Battle rifle???? Really?

Gun, shooting and equipment discussions unrelated to CHL issues

Moderator: carlson1


Topic author
cmgee67
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 1914
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2015 2:45 pm

Battle rifle???? Really?

#1

Post by cmgee67 »

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
User avatar

C-dub
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 13570
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 7:18 pm
Location: DFW

Re: Battle rifle???? Really?

#2

Post by C-dub »

Can I still consider my Garand, Enfield, or Springfield 1903 battle rifles?
I am not and have never been a LEO. My avatar is in honor of my friend, Dallas Police Sargent Michael Smith, who was murdered along with four other officers in Dallas on 7.7.2016.
NRA Patriot-Endowment Lifetime Member---------------------------------------------Si vis pacem, para bellum.................................................Patriot Guard Rider
User avatar

mojo84
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 9043
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 4:07 pm
Location: Boerne, TX (Kendall County)

Re: Battle rifle???? Really?

#3

Post by mojo84 »

What prompted this? I haven't seen that term used very much if at all.
Note: Me sharing a link and information published by others does not constitute my endorsement, agreement, disagreement, my opinion or publishing by me. If you do not like what is contained at a link I share, take it up with the author or publisher of the content.

WTR
Banned
Posts in topic: 6
Posts: 1931
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 10:41 pm

Re: Battle rifle???? Really?

#4

Post by WTR »

cmgee67 wrote: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
Any gun fight that a person may engage in is a battle. Only the Military engage on a field defined as a battle field.
User avatar

Skiprr
Moderator
Posts in topic: 6
Posts: 6458
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2006 4:50 pm
Location: Outskirts of Houston

Re: Battle rifle???? Really?

#5

Post by Skiprr »

mojo84 wrote:What prompted this? I haven't seen that term used very much if at all.
Ditto. The only reference to "battle rifle" I've seen on this Forum in 2017 was in a 7.62 NATO over 5.56 mention.

For all intents and purposes, I believe the accepted term for any AR-15 is "modern sporting rifle." Or maybe "modern sporting pistol" for my small one. ;-)

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."
Join the NRA or upgrade your membership today. Support the Texas Firearms Coalition and subscribe to the Podcast.
I’ve contacted my State Rep, Gary Elkins, about co-sponsoring HB560. Have you contacted your Rep?
NRA Benefactor Life Member

Topic author
cmgee67
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 1914
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2015 2:45 pm

Re: Battle rifle???? Really?

#6

Post by cmgee67 »

It's a term I have seen all over other forums and YouTube with the tacticool ninjas. I wasn't jumping on anybody body here. And yes old military rifles can still be called that lol. And mordern sporting rifle that's a good one!

Ruark
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 1811
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 8:11 pm

Re: Battle rifle???? Really?

#7

Post by Ruark »

Why does it "get on your nerves" what somebody else chooses to call their gun? What if I call mine "whoopeekipperredherring"? You gonna have a tiff? :coolgleamA:

I just call mine my "AR." Sometimes I call my magazines "clips," too, but boy, watch the Language Police come out of the woodwork when I do.
-Ruark
User avatar

C-dub
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 13570
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 7:18 pm
Location: DFW

Re: Battle rifle???? Really?

#8

Post by C-dub »

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.
I am not and have never been a LEO. My avatar is in honor of my friend, Dallas Police Sargent Michael Smith, who was murdered along with four other officers in Dallas on 7.7.2016.
NRA Patriot-Endowment Lifetime Member---------------------------------------------Si vis pacem, para bellum.................................................Patriot Guard Rider
User avatar

Skiprr
Moderator
Posts in topic: 6
Posts: 6458
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2006 4:50 pm
Location: Outskirts of Houston

Re: Battle rifle???? Really?

#9

Post by Skiprr »

cmgee67 wrote:And modern sporting rifle that's a good one!
Goes back in common use to 2009. Here's a Google search.
Join the NRA or upgrade your membership today. Support the Texas Firearms Coalition and subscribe to the Podcast.
I’ve contacted my State Rep, Gary Elkins, about co-sponsoring HB560. Have you contacted your Rep?
NRA Benefactor Life Member

jason812
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 1534
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:41 pm
Location: Central Texas

Re: Battle rifle???? Really?

#10

Post by jason812 »

Are my model 70's battle rifles? If so is it only the 06 and not the 243 or 270?
In certain extreme situations, the law is inadequate. In order to shame its inadequacy, it is necessary to act outside the law to pursue a natural justice.

WTR
Banned
Posts in topic: 6
Posts: 1931
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 10:41 pm

Re: Battle rifle???? Really?

#11

Post by WTR »

jason812 wrote:Are my model 70's battle rifles? If so is it only the 06 and not the 243 or 270?
Now we are getting into "Sniper" rifles. Most of the ARs shown here would be considered "assault" rifles if they had a bayonet attachment.

Wag2323
Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 157
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2016 8:04 am
Location: Conroe

Re: Battle rifle???? Really?

#12

Post by Wag2323 »

My rifle is called the "Pirate AR" it has a spikes jolly roger lower.
User avatar

Skiprr
Moderator
Posts in topic: 6
Posts: 6458
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2006 4:50 pm
Location: Outskirts of Houston

Re: Battle rifle???? Really?

#13

Post by Skiprr »

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.
Join the NRA or upgrade your membership today. Support the Texas Firearms Coalition and subscribe to the Podcast.
I’ve contacted my State Rep, Gary Elkins, about co-sponsoring HB560. Have you contacted your Rep?
NRA Benefactor Life Member
User avatar

Skiprr
Moderator
Posts in topic: 6
Posts: 6458
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2006 4:50 pm
Location: Outskirts of Houston

Re: Battle rifle???? Really?

#14

Post by Skiprr »

WTR wrote:Most of the ARs shown here would be considered "assault" rifles if they had a bayonet attachment.
Seriously?
Join the NRA or upgrade your membership today. Support the Texas Firearms Coalition and subscribe to the Podcast.
I’ve contacted my State Rep, Gary Elkins, about co-sponsoring HB560. Have you contacted your Rep?
NRA Benefactor Life Member
User avatar

Jusme
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 5350
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2016 4:23 pm
Location: Johnson County, Texas

Re: Battle rifle???? Really?

#15

Post by Jusme »

I call mine Sue. No reason just figured if it made Johnny Cash tougher it would work for my rifle. :biggrinjester:
Take away the Second first, and the First is gone in a second :rules: :patriot:
Post Reply

Return to “General Gun, Shooting & Equipment Discussion”