Liberal Forum

Blackvegetable » 06 Sep 2022, 7:21 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 7:21 am

Huey » 06 Sep 2022, 7:17 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 7:17 am

You going off on a tangent is why it takes so long.  Now get to your argument.

No, tiny...

The EVIDENCE clearly shows you gave 3 different answers.

You are not owed ANYTHING.

 

The first time was a summary.

The second time was a direct attempt to copy and pasted directly from the report itself.

The third time was the actual title.  That you reposted.

What the evidence shows is you are a spoiled little bitch who whines when he does get his way and is incapable of make an argument on his own.  

Blackvegetable » 06 Sep 2022, 7:27 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 7:27 am

Huey » 06 Sep 2022, 7:22 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 7:22 am

I am still waiting on your narrative that shows I am wrong concerning that comment and your narrative as to why you demanded I repost the title of that report:

Actually, no.  It is not irrelevant.  It blows your “designed for the battlefield **** out of the water.  Plus, none of the modern Seminauto sports rifles were designed for the battlefield.  It is the crux of the matter.

 

I am still waiting on your narrative that shows I am wrong concerning that comment and your narrative as to why you demanded I repost the title of that report:

No, you aren't.

 

 

As I said you are not capable of creating a narrative argument.  

Since you can't tell us the differences in the lowers you are not informed enough to go further.

Huey » 06 Sep 2022, 7:28 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 7:28 am

As I said you are not capable of creating a narrative argument.  

Since you can't tell us the differences in the lowers you are not informed enough to go further.

I don't retell.

I post the facts and connect them to a premise.

You make **** up to facilitate your denial.

The problem you have is that you cannot read. If you doubt it, I will be happy to illustrate with a glaring example.

 
Since you can't tell us the differences in the lowers you are not informed enough to go further.

They are IRRELEVANT.


Why not because you dunk on Rudy Gobert?

**** idiot.

Blackvegetable » 06 Sep 2022, 7:32 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 7:32 am

Huey » 06 Sep 2022, 7:28 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 7:28 am

As I said you are not capable of creating a narrative argument.  

Since you can't tell us the differences in the lowers you are not informed enough to go further.

I don't retell.

I post the facts and connect them to a premise.

You make **** up to facilitate your denial.

The problem you have is that you cannot read. If you doubt it, I will be happy to illustrate with a glaring example.

 
Since you can't tell us the differences in the lowers you are not informed enough to go further.

They are IRRELEVANT.


Why not because you dunk on Rudy Gobert?

**** idiot.

 

I have done it multiple times.  You have NEVER answered that question nor have you acknowledged the facts. 

The auto sear in particular.  Quick, go google it. 

Next, your argument applies only to the SP1.  Nothing else. 

 

Huey » 06 Sep 2022, 7:36 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 7:36 am

I have done it multiple times.  You have NEVER answered that question nor have you acknowledged the facts. 

The auto sear in particular.  Quick, go google it. 

Next, your argument applies only to the SP1.  Nothing else.

IT IS A MODIFICATION, NOT A DESIGN.

**** moron.

 

Blackvegetable » 06 Sep 2022, 8:14 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 8:14 am

Huey » 06 Sep 2022, 7:36 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 7:36 am

I have done it multiple times.  You have NEVER answered that question nor have you acknowledged the facts. 

The auto sear in particular.  Quick, go google it. 

Next, your argument applies only to the SP1.  Nothing else.

IT IS A MODIFICATION, NOT A DESIGN.

**** moron.

 

 

The SP1 is not the same design as the Armalite Rifle 15 being tested in the 1957 report.  Next, the Armalite Rifle 15 is not the same as modern day AR STYLE weapons.  

 

Blackvegetable » 06 Sep 2022, 8:14 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 8:14 am

Huey » 06 Sep 2022, 7:36 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 7:36 am

I have done it multiple times.  You have NEVER answered that question nor have you acknowledged the facts. 

The auto sear in particular.  Quick, go google it. 

Next, your argument applies only to the SP1.  Nothing else.

IT IS A MODIFICATION, NOT A DESIGN.

**** moron.

 

 

This will help clear up any confusion and ignorance you have on the issue.  Remember, this only applies to the SP1, not the modern versions.

viewtopic.php?p=1647682#p1647682

 

Huey » 06 Sep 2022, 8:33 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 8:33 am

This will help clear up any confusion and ignorance you have on the issue.  Remember, this only applies to the SP1, not the modern versions.

viewtopic.php?p=1647682#p1647682

Twatty,

You presume that your yappy yappy is a substitute for citations.

It isn't.

You've lost.

No one is subject to your reinterpretations.

Blackvegetable » 06 Sep 2022, 8:36 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 8:36 am

Huey » 06 Sep 2022, 8:33 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 8:33 am

This will help clear up any confusion and ignorance you have on the issue.  Remember, this only applies to the SP1, not the modern versions.

viewtopic.php?p=1647682#p1647682

Twatty,

You presume that your yappy yappy is a substitute for citations.

It isn't.

You've lost.

No one is subject to your reinterpretations.

 

*******, click the link.  The citations are there.  Ya non reading waste of a ****. 

Due to the reduced character count I can't repost it.  So you will have to do a little work and actually clink to the post ya lazy bastard.

Huey » 06 Sep 2022, 8:48 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 8:48 am

*******, click the link.  The citations are there.  Ya non reading waste of a ****. 

Due to the reduced character count I can't repost it.  So you will have to do a little work and actually clink to the post ya lazy bastard.

Tiny,

I'm satisfied that my citation is dispositive.

I am also certain that you're a yapping imbecile.


 

Blackvegetable » 06 Sep 2022, 8:50 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 8:50 am

Tiny,

I'm satisfied that my citation is dispositive.

I am also certain that you're a yapping imbecile.

I am satisfied my experience and my citations are spot on.  Hell, I gave you your citations.  You don't understand them. 

Huey » 06 Sep 2022, 9:03 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 9:03 am

I am satisfied my experience and my citations are spot on.  Hell, I gave you your citations.  You don't understand them.

You can't know if your citations are even relevant, never mind "spot on",
because you can't read.

Asked to post a title of some dozen words, you offered 3 different versions..

 

Blackvegetable » 06 Sep 2022, 9:10 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 9:10 am

Huey » 06 Sep 2022, 9:03 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 9:03 am

I am satisfied my experience and my citations are spot on.  Hell, I gave you your citations.  You don't understand them.

You can't know if your citations are even relevant, never mind "spot on",
because you can't read.

Asked to post a title of some dozen words, you offered 3 different versions..

 

 

That's a stretch of the truth.  

Huey » 06 Sep 2022, 9:25 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 9:25 am

That's a stretch of the truth.

No...that has been demonstrated...

In your own words.

Blackvegetable » 06 Sep 2022, 9:50 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 9:50 am

Huey » 06 Sep 2022, 9:25 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 9:25 am

That's a stretch of the truth.

No...that has been demonstrated...

In your own words.

 

What has been demonstrated is you do not understand the info you were given AND the fact that none of this applies to the modern sporting rifles you buy today.  

@Blackvegetable  

Still waiting for your narrative as to the relevance of your 1957 report.  You sure are scared of that.  As scared as  you are to explain the difference in the lowers. 

Huey » 06 Sep 2022, 10:07 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 10:07 am

@Blackvegetable  

Still waiting for your narrative as to the relevance of your 1957 report.  You sure are scared of that.  As scared as  you are to explain the difference in the lowers.

No...you're  not.

Admit that you are far too stupid to understand the process by which the AR-15 evolved and why.

Then I will consider explaining it to you.


It isn't my job to disabuse you of all the things you believe are so.
 

Huey » 06 Sep 2022, 10:06 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 10:06 am

What has been demonstrated is you do not understand the info you were given AND the fact that none of this applies to the modern sporting rifles you buy today.

You've asserted it.

You have never demonstrated it.
 

Blackvegetable » 06 Sep 2022, 10:14 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 10:14 am

Huey » 06 Sep 2022, 10:07 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 10:07 am

@Blackvegetable  

Still waiting for your narrative as to the relevance of your 1957 report.  You sure are scared of that.  As scared as  you are to explain the difference in the lowers.

No...you're  not.

Admit that you are far too stupid to understand the process by which the AR-15 evolved and why.

Then I will consider explaining it to you.


It isn't my job to disabuse you of all the things you believe are so.
 

 

I am the one who explained it to you.

The Armalite Rifle 15 was manufactured by Armalite, a division of Fairchild.  Colt bought the design and named it the c601.  It was a select fire weapon with full auto.  After changes it became the M16.

The AR 15 SP1 was the civilian model, was not select fire with auto, had a few parts that were changed out to pass the BATF and the NFA of 1934 for civilian use.  The letter was posted for you.  Colt named it the AR 15 because they owned the name.  Plain and simple.  The AR 15 was not the Armalite Rifle used in the 1957 report. Nod and acknowledge.

Modern sports rifles are NOT what is in the 1957 report.  So please, explain the relevance.  

 

Blackvegetable » 06 Sep 2022, 10:15 am » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2022, 10:15 am

You've asserted it.

You have never demonstrated it.

Most of the links you use were given to you by me.

Now explain the relevance of your 1957 report AND how it applies to todays modern sporting rifles.