|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
June 17, 2016, 11:14 PM | #26 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 18, 2009
Location: NorthWest USA
Posts: 1,996
|
If what they say about the AR-15 is the truth then I wonder how Eugene Stoner's children and grandchildren would explain his state of mind in the early 1990s when he revived his old 1950s AR-10 project while working at Knight's Armament on the SR-25 (Stoner Rifle AR-10 + AR-15). A lot of SR-25s were sold to civilians and surely he knew that would happen just like all the AR-15 civilian sales from the mid-1960s, thirty years before the SR-25.
Nah, it doesn't add up. I don't believe a word of that NBC concocted story. |
June 17, 2016, 11:29 PM | #27 |
Staff
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,931
|
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
|
June 18, 2016, 12:33 AM | #28 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 12, 2011
Location: Top of the Baltic stack
Posts: 6,079
|
Quote:
It only matters if you can get that story out without looking cynical or petty in light of the recent tragedies...
__________________
When the right to effective self-defence is denied, that right to self-defence which remains is essentially symbolic. Freedom: Please enjoy responsibly.
|
|
June 18, 2016, 03:49 PM | #29 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 28, 2008
Location: Near Fairbanks Alaska
Posts: 829
|
Well, they are just a bunch of Stoners, after all.
|
June 18, 2016, 04:57 PM | #30 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 23, 2009
Posts: 3,963
|
Damn hippies!
That explains their memory loss. |
June 18, 2016, 07:41 PM | #31 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 27, 2006
Posts: 2,313
|
When Stoner was designing the AR series, one could order a dewat machine gun, or a Lahti 20mm AT rifle to your door. Gun mags were full of ads for Garands, FN49's...to be shipped to you at your convenience.
I doubt he would have a problem with it The AR, in fact, is a testament to civilian firearms ownership, designed and tested by a private citizen.
__________________
The past is gone...the future may never happen. Be Here Now. |
June 19, 2016, 04:29 PM | #32 |
Junior Member
Join Date: June 19, 2016
Posts: 1
|
Basic Confusion About The AR15 and the M16.
I find that people throw around the words "assault rifle" as though they know what an assault rife really means. First of all AR stands for "Armalite Rifle". The AR-15 is a "semi-automatic" rifle. Less powerful than many other semi-automatic rifles in more powerful calibers. The M-16 is a "Military" rifle that can be fired as a semi-automatic(one round down range with each pull of the trigger), Burst(three rounds down range with each pull of the trigger), and Full Auto(one round down range with each cycle as long as the trigger is held until the shooter releases the trigger, or the rifle runs out of ammo). The rifle used at the Pulse that night was a semi-automatic period. He could have chosen a .30 caliber or any number of rifles loaded with a higher caliber ammunition. In short, the AR-15 is a semi-automatic rifle that "looks like" the M-16.
The AR-15 is popular because it is designed for attachments and accessories. The owner can configure his rifle with any type of scope or open sites. It is relatively simple to clean and maintain. All of this means the owner does not have to have the gun modified by a gunsmith in order to mount a specific scope or accessory. In fact, the owner can easily change from one scope to another in just a few minutes. The gun's receiver cannot be modified to a "full auto" rifle. There are existing laws concerning the ownership of full automatic rifles( referred to as "machine guns" or "assault rifles") Look back over the history of the AR-15 and you will find that it has followed the evolution of military rifles while remaining a semi-automatic rifle. The general public has swallowed the propaganda of the gun-control advocates and the media. I've been shooting for over 62 years. I served in the military and fired different versions of the M-16 in all three firing settings. The "full auto" position is referred to as the "spray and pray" position. It chews up clips very quickly and hits fewer targets. The "Burst" position is the "standard" with a three round burst. Easier to stay on target and a more disciplined method. I've, also, fired the AR-15 many times in its evolution. Its familiar semi-automatic action is comfortable and a known quantity. I don't own an AR. I use a .30-06 for hunting because of the distances that I have to shoot to bring down deer and elk. I apologize to those that know the difference between the civilian AR and the military M-16. |
June 19, 2016, 05:25 PM | #33 | |||
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,677
|
Basic Confusion About The AR15 and the M16.
Welcome to TFL, AFMISSILER!
we've covered the proper definitions many, many times, but no one seem to be listening but us, and sometimes not all of "us". To be precise, the M16 doesn't have the burst feature. Rifles in the M16 series do (A2) but the M16 and M16A1 do not. Select fire, safe, semi and full auto in those models. Quote:
Quote:
Assault Weapon is a term used in the 1994 AWB (and in some states's laws) and refers ONLY to SEMIAUTOMATIC arms with a certain combination of stated features. As a legal term, assault weapon does NOT apply to machine guns or Assault RIFLES (which are selective fire). Quote:
They DON'T know what they are talking about, and are only repeating incorrect terms and usages the way they hear them in the media. They THINK they know what those terms mean, but by the way they use them, they don't. And the Media and gun banners have a vested interest in NOT explaining the truth.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
|||
June 19, 2016, 06:00 PM | #34 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 15, 2010
Posts: 8,235
|
The widespread response across the country has been phrases like these:
"No one is going to take your precious guns" "No one wants to keep law abiding citizens from owning guns" "You can keep your toys" "Gun ownership has increased under President __________" And so on. I believe they do want to take away guns, but it really isn't so easy. But we keep hearing pundits and politicians say: "Weapons of war" "Civilians don't need those" "Reinstate the AWB" "Prohibit all semi autos" "The NRA is responsible for the terrorist attacks" "The NRA blocks our legislation " So yes, they do want to take them, just haven't figured out how yet... They'll continue to chip away at the public opinion until they can. They have a significant portion of the population ready to sidestep due process to get things done. So, it's just a waiting game until gun rights disappear. |
June 19, 2016, 07:01 PM | #35 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 19, 2010
Location: Medina, Ohio
Posts: 1,049
|
But in the general sense, Stoner did not design any of his weapons for civilian use until the 1990s. They were all designed for the military because back then, civilian weapons didn't look like the AR.
And yes, I imagine anyone who designed a weapon that was subsequently used in crimes would be sickened.
__________________
Member: Orange Gunsite Family, NRA--Life, ARTCA, and American Legion. Caveat Emptor: Cavery Grips/AmericanGripz/Prestige Grips/Stealth Grips from Clayton, NC. He is a scammer Last edited by Spats McGee; June 20, 2016 at 06:19 AM. Reason: Removing troll-calling |
June 20, 2016, 09:13 AM | #36 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 7,523
|
Quote:
Armalite was initially backed by Fairchild Aircraft in the 1950s; at the time, Fairchild's bread and butter was selling airplanes to the military (C-82 Packet, C-119 Flying Boxcar, and C-123 Provider transports).
__________________
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak |
|
June 20, 2016, 09:50 AM | #37 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 2, 2013
Posts: 975
|
Quote:
|
|
June 20, 2016, 04:41 PM | #38 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 4, 2010
Posts: 1,243
|
A friend of mine has been a friend of the family for many years. The stories he tells me about them do not coincide with the news story statements attributed to them. He is a member on this site. I will ask him if he would like to comment on this. He might not but I will check.
__________________
Seams like once we the people give what, at the time, seams like a reasonable inch and "they" take the unreasonable mile we can only get that mile back one inch at a time. No spelun and grammar is not my specialty. So please don't hurt my sensitive little feelings by teasing me about it. |
June 20, 2016, 09:21 PM | #39 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 28, 2008
Location: Near Fairbanks Alaska
Posts: 829
|
The DHS folks actually recommend the AR15 for personal defense.
http://radioviceonline.com/departmen...sonal-defense/ |
June 21, 2016, 12:56 AM | #40 |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,677
|
It appears the DHS is saying the AR with a 30 rnd stick is good personal defense choice, FOR THEMSELVES, NOT for civilians.
All for me, none for thee, classic elitist motto... Seems typical one hand of government buy them, because they are good at what they do, and the other hand of government working to BAN them, because they are good at what they do.... and, of course, the ban only applying to people who don't work for the government...
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
June 21, 2016, 12:32 PM | #41 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 8, 2013
Location: Rittman, Ohio
Posts: 2,074
|
When you look through history, it is hard to find any firearms concepts that were NOT first designed as "weapons of war".
|
June 21, 2016, 06:58 PM | #42 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 13, 2006
Posts: 8,274
|
I recently listened to a radio news report about Remington and Bushmaster and the lawsuit they are fighting.Something about providing civilians with a weapon of war.
Remarkable how the language of the Stoner family coincides with the language of the plaintiff's case against Remington. Might be an pre-emptive statement to protect Mr Stoner's legacy. I don't like the politics of the Stoner statement,but is Bushmaster/Remington lose,where does it stop? And,yes,early 60's there was an AR-15 in our house with a SN < 4000. The Air Force was evaluating the rifle.It was not a US military rifle yet. IIRC,it was Colt who introduced the AR-15 to us. Seems like airplanes were weapons of war from the get go. Didn't the Lear jet have its roots in a military plane? Seems like the drive behind penicillin was battle related. The only force I know of that compares with the military for driving advances in technology is NASA...and that certainly is a military platform. Last edited by HiBC; June 21, 2016 at 07:08 PM. |
June 22, 2016, 09:40 AM | #43 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 7,523
|
Quote:
__________________
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak Last edited by carguychris; June 22, 2016 at 09:44 AM. Reason: reword |
|
June 22, 2016, 02:51 PM | #44 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 13, 2005
Posts: 4,700
|
I doubt if John Garand "intended" his rifle for civilians.
|
June 22, 2016, 10:41 PM | #45 |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,677
|
The list of new inventions and improvements in existing designs due to the pressure of war is probably greater than the list of the same done in complete peace time.
The invention of the microwave oven was due to military research. Modern computers, as well. The list of things is HUGE. And really, it matters little for what purpose an inventor /designer does something, what matters is what the WORLD does with his invention(s).
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
June 24, 2016, 11:11 AM | #46 |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,434
|
John M. Browning didn't design the M1911 for civilians, either. The U.S. Ordnance Department put out specifications, and Colt hired John Browning to design a handgun that met those specifications and did so better than the competition. The fact that Browning (and Colt) didn't "intend" it for civilians didn't stop Colt from almost immediately offering commercial versions on the civilian market.
With respect to Mr. Stoner's descendants, what they say, think or believe today is entirely irrelevant to the gun control debate. The civilian, semi-automatic AR-15 is not a select-fire military weapon, and that's what the gun grabbers persist in trying to sell to the American populace. |
June 24, 2016, 03:45 PM | #47 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 15, 2013
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 1,416
|
^^^
"American populace." AKA: Kool Aid chugging uninformed. I guess my 1860's Spencer rifle should be banned as a weapon of war. The same with my Yugo capture K98 Mauser, 1903 Springfield, FN Hi Power, Remington Rand 1911 (surplus purchase by my dad back in the '60s), Sistema Colt 1911, Radom 9mm and probably a few others. |
June 24, 2016, 07:34 PM | #48 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,434
|
Quote:
2016 - Orlando, FL - Pulse Club 2015 - San Bernardino, CA 2012 - Sandy Hook, CT - Sandy Hook Elementary School 2012 - Aurora Theater 2007 - New Life Church, CO 2007 - West Roads Mall, Nebraska 2000 - Edgewater Technology, MA Those are the only ones I have found in which so-called "assault weapons" of all types (not just AR-15s) were used. That's only seven incidents, not ten, and I don't consider events that occurred ten to fifteen years ago as "recent." What "recent" mass shootings involving assault weapons have I overlooked? Last edited by Aguila Blanca; June 24, 2016 at 11:25 PM. Reason: typo |
|
June 24, 2016, 10:34 PM | #49 |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,677
|
I can't begin to tell you what one's you've overlooked, but I think I can tell you what you HAVE overlooked.
Mass Shooting The FBI is (as I understand it) is currently defining a mass murder as 4 or more dead. The media now seems to be defining "mass shooting" as 4 or more WOUNDED. While reporting on the number killed, to make it a mass SHOOTING only requires 4 or more people wounded, not killed. Using THEIR definition, I suspect you could find 10 recent mass shootings where the AR class rifle was used. You might even be able to use some police shootings as well. Their side certainly has in the past.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
June 24, 2016, 10:53 PM | #50 |
Member
Join Date: April 16, 2013
Location: Richmond/Rosenberg, TX
Posts: 50
|
I've read that that thought was a made up lie or misquote.
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|