• magnusrufus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    The AR15 was designed to be the most effective general case weapon of war to be carried by soldiers. If it didn’t have measurable advantage over other rifles why did the US military adopt the M-16? Select fire is far from the only characteristic that contributes to the efficient lethality of that design.

    • SupraMario@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      They don’t use the AR-15 in the military… it’s still a plastic fucking semi automatic rifle …just like my wood ones that are semi auto…there is no difference. It’s like trying to ban a car because it’s got a spoiler and painted red…

      • magnusrufus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        If it didn’t have measurable advantage over other rifles why did the US military adopt the M-16? The M-16 was derived from the AR-15. The semi-auto characteristic is just one aspect of the rifle. No one, pro-gun, anti-gun, or anywhere in between takes the opinion “all semi-auto rifles are the same” seriously, because its ridiculously reductive and just not true. Its weight, length, ease of use, magazine capacity, and ammo type all significantly factor into its performance. Are you trying to be honest or are you emotionally blinded on this topic?