Battle rifle???? Really?

[twomillenium]

Jeff Cooper called them poodle shooters.

I guess if a pack or even a herd of poodles started an attack the AR15 could be justifiably used as a poodle shooter.

[Ameer]

what's not very often said is he also had a lot of folks who thought him a big blowhard...

[twomillenium]

Jeff Cooper had a lot of good gun opinions and at times a lot of arrogance...

He justifiably had and still has a lot of admirers, but what's not very often said is he also had a lot of folks who thought him a big blowhard...

And nobody remembers their names, let alone remember having ever seen them prove him wrong...

Aren't we all big blowhards at times? It is just that some of us do it in a way that is more successful or more remembered than others.

[rm9792]

Not sure if this was brought up but it seems to be used to distinguish what the liberals like to call an assault rifle from other rifles that aren't hunting rifles. I wish the pundits would pick up the term as it is not as offensive to snowflakes as assault rifle. As to the OP comment, no you are not a soldier nor in battle but it is still a battle rifle. My pickup truck is not trucking anything right now but it is still a truck.

[longtooth]

I do not understand why people refer to their Ar platform rifles as their "battle rifles". First of all if an individual is not enlisted or an LEO and in an actual conflict then the rifle is not a battle rifle. It is simply a defensive rifle or a hunting rifle or a range rifle. The rifle gets the name associated with that best defines its use/uses. Sorry gents and ladies I had to rant a little bit it just has been on my nerves. That is all. CARRY ON

When the battle comes all my battle rifles will be proven to be aaaaaaaa, well, Battle Rifles.
When I hunt w/ them they are hunting rifles.
When I poke holes in paper they are target rifles.

[cmgee67]

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.

[Liberty]

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.

[Jusme]

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"

[Liberty]

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"

[The Annoyed Man]

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.