Define more restrictive
For once dont just troll and ankle bite.
Be specific and (LOL) rational.
Sounded like it cost a bunch of money and requires some expertise.
I do believe he knows his guns, but its comical when he tries to retreat from what he has said by just throwing gun jargon out that has nothing to do with his original quote. DMC is famous for this tactic. He thinks we will think there is some kind of hidden argument in the jargon itself. He defaults to gun specifications instead of addressing the actual statement.
If you live in Texas, one will have friends who know about guns, some more intricately than he does most likely. Which is why I brought the M15 stuff in the first place and he swallowed it. The weird thing is these gun lovers actually hate all the new laws allowing open carry and no real restrictions. These guys actually know how dangerous these things are and the problem with having cartridges or whatever that hold way too many rounds. They want stricter laws on classes for gun use, waiting for a license, etc... They feel they get drowned out by the lunatics who use guns as a penis. Or people who are just unduly scared of some bizarre Zombie apocalypse situation.
Define more restrictive
For once dont just troll and ankle bite.
Be specific and (LOL) rational.
We were talking about the M-16 in this conversation, then you interjected with the above comment.
M-16 is a fully automatic weapon. If I claimed to have made one, I would have claimed to have made an automatic weapon. I have built AR-15s (as have a lot of people) and AR-10s. They are semi-auto. They are basically assembly required rifles with selectable components.
Still waiting for you to provide the quote where I said I basically made an M-16.
Chop chop
In what context are you using the term "more restrictive"?
You're so confused on this.
I said gun nerds wouldn't care for a semi-auto hunting rifle
I said the AR-15 is easy to build, and I have built several
https://www.brownells.com/.aspx/bapi...build-an-ar-15
I never said I built an M-16
Transferrable M16, sells for just under 30,000 dollars.
The M15 is fully automatic. The M15 isn't even produced.
The M5 (replacement for the M4) is fully automatic, like its predecessor, only it shoots a larger round but about the same size as the 6.8 which is what I already have in an AR platform (platform being a gun type, not a physical metal platform you could stand on). So no one would be standing around to be the 1st to buy one since they are not for sale to the GP in the automatic receiver version.
You got embarrassed by stepping outside of your depth and have been salty since. However you just keep saying more and more stupid , so consider this a freebie where I set you back on the path of righteousness for my namesake.
If it's that easy to build why don't we hear more about Ar-15s being used that were homemade?
Don't worry, you don't have to answer. It's more rhetorical than not.
That's a sweet platform
It's more re ed than not.
We have already been over this.
Basically you said no one would want it.
Then That you built one.
And that no one would sell one. Like it could not be built and sold. Even though you built one.
Then you put yourself outside the general public and then made yourself creep back into the general public.
You know exactly what was said. See what happens when you try and change your .
You got embarrassed by contradicting yourself and then tried to use a flurry of gun lingo to work your way back in.
And you had the gall to use my post on other posters just because RG made a minor mistake in saying DNA instead of mRNA. I knew exactly what he meant as did other posters and you had no clue. You are a real hack. And not a good one. But you are a blatant hypocrite, give yourself a W for that.
The following is a blatant lie.
"I said the AR-15 is easy to build, and I have built several"
I agree. And DMC keeps bringing it up any way.
Wait.
The M5 /M15 switch will be a thing of beauty.
It brought about 2 or 3 different lies.
Good stew is left cooking.
It's not hard to compile historical data, take into consideration and adjust for other variables, and then use that to generate a trend analysis to project an "otherwise". You then measure against that.
No this is not what you said to me in the conversation I mentioned the M5.
And thats what WE, you and I, were talking about and you dared me to find.
Because you cannot tell one is home made since they are all basically assembled somewhere using basically the same parts. It's not like someone used a CNC machine at home to mill out a receiver![]()
So show the trend to date.
you introduced the M15 out of nowhere, no doubt meaning the M5.
You feeling ok?
See, that wasn't hard, was it? I found it for you.
Both the M4 and the AR15 are built off the M16 platform. This isn't the Eugene Stoner AR15, but Colt's version. So when I say I can build the same platform, I mean I can build an AR that fires the exact same round as the XM5, and since you cannot by the XM5 (or the M5) as a civilian, all you'd be able to get is the AR equivalent.
While your re ed brain morphed "same platform" to "same rifle", anyone with a lick of gun knowledge knows I never once said I can build an XM5 (a person could but it would be extremely illegal and be a le II firearm worth about 10 years if they weren't a class 2 manufacturer).
What? Every time someone has used an AR-15, we know where they got it.
And if they bought the parts to put together, we'd know that too.
Which makes this "aNyoNe cAn maKe tHeY oWn aR 15 iT eaSy" argument that you bring up in every gun thread worthless and re ed.
And you wonder why I said you're not qualified to debate this with me.
Ah the jargon tar baby.
DMC wants to do exactly nothing about gun. violence.
No Trump does.
They all are counting on gun violence to get their way in the future.
Let's make it simple
True or false: it's easy for anyone in Japan to make their own ar-15.
He'll talk to me about assembling guns but will never touch the topic.
Lol.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)