TexasCHLforum.com

Jusme wrote:

Liberty wrote:

cmgee67 wrote:I agree that if a battle comes and we have to fight the rifle could be considered a battle rifle. But we most likely will never be in a "battle". To me the Ar will be called whatever role it is in to me. And that's hunting and defensive. Don't get me wrong, I think we should be prepared should something ever happen but I'm not gonna live And worry like it will.

One of the things that drives me nuts is how us gun people get all defensive when someone refers certain styles of guns as Assault Rifles. So who cares if they have a scary name. I sure like the label Assault rifle a whole lot better than "Sporting Rifle" To me it makes the guns sound like a daisy airgun it's a terrible label. These guns are not about organized children's games, they are military styled weapons. We let the leftist media put us on the defensive instead of owning it. They push us around and set the narrative.

Stoner and ArmorLite didn't design the AR 15 to be a sporting gun they designed it for a fight whether it be for battle or assault. I actualy prefer the label "combat rifle" While most of us have no expectation to take these into combat we are all very much aware that this is what they were designed and intended for. We should take no shame in that, and be proud that such guns have this heritage. We don't owe anyone apologies over this heritage and we should remember that the 2nd amendment was all about military grade weapons. The modern quality AR15 we have today is a much better fighting machine than the Jammomatic that was forced on our troops in its day. The lack of automatic selection is a minor thing even the military has been trying to downplay.

I don't own a battle rifle or an assault rifle, I own a scout rifle. It was designed for scouting purposes, although it is doubtful I will ever use it for its intended role. The design for the common style black rifles is for assault, combat or battle. even if its user never intends to use them that way.

I agree, I have never been too worried about "labels" especially when they are perpetrated by liberals. In fact I have fully embraced several of them.

And, with that in mind, my rifle will now be my "Deplorable Rifle"

I think of all EBRs as "militia rifles". It's politically incorrect, but if it irritates liberals, I'm for it. What does a member of the unorganized militia do with a rifle? Anything and everything, including maintains his/her skills at the range, feeding him/herself fresh meat, defending hearth and home, plinking red coats, putting down both 4-legged and 2-legged predators, and parading around the town square with fife and drum. Anything that irritates lefties. All of that said, I don't see much value in the "parading around the town square" part......unless the flag has gone up, and the call out for the militia to organize has gone out. Otherwise, it's just needless provocation. Anybody can be a provocateur. It takes no special talent. But I do like the finesse game, and irritating a liberal in a way that they can't really do anything about it provides one with endless entertainment. So when a libtard says to me, "why do you need a [substitute type of EBR here]?" My answer is that I am a member of the unorganized militia, and it is my militia rifle — to hunt with, feed my family with, protect my hearth and home with, plink red coats (and quislings) with, and to parade with fife and drum in the town square when the militia organizes and gets called up.

That can lead to all kinds of opportunities for either entertainment, or intelligent conversation, depending on the individual liberal's depth of intellect. The shallow ones I irritate for my own amusement. The ones with deeper intellect I challenge through conversation......including asking them what THEY have done to prepare themselves as part of the nation's unorganized militia.

Skiprr wrote:

C-dub wrote:

Skiprr wrote: And FYI, if you want pick apart the term "battle rifle," I would include only the military, not law enforcement. LE has become more militarized over time--arguably either a good or bad thing, depending on where you stand--but even the DEA or FBI HRT don't actually go into "battle."

I also considered this, but then I thought that just because of who owns it doesn't change what it is. The M4 Sherman tanks and other models that often sit outside various posts or VFW's are still tanks or battle tanks or whatever. They may not be functional as such, but they are still tanks.

But even during the brief one-year period (61-62) when a rifle referred to as the "AR-15" found its way into unofficial use in Viet Nam, it was a full-auto select-fire. In November 1963, with the first military order from Colt, it became the "M16."

The Eugene Stoner military design was never semi-automatic only. Semi-autos never went into battle. So I guess it would be like calling a heavy vehicle designed and built to run on treads but with no armament a "battle tank." It's a tank, but its design has never seen battle.

You can go out and buy a 190 mph motorcycle that has lights and turn signals on it. Some people call that a race-bike, even though it may never see an actual race-track. Ultimately, any rifle you do battle with is a "battle rifle". I don't know where the term originated, but I have used it. When I have, I always used it to mean a .308 caliber civilian owned version of military rifles for tactical use, like the M14, FN FAL, SCAR 17H, M110/SR25, HK 91, etc., etc. For whatever reason, I never thought of the AR15 in that same light......although like you point it, it certainly meets the description. I've always thought of civilian ownership of the AR15 as more of a personal defense / hunting thing. I have also described it as a "militia weapon"......in step with the theory of "well regulated" in the 2nd Amendment meaning for the militia to be similarly equipped in terms of small arms to the standing army, for logistical reasons.

But for me personally, the term Battle Rifle has always had sort of a "here comes the heavy metal" sort of smell to it. The AR15 is a great platform, and I love mine. But it isn't "heavy metal", like my SCAR 17 is.