edwdickinson Loc: Ardmore PA

The AR15 is a civilian weapon, there is no military version of the AR15. All firearms are deadly weapons regardless of who is holding it, weapons regardless as to whether it is an AR15 or a Glock do not cause grief only the person firing the weapon does. The only people who consider gun owners or collectors monsters are those who have been indoctrinated to believe so. Stringent gun laws mean nothing to the criminals who are killing people. Guns do not kill people it is the person pulling the trigger that kills people.

mikedent Loc: Florida

Yes, logical answers to the problem of criminals using firearms don't always sway emotional reactions.

pendennis

The AR-15 is no deadlier than any other weapon. And the ban on high capacity magazines was tried, and found not to be a deterrence to those who wished to harm others. You, as a "gun collector" should also know the difference between a "clip" and a "magazine. And, I have no idea what you mean by "auto switches". In fact the AR-15 is further down on the list than are handguns of all types. You are far more likely to be killed by a drunk driver than an AR-15.

You can't have it both ways with the 2nd Amendment. The right to keep and bear arms long precedes the U.S. Constitution; it even precedes the settlement of the colonies in North America.

As to the "Wild West", it wasn't. Murder rates in Kansas during the cattle drive years, had fewer murders in several towns in total, that the number in Chicago, and many other cities in the East. The west was very tame, and in fact, many towns, such as Dodge City and Abilene had ordinances which forbade carrying guns in the city limits.

mikedent Loc: Florida

"An armed society is a polite society." Heinlein?

BebuLamar

I am not sure if the military ever got their rifles from Armalite. Most of the M16 I've seen are from Colt.

pendennis

Armalite was never the M-16 contractor. Armalite sold the design to Colt in 1959. In 1962, Colt, with Eugene Stoner as a paid consultant, sold some 80K rifles to the Air Force as a lightweight base security weapon, while Curtis LeMay was USAF Chief of Staff.

edwdickinson Loc: Ardmore PA

I'm pretty sure he meant select fire and not auto switches. Although in his defense he did say he collected guns not that he knew anything about them.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

I can tell you from experience that a fully loaded M-16 (5.56mm) magazine is much lighter (almost half) the weight of an M-14 (.308 cal) magazine - a BIG deal if you have to carry a pack full of magazines in the bush. Not to mention the fact that an M-14 on full auto is very difficult to control, whereas the M-16 is pretty benign for short bursts. However, short of having to hump 20 magazines in the bush, I’ll take an M-14 any day - much more effective at 300+ yds.

Effate Loc: El Dorado Hills, Ca.

Oklahoma City, fertilizer, Japan has very few guns so a mentally I’ll person kills 69 people by setting fire to a video gaming event and the largest mass school shooting in U.S. history (Virginia Tech) was committed with two hand guns (9mm and .22). Where there is a will, there is a way. You can’t legislate against crazy! Less than 1% of homicides are committed with any type of rifle.

GregS Loc: Central Illinois, USA

Just a note: No military in the world uses an AR-15 rifle.

pendennis

I know what he meant. But, any collector of firearms ought to know the proper nomenclature for his hobby. There are but few weapons in the "public domain" with selector switches, and he should know that.

He also has a pretty poor understanding of history.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

My M14 with a light weight clip on bipod and selector switch when on guard with it set up in a bunker around the compound used to attract a lot of attention from combat troops (we had transit barracks for field troops visiting the hospitals, depots, HQ etc. so we got a lot of field guys in our compound) who often tried to get me to trade for all kinds of exotic things plus a wad of money. They seemed to think that I could just report it a "combat loss" until I pointed out we were in the middle of a 1200(later 2100) troop compound which I almost never left. On the M14 the switch can be removed-our HQ unit only officers, E-6 and above NCO's and the ten best shots got a switch. I was #2 after an 18 year old alcoholic with perfect eye sight* from the Ozarks who grew up hunting small game with a .22 from age 7 if he wanted any meat at his meals. So I got one.

*I wore and still wear "coke bottle" class glasses. After 2 years 8 months of my 3 year Regular Army enlistment a doctor at our clinic told me I shouldn't have been in a combat zone and probably not even in the Army with my eye sight minus glasses. He said he could get me an honorable medical discharge in 4-6 weeks. I just told him I only had 4 months left on my enlistment so don't bother. I did have three pairs of glasses (wore one and carried one at all times) plus prescription lenses that fit in my gas mask.

But those field guys, esp. those who manned LZs etc. and didn't have to hump with a 14 and load of ammo, or spent their days riding in a vehicle of some kind, really wanted my M14 for the range, penetration and stopping power. Captured full caliber "battle rifles" were popular with them if they couldn't get a US M14 or even M1.

edwdickinson Loc: Ardmore PA

Yea, I was being facetious.

pendennis

pendennis

I had an opportunity to try out the M-14E2 (later -A1) at Camp Fogarty, RI. The Marine armorer told us how "easy" it was to hold down the E2 with the modified stock, and using the left hand to brace the right. However, after about the third round, bullet placement was iffy, at best. And trying to keep the rate of fire to three-round bursts was fantasy. I could handle the M-60 better. Yeah, I know. The M-60 was "a lot more" gun.

A few years earlier, I got to try out the Browning BAR. It was infinitely easier to keep on target, but the weight was a real pain.