Liberal Forum

Blackvegetable » 18 Aug 2026, 5:09 am » wrote: ↑

18 Aug 2026, 5:09 am

The ball's still in your court.

You know what's in that letter.

No air.  You are making outrageous claims and refusing to back them up.  Per your norm.  Until you explain WTF you are talk8ng about now I will maintain the W.

This is another case of you not understanding the information.  You must prove you understand it before you dare question me on it..

Huey » 18 Aug 2026, 5:12 am » wrote: ↑

18 Aug 2026, 5:12 am

No air.  You are making outrageous claims and refusing to back them up.  

Tiny,

You made reference to a letter.

We know what's in that letter.....a reference to a second weapon submitted to the Feds along with the modified one..

You don't want to answer that question either.

Huey » 17 Aug 2026, 3:02 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Aug 2026, 3:02 pm

Anyway, the basic premise of the thread has been proven correct. An AR style firearm is no an Assault Rifle according to the military and government.

  That's absolutely right.
They're the final word but some just can't accept it.
​​​​
 
 

Blackvegetable » 17 Aug 2026, 2:15 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Aug 2026, 2:15 pm

B) I  win because words mean what they say.

  You lost with your first post in this thread
when you asserted that AR 15s are assault rifles even after the definition was posted.
  Basically you're saying you know more about what an assault rifle is than the military. You've been proven wrong over and over but still can't accept the fact that the AR 15 isn't an assault rifle. It isn't even an "assault weapon",that term is used as a political fear mongering talking point by gun control advocates because even they know it isn't an assault rifle and would get their asses handed to them in court for asserting it is.
 
  
 
 
  
  
  
 

Squatchman » 18 Aug 2026, 6:09 am » wrote: ↑

18 Aug 2026, 6:09 am

  You lost with your first post in this thread
when you asserted that AR 15s are assault rifles even after the definition was posted.
  

Please stop.


This isn't about taxonomy.

The German original is


Sturmgewehr.....

Loosely

"Assault rifle"

That is what the AR-15 was DESIGNED for.

And it was designed only once, though it has been broadly modified.



 

Blackvegetable » 18 Aug 2026, 5:19 am » wrote: ↑

18 Aug 2026, 5:19 am

Tiny,

You made reference to a letter.

We know what's in that letter.....a reference to a second weapon submitted to the Feds along with the modified one..

You don't want to answer that question either.

 

I have no clue what your case is.  Make it.  
 

Blackvegetable » 18 Aug 2026, 5:19 am » wrote: ↑

18 Aug 2026, 5:19 am

Tiny,

You made reference to a letter.

We know what's in that letter.....a reference to a second weapon submitted to the Feds along with the modified one..

You don't want to answer that question either.

 

 reference to a second weapon submitted to the Feds along with the modified one..

The wording was changed in basic DESIGN so as not to be a machine gun.

You may make your point now.  


 

Huey » 18 Aug 2026, 6:22 am » wrote: ↑

18 Aug 2026, 6:22 am

I have no clue 

YOU made reference to the letter...too late to "play" stupid.

Answer the question. 

Huey » 18 Aug 2026, 6:31 am » wrote: ↑

18 Aug 2026, 6:31 am

The wording was changed in basic DESIGN so as not to be a machine gun.

You may make your point now.

"The wording"?

Blackvegetable » 18 Aug 2026, 6:32 am » wrote: ↑

18 Aug 2026, 6:32 am

YOU made reference to the letter...too late to "play" stupid.

Answer the question. 


 

Yeah, I did.   A letter where the BATF classified the Sporter as Class 1 firearm and not an NFA weapon, meaning it was available for the public to purchase.

You may make your point now.
 

Huey » 18 Aug 2026, 6:34 am » wrote: ↑

18 Aug 2026, 6:34 am

Yeah, I did.   A letter where the BATF classified the Sporter as Class 1 firearm and not an NFA weapon, meaning it was available for the public to purchase.

You may make your point now.

YOU are making some issue of the letter...

**** idiot.

Blackvegetable » 18 Aug 2026, 6:36 am » wrote: ↑

18 Aug 2026, 6:36 am

YOU are making some issue of the letter...

**** idiot.

 

No one has a clue what you are rambling about.  The title of the article posted is my point.  Now post your point.  
 

Huey » 18 Aug 2026, 6:47 am » wrote: ↑

18 Aug 2026, 6:47 am

No one has a 

Scroll up.

You wouldn't have confused yourself had you answered the question the first time...

Blackvegetable » 18 Aug 2026, 6:49 am » wrote: ↑

18 Aug 2026, 6:49 am

Scroll up.

You wouldn't have confused yourself had you answered the question the first time...

 

I don't see a point yet. Don't reply unless it is to post a point.  
 

Huey » 18 Aug 2026, 6:34 am » wrote: ↑

18 Aug 2026, 6:34 am

Yeah, I did.   A letter where the BATF classified the Sporter as Class 1 firearm and not an NFA weapon, meaning it was available for the public to purchase.

You may make your point now.

Which has nothing at all to do with the question at hand.

But the reference to the other weapon does.
 

Blackvegetable » 18 Aug 2026, 6:52 am » wrote: ↑

18 Aug 2026, 6:52 am

Which has nothing at all to do with the question at hand.

But the reference to the other weapon does.
 

 

Post your point about the other weapon.  Damn is not difficult, Douche.  
 

Huey » 18 Aug 2026, 6:51 am » wrote: ↑

18 Aug 2026, 6:51 am

I don't see a point yet. Don't reply unless it is to post a point.

We know all about your vision thing...

Huey » 18 Aug 2026, 6:53 am » wrote: ↑

18 Aug 2026, 6:53 am

Post your point about the other weapon.  Damn is not difficult, Douche.

When you admit what it is...

Blackvegetable » 18 Aug 2026, 6:54 am » wrote: ↑

18 Aug 2026, 6:54 am

When you admit what it is...

 

There was a disabled M 16 and a Sporter.

Now make your **** point without a question.

Blackvegetable » 18 Aug 2026, 6:16 am » wrote: ↑

18 Aug 2026, 6:16 am

Please stop.

This isn't about taxonomy.

The German original is

Sturmgewehr.....

Loosely

"Assault rifle"

That is what the AR-15 was DESIGNED for.

And it was designed only once, though it has been broadly modified.

  Nope.
 You've lost.
You just don't know it or you're some kind of masochist that likes a good beating.
  No matter how many german words that mean "loosely" you throw out an AR 15 isn't an assault rifle. 
  You can't accept the true definition of what an assault rifle is even when it's been presented to you numerous times. Even gun control advocates pushing legislation to ban them don't use the term because they know it isn't what an AR 15 is and will get tossed. That's why they came up with the term assault weapon. To get past that pesky definition of assault rifle.
 Yes the original design was submitted for testing by the military but since it wasn't a fully auto weapon it wasn't an assault rifle. It had to be  modified to make it into an assault rifle for military use. That gun is the M16. Civilians don't get to enjoy those modifications because they aren't allowed to own assault rifles. We can own AR 15s because they aren't assault rifles. They're simply semi auto guns that look like assault rifles.
   You can continue to flail if you like. It's quite entertaining watching you dance but in the end you've still lost the argument.