What Is Defined As A Weapon Of War?

A weapon of war would be defined by the style and type of weapon military personal use.
 
So damn what. You entered this thread talking about the AR-15 not being a weapon of war and there it is, 1962. Project Agile, IT WAS FLIPPIN CREATED AS A WEAPON OF WAR. The damn military was singing its praises, how effective it was, how much damage it delivered. Now, more than fifty years later some snot nosed little pencil dick wants to pretend the AR-15 is not a weapon of war. Lame.
Look at you, unable to understand the AR15 which evolved into the M16 is not the same AR15 sold in gun stores all across America, and the AR15 Democrats keep telling us they need to ban.
 
Last edited:
A weapon of war would be defined by the style and type of weapon military personal use.

As well as the scenario it was used in. In earlier times, the entire world went to war with antiquated bolt-action rifles which are now suitable for hunting deer. Prior to that, our American Revolution was fought with single-shot black powder weapons that shot round lead balls. Both of those were "weapons of war."
 
Obvious truth:

1726489724933.webp
 
As well as the scenario it was used in. In earlier times, the entire world went to war with antiquated bolt-action rifles which are now suitable for hunting deer. Prior to that, our American Revolution was fought with single-shot black powder weapons that shot round lead balls. Both of those were "weapons of war."
One thing I noticed was, the British colonies really couldn't be arsed owning a gun, very few did, so as the war for independence was growing near, they started to smuggle in rifles/weapons. And what do the John Wayne's of American gun nuts claim, "We kicked you out trying to take our guns".

One thing is certain, there's no mouth frothing threads on UK forums about guns. The suitable vetted folk just enjoy using them. On the likes of USMB, there's more threads on guns than hairs on my backside, and I've got an hairy ass.
 
Look at you, unable to understand the AR15 which evolved into the M16 is not the same AR15 sold in gun stores all across America, and the AR15 Democrats keep telling us they need to ban.
You know what is really funny? Who owns the intellectual property rights to the design of the AR-15? Is it Colt? Is it Armalite? Uh, no, that design is part of the public domain, owned by the public because contracted products DESIGNED FOR THE MILITARY, including the intellectual property rights, the design itself, becomes part of the public domain. There is no copyright protection because the gun was DESIGNED FOR THE MILITARY. Colt only holds the right to the name, not the design. Why you can find so many other manufacturers of this AR-15 style rifle, chambered in many calibers, including the .50.
 
You know what is really funny?
Look at you, CHOOSING to not understand the AR15 which evolved into the M16 is not the same AR15 sold in gun stores all across America, and the AR15 Democrats keep telling us they need to ban.
There is no copyright protection because the gun was DESIGNED FOR THE MILITARY.
Colt only holds the right to the name, not the design.
Colt holds the COPYRIGHT on the NAME. Its a TRADEMARK and no one else can use it.
The term you're looking for is PATENT.
Colt's PATENTS on its AR15 design expired in 1977, at which point anyone could make their own version.

Please:
Talk out your ass some more.
 
Last edited:
One thing I noticed was, the British colonies really couldn't be arsed owning a gun, very few did, so as the war for independence was growing near, they started to smuggle in rifles/weapons. And what do the John Wayne's of American gun nuts claim, "We kicked you out trying to take our guns".

One thing is certain, there's no mouth frothing threads on UK forums about guns. The suitable vetted folk just enjoy using them. On the likes of USMB, there's more threads on guns than hairs on my backside, and I've got an hairy ass.
The US or colonies, if you prefer, didn't import a single RIFLE. Rifles weren't in common use by any military in those days. During the revolution, the British commissioned a single small unit armed with Baker Rifles and decommissioned it as soon as Major Baker was killed. Yes, the Americans imported large quantities of Charleville muskets from France, the US had no large-scale arms industry. American firearms were built by individual skilled craftsmen to order.
 
The US or colonies, if you prefer, didn't import a single RIFLE. Rifles weren't in common use by any military in those days. During the revolution, the British commissioned a single small unit armed with Baker Rifles and decommissioned it as soon as Major Baker was killed. Yes, the Americans imported large quantities of Charleville muskets from France, the US had no large-scale arms industry. American firearms were built by individual skilled craftsmen to order.
Bullshit. Get back to school numpty boy
 
You know what is really funny? Who owns the intellectual property rights to the design of the AR-15? Is it Colt? Is it Armalite? Uh, no, that design is part of the public domain, owned by the public because contracted products DESIGNED FOR THE MILITARY, including the intellectual property rights, the design itself, becomes part of the public domain. There is no copyright protection because the gun was DESIGNED FOR THE MILITARY. Colt only holds the right to the name, not the design. Why you can find so many other manufacturers of this AR-15 style rifle, chambered in many calibers, including the .50.
There is no such thing as "intellectual property rights" to an object. There is only a patent. Colt owned the patent for the AR-15 which expired in the 1970s. It's an open domain design now which is why so many companies use it as a base for their weapons. Do a little research before making yourself look ignorant and stupid next time.

And you are wrong; products designed for the military are NOT in the public domain, otherwise Boeing could build Apache helicopters and Bell could build F-35s. If the military commissions a design, it may belong to the MILITARY, but it isn't in the public domain.
 
RetiredGySgt AZrailwhale

You uneducated retards -


...But getting back to guns; firearms were not part of early American culture and no, most colonial Americans not only did not own guns prior to the war, most had never even fired one. Our forefathers and leaders of revolt knew this. They spent the few years leading up to hostilities struggling to smuggle guns from Europe...

One thing Yanks don't do is correct history. They bullshit it to look tough. But you will never fool me.

And to top it off, the 13 colonies needed the French navy to stop their asses getting kicked. If you don't believe me, I will school you on that too. So sort yourselves out and belt up.
 
Back
Top Bottom