Liberal Forum

Huey » 21 Feb 2023, 10:38 am » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 10:38 am

@Blackvegetable  

I am saying there are two designs.  Don't ask again.

So, again.

Are you arguing that Colt sent a semi auto, AND a "version" modified so as not to be a machine gun"?
 

Blackvegetable » 21 Feb 2023, 12:03 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 12:03 pm

So, again.

Are you arguing that Colt sent a semi auto, AND a "version" modified so as not to be a machine gun"?

So again....

I am saying there are two designs.  Don't ask again.

Huey » 21 Feb 2023, 12:06 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 12:06 pm

So again....

I am saying there are two designs.  Don't ask again.

Your new snippet doesn't make that case....either.

We KNOW one of the weapons was a disabled "machine gun" under the ATF definition.

 

Blackvegetable » 21 Feb 2023, 12:08 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 12:08 pm

Your new snippet doesn't make that case....either.

We KNOW one of the weapons was a disabled "machine gun" under the ATF definition.

Of course.  Never in dispute.  

Blackvegetable » 20 Feb 2023, 6:09 pm » wrote: ↑

20 Feb 2023, 6:09 pm

The weapon in question was what at the time was the only COLT AR-15 in existence, specifically the full auto version sold to the Air Force in 1962.

This is why using ATF lingo is stupid.

Nod.

Stop being an imbecile, Princess Sheilagh of Lilliput Circle.

This post is where you **** up.  In reply to this comment:

It is the opinion of this office that the AR-15 automatic rifle used as a
prototype model of the Sport Version weapon

No you are trying to wiggle out of it.  

 

Huey » 21 Feb 2023, 12:13 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 12:13 pm

Of course.  Never in dispute.

So we have a full auto being compared to a "modified" "version" of the same weapon.

I count one design, one variant.

Huey » 21 Feb 2023, 12:17 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 12:17 pm

This post is where you **** up.  In reply to this comment:

It is the opinion of this office that the AR-15 automatic rifle used as a
prototype model of the Sport Version weapon

No you are trying to wiggle out of it.

Where are you seeing any confirmation of a second design?

Blackvegetable » 21 Feb 2023, 12:37 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 12:37 pm

So we have a full auto being compared to a "modified" "version" of the same weapon.

I count one design, one variant.

You have one design being compared to another design.   

Blackvegetable » 21 Feb 2023, 12:39 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 12:39 pm

Where are you seeing any confirmation of a second design?

Looks like you have nothing but questions.

I have posted all the design changes multiple times.  

Huey » 21 Feb 2023, 12:53 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 12:53 pm

Looks like you have nothing but questions.

I have posted all the design changes multiple times.

The modifications, necessary so as not to make it a machine gun...

 

Huey » 21 Feb 2023, 12:52 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 12:52 pm

You have one design being compared to another design.

If it was "another design"  it would not be

referred to as a "version"

"modified"

accompanied by a disabled unit of the "machine gun"

Blackvegetable » 21 Feb 2023, 1:09 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 1:09 pm

If it was "another design"  it would not be

referred to as a "version"

"modified"

accompanied by a disabled unit of the "machine gun"

If it was "another design"  it would not be

referred to as a "version"

Sure it would.

Accompanied by a weapon designed for combat.  


 

Blackvegetable » 21 Feb 2023, 1:07 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 1:07 pm

The modifications, necessary so as not to make it a machine gun...

Sure, the newly designed bolt carrier, trigger assembly, lower receiver to name a very few.  

Blackvegetable » 21 Feb 2023, 1:09 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 1:09 pm

If it was "another design"  it would not be

referred to as a "version"

"modified"

accompanied by a disabled unit of the "machine gun"

 

• The lower parts kit: The AR-15 and the M16 use different lower parts kits. These kits include components such as the trigger, disconnector, safety selector lever and hammer. The main difference within these components is that the parts in an M16 lower work with an auto sear enabling the rifle to fire three-round bursts or in fully automatic.
• The lower receiver: The AR-15’s lower receiver is made with different internal dimensions to prevent it from accepting the M16’s auto sear.
• The bolt: In order for the M16 to provide its full-auto function, the bolt design is slightly different from that of the AR-15’s commercial bolt carrier group. The M16’s bolt carrier has extra mass at its rear, which interacts with the sear and helps to reduce the recoil endured when the gun is set to automatic.

https://www.wingtactical.com/blog/ar15-vs-m16/

Different designs. 

 

Huey » 21 Feb 2023, 1:55 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 1:55 pm

Sure it would.

Accompanied by a weapon designed for combat.

Why would they include the weapon designed for combat?

Huey » 21 Feb 2023, 2:04 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 2:04 pm

• The lower parts kit: The AR-15 and the M16 use different lower parts kits. These kits include components such as the trigger, disconnector, safety selector lever and hammer. The main difference within these components is that the parts in an M16 lower work with an auto sear enabling the rifle to fire three-round bursts or in fully automatic.
• The lower receiver: The AR-15’s lower receiver is made with different internal dimensions to prevent it from accepting the M16’s auto sear.
• The bolt: In order for the M16 to provide its full-auto function, the bolt design is slightly different from that of the AR-15’s commercial bolt carrier group. The M16’s bolt carrier has extra mass at its rear, which interacts with the sear and helps to reduce the recoil endured when the gun is set to automatic.

https://www.wingtactical.com/blog/ar15-vs-m16/

Different designs.

Those are modifications.

 
 

Huey » 21 Feb 2023, 1:56 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 1:56 pm

Sure, the newly designed bolt carrier, trigger assembly, lower receiver to name a very few.

Modifications.

And yet the AR-15 can STILL be converted to a "machine gun"..
 

Blackvegetable » 21 Feb 2023, 2:28 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 2:28 pm

Those are modifications.

Which meant a newly designed pieces and parts.  To include the lower.  Two designs.  

Blackvegetable » 21 Feb 2023, 2:29 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 2:29 pm

Modifications.

And yet the AR-15 can STILL be converted to a "machine gun"..

You can not convert a Sporter to full auto or to a "machine gun" by simply inserting M 16 parts.  Two different designs. 

Huey » 21 Feb 2023, 2:42 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 2:42 pm

You can not convert a Sporter to full auto or to a "machine gun" by simply inserting M 16 parts.  Two different designs.

Can a Colt AR-15 be converted into a machine gun?

Yes or no?