Relationship My girl bought an AR15 assault rifle

[Copper Burner]

I cant' stand this argument... anybody who's served knows that, outside of training, that select fire button never sees the "auto" or "burst" setting.. his girlfriend has a weapon that's functionally equivalent to how the M4 is used in the military.

And good for her.

A store bought ar15 is "functionally equivalent" to how the m4 is used in the military? Are you out of your mind?

 

[Cool Hand Luke]

Hinging the term "assault rifle" on full-auto capability is somewhat disingenuous, or ignorant.

A regular Ar-15 with a binary, or forced-reset trigger can shoot faster than a full-auto m4. Just a regular aftermarket trigger will get you damn close to full-auto fire rates with a little practice. And to be fair, most of the M4's in the military that have seen combat have never had their selector on anything other than semi and safe.

Arguing technicalities instead of actualities is not a good faith argument.

that's not the argument though.

 

[chickenlip]

I cant' stand this argument... anybody who's served knows that, outside of training, that select fire button never sees the "auto" or "burst" setting.. his girlfriend has a weapon that's functionally equivalent to how the M4 is used in the military.

And good for her.

What argument can’t you stand? Being select-fire is basically the most important feature of being an assault rifle.

 

[djacobox372]

What argument can’t you stand? Being select-fire is basically the most important feature of being an assault rifle.

I can't stand the argument that the AR-15 and guns like it shouldn't be banned as "assault rifles," because they "aren't assault rifles" simply because they lack a feature that is rarely used.

The better argument should be that "assault rifles" are expressly protected by the 2A and shouldn't be banned period.

In actual combat, the M4 stays in semi 99% of the time. And the 1% that flips it to auto gets chewed out by their captain for wasting ammo and missing their target.

That's how "important" that feature is for this particular "weapon of war." The claim that this unused feature is somehow the end-all-be-all of what makes a rifle a military rifle is silly.

Most probably aren't aware that between the mid 80's to the mid 90's, standard army M16's didn't even have full auto... just a crappy burst mode that nobody ever used.

 

[djacobox372]

A store bought ar15 is "functionally equivalent" to how the m4 is used in the military? Are you out of your mind?

How do you think the M4 is used in the military?

Hint: it's not like the movies. Nobody is spraying and praying.

Considering that soldiers are trained to leave their guns on semi-auto, and don't use full-auto--how is the AR-15 functionally different in how the M4 is used in the military?

 

[BB in Crazy!!!!]

My M-16 was an assault rifle compared to an AR-15. Mainly because I had a grenade launcher on it.

 

[BB in Crazy!!!!]

How do you think the M4 is used in the military?

Hint: it's not like the movies. Nobody is spraying and praying.

Considering that soldiers are trained to leave their guns on semi-auto, and don't use full-auto--how is the AR-15 functionally different in how the M4 is used in the military?

They are if suppressive fire is needed and someone is down a SAW. Or the Sawgunner needs to bound in a firefight. Burst becomes handy then.

 

[My Spot]

How do you think the M4 is used in the military?

Hint: it's not like the movies. Nobody is spraying and praying.

Considering that soldiers are trained to leave their guns on semi-auto, and don't use full-auto--how is the AR-15 functionally different in how the M4 is used in the military?

It absolutely is used. Why do you think the M4A1 has a thicker barrel than the M4 and can fire auto instead of burst?

 

[lsa]

My M-16 was an assault rifle compared to an AR-15. Mainly because I had a grenade launcher on it.

For duck hunting?

 

[BB in Crazy!!!!]

For duck hunting?

No of course not!!!


It was for huntin rabbits.

 

[chickenlip]

I can't stand the argument that the AR-15 and guns like it shouldn't be banned as "assault rifles," because they "aren't assault rifles" simply because they lack a feature that is rarely used.

The better argument should be that "assault rifles" are expressly protected by the 2A and shouldn't be banned period.

In actual combat, the M4 stays in semi 99% of the time. And the 1% that flips it to auto gets chewed out by their captain for wasting ammo and missing their target.

That's how "important" that feature is for this particular "weapon of war." The claim that this unused feature is somehow the end-all-be-all of what makes a rifle a military rifle is silly.

Most probably aren't aware that between the mid 80's to the mid 90's, standard army M16's didn't even have full auto... just a crappy burst mode that nobody ever used.

It’s a valid argument whether you agree with it or not. Being select-fire is part of the definition of assault rifle.

That’s basically like calling a SP5 a sub machine gun when it isn’t capable of fully automatic fire.

 

[RemyR]

I'd be furious

Spoiler

that she didn't get me one too

 

[crabmeat]

I cant' stand this argument... anybody who's served knows that, outside of training, that select fire button never sees the "auto" or "burst" setting.. his girlfriend has a weapon that's functionally equivalent to how the M4 is used in the military.

And good for her.

Selective fire is great for breaking contact. Also, at checkpoints when shit goes south. You have to throw everything you can, as fast as you can, in both scenarios.