Liberal Forum

Blackvegetable » 20 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

20 minutes ago

Only in your "re-interpretations".

You continue to labor the issue of "re-designed".....of what are these alleged "redesigns"?

if something is DESIGNED for a specific purpose, why would there ever be talk of RE-design?

Colt saying it was redesigned is not an interpretation.

The BATF saying the weapon was changed in basic design is not a re interpretation.

The military saying it is not an assault rifle/weapon is not a re interpretation.  

Your source listing what was changed in the lower is not a re interpretation.  

I have posted the changes today as well as multiple times in the past.

IT was designed for the civilian population and was never labeled a military weapon