4 is only capable of 5.56.
3 Automation - Until 1986, both rifles were legally capable of full automatic fire, but the AR15 was modified in 1986. Conversion back to auto fire is neither hard or expensive, but is illegal. ------------this was noted in the OP.
4 manufacturer
5. legality. This has been discussed, but is not a material difference in the guns, or the way they work. other than the already mentioned full auto capability.
6 Category. This is how they are referred to on paper, and has nothing to do with material differences between the rifles, other than the auto capability.

You did point out that the barrel is shaped a little different, but the purpose of that was to attach grenade launcher. Hardly a material difference in the accuracy, speed, or capability of long term continuous use. You got anything else to add to your list? The rest of the differences in your link are really just distinctions without any real differences.


Yeah...other rifles are also convertible to full automatic fire....

See the North Hollywood shootout where the rifles were converted to fully automatic fire...yet, in the shootout...the two robbers, firing fully automatic at the police didn't manage to kill anyone.....both, however, were killed by police using semi-automatic weapons...

So again, it isn't the weapon, it is the target location...in the North Hollywood shootout, the people they shot at were in the open, not in a building, and were behind cover.....so no one was killed by the fully automatic rifle fire.....however, again, both perps, even with their fully automatic rifles, were killed by police with semi-automatic weapons....

It isn't the weapon, it is the target location that makes all the difference....

Case in point...the 1984 FBI shooting, the two criminals had a mini-14 rifle, a semi-automatic rifle, and a pump action shotgun.....they managed to kill 2 FBI agents and wounded 5 others......

Again, it isn't the weapon, it is the target location.....in this case, the shooters were good shots.......the FBI weren't so good...

I am curious as to your point...where you would like to go with this....
The point is to find the material differences between the two rifles. In this thread I have learned the M4 has a shorter barrel, and is shaped so a grenade launcher can attach to it. Other than the auto capability, that is the only difference anybody has been able to mention.
well and the whole auto fire thing that you keep ignoring
I's not hard or expensive to convert an AR15 to full auto capability. It's illegal as hell, and you should be ready to spend a lot of time in prison, but it's not that hard to do.
If you have a file, pretty much any double action gun can be made full auto. The trouble is you can't stop it after you pull the trigger. AR's are simple to convert if you have the selector.





No, they aren't. As someone who actually HAS, legally converted an AR-15 into a M-16 it is actually quite easy if you have a full machine shop. Quite the opposite if you don't. And you need much more than just the selector lever, you need a disconnector, you need to drill the hole for the safety sear in EXACTLY the right position, if you're off by more than a couple of thousandths you're SOL. You have to change the bolt carrier, you have to change the firing pin, and, if you want it to work well, you'll need to upgrade the buffer, and buffer spring.

So, no. If you don't have access to a machine shop, it ain't easy.
How many of those parts are easily and legally available for purchase? How much of that list can be found on the shelf of any large gun shop? Next, please list any parts that aren't easily purchased.






All of them are legal. Except for in the state of californication. As far as availability goes, they aren't very available. When you can find them, they are expensive. And, because they are hard working parts, you can't just make them in a cheap 3D printer either.
Interesting, but not very specific. I'll go at it from a different angle. which of those parts can't be easily purchased without some sort of special license, permit, or other special permission. The ones that Joe Blow, on the street couldn't easily purchase.






Actually, I was VERY specific. No special permission is required to buy ANY of those parts. They are just difficult to find because there is no demand, so why make something that has low demand?
Just to be clear, you are saying that there is no real difference between an ordinary Ar15 and a fully automatic AR15, other than a few easily changed parts, right?
No, he's not. Clean the wax out of your ears.
It's almost like bulldog is a moron.
 
OP
BULLDOG

BULLDOG

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2014
Messages
73,676
Reaction score
14,738
Points
2,180
Well, no, it cannot be "easily" converted-the receiver is different.
Most people could make an auto sear in their garage with a grinder and a vice. It wouldn't be legal, but it could be done pretty easily. However, the question was other than full auto, what are the material differences between the two rifles.
That's a machined part. You think you can manufacture a machined part in your garage with a grinder and a vice? Seriously?
Of course I could. It wouldn't be nearly as pretty, but it doesn't have to be pretty to work. It just has to make contact in the right places at the right time. Doesn't take pretty to do that
 

ding

Confront reality
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
84,332
Reaction score
8,633
Points
2,070
Location
Houston
Well, no, it cannot be "easily" converted-the receiver is different.
Most people could make an auto sear in their garage with a grinder and a vice. It wouldn't be legal, but it could be done pretty easily. However, the question was other than full auto, what are the material differences between the two rifles.
That's a machined part. You think you can manufacture a machined part in your garage with a grinder and a vice? Seriously?
Of course I could. It wouldn't be nearly as pretty, but it doesn't have to be pretty to work. It just has to make contact in the right places at the right time. Doesn't take pretty to do that
No. You couldn't. The fact that you think you could just proves you don't know jack shit about anything especially machining precision parts. That is seriously one of the stupidest claim you could make. I could write a book on the reasons you can't do it. But go ahead and prove me wrong. Make that part.
 
OP
BULLDOG

BULLDOG

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2014
Messages
73,676
Reaction score
14,738
Points
2,180
I'm not seeing your point.

What is the material difference between this military issue M24 sniper rifle...

View attachment 489683

...and this extremely popular Remington 700 deer rifle...?


View attachment 489684

You should start a thread if you are looking for that answer. This thread is about the M4 and the AR15.
Figure it out, Einstein

That is the only attempt at an answer in the entire thread.
1. Barrel - The M4 has a shorter barrel, and is shaped to receive a grenade launcher.
2 Ammo. - The Ar15 can be chambered for several different shells, but the M4 is only capable of 5.56.
3 Automation - Until 1986, both rifles were legally capable of full automatic fire, but the AR15 was modified in 1986. Conversion back to auto fire is neither hard or expensive, but is illegal. ------------this was noted in the OP.
4 manufacturer
5. legality. This has been discussed, but is not a material difference in the guns, or the way they work. other than the already mentioned full auto capability.
6 Category. This is how they are referred to on paper, and has nothing to do with material differences between the rifles, other than the auto capability.

You did point out that the barrel is shaped a little different, but the purpose of that was to attach grenade launcher. Hardly a material difference in the accuracy, speed, or capability of long term continuous use. You got anything else to add to your list? The rest of the differences in your link are really just distinctions without any real differences.


Yeah...other rifles are also convertible to full automatic fire....

See the North Hollywood shootout where the rifles were converted to fully automatic fire...yet, in the shootout...the two robbers, firing fully automatic at the police didn't manage to kill anyone.....both, however, were killed by police using semi-automatic weapons...

So again, it isn't the weapon, it is the target location...in the North Hollywood shootout, the people they shot at were in the open, not in a building, and were behind cover.....so no one was killed by the fully automatic rifle fire.....however, again, both perps, even with their fully automatic rifles, were killed by police with semi-automatic weapons....

It isn't the weapon, it is the target location that makes all the difference....

Case in point...the 1984 FBI shooting, the two criminals had a mini-14 rifle, a semi-automatic rifle, and a pump action shotgun.....they managed to kill 2 FBI agents and wounded 5 others......

Again, it isn't the weapon, it is the target location.....in this case, the shooters were good shots.......the FBI weren't so good...

I am curious as to your point...where you would like to go with this....
The point is to find the material differences between the two rifles. In this thread I have learned the M4 has a shorter barrel, and is shaped so a grenade launcher can attach to it. Other than the auto capability, that is the only difference anybody has been able to mention.
well and the whole auto fire thing that you keep ignoring
I's not hard or expensive to convert an AR15 to full auto capability. It's illegal as hell, and you should be ready to spend a lot of time in prison, but it's not that hard to do.
If you have a file, pretty much any double action gun can be made full auto. The trouble is you can't stop it after you pull the trigger. AR's are simple to convert if you have the selector.





No, they aren't. As someone who actually HAS, legally converted an AR-15 into a M-16 it is actually quite easy if you have a full machine shop. Quite the opposite if you don't. And you need much more than just the selector lever, you need a disconnector, you need to drill the hole for the safety sear in EXACTLY the right position, if you're off by more than a couple of thousandths you're SOL. You have to change the bolt carrier, you have to change the firing pin, and, if you want it to work well, you'll need to upgrade the buffer, and buffer spring.

So, no. If you don't have access to a machine shop, it ain't easy.
How many of those parts are easily and legally available for purchase? How much of that list can be found on the shelf of any large gun shop? Next, please list any parts that aren't easily purchased.






All of them are legal. Except for in the state of californication. As far as availability goes, they aren't very available. When you can find them, they are expensive. And, because they are hard working parts, you can't just make them in a cheap 3D printer either.
Interesting, but not very specific. I'll go at it from a different angle. which of those parts can't be easily purchased without some sort of special license, permit, or other special permission. The ones that Joe Blow, on the street couldn't easily purchase.






Actually, I was VERY specific. No special permission is required to buy ANY of those parts. They are just difficult to find because there is no demand, so why make something that has low demand?
Just to be clear, you are saying that there is no real difference between an ordinary Ar15 and a fully automatic AR15, other than a few easily changed parts, right?
No, he's not. Clean the wax out of your ears.
It's almost like bulldog is a moron.
I'm not sure you are the best person to make that judgement. You are certainly entitled to your opinion though, for what that is worth.
 

ding

Confront reality
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
84,332
Reaction score
8,633
Points
2,070
Location
Houston
Well, no, it cannot be "easily" converted-the receiver is different.
Most people could make an auto sear in their garage with a grinder and a vice. It wouldn't be legal, but it could be done pretty easily. However, the question was other than full auto, what are the material differences between the two rifles.
That's a machined part. You think you can manufacture a machined part in your garage with a grinder and a vice? Seriously?
Of course I could. It wouldn't be nearly as pretty, but it doesn't have to be pretty to work. It just has to make contact in the right places at the right time. Doesn't take pretty to do that

Here you go dumb ass.
 

ding

Confront reality
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
84,332
Reaction score
8,633
Points
2,070
Location
Houston
I'm not seeing your point.

What is the material difference between this military issue M24 sniper rifle...

View attachment 489683

...and this extremely popular Remington 700 deer rifle...?


View attachment 489684

You should start a thread if you are looking for that answer. This thread is about the M4 and the AR15.
Figure it out, Einstein

That is the only attempt at an answer in the entire thread.
1. Barrel - The M4 has a shorter barrel, and is shaped to receive a grenade launcher.
2 Ammo. - The Ar15 can be chambered for several different shells, but the M4 is only capable of 5.56.
3 Automation - Until 1986, both rifles were legally capable of full automatic fire, but the AR15 was modified in 1986. Conversion back to auto fire is neither hard or expensive, but is illegal. ------------this was noted in the OP.
4 manufacturer
5. legality. This has been discussed, but is not a material difference in the guns, or the way they work. other than the already mentioned full auto capability.
6 Category. This is how they are referred to on paper, and has nothing to do with material differences between the rifles, other than the auto capability.

You did point out that the barrel is shaped a little different, but the purpose of that was to attach grenade launcher. Hardly a material difference in the accuracy, speed, or capability of long term continuous use. You got anything else to add to your list? The rest of the differences in your link are really just distinctions without any real differences.


Yeah...other rifles are also convertible to full automatic fire....

See the North Hollywood shootout where the rifles were converted to fully automatic fire...yet, in the shootout...the two robbers, firing fully automatic at the police didn't manage to kill anyone.....both, however, were killed by police using semi-automatic weapons...

So again, it isn't the weapon, it is the target location...in the North Hollywood shootout, the people they shot at were in the open, not in a building, and were behind cover.....so no one was killed by the fully automatic rifle fire.....however, again, both perps, even with their fully automatic rifles, were killed by police with semi-automatic weapons....

It isn't the weapon, it is the target location that makes all the difference....

Case in point...the 1984 FBI shooting, the two criminals had a mini-14 rifle, a semi-automatic rifle, and a pump action shotgun.....they managed to kill 2 FBI agents and wounded 5 others......

Again, it isn't the weapon, it is the target location.....in this case, the shooters were good shots.......the FBI weren't so good...

I am curious as to your point...where you would like to go with this....
The point is to find the material differences between the two rifles. In this thread I have learned the M4 has a shorter barrel, and is shaped so a grenade launcher can attach to it. Other than the auto capability, that is the only difference anybody has been able to mention.
well and the whole auto fire thing that you keep ignoring
I's not hard or expensive to convert an AR15 to full auto capability. It's illegal as hell, and you should be ready to spend a lot of time in prison, but it's not that hard to do.
If you have a file, pretty much any double action gun can be made full auto. The trouble is you can't stop it after you pull the trigger. AR's are simple to convert if you have the selector.





No, they aren't. As someone who actually HAS, legally converted an AR-15 into a M-16 it is actually quite easy if you have a full machine shop. Quite the opposite if you don't. And you need much more than just the selector lever, you need a disconnector, you need to drill the hole for the safety sear in EXACTLY the right position, if you're off by more than a couple of thousandths you're SOL. You have to change the bolt carrier, you have to change the firing pin, and, if you want it to work well, you'll need to upgrade the buffer, and buffer spring.

So, no. If you don't have access to a machine shop, it ain't easy.
How many of those parts are easily and legally available for purchase? How much of that list can be found on the shelf of any large gun shop? Next, please list any parts that aren't easily purchased.






All of them are legal. Except for in the state of californication. As far as availability goes, they aren't very available. When you can find them, they are expensive. And, because they are hard working parts, you can't just make them in a cheap 3D printer either.
Interesting, but not very specific. I'll go at it from a different angle. which of those parts can't be easily purchased without some sort of special license, permit, or other special permission. The ones that Joe Blow, on the street couldn't easily purchase.






Actually, I was VERY specific. No special permission is required to buy ANY of those parts. They are just difficult to find because there is no demand, so why make something that has low demand?
Just to be clear, you are saying that there is no real difference between an ordinary Ar15 and a fully automatic AR15, other than a few easily changed parts, right?
No, he's not. Clean the wax out of your ears.
It's almost like bulldog is a moron.
I'm not sure you are the best person to make that judgement. You are certainly entitled to your opinion though, for what that is worth.
You mean besides the fact that I have shit built at machine shops?

What's your experience in machining. Besides I just posted a smyth buster video on why you are full of shit. You'd believe anything that confirmed your bias. Next time though you might want to do a little research before you get your pants pulled down in front of everyone.
 
OP
BULLDOG

BULLDOG

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2014
Messages
73,676
Reaction score
14,738
Points
2,180
Well, no, it cannot be "easily" converted-the receiver is different.
Most people could make an auto sear in their garage with a grinder and a vice. It wouldn't be legal, but it could be done pretty easily. However, the question was other than full auto, what are the material differences between the two rifles.
That's a machined part. You think you can manufacture a machined part in your garage with a grinder and a vice? Seriously?
Of course I could. It wouldn't be nearly as pretty, but it doesn't have to be pretty to work. It just has to make contact in the right places at the right time. Doesn't take pretty to do that
No. You couldn't. The fact that you think you could just proves you don't know jack shit about anything especially machining precision parts. That is seriously one of the stupidest claim you could make. I could write a book on the reasons you can't do it. But go ahead and prove me wrong. Make that part.
No need to prove anything to you. Perhaps reading a ruler and grinding along a straight line is an unsurmountable chore for you. Perhaps you have never done any fabrication.
 

ding

Confront reality
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
84,332
Reaction score
8,633
Points
2,070
Location
Houston
Well, no, it cannot be "easily" converted-the receiver is different.
Most people could make an auto sear in their garage with a grinder and a vice. It wouldn't be legal, but it could be done pretty easily. However, the question was other than full auto, what are the material differences between the two rifles.
That's a machined part. You think you can manufacture a machined part in your garage with a grinder and a vice? Seriously?
Of course I could. It wouldn't be nearly as pretty, but it doesn't have to be pretty to work. It just has to make contact in the right places at the right time. Doesn't take pretty to do that
No. You couldn't. The fact that you think you could just proves you don't know jack shit about anything especially machining precision parts. That is seriously one of the stupidest claim you could make. I could write a book on the reasons you can't do it. But go ahead and prove me wrong. Make that part.
No need to prove anything to you. Perhaps reading a ruler and grinding along a straight line is an unsurmountable chore for you. Perhaps you have never done any fabrication.
You don't machine precision parts with a grinder and a vice, dumb ass. Not to mention the other components you forgot to mention that are needed for full auto.

The government does not allow receiver designs which can be converted to full auto. If you don't believe me call the ATF.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$505.00
Goal
$350.00

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top