• @ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    18 months ago

    AR and M-16 are essentially the same rifle.

    Actually yes that is my point exactly, they’re not essentially the same rifle. Are a nuke and a grenade “essentially the same” because they both explode? No because despite having similarities there are a few key differences between the two ordanences. Similarly, the AR15 and M16 are different rifles despite cosmetic similarities, because the key differences in the functional parts, namely the auto sear (or burst ratcheting system for the M4). For a civilian to have what you’re trying to dress AR15s up as they have to have that class III SOT bullshit.

    Yes yes the military got them to add a forward assist and bought like 1,000 of them under the designation of AR-15 between 1957 and 1961, when they changed the designation to M16 for full adoption. Who’s the pedant now? They were still select fire, so fine, “there were about 1,000 ‘military grade’ ones in 1959ish,” but why pretend that everyone has one in their closet today if we both know it isn’t true? The ones owned by people without a class III SOT today are all invariably “not military grade,” so why pretend that they are? You and I both know the functional parts are different, yet you pretend they aren’t.

    • ArcaneSlime said:

      pssst. The AR-15 has been used by a total of no military anywhere on the planet.

      but wait…

      ArcaneSlime also said:

      Yes yes the military got them to add a forward assist and bought like 1,000 of them under the designation of AR-15 between 1957 and 1961

      Oh, so you agree? Just wanted to memorialize that for you. Keep arguing about the technicalities on your own.

      • @ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        1
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Yes yes, a total of 1,000, whoopty doo, I was under the impression that since it wasn’t officially adopted only purchased by the designation of “ar15” in the same configuration as an m16, I could get away with saying “use.” I was mistaken, I can admit when I was wrong.

        So you agree this problem was already addressed in 1986 then, which is a refreshing change.