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:
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.
Yeah but, instead of getting on the defensive and stop using the term altogether, I'd say use it the way it makes more sense, you have designated marksman rifles, you have hunting rifles, you have precision/sniper rifles, why not have a assault rifle category which serves a very clear and specific purpose/has a definite set of characteristics.
My thinking is the more gun owners get defensive over the term, the more leftist sheep think there's some credence to the propaganda.
I could be wrong anyway, but my only point is that TO ME the term makes sense, reasons stated in my op.
There is no "very clear and specific purpose" for an "assault rifle." The AR-15 is used for defense and for hunting.
It's purpose is to shoot and disable/kill whatever it is on the receiving end, the context for that shooting is entirely on the hands of the shooter.
That's what should be made bare to anti-gun freaks, the weapon is not the problem, it's just a tool, whatever it may be called is meaningless, it could be called killing stick for all I care.
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.
OK but it fires the same round, yes or no?
If you have an M4 set for semi-auto, and an AR-15, then you fire both, using the exact same ammunition, functionally, ballistically, they will act and operate the exact same yes or no?
Full-auto/semi auto was not what I meant
The M4 is chambered in 5.56 Nato M855
The AR-15 is chambered in
.22 Nosler
.223 Remington
.224 Valkyrie
.25-45 Sharps
5.56 Nato
6.5 Grendel
6.8 SPC
.30 Remington AR
.300 Ham’r
.300 Blackout
.350 Legend
.450 Bushmaster
.458 Socom
You just don't know shit about ARs maybe you should stick to crayons.
OH MY!!! YOU DON'T SAY!!!!?!?!?!!!!
Now answer the question posed to this comment you just replied to, I thought I had posed said question quite clearly, that even a retard could understand it, evidently I was wrong, here I'll repeat it in case you are too stupid to go back and read it again:
You keep spewing these obvious factoids about firearms, as if you're the only one that knows them, you really think I didn't know AR-15's are chambered in a number of different calibers?
Again you fail to understand the point of my arguments, and it's amazing how stupid you'd have to be to miss em.
The caliber of a rifle has no bearing in the classification of a "assault weapon" all calibers up to .50 are legal. So what's your point?
Just exactly what do you mean???
Ok, lemme try to break the discussion down for you, since you obviously have serious problems with text interpretation.
All I said at the beginning was that FOR ME, the term assault rifle made sense, given the story of the sturmgewehr (yes, which comes from the STG-44..) and the literal interpretation of its name, and why it was the reason why I (as in ME, JUST ME, PERSONALLY) believed the AR stood for Assault Rifle, that's all I said.
Then at some point the discussion turned to the US military using AR-15's or not, I have no qualms in admitting I didn't know the M4 had a different gas-system, but what I said in this post to which you just replied, was to try and explain the point that even though the platform might be different, they essentially work the same, they fire the same round, they have the same lethal potential, and they operate mostly the same, since they're both based out of the same platform.
So these are two different discussions you see? again I know it's difficult for you to understand, but I have some crayons around here somewhere, I could draw something for you if it's going to make it easier.
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.