Weapon for Equipment

[JimS]

I had some one contact me from my ad on Craigslist offering me a trade, an AR 15 for a Shaver post pounder. I thought it very odd, especially as I am in CA and transfer is illegal.

Not doing it. Highly suspicious.

 

[Fred Werring]

That and you can buy new...granted, low end...AR15's for less than $500 all day any more.

Take a pretty rough shaver driver to only bring $500 around here.

Fred

 

[RayP(MI)]

Tell him no. tell him to sell it and bring cash. Sounds awfully shaky to me. Maybe his stuff is hot?

 

[Dachshund]

A local Amish man has a nice Logan metal lathe for sale...Had a guy offer him a 4 wheeler in trade.....

 

[the tractor vet]

IMHO the driver is worth more then any AR15 even if it was legal.

 

[Sprint 6]

An AR 15 is no more a weapon than a pocket knife. It is the situation that makes a weapon, not the object. An AR 15 is a gun, just like millions of others. Please don't perpetuate misinformation like the media.

 

[Cameano]

I bought a nice 350 Chevy off of a friend because he had no place to store it and I was moving. He had offered it for free, but I insisted on buying it, so he priced it at $250. I ended up selling the heads to buy a .44mag Ruger Super Redhawk, then traded the short block to a coworker's friend for a Bushmaster AR15. Not a bad deal all around, but if it's illegal to transfer a semi auto rifle because it looks scary to people in your state, don't do it.

 

[krm]

Nice to see the NRA is keeping an eye on us. You would have to catch me to use a knife on me but no so on the AR15.

 

[rockyridgefarm]

A weapon is any object that is designed for the purpose of inflicting harm to persons, objects, or systems. The AR-15 is designed for one purpose - to inflict damage to persons, so it is a weapon. A pocket knife is not designed to inflict damage to persons, objects, or systems. Therefore, it is not a weapon. It can be used as a weapon, but it is not defined as one. Please don't perpetuate the misinformation of the NRA.

On a side note, try calling an AR-15 a gun to a person in the military

 

[GordoSD]

And you can pay more. I sold an original pre ban Colt SP-1 AR for $2100 a few weeks ago.

 

[Sprint 6]

Interesting view point. My AR 15 has never been inflicted harm on a person, perhaps it missed that memo when it left the factory? On the
other hand, my pocket knife has often cut my finger when it slipped, perhaps it is confused as to its status in the world?

 

[oldtanker]

(quoted from post at 09:49:27 02/16/17)
A weapon is any object that is designed for the purpose of inflicting harm to persons, objects, or systems. The AR-15 is designed for one purpose - to inflict damage to persons, so it is a weapon. A pocket knife is not designed to inflict damage to persons, objects, or systems. Therefore, it is not a weapon. It can be used as a weapon, but it is not defined as one. Please don't perpetuate the misinformation of the NRA.

___________________________________________________

On a side note, try calling an AR-15 a gun to a person in the military

ctually the AR platform rifle was designed and sold as a sporting firearm starting in 1956. In 59 some AR15's were sold to another country as a military firearm. After it was modified to suit the US Army it was adopted in 1963 as the M16. So no, it wasn't designed to inflict "damage to persons". It was modified to do that from a sporting firearm.

Also as a side note, when the 2nd Amendment was written and ratified the Army was equipped with a French smooth bore musket with an accurate rage of 50-75 yards while a popular civilian firearm was the Pennsylvania Long Rifle with an accurate range of about 200 yards. Plus there was no bar to civilians owning cannons. Now I am not advocating allowing civilians owning modern cannons but our founding fathers clearly did not mind the civilian population having better weapons than the military. Fast forward to the civil war and the army was equipped with muzzle loading rifles but the lever action rifle had been in civilian hands more than 5 years. When Custer was defeated at the Little Big Horn he troops were armed with single shot breach loaders while the Indians had mostly level guns. The auto loading rifle was in civilian hands around 1905 yet the military did not adopt one until the late 1930s when they bought the M1 rifle.

Just because someone said the AR was designed as an assault rifle doesn't make it so. The AR15 of today lacks certain features like the ability to fire auto that defines an assault weapon.

Gee that means the US Military has been equipped with a sporting rifle modified to military standards sense 1963 through today.

Rick

 

[Traditional Farmer]

To look at it that way I guess military tanks are modified farm tractors since they operate under the same basic design.The 5.56 round that the AR 15 fires isn't a very powerful bullet as far
as rifle bullets go anyway.Theory is a wounded enemy is better than a dead one in war as it takes way more resources away from the enemy to handle the wounded.

 

[rockyridgefarm]

Oldtanker,

At the time of the writing of the Bill of Rights, a single firearm wasn't effective as a military weapon. What made them effective was masses of men carrying masses of firearms. One man with an AR could wipe out an entire rank of men with muzzleloaders before they even got into range to fire.

But that wasn't my point. My point was that trying to argue that an AR15 is not a weapon is foolish. "This isn't a tractor, it's a vehicle", is about the same argument.

 

[oldtanker]

(quoted from post at 00:02:54 02/17/17) To look at it that way I guess military tanks are modified farm tractors since they operate under the same basic design.The 5.56 round that the AR 15 fires isn't a very powerful bullet as far
as rifle bullets go anyway.Theory is a wounded enemy is better than a dead one in war as it takes way more resources away from the enemy to handle the wounded.

The Remington .233 (AKA 5.56) started life because of what the US military wanted. And correct, a dead soldier if need be can be left where they fell. Wounded man requires a medic, litter bearers and such. They figured back then it took 6 men to transport wounded soldier to an aid station. Plus the assets treat/transport the soldier after they reached the aid station. Against an enemy who is concerned about taking care of their men it works. Against others, not so much.

Another factor involved with this is studies conducted both after WWII and Korea. The average infantry soldier was reluctant to take a shot further than a couple hundred meters. So why issue a rifle and ammo capable of 800 to 1000 yards? Soldier could carry much more ammo too. The basic load in 1776 was 40 rounds. WWII 80. With the Load Bearing Equipment (LBE) issued after the M16 was adopted the Mag pouches carried 4 mags each and 2 pouches were issued. Plus more ammo could be carried in fanny packs and ruck sacks (back packs). Mission dictates load out.

Rick

 

[Sprint 6]

If someone pulls a knife on you inside of 8 feet, you are a dead man. Have friends that have been through the police academy, they are taught if a perp is advancing with a knife, they must be put down outside the 8 foot circle. Otherwise the outcome won't be good.

 

[oldtanker]

(quoted from post at 07:42:21 02/17/17) Oldtanker,

At the time of the writing of the Bill of Rights, a single firearm wasn't effective as a military weapon. What made them effective was masses of men carrying masses of firearms. One man with an AR could wipe out an entire rank of men with muzzleloaders before they even got into range to fire.

But that wasn't my point. My point was that trying to argue that an AR15 is not a weapon is foolish. "This isn't a tractor, it's a vehicle", is about the same argument.

At the time the bill of rights was signed it was common for a community to mass together to defend itself mostly at the time from Indians and the founding fathers knew that. Most of the Militias who fought the British, what were they carrying? GO ask the British just how effective they were!

One person with an AR15 can kill a lot of undefended people, that's true. And fertilizer and a Uhaul truck can kill a lot too. How about a semi truck just driven into a large crowd? Or an airliner being crashed into a building? Or something as simple as a pressure cooker?

Less than 1% of the 8-10,000 murders committed each year with firearms use and AR15, AK series, Mini14 or other such type rifle. Most use handguns. But look at the mass murders. The VA Tech killings, Sandy Hook, Arora CO, Bath MI (1927) 2 used AR15's, one pistols and lastly explosives. The murders all had something in common, MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES! The VA Tech killings, Sandy Hook and Arora CO all had KNOWN mental health issues. Don't blame the tool. Blame the "mechanic"!

A .22 rifle is a weapon too. The AR15 IS NOT AN ASSUALT WEAPON. Never was. That's what I was pointing out. Contrary to what some politicians and gun control supporters claim the AR15 doesn't even meet the book or military definition of an assault rifle.

Rick