What makes the M4/M16 type rifles more deadly besides the select fire trigger?

[GripItAndRipIt]

I often hear the gun grabbers say we don't need military style weapons in civilians hands. The firearm supporters often fire back saying the AR15 is not a military style weapon. Besides the select fire trigger system of the M4/M16, what would make a higher end AR15 less capable than an M4/M16? It seems to me that we can get higher quality and more accurate barrels for our AR15s compared to the typical M4/M16 barrels. Wouldn't improved accuracy give us a more capable firearm especially at farther distances.

Correction: They don't call ARs 'military style' weapons. They ignorantly or disingenuously call them MILITARY WEAPONS or WEAPONS OF WAR. Titling at windmills to gaslight the public and sway public opinion, mobilizing soccer birthing people to donate more money to Birthing People Demand Action with the ultimate goal of taking our guns. ALL our guns.

 

[American123]

All true. But the people that want to ban ARs aren't concerned with their effectiveness in accurate military type use, but whether their lack of full auto makes them any less effective for indiscriminate mass murder. Which seems to be the case.

I don't truly believe they care all that much about murder either, because their focus seems to ignore a lot of murder and only include select types of murder that are (in terms of lives lost) one of the smallest type under the umbrella of murder.

 

[American123]

Correction: They don't call ARs 'military style' weapons. They ignorantly or disingenuously call them MILITARY WEAPONS or WEAPONS OF WAR. Titling at windmills to gaslight the public and sway public opinion, mobilizing soccer birthing people to donate more money to Birthing People Demand Action with the ultimate goal of taking our guns. ALL our guns.

Even the bolt action rifles and pump shotguns that the Fudds only care about.

"aS LoNg As tHEy DOnt TakE mY dEEr rIFlE"

 

[arakboss]

Correction: They don't call ARs 'military style' weapons. They ignorantly or disingenuously call them MILITARY WEAPONS or WEAPONS OF WAR. Titling at windmills to gaslight the public and sway public opinion, mobilizing soccer birthing people to donate more money to Birthing People Demand Action with the ultimate goal of taking our guns. ALL our guns.

They use all sorts of descriptions including the ones you mentioned. There really seems to be no difference between the AR15 style rifles and the military versions other than the select fire trigger system. I agree with @American123 that all firearms should be available to us unrestricted, but it's silly to describe the M4 or M16 as a drastically different firearm, when the only difference is the trigger system.

 

[American123]

They use all sorts of descriptions including the ones you mentioned. There really seems to be no difference between the AR15 style rifles and the military versions other than the select fire trigger system. I agree with @American123 that all firearms should be available to us unrestricted, but it's silly to describe the M4 or M16 as a drastically different firearm, when the only difference is the trigger system.

Yes, that's a terrible argument because it presupposes that the American public are denied "weapons of war." Which was actually the entire point of the 2nd Amendment.

 

[Jonnyuma]

soccer birthing people

That cracks me up every time l see it.
Wokes are so... ridiculous.

 

[DirectDrive]

I am trying to understand what is so special about the M4/M16 rifles. I see no difference besides the select fire capability.

It's the Full Auto feature. That's a big difference.
Some have the M203 grenade launcher attached.

 

[RX-79G]

They are less effective for indiscriminate mass murder, which is why most mass shootings are with pistols.

The comparison is between full auto and semi rifles. But your point about pistols flies in the face of the fact that we all know perfectly well that .223 is much more effective than pistol rounds, and constantly tell each other that. A mass murderer is going to kill more people per hit with .223 because handgun rounds are more survivable.

Handguns are used across all crimes more because they are easier to steal, easier to buy and easier to conceal. But everyone would rather face a criminal shooter with a 30 round Glock than an AR.

What seems to be the case?

That shooting random people in a school or mall doesn't disadvantage a semiauto rifle. The ranges are generally close and the shooter is motivated by each sequential kill rather than a final count. So having to pull the trigger 20 times to kill 20 people doesn't really matter to the shooter and their likelihood of deciding to do something evil, and succeeding. Even if there is a large crowd to spray bullets into, there a likely to be enough potential victims for a mass shooter to kill just as large a number at semiauto speeds. The advantages of full auto are primarily against other combatants.


What I see in these kind of debates is a disingenuous attempt to distract from the point the antis are making - that mass shootings have higher death tolls when the murderer combines the advantages of a rifle with the capacity, low recoil and speed of a semiauto pistol. Those things are true - they just are besides the point. The real point is that we have firearms to ensure freedom, and some level of abuse of that right is going to be the price we pay.

And, mass murders who don't use guns are going to graduate to even deadlier weapons, like bombs and fire. The real problem is that our society is currently producing a huge number of people with no sense of self preservation. Why are so many men willing to commit suicide this way?

 

[arakboss]

The comparison is between full auto and semi rifles. But your point about pistols flies in the face of the fact that we all know perfectly well that .223 is much more effective than pistol rounds, and constantly tell each other that. A mass murderer is going to kill more people per hit with .223 because handgun rounds are more survivable.

Handguns are used across all crimes more because they are easier to steal, easier to buy and easier to conceal. But everyone would rather face a criminal shooter with a 30 round Glock than an AR.


That shooting random people in a school or mall doesn't disadvantage a semiauto rifle. The ranges are generally close and the shooter is motivated by each sequential kill rather than a final count. So having to pull the trigger 20 times to kill 20 people doesn't really matter to the shooter and their likelihood of deciding to do something evil, and succeeding. Even if there is a large crowd to spray bullets into, there a likely to be enough potential victims for a mass shooter to kill just as large a number at semiauto speeds. The advantages of full auto are primarily against other combatants.


What I see in these kind of debates is a disingenuous attempt to distract from the point the antis are making - that mass shootings have higher death tolls when the murderer combines the advantages of a rifle with the capacity, low recoil and speed of a semiauto pistol. Those things are true - they just are besides the point. The real point is that we have firearms to ensure freedom, and some level of abuse of that right is going to be the price we pay.

And, mass murders who don't use guns are going to graduate to even deadlier weapons, like bombs and fire. The real problem is that our society is currently producing a huge number of people with no sense of self preservation. Why are so many men willing to commit suicide this way?

"That shooting random people in a school or mall doesn't disadvantage a semiauto rifle. The ranges are generally close and the shooter is motivated by each sequential kill rather than a final count. So having to pull the trigger 20 times to kill 20 people doesn't really matter to the shooter and their likelihood of deciding to do something evil, and succeeding."

I agree with this.

 

[Dinglenutz]

I argue neither is better than an M16. Each commercial product less capable

Fact check: Mostly true. I can do things w/ some of my AR rifles that a good marksman with an M16 would be hard pressed to duplicate, but those are special circumstances and not highly applicable to the topic gun-grabbers would have in mind.

 

[American123]

That cracks me up every time l see it.
Wokes are so... ridiculous.

Everything woke turns to bubblegum - Trump

 

[GripItAndRipIt]

Even the bolt action rifles and pump shotguns that the Fudds only care about.

"aS LoNg As tHEy DOnt TakE mY dEEr rIFlE"

100%. And Fudd's deer rifle is my .308 ranch rifle, which is a stone's throw from my AK.

Make no mistake: the global elites demand, require the total disarming of the last stronghold of quasi-freedom on this earth. They cannot build back better (aka install global Marxism) until 400 million guns in private hands are melted into solar panel frames.

 

[GripItAndRipIt]

They use all sorts of descriptions including the ones you mentioned. There really seems to be no difference between the AR15 style rifles and the military versions other than the select fire trigger system. I agree with @American123 that all firearms should be available to us unrestricted, but it's silly to describe the M4 or M16 as a drastically different firearm, when the only difference is the trigger system.

I am referring specifically to the language and obfuscation used by the punditry and certain elected leaders whose sole objective is the elimination or nullification of the 2A and the confiscation of privately-owned firearms. Their use of the language is deliberate, the subtle nuances of which are lost on casual obsevers who would believe such pablum as the AR-15 is a 'military weapon' or an 'assault rifle.'

To you main point: You are correct, the only functional difference between the military and civilian hardware is the trigger system.

 

[Diamondback]

Remember, these freaks think even a lowly Ruger 10/22 is an EEBIL MASS KILLING MILITARY INSTRUMENT OF DOOMING DEATH... there's no reasoning with them, only inoculating the populace by making them beclown themselves at every opportunity.

 

[GripItAndRipIt]

That cracks me up every time l see it.
Wokes are so... ridiculous.

Their manipulation of the public by the destruction and commandeering of the language would be laughable were it not so frightening.

 

[RX-79G]

I am referring specifically to the language and obfuscation used by the punditry and certain elected leaders whose sole objective is the elimination or nullification of the 2A and the confiscation of privately-owned firearms. Their use of the language is deliberate, the subtle nuances of which are lost on casual obsevers who would believe such pablum as the AR-15 is a 'military weapon' or an 'assault rifle.'

To you main point: You are correct, the only functional difference between the military and civilian hardware is the trigger system.

Asking not arguing - if the only real difference is the trigger system, in what way do you feel the language is being manipulated to further gun control?

Calling an AR15 a weapon of war might be a good way of motivating people who already hate guns, but is it false? It seems more like pointing out the obvious, but two people having completely different POVs on whether an attribute is positive or negative. Like whether a big SUV is a good, useful thing or an unnecessary, wasteful thing.

 

[GripItAndRipIt]

Remember, these freaks think even a lowly Ruger 10/22 is an EEBIL MASS KILLING MILITARY INSTRUMENT OF DOOMING DEATH... there's no reasoning with them, only inoculating the populace by making them beclown themselves at every opportunity.

My 10/22 is an EEBIL MASS KILLING INSTRUMENT OF DEATH if you happen to be a rabbit.

 

[GripItAndRipIt]

Asking not arguing - if the only real difference is the trigger system, in what way do you feel the language is being manipulated to further gun control?

Calling an AR15 a weapon of war might be a good way of motivating people who already hate guns, but is it false? It seems more like pointing out the obvious, but two people having completely different POVs on whether an attribute is positive or negative. Like whether a big SUV is a good, useful thing or an unnecessary, wasteful thing.

Yes. It is false that an AR-15 is a weapon of war. It is a lie - proffered to manipulate people by emotional subterfuge so they will be more pliable and willing to acquiesce to the anti-gun agenda. Add 'whiteness' to the mix as they now do, and you've got two legs of an awful tripod.

 

[Stomper]

100%. And Fudd's deer rifle is my .308 ranch rifle, which is a stone's throw from my AK.

Make no mistake: the global elites demand, require the total disarming of the last stronghold of quasi-freedom on this earth. They cannot build back better (aka install global Marxism) until 400 million guns in private hands are melted into solar panel frames.

As well as the former gun owners being turned into lamp-shades and bars of soap.

 

[RX-79G]

Yes. It is false that an AR-15 is a weapon of war. It is a lie - proffered to manipulate people by emotional subterfuge so they will be more pliable and willing to acquiesce to the anti-gun agenda. Add 'whiteness' to the mix as they now do, and you've got two legs of an awful tripod.

What makes it not a weapon of war, if we use that phrase to mean a gun developed for and issued for military use?