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

[marvin martian]

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.

The M16 Trigger, Disconnector, Hammer, Selector, and Bolt Carrier are all readily available, and non regulated. It's still highly illegal to assemble them to produce a fully auto rifle, and the ATF will have a running shit fit. It can be done though.

Readily available? Prove it.

Cause I think we have different definitions of readily available.

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.

Don't forget about the BGC you can't use a BCG designed for an AR in an M4 because the AR BGC is not cut for automatic function

but you can use an M16 BCG on an AR15. Not too expensive either.

$300 IF you can find one. Which is a big if. But you still need that $15,000 auto sear that you ain't machining in your garage with a ruler, vise and grinder from drawings/specifications that you don't have.

Bottom line this is not the simple or easy conversion you seem to think it is. But if you diagree you should take it up with ATF as they are the ones tasked with not allowing simple or easy conversions from semi-automatic to full-automatic.

An internet search shows them for as little as $79.00. The hammer, and other parts needed run about $50.00 or less. That shouldn't be a problem for gun nuts who have already spent much more than that preparing for the civil war they so desperately want.
View attachment 490635

Standard Mass 5.56 x 45(223) M16 BCG Complete w/ Adjustable Gas Key – Welcome to Rubber City Armory

rubbercityarmory.com

What is your point? You can find cheap ones, and some that are not so cheap. Still, $215 wouldn't be so bad if you were a nutbag gearing up for an armed civil war.

and you would be a nutbag to press the war

I'd say him posting that he could build one using a ruler, a vise and a grinder qualifies him for nutbag of the year.

You can say what you want, and I suppose it is partially my fault for letting the thread get misdirected, but the point is that there is very little difference between the use of the two guns.

You're VERY ignorant about both firearms and the law. It would be better if you didn't comment on either until you get some education.

 

[Muhammed]

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?

Another Democrat spewing Hitler's propaganda.

The M4 is a carbine rifle, not an "assault rifle". "Assault rifle" is just a ridiculous term that the Nazi's made up out of thin air when they renamed the MP 43 to make it sound scary for propaganda purposes.

Only Nazis call any rifle an "assault rifle".

 

[BULLDOG]

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.

The M16 Trigger, Disconnector, Hammer, Selector, and Bolt Carrier are all readily available, and non regulated. It's still highly illegal to assemble them to produce a fully auto rifle, and the ATF will have a running shit fit. It can be done though.

Readily available? Prove it.

Cause I think we have different definitions of readily available.

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.

Don't forget about the BGC you can't use a BCG designed for an AR in an M4 because the AR BGC is not cut for automatic function

but you can use an M16 BCG on an AR15. Not too expensive either.

$300 IF you can find one. Which is a big if. But you still need that $15,000 auto sear that you ain't machining in your garage with a ruler, vise and grinder from drawings/specifications that you don't have.

Bottom line this is not the simple or easy conversion you seem to think it is. But if you diagree you should take it up with ATF as they are the ones tasked with not allowing simple or easy conversions from semi-automatic to full-automatic.

An internet search shows them for as little as $79.00. The hammer, and other parts needed run about $50.00 or less. That shouldn't be a problem for gun nuts who have already spent much more than that preparing for the civil war they so desperately want.
View attachment 490635

Standard Mass 5.56 x 45(223) M16 BCG Complete w/ Adjustable Gas Key – Welcome to Rubber City Armory

rubbercityarmory.com

What is your point? You can find cheap ones, and some that are not so cheap. Still, $215 wouldn't be so bad if you were a nutbag gearing up for an armed civil war.

and you would be a nutbag to press the war

I'd say him posting that he could build one using a ruler, a vise and a grinder qualifies him for nutbag of the year.

You can say what you want, and I suppose it is partially my fault for letting the thread get misdirected, but the point is that there is very little difference between the use of the two guns.

You're VERY ignorant about both firearms and the law. It would be better if you didn't comment on either until you get some education.

No. I am very different from the rhetoric you see as gospel, though.

 

[BULLDOG]

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?

Another Democrat spewing Hitler's propaganda.

The M4 is a carbine rifle, not an "assault rifle". "Assault rifle" is just a ridiculous term that the Nazi's made up out of thin air when they renamed the MP 43 to make it sound scary for propaganda purposes.

Only Nazis call any rifle an "assault rifle".

Our military and the NRA disagree with you

NRA-ILA | Glossary

For definitions of key words related to firearms and the 2nd amendment check out this page.

www.nraila.org

 

[daveman]

Actually. There are. The alloys used in construction of military grade weapons are restricted. So the weapon is in fact. Stronger.

Another example of that is concrete. Yes. Concrete. The mix they use to construct Prisons is rated at 80k pounds per square inch. That is far more than you can manage with civilian concrete. The mix is restricted to official government use.

Take a civilian weapon. The PS-90. That original weapon was the P-90. Designed to use special ammunition to defeat soft body armor. The weapon was wildly successful at that. Today you can buy a PS-90 or a pistol to fire the 5.7 MM ammo. But the actual armor piercing ammo is restricted. The penetrating ammo is available for LEO’s or Military only.

The civilian ammo is good. But it is not nearly as good as the restricted.

Now you say it is easy to replace the sea. Well. Yes and no. First. Controlling a fully automatic rifle is a lot harder than it appears in Hollywood. Truth be told after the third round you aren’t hitting where you were aiming. At full cyclic rate you can dump a thirty round magazine in about three seconds.

This causes problems. Ammo gets heavy. And dumping a mag heats up the barrel. Here is where those special alloys come in. Your six hundred dollar cheap knockoff is going to melt down a lot sooner than a military rifle.

Even the military rifles have a problem with heat. You can cook off the rounds from the heat.

Modifying or filing the sear isn’t the solution you think it is. The AR-15 platform has an unusual bolt carrier for a reason. The back closed section is designed to trip the hammer release. What happens without that part properly aligned a good probability one of two equally undesirable results. First the weapon could fire early. The hammer hits the firing pin before the bolt is locked in position. Your fully automatic rifle jams. Potentially blowing up the upper receiver.

The other possibility is FTF. Or fail to fire. The firing pin is brushed forward but it does not have sufficient force to ignite the primer.

Your filed or modified sear that seems so simple probably fires full auto. But it is also very likely to have malfunctions.

But let’s get back to that fully auto rifle that has you worried. That spray and pray is used more for suppressive fire. The idea is to get the other guy to duck and keep his head down so he can’t shoot you. This is used when you are trying to fix an enemy in a location for either a flanking move or some sort of support fire. Say artillery or air strike.

The Las Vegas Shooter was thankfully an idiot. He fired a thousand rounds. He managed to kill 60 and wound 411. That is spray and pray into a crowd. A crowd where you almost couldn’t miss. And he managed a kill rate of one for every sixteen rounds fired. His hit rate in a densely packed crowd was not even 50%.

He like you thought the AR’s just looked scary. If he was educated he could have gotten those kills off of a true long range rifle much more efficiently. And probably made his escape to Mexico before they identified his location.

I got as far as your remarks about concrete. Obviously, you never heard about rebar.

You know as much about construction as you do about firearms.

Please tell me more about this heavily regulated concrete that is only allowed to be used in prisons.

I don't know anything about that, but I'm not pretending the inclusion of rebar into concrete makes it infinitely strong.

 

[daveman]

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?

Another Democrat spewing Hitler's propaganda.

The M4 is a carbine rifle, not an "assault rifle". "Assault rifle" is just a ridiculous term that the Nazi's made up out of thin air when they renamed the MP 43 to make it sound scary for propaganda purposes.

Only Nazis call any rifle an "assault rifle".

Our military and the NRA disagree with you

NRA-ILA | Glossary

For definitions of key words related to firearms and the 2nd amendment check out this page.

www.nraila.org

You didn't read far enough.

• Assault Rifle
  By U.S. Army definition, a selective-fire rifle chambered for a cartridge of intermediate power. If applied to any semi-automatic firearm regardless of its cosmetic similarity to a true assault rifle, the term is incorrect.

 

[BULLDOG]

Actually. There are. The alloys used in construction of military grade weapons are restricted. So the weapon is in fact. Stronger.

Another example of that is concrete. Yes. Concrete. The mix they use to construct Prisons is rated at 80k pounds per square inch. That is far more than you can manage with civilian concrete. The mix is restricted to official government use.

Take a civilian weapon. The PS-90. That original weapon was the P-90. Designed to use special ammunition to defeat soft body armor. The weapon was wildly successful at that. Today you can buy a PS-90 or a pistol to fire the 5.7 MM ammo. But the actual armor piercing ammo is restricted. The penetrating ammo is available for LEO’s or Military only.

The civilian ammo is good. But it is not nearly as good as the restricted.

Now you say it is easy to replace the sea. Well. Yes and no. First. Controlling a fully automatic rifle is a lot harder than it appears in Hollywood. Truth be told after the third round you aren’t hitting where you were aiming. At full cyclic rate you can dump a thirty round magazine in about three seconds.

This causes problems. Ammo gets heavy. And dumping a mag heats up the barrel. Here is where those special alloys come in. Your six hundred dollar cheap knockoff is going to melt down a lot sooner than a military rifle.

Even the military rifles have a problem with heat. You can cook off the rounds from the heat.

Modifying or filing the sear isn’t the solution you think it is. The AR-15 platform has an unusual bolt carrier for a reason. The back closed section is designed to trip the hammer release. What happens without that part properly aligned a good probability one of two equally undesirable results. First the weapon could fire early. The hammer hits the firing pin before the bolt is locked in position. Your fully automatic rifle jams. Potentially blowing up the upper receiver.

The other possibility is FTF. Or fail to fire. The firing pin is brushed forward but it does not have sufficient force to ignite the primer.

Your filed or modified sear that seems so simple probably fires full auto. But it is also very likely to have malfunctions.

But let’s get back to that fully auto rifle that has you worried. That spray and pray is used more for suppressive fire. The idea is to get the other guy to duck and keep his head down so he can’t shoot you. This is used when you are trying to fix an enemy in a location for either a flanking move or some sort of support fire. Say artillery or air strike.

The Las Vegas Shooter was thankfully an idiot. He fired a thousand rounds. He managed to kill 60 and wound 411. That is spray and pray into a crowd. A crowd where you almost couldn’t miss. And he managed a kill rate of one for every sixteen rounds fired. His hit rate in a densely packed crowd was not even 50%.

He like you thought the AR’s just looked scary. If he was educated he could have gotten those kills off of a true long range rifle much more efficiently. And probably made his escape to Mexico before they identified his location.

I got as far as your remarks about concrete. Obviously, you never heard about rebar.

You know as much about construction as you do about firearms.

Please tell me more about this heavily regulated concrete that is only allowed to be used in prisons.

I don't know anything about that, but I'm not pretending the inclusion of rebar into concrete makes it infinitely strong.

I'm not either. Tell me more about that super duper concrete that is only allowed in prisons.

 

[BULLDOG]

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?

Another Democrat spewing Hitler's propaganda.

The M4 is a carbine rifle, not an "assault rifle". "Assault rifle" is just a ridiculous term that the Nazi's made up out of thin air when they renamed the MP 43 to make it sound scary for propaganda purposes.

Only Nazis call any rifle an "assault rifle".

Our military and the NRA disagree with you

NRA-ILA | Glossary

For definitions of key words related to firearms and the 2nd amendment check out this page.

www.nraila.org

You didn't read far enough.

• Assault Rifle
  By U.S. Army definition, a selective-fire rifle chambered for a cartridge of intermediate power. If applied to any semi-automatic firearm regardless of its cosmetic similarity to a true assault rifle, the term is incorrect.

I read the entire thing. You agree the M4 is an assault rifle though, like I said in the OP --- right?

 

[daveman]

Actually. There are. The alloys used in construction of military grade weapons are restricted. So the weapon is in fact. Stronger.

Another example of that is concrete. Yes. Concrete. The mix they use to construct Prisons is rated at 80k pounds per square inch. That is far more than you can manage with civilian concrete. The mix is restricted to official government use.

Take a civilian weapon. The PS-90. That original weapon was the P-90. Designed to use special ammunition to defeat soft body armor. The weapon was wildly successful at that. Today you can buy a PS-90 or a pistol to fire the 5.7 MM ammo. But the actual armor piercing ammo is restricted. The penetrating ammo is available for LEO’s or Military only.

The civilian ammo is good. But it is not nearly as good as the restricted.

Now you say it is easy to replace the sea. Well. Yes and no. First. Controlling a fully automatic rifle is a lot harder than it appears in Hollywood. Truth be told after the third round you aren’t hitting where you were aiming. At full cyclic rate you can dump a thirty round magazine in about three seconds.

This causes problems. Ammo gets heavy. And dumping a mag heats up the barrel. Here is where those special alloys come in. Your six hundred dollar cheap knockoff is going to melt down a lot sooner than a military rifle.

Even the military rifles have a problem with heat. You can cook off the rounds from the heat.

Modifying or filing the sear isn’t the solution you think it is. The AR-15 platform has an unusual bolt carrier for a reason. The back closed section is designed to trip the hammer release. What happens without that part properly aligned a good probability one of two equally undesirable results. First the weapon could fire early. The hammer hits the firing pin before the bolt is locked in position. Your fully automatic rifle jams. Potentially blowing up the upper receiver.

The other possibility is FTF. Or fail to fire. The firing pin is brushed forward but it does not have sufficient force to ignite the primer.

Your filed or modified sear that seems so simple probably fires full auto. But it is also very likely to have malfunctions.

But let’s get back to that fully auto rifle that has you worried. That spray and pray is used more for suppressive fire. The idea is to get the other guy to duck and keep his head down so he can’t shoot you. This is used when you are trying to fix an enemy in a location for either a flanking move or some sort of support fire. Say artillery or air strike.

The Las Vegas Shooter was thankfully an idiot. He fired a thousand rounds. He managed to kill 60 and wound 411. That is spray and pray into a crowd. A crowd where you almost couldn’t miss. And he managed a kill rate of one for every sixteen rounds fired. His hit rate in a densely packed crowd was not even 50%.

He like you thought the AR’s just looked scary. If he was educated he could have gotten those kills off of a true long range rifle much more efficiently. And probably made his escape to Mexico before they identified his location.

I got as far as your remarks about concrete. Obviously, you never heard about rebar.

You know as much about construction as you do about firearms.

Please tell me more about this heavily regulated concrete that is only allowed to be used in prisons.

I don't know anything about that, but I'm not pretending the inclusion of rebar into concrete makes it infinitely strong.

I'm not either. Tell me more about that super duper concrete that is only allowed in prisons.

I have no obligation to defend a claim I didn't make.

 

[daveman]

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?

Another Democrat spewing Hitler's propaganda.

The M4 is a carbine rifle, not an "assault rifle". "Assault rifle" is just a ridiculous term that the Nazi's made up out of thin air when they renamed the MP 43 to make it sound scary for propaganda purposes.

Only Nazis call any rifle an "assault rifle".

Our military and the NRA disagree with you

NRA-ILA | Glossary

For definitions of key words related to firearms and the 2nd amendment check out this page.

www.nraila.org

You didn't read far enough.

• Assault Rifle
  By U.S. Army definition, a selective-fire rifle chambered for a cartridge of intermediate power. If applied to any semi-automatic firearm regardless of its cosmetic similarity to a true assault rifle, the term is incorrect.

I read the entire thing. You agree the M4 is an assault rifle though, like I said in the OP --- right?

Yes. But the AR-15 is not. By the definition you cited.

Looks like this thread is over.

 

[BULLDOG]

Actually. There are. The alloys used in construction of military grade weapons are restricted. So the weapon is in fact. Stronger.

Another example of that is concrete. Yes. Concrete. The mix they use to construct Prisons is rated at 80k pounds per square inch. That is far more than you can manage with civilian concrete. The mix is restricted to official government use.

Take a civilian weapon. The PS-90. That original weapon was the P-90. Designed to use special ammunition to defeat soft body armor. The weapon was wildly successful at that. Today you can buy a PS-90 or a pistol to fire the 5.7 MM ammo. But the actual armor piercing ammo is restricted. The penetrating ammo is available for LEO’s or Military only.

The civilian ammo is good. But it is not nearly as good as the restricted.

Now you say it is easy to replace the sea. Well. Yes and no. First. Controlling a fully automatic rifle is a lot harder than it appears in Hollywood. Truth be told after the third round you aren’t hitting where you were aiming. At full cyclic rate you can dump a thirty round magazine in about three seconds.

This causes problems. Ammo gets heavy. And dumping a mag heats up the barrel. Here is where those special alloys come in. Your six hundred dollar cheap knockoff is going to melt down a lot sooner than a military rifle.

Even the military rifles have a problem with heat. You can cook off the rounds from the heat.

Modifying or filing the sear isn’t the solution you think it is. The AR-15 platform has an unusual bolt carrier for a reason. The back closed section is designed to trip the hammer release. What happens without that part properly aligned a good probability one of two equally undesirable results. First the weapon could fire early. The hammer hits the firing pin before the bolt is locked in position. Your fully automatic rifle jams. Potentially blowing up the upper receiver.

The other possibility is FTF. Or fail to fire. The firing pin is brushed forward but it does not have sufficient force to ignite the primer.

Your filed or modified sear that seems so simple probably fires full auto. But it is also very likely to have malfunctions.

But let’s get back to that fully auto rifle that has you worried. That spray and pray is used more for suppressive fire. The idea is to get the other guy to duck and keep his head down so he can’t shoot you. This is used when you are trying to fix an enemy in a location for either a flanking move or some sort of support fire. Say artillery or air strike.

The Las Vegas Shooter was thankfully an idiot. He fired a thousand rounds. He managed to kill 60 and wound 411. That is spray and pray into a crowd. A crowd where you almost couldn’t miss. And he managed a kill rate of one for every sixteen rounds fired. His hit rate in a densely packed crowd was not even 50%.

He like you thought the AR’s just looked scary. If he was educated he could have gotten those kills off of a true long range rifle much more efficiently. And probably made his escape to Mexico before they identified his location.

I got as far as your remarks about concrete. Obviously, you never heard about rebar.

You know as much about construction as you do about firearms.

Please tell me more about this heavily regulated concrete that is only allowed to be used in prisons.

I don't know anything about that, but I'm not pretending the inclusion of rebar into concrete makes it infinitely strong.

I'm not either. Tell me more about that super duper concrete that is only allowed in prisons.

I have no obligation to defend a claim I didn't make.

Fair enough. It was a batshit crazy claim anyway. Typical coming from a batshit crazy right winger.

 

[BULLDOG]

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?

Another Democrat spewing Hitler's propaganda.

The M4 is a carbine rifle, not an "assault rifle". "Assault rifle" is just a ridiculous term that the Nazi's made up out of thin air when they renamed the MP 43 to make it sound scary for propaganda purposes.

Only Nazis call any rifle an "assault rifle".

Our military and the NRA disagree with you

NRA-ILA | Glossary

For definitions of key words related to firearms and the 2nd amendment check out this page.

www.nraila.org

You didn't read far enough.

• Assault Rifle
  By U.S. Army definition, a selective-fire rifle chambered for a cartridge of intermediate power. If applied to any semi-automatic firearm regardless of its cosmetic similarity to a true assault rifle, the term is incorrect.

I read the entire thing. You agree the M4 is an assault rifle though, like I said in the OP --- right?

Yes. But the AR-15 is not. By the definition you cited.

Looks like this thread is over.

I never said the AR was. I did say that other than the multi-fire capability, there were no substantial differences in the two. That is, unless you can name those substantial differences.

 

[daveman]

Actually. There are. The alloys used in construction of military grade weapons are restricted. So the weapon is in fact. Stronger.

Another example of that is concrete. Yes. Concrete. The mix they use to construct Prisons is rated at 80k pounds per square inch. That is far more than you can manage with civilian concrete. The mix is restricted to official government use.

Take a civilian weapon. The PS-90. That original weapon was the P-90. Designed to use special ammunition to defeat soft body armor. The weapon was wildly successful at that. Today you can buy a PS-90 or a pistol to fire the 5.7 MM ammo. But the actual armor piercing ammo is restricted. The penetrating ammo is available for LEO’s or Military only.

The civilian ammo is good. But it is not nearly as good as the restricted.

Now you say it is easy to replace the sea. Well. Yes and no. First. Controlling a fully automatic rifle is a lot harder than it appears in Hollywood. Truth be told after the third round you aren’t hitting where you were aiming. At full cyclic rate you can dump a thirty round magazine in about three seconds.

This causes problems. Ammo gets heavy. And dumping a mag heats up the barrel. Here is where those special alloys come in. Your six hundred dollar cheap knockoff is going to melt down a lot sooner than a military rifle.

Even the military rifles have a problem with heat. You can cook off the rounds from the heat.

Modifying or filing the sear isn’t the solution you think it is. The AR-15 platform has an unusual bolt carrier for a reason. The back closed section is designed to trip the hammer release. What happens without that part properly aligned a good probability one of two equally undesirable results. First the weapon could fire early. The hammer hits the firing pin before the bolt is locked in position. Your fully automatic rifle jams. Potentially blowing up the upper receiver.

The other possibility is FTF. Or fail to fire. The firing pin is brushed forward but it does not have sufficient force to ignite the primer.

Your filed or modified sear that seems so simple probably fires full auto. But it is also very likely to have malfunctions.

But let’s get back to that fully auto rifle that has you worried. That spray and pray is used more for suppressive fire. The idea is to get the other guy to duck and keep his head down so he can’t shoot you. This is used when you are trying to fix an enemy in a location for either a flanking move or some sort of support fire. Say artillery or air strike.

The Las Vegas Shooter was thankfully an idiot. He fired a thousand rounds. He managed to kill 60 and wound 411. That is spray and pray into a crowd. A crowd where you almost couldn’t miss. And he managed a kill rate of one for every sixteen rounds fired. His hit rate in a densely packed crowd was not even 50%.

He like you thought the AR’s just looked scary. If he was educated he could have gotten those kills off of a true long range rifle much more efficiently. And probably made his escape to Mexico before they identified his location.

I got as far as your remarks about concrete. Obviously, you never heard about rebar.

You know as much about construction as you do about firearms.

Please tell me more about this heavily regulated concrete that is only allowed to be used in prisons.

I don't know anything about that, but I'm not pretending the inclusion of rebar into concrete makes it infinitely strong.

I'm not either. Tell me more about that super duper concrete that is only allowed in prisons.

I have no obligation to defend a claim I didn't make.

Fair enough. It was a batshit crazy claim anyway. Typical coming from a batshit crazy right winger.

Ever find a source for that Limbaugh quote?

Or is that just some typical batshit crazy left-winger shit?

 

[daveman]

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?

Another Democrat spewing Hitler's propaganda.

The M4 is a carbine rifle, not an "assault rifle". "Assault rifle" is just a ridiculous term that the Nazi's made up out of thin air when they renamed the MP 43 to make it sound scary for propaganda purposes.

Only Nazis call any rifle an "assault rifle".

Our military and the NRA disagree with you

NRA-ILA | Glossary

For definitions of key words related to firearms and the 2nd amendment check out this page.

www.nraila.org

You didn't read far enough.

• Assault Rifle
  By U.S. Army definition, a selective-fire rifle chambered for a cartridge of intermediate power. If applied to any semi-automatic firearm regardless of its cosmetic similarity to a true assault rifle, the term is incorrect.

I read the entire thing. You agree the M4 is an assault rifle though, like I said in the OP --- right?

Yes. But the AR-15 is not. By the definition you cited.

Looks like this thread is over.

I never said the AR was. I did say that other than the multi-fire capability, there were no substantial differences in the two. That is, unless you can name those substantial differences.

Again -- I have no obligation to defend a claim I didn't make.

I don't know what's so hard about that to understand.

 

[BULLDOG]

Actually. There are. The alloys used in construction of military grade weapons are restricted. So the weapon is in fact. Stronger.

Another example of that is concrete. Yes. Concrete. The mix they use to construct Prisons is rated at 80k pounds per square inch. That is far more than you can manage with civilian concrete. The mix is restricted to official government use.

Take a civilian weapon. The PS-90. That original weapon was the P-90. Designed to use special ammunition to defeat soft body armor. The weapon was wildly successful at that. Today you can buy a PS-90 or a pistol to fire the 5.7 MM ammo. But the actual armor piercing ammo is restricted. The penetrating ammo is available for LEO’s or Military only.

The civilian ammo is good. But it is not nearly as good as the restricted.

Now you say it is easy to replace the sea. Well. Yes and no. First. Controlling a fully automatic rifle is a lot harder than it appears in Hollywood. Truth be told after the third round you aren’t hitting where you were aiming. At full cyclic rate you can dump a thirty round magazine in about three seconds.

This causes problems. Ammo gets heavy. And dumping a mag heats up the barrel. Here is where those special alloys come in. Your six hundred dollar cheap knockoff is going to melt down a lot sooner than a military rifle.

Even the military rifles have a problem with heat. You can cook off the rounds from the heat.

Modifying or filing the sear isn’t the solution you think it is. The AR-15 platform has an unusual bolt carrier for a reason. The back closed section is designed to trip the hammer release. What happens without that part properly aligned a good probability one of two equally undesirable results. First the weapon could fire early. The hammer hits the firing pin before the bolt is locked in position. Your fully automatic rifle jams. Potentially blowing up the upper receiver.

The other possibility is FTF. Or fail to fire. The firing pin is brushed forward but it does not have sufficient force to ignite the primer.

Your filed or modified sear that seems so simple probably fires full auto. But it is also very likely to have malfunctions.

But let’s get back to that fully auto rifle that has you worried. That spray and pray is used more for suppressive fire. The idea is to get the other guy to duck and keep his head down so he can’t shoot you. This is used when you are trying to fix an enemy in a location for either a flanking move or some sort of support fire. Say artillery or air strike.

The Las Vegas Shooter was thankfully an idiot. He fired a thousand rounds. He managed to kill 60 and wound 411. That is spray and pray into a crowd. A crowd where you almost couldn’t miss. And he managed a kill rate of one for every sixteen rounds fired. His hit rate in a densely packed crowd was not even 50%.

He like you thought the AR’s just looked scary. If he was educated he could have gotten those kills off of a true long range rifle much more efficiently. And probably made his escape to Mexico before they identified his location.

I got as far as your remarks about concrete. Obviously, you never heard about rebar.

You know as much about construction as you do about firearms.

Please tell me more about this heavily regulated concrete that is only allowed to be used in prisons.

I don't know anything about that, but I'm not pretending the inclusion of rebar into concrete makes it infinitely strong.

I'm not either. Tell me more about that super duper concrete that is only allowed in prisons.

I have no obligation to defend a claim I didn't make.

Fair enough. It was a batshit crazy claim anyway. Typical coming from a batshit crazy right winger.

Ever find a source for that Limbaugh quote?

Or is that just some typical batshit crazy left-winger shit?

If you're interested in another thread, I suggest you go to that thread.

 

[BULLDOG]

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?

Another Democrat spewing Hitler's propaganda.

The M4 is a carbine rifle, not an "assault rifle". "Assault rifle" is just a ridiculous term that the Nazi's made up out of thin air when they renamed the MP 43 to make it sound scary for propaganda purposes.

Only Nazis call any rifle an "assault rifle".

Our military and the NRA disagree with you

NRA-ILA | Glossary

For definitions of key words related to firearms and the 2nd amendment check out this page.

www.nraila.org

You didn't read far enough.

• Assault Rifle
  By U.S. Army definition, a selective-fire rifle chambered for a cartridge of intermediate power. If applied to any semi-automatic firearm regardless of its cosmetic similarity to a true assault rifle, the term is incorrect.

I read the entire thing. You agree the M4 is an assault rifle though, like I said in the OP --- right?

Yes. But the AR-15 is not. By the definition you cited.

Looks like this thread is over.

I never said the AR was. I did say that other than the multi-fire capability, there were no substantial differences in the two. That is, unless you can name those substantial differences.

Again -- I have no obligation to defend a claim I didn't make.

I don't know what's so hard about that to understand.

OK. Since you can't point out any fault in this OP, I assume we are in agreement.

 

[daveman]

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?

Another Democrat spewing Hitler's propaganda.

The M4 is a carbine rifle, not an "assault rifle". "Assault rifle" is just a ridiculous term that the Nazi's made up out of thin air when they renamed the MP 43 to make it sound scary for propaganda purposes.

Only Nazis call any rifle an "assault rifle".

Our military and the NRA disagree with you

NRA-ILA | Glossary

For definitions of key words related to firearms and the 2nd amendment check out this page.

www.nraila.org

You didn't read far enough.

• Assault Rifle
  By U.S. Army definition, a selective-fire rifle chambered for a cartridge of intermediate power. If applied to any semi-automatic firearm regardless of its cosmetic similarity to a true assault rifle, the term is incorrect.

I read the entire thing. You agree the M4 is an assault rifle though, like I said in the OP --- right?

Yes. But the AR-15 is not. By the definition you cited.

Looks like this thread is over.

I never said the AR was. I did say that other than the multi-fire capability, there were no substantial differences in the two. That is, unless you can name those substantial differences.

Again -- I have no obligation to defend a claim I didn't make.

I don't know what's so hard about that to understand.

OK. Since you can't point out any fault in this OP, I assume we are in agreement.

Are you still trying to hide that you want the AR banned because "there's no substantial differences between the two"?

Because the semi-auto and full-auto thing is a substantial difference.

 

[daveman]

Actually. There are. The alloys used in construction of military grade weapons are restricted. So the weapon is in fact. Stronger.

Another example of that is concrete. Yes. Concrete. The mix they use to construct Prisons is rated at 80k pounds per square inch. That is far more than you can manage with civilian concrete. The mix is restricted to official government use.

Take a civilian weapon. The PS-90. That original weapon was the P-90. Designed to use special ammunition to defeat soft body armor. The weapon was wildly successful at that. Today you can buy a PS-90 or a pistol to fire the 5.7 MM ammo. But the actual armor piercing ammo is restricted. The penetrating ammo is available for LEO’s or Military only.

The civilian ammo is good. But it is not nearly as good as the restricted.

Now you say it is easy to replace the sea. Well. Yes and no. First. Controlling a fully automatic rifle is a lot harder than it appears in Hollywood. Truth be told after the third round you aren’t hitting where you were aiming. At full cyclic rate you can dump a thirty round magazine in about three seconds.

This causes problems. Ammo gets heavy. And dumping a mag heats up the barrel. Here is where those special alloys come in. Your six hundred dollar cheap knockoff is going to melt down a lot sooner than a military rifle.

Even the military rifles have a problem with heat. You can cook off the rounds from the heat.

Modifying or filing the sear isn’t the solution you think it is. The AR-15 platform has an unusual bolt carrier for a reason. The back closed section is designed to trip the hammer release. What happens without that part properly aligned a good probability one of two equally undesirable results. First the weapon could fire early. The hammer hits the firing pin before the bolt is locked in position. Your fully automatic rifle jams. Potentially blowing up the upper receiver.

The other possibility is FTF. Or fail to fire. The firing pin is brushed forward but it does not have sufficient force to ignite the primer.

Your filed or modified sear that seems so simple probably fires full auto. But it is also very likely to have malfunctions.

But let’s get back to that fully auto rifle that has you worried. That spray and pray is used more for suppressive fire. The idea is to get the other guy to duck and keep his head down so he can’t shoot you. This is used when you are trying to fix an enemy in a location for either a flanking move or some sort of support fire. Say artillery or air strike.

The Las Vegas Shooter was thankfully an idiot. He fired a thousand rounds. He managed to kill 60 and wound 411. That is spray and pray into a crowd. A crowd where you almost couldn’t miss. And he managed a kill rate of one for every sixteen rounds fired. His hit rate in a densely packed crowd was not even 50%.

He like you thought the AR’s just looked scary. If he was educated he could have gotten those kills off of a true long range rifle much more efficiently. And probably made his escape to Mexico before they identified his location.

I got as far as your remarks about concrete. Obviously, you never heard about rebar.

You know as much about construction as you do about firearms.

Please tell me more about this heavily regulated concrete that is only allowed to be used in prisons.

I don't know anything about that, but I'm not pretending the inclusion of rebar into concrete makes it infinitely strong.

I'm not either. Tell me more about that super duper concrete that is only allowed in prisons.

I have no obligation to defend a claim I didn't make.

Fair enough. It was a batshit crazy claim anyway. Typical coming from a batshit crazy right winger.

Ever find a source for that Limbaugh quote?

Or is that just some typical batshit crazy left-winger shit?

If you're interested in another thread, I suggest you go to that thread.

Why? You haven't responded to it.

 

[BULLDOG]

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?

Another Democrat spewing Hitler's propaganda.

The M4 is a carbine rifle, not an "assault rifle". "Assault rifle" is just a ridiculous term that the Nazi's made up out of thin air when they renamed the MP 43 to make it sound scary for propaganda purposes.

Only Nazis call any rifle an "assault rifle".

Our military and the NRA disagree with you

NRA-ILA | Glossary

For definitions of key words related to firearms and the 2nd amendment check out this page.

www.nraila.org

You didn't read far enough.

• Assault Rifle
  By U.S. Army definition, a selective-fire rifle chambered for a cartridge of intermediate power. If applied to any semi-automatic firearm regardless of its cosmetic similarity to a true assault rifle, the term is incorrect.

I read the entire thing. You agree the M4 is an assault rifle though, like I said in the OP --- right?

Yes. But the AR-15 is not. By the definition you cited.

Looks like this thread is over.

I never said the AR was. I did say that other than the multi-fire capability, there were no substantial differences in the two. That is, unless you can name those substantial differences.

Again -- I have no obligation to defend a claim I didn't make.

I don't know what's so hard about that to understand.

OK. Since you can't point out any fault in this OP, I assume we are in agreement.

Are you still trying to hide that you want the AR banned because "there's no substantial differences between the two"?

Because the semi-auto and full-auto thing is a substantial difference.

Yes, it is a substantial difference that everybody is aware of. That's why I excluded it from the discussion. I'm trying to find any other substantial differences that might exist. You know of any?.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

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.

The M16 Trigger, Disconnector, Hammer, Selector, and Bolt Carrier are all readily available, and non regulated. It's still highly illegal to assemble them to produce a fully auto rifle, and the ATF will have a running shit fit. It can be done though.

Readily available? Prove it.

Cause I think we have different definitions of readily available.

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.

Don't forget about the BGC you can't use a BCG designed for an AR in an M4 because the AR BGC is not cut for automatic function

but you can use an M16 BCG on an AR15. Not too expensive either.

$300 IF you can find one. Which is a big if. But you still need that $15,000 auto sear that you ain't machining in your garage with a ruler, vise and grinder from drawings/specifications that you don't have.

Bottom line this is not the simple or easy conversion you seem to think it is. But if you diagree you should take it up with ATF as they are the ones tasked with not allowing simple or easy conversions from semi-automatic to full-automatic.

An internet search shows them for as little as $79.00. The hammer, and other parts needed run about $50.00 or less. That shouldn't be a problem for gun nuts who have already spent much more than that preparing for the civil war they so desperately want.
View attachment 490635

Standard Mass 5.56 x 45(223) M16 BCG Complete w/ Adjustable Gas Key – Welcome to Rubber City Armory

rubbercityarmory.com

What is your point? You can find cheap ones, and some that are not so cheap. Still, $215 wouldn't be so bad if you were a nutbag gearing up for an armed civil war.

and you would be a nutbag to press the war

I'd say him posting that he could build one using a ruler, a vise and a grinder qualifies him for nutbag of the year.

You can say what you want, and I suppose it is partially my fault for letting the thread get misdirected, but the point is that there is very little difference between the use of the two guns.

again there are over 600,000 automatic firearms in the hands of the general public it's irrelevant if you think the AR and m16 have very little difference
It's irrelevant because they are constitutionally protected