When anti gun “experts” want to debate you
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (137)
sorted by:
I've never used the term "assault" in front of anything, as anything can be used to assault someone. An AR-15 is for targets or hunting or anything else you want it for. It's not just for "assault."
The M4 is not "basically the same thing." Military weapons are fully automatic. The AR-15 is semi-automatic, way different. Look it up.
...Yeah they are made to be semi-auto only, but the platform is the exact same, look it up.
Hey listen, you can keep obeying the media's commands and stop using the term, I really dgaf
It's a senseless term. I have assault fists. I have an assault ball bat. I have an assault car. I have an assault slingshot.
I don't care what the "media" says. I don't even have a TV.
BTW, the M4 is a gas-operated carbine and has nothing in common with the AR-15 but a similarity in looks, which doesn't count.
Yeah but it's a viable term, that's all I'm saying, any weapon can be an assault weapon, like you say yourself, so why not a rifle?
They are using the term to imply that the only purpose of that rifle is to shoot innocent people offensively, which isn't true. It's purpose is personal defense or hunting.
If you have ever fired a fully automatic weapon, I don't think you would be holding onto your somewhat silly argument that a select fire M4A1 and an AR-15 are remotely alike. Granted some versions of the M4 will only fire short three-round burst automatically, but these are used by admin types, cooks, etc., and not combat troops. The so-called M4s sold in the civilian market look like military M4s, but are really AR-15s, which are semiautomatic and quite difficult to convert to a fully automatic military rifle no matter what some say.
Disney is a viable term as well, but I'm still calling them Groomer(s). Or Q and Anons vs. QANON. I pick the term that is going to piss the left off more and stick with it.