Guns: how much longer will it take ....

AR-15s are not regular rifles. They were the protypes for M-16s.
Where go you dig your opinions up from????

As a result, the Army was forced to reconsider a 1957 request by General Willard G. Wyman, commander of the U.S. Continental Army Command (CONARC) to develop a .223 inch caliber (5.56 mm) select-fire rifle weighing 6 lb (2.7 kg) when loaded with a 20-round magazine.[27] The 5.56 mm round had to penetrate a standard U.S. helmet at 500 yards (460 meters) and retain a velocity in excess of the speed of sound, while matching or exceeding the wounding ability of the .30 Carbine cartridge.[51]

This request ultimately resulted in the development of a scaled-down version of the Armalite AR-10, named ArmaLite AR-15 rifle.[52][53][54] In the late 1950s, designer Eugene Stoner was completing his work on the AR-15. The AR-15 used .22-caliber bullets, which destabilized when they hit a human body, as opposed to the .30 round, which typically passed through in a straight line. The smaller caliber meant that it could be controlled in autofire due the reduced recoil. Being almost one-third the weight of the .30 meant that the soldier could sustain fire for longer with the same load. Due to design innovations, the AR-15 could fire 600 to 700 rounds a minute with an extremely low jamming rate. Parts were stamped out, not hand-machined, so could be mass-produced, and the stock was plastic to reduce weight.[26]
ArmaLite AR-15

In 1958, the Army's Combat Developments Experimentation Command ran experiments with small squads in combat situations using the M14, AR-15, and another rifle designed by Winchester. The resulting study recommended adopting a lightweight rifle like the AR-15. In response, the Army declared that all rifles and machine guns should use the same ammunition, and ordered full production of the M-14.[26] However, advocates for the AR-15 gained the attention of Air Force Chief of Staff General Curtis Lemay. After testing the AR-15 with the ammunition manufactured by Remington that Armalite and Colt recommended, the Air Force declared that the AR-15 was its 'standard model' and ordered 8,500 rifles and 8.5 million rounds.[26] Advocates for the AR-15 in the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency acquired 1,000 Air Force AR-15s and shipped them to be tested by the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN). The South Vietnam soldiers issued glowing reports of the weapon's reliability, recording zero broken parts while firing 80,000 rounds in one stage of testing, and requiring only two replacement parts for the 1,000 weapons over the entire course of testing. The report of the experiment recommended that the U.S. provide the AR-15 as the standard rifle of the ARVN, but Admiral Harry Felt, then Commander in Chief, Pacific Forces, rejected the recommendations on the advice of the U.S. Army.[26]

Throughout 1962 and 1963, the U.S. military extensively tested the AR-15. Positive evaluations emphasized its lightness, "lethality", and reliability.[26] However, the Army Materiel Command criticized its inaccuracy at longer ranges and lack of penetrating power at higher ranges.[52][46][26] In early 1963, the U.S. Special Forces asked, and was given permission, to make the AR-15 its standard weapon. Other users included Army Airborne units in Vietnam and some units affiliated with the Central Intelligence Agency. As more units adopted the AR-15, Secretary of the Army Cyrus Vance ordered an investigation into why the weapon had been rejected by the Army. The resulting report found that Army Materiel Command had rigged the previous tests, selecting tests that would favor the M14 and choosing match grade M14s to compete against AR-15s out of the box.[26] At this point, the bureaucratic battle lines were well-defined, with the Army ordnance agencies opposed to the AR-15 and the Air Force and civilian leadership of the Defense Department in favor.[26]

In January 1963, Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara concluded that the AR-15 was the superior weapon system and ordered a halt to M14 production.[52][46] In late 1963, the Defense Department began mass procurement of rifles for the Air Force and special Army units. Secretary McNamara designated the Army as the procurer for the weapon with the Department, which allowed the Army ordnance establishment to modify the weapon as they wished. The first modification was the additions of a "manual bolt closure," allowing a soldier to ram in a round if it failed to seat properly. The Air Force, which was buying the rifle, and the Marine Corps, which had tested it both objected to this addition, with the Air Force noting, "During three years of testing and operation of the AR-15 rifle under all types of conditions the Air Force has no record of malfunctions that could have been corrected by a manual bolt closing device." They also noted that the closure added weight and complexity, reducing the reliability of the weapon. Colonel Howard Yount, who managed the Army procurement, would later state the bolt closure was added after direction from senior leadership, rather than as a result of any complaint or test result, and testified about the reasons: "the M-1, the M-14, and the carbine had always had something for the soldier to push on; that maybe this would be a comforting feeling to him, or something."[26][55]

After modifications,[53] the new redesigned rifle was subsequently adopted as the M16 Rifle.[1][52][46] "(The M16) was much lighter compared to the M14 it replaced, ultimately allowing soldiers to carry more ammunition. The air-cooled, gas-operated, magazine-fed assault rifle was made of steel, aluminum alloy and composite plastics, truly cutting-edge for the time. Designed with full and semi-automatic capabilities, the weapon initially did not respond well to wet and dirty conditions, sometimes even jamming in combat. After a few minor modifications, the weapon gained in popularity among troops on the battlefield."[46][56][57]
An M16A1

Despite its early failures the M16 proved to be a revolutionary design and stands as the longest continuously serving rifle in US military history.[1][52] It has been adopted by many US allies and the 5.56×45mm NATO cartridge has become not only the NATO standard, but "the standard assault-rifle cartridge in much of the world."[52][58][59] It also led to the development of small-caliber high-velocity service rifles by every major army in the world.[52] It is a benchmark against which other assault rifles are judged.[52][60][61]

M16s were produced by Colt until the late 1980s, when FN Herstal began to manufacture them.[62]
Adoption

In July 1960, General Curtis LeMay was impressed by a demonstration of the ArmaLite AR-15. In the summer of 1961, General LeMay was promoted to U.S. Air Force, Chief of Staff, and requested 80,000 AR-15s. However, General Maxwell D. Taylor, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, advised President John F. Kennedy that having two different calibers within the military system at the same time would be problematic and the request was rejected.[63] In October 1961, William Godel, a senior man at the Advanced Research Projects Agency, sent 10 AR-15s to South Vietnam. The reception was enthusiastic, and in 1962 another 1,000 AR-15s were sent.[64] United States Army Special Forces personnel filed battlefield reports lavishly praising the AR-15 and the stopping-power of the 5.56 mm cartridge, and pressed for its adoption.[46]

The damage caused by the 5.56 mm bullet was originally believed to be caused by "tumbling" due to the slow 1 turn in 14-inch (360 mm) rifling twist rate.[46][63] However, any pointed lead core bullet will "tumble" after penetration in flesh, because the center of gravity is towards the rear of the bullet. The large wounds observed by soldiers in Vietnam were actually caused by bullet fragmentation created by a combination of the bullet's velocity and construction.[65] These wounds were so devastating, that the photographs remained classified into the 1980s.[66]

However, despite overwhelming evidence that the AR-15 could bring more firepower to bear than the M14, the Army opposed the adoption of the new rifle.[52][46] U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara now had two conflicting views: the ARPA report[67] favoring the AR-15 and the Army's position favoring the M14.[46] Even President Kennedy expressed concern, so McNamara ordered Secretary of the Army Cyrus Vance to test the M14, the AR-15 and the AK-47. The Army reported that only the M14 was suitable for service, but Vance wondered about the impartiality of those conducting the tests. He ordered the Army Inspector General to investigate the testing methods used; the Inspector General confirmed that the testers were biased towards the M14.

As a result, the Army was forced to reconsider a 1957 request by General Willard G. Wyman, commander of the U.S. Continental Army Command (CONARC) to develop a .223 inch caliber (5.56 mm) select-fire rifle weighing 6 lb (2.7 kg) when loaded with a 20-round magazine.[27] The 5.56 mm round had to penetrate a standard U.S. helmet at 500 yards (460 meters) and retain a velocity in excess of the speed of sound, while matching or exceeding the wounding ability of the .30 Carbine cartridge.[51]

This request ultimately resulted in the development of a scaled-down version of the Armalite AR-10, named ArmaLite AR-15 rifle.[52][53][54] In the late 1950s, designer Eugene Stoner was completing his work on the AR-15. The AR-15 used .22-caliber bullets, which destabilized when they hit a human body, as opposed to the .30 round, which typically passed through in a straight line. The smaller caliber meant that it could be controlled in autofire due the reduced recoil. Being almost one-third the weight of the .30 meant that the soldier could sustain fire for longer with the same load. Due to design innovations, the AR-15 could fire 600 to 700 rounds a minute with an extremely low jamming rate. Parts were stamped out, not hand-machined, so could be mass-produced, and the stock was plastic to reduce weight.[26]
ArmaLite AR-15

In 1958, the Army's Combat Developments Experimentation Command ran experiments with small squads in combat situations using the M14, AR-15, and another rifle designed by Winchester. The resulting study recommended adopting a lightweight rifle like the AR-15. In response, the Army declared that all rifles and machine guns should use the same ammunition, and ordered full production of the M-14.[26] However, advocates for the AR-15 gained the attention of Air Force Chief of Staff General Curtis Lemay. After testing the AR-15 with the ammunition manufactured by Remington that Armalite and Colt recommended, the Air Force declared that the AR-15 was its 'standard model' and ordered 8,500 rifles and 8.5 million rounds.[26] Advocates for the AR-15 in the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency acquired 1,000 Air Force AR-15s and shipped them to be tested by the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN). The South Vietnam soldiers issued glowing reports of the weapon's reliability, recording zero broken parts while firing 80,000 rounds in one stage of testing, and requiring only two replacement parts for the 1,000 weapons over the entire course of testing. The report of the experiment recommended that the U.S. provide the AR-15 as the standard rifle of the ARVN, but Admiral Harry Felt, then Commander in Chief, Pacific Forces, rejected the recommendations on the advice of the U.S. Army.[26]

Throughout 1962 and 1963, the U.S. military extensively tested the AR-15. Positive evaluations emphasized its lightness, "lethality", and reliability.[26] However, the Army Materiel Command criticized its inaccuracy at longer ranges and lack of penetrating power at higher ranges.[52][46][26] In early 1963, the U.S. Special Forces asked, and was given permission, to make the AR-15 its standard weapon. Other users included Army Airborne units in Vietnam and some units affiliated with the Central Intelligence Agency. As more units adopted the AR-15, Secretary of the Army Cyrus Vance ordered an investigation into why the weapon had been rejected by the Army. The resulting report found that Army Materiel Command had rigged the previous tests, selecting tests that would favor the M14 and choosing match grade M14s to compete against AR-15s out of the box.[26] At this point, the bureaucratic battle lines were well-defined, with the Army ordnance agencies opposed to the AR-15 and the Air Force and civilian leadership of the Defense Department in favor.[26]

In January 1963, Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara concluded that the AR-15 was the superior weapon system and ordered a halt to M14 production.[52][46] In late 1963, the Defense Department began mass procurement of rifles for the Air Force and special Army units. Secretary McNamara designated the Army as the procurer for the weapon with the Department, which allowed the Army ordnance establishment to modify the weapon as they wished. The first modification was the additions of a "manual bolt closure," allowing a soldier to ram in a round if it failed to seat properly. The Air Force, which was buying the rifle, and the Marine Corps, which had tested it both objected to this addition, with the Air Force noting, "During three years of testing and operation of the AR-15 rifle under all types of conditions the Air Force has no record of malfunctions that could have been corrected by a manual bolt closing device." They also noted that the closure added weight and complexity, reducing the reliability of the weapon. Colonel Howard Yount, who managed the Army procurement, would later state the bolt closure was added after direction from senior leadership, rather than as a result of any complaint or test result, and testified about the reasons: "the M-1, the M-14, and the carbine had always had something for the soldier to push on; that maybe this would be a comforting feeling to him, or something."[26][55]

After modifications,[53] the new redesigned rifle was subsequently adopted as the M16 Rifle.[1][52][46] "(The M16) was much lighter compared to the M14 it replaced, ultimately allowing soldiers to carry more ammunition. The air-cooled, gas-operated, magazine-fed assault rifle was made of steel, aluminum alloy and composite plastics, truly cutting-edge for the time. Designed with full and semi-automatic capabilities, the weapon initially did not respond well to wet and dirty conditions, sometimes even jamming in combat. After a few minor modifications, the weapon gained in popularity among troops on the battlefield."[46][56][57]
An M16A1

Despite its early failures the M16 proved to be a revolutionary design and stands as the longest continuously serving rifle in US military history.[1][52] It has been adopted by many US allies and the 5.56×45mm NATO cartridge has become not only the NATO standard, but "the standard assault-rifle cartridge in much of the world."[52][58][59] It also led to the development of small-caliber high-velocity service rifles by every major army in the world.[52] It is a benchmark against which other assault rifles are judged.[52][60][61]

M16s were produced by Colt until the late 1980s, when FN Herstal began to manufacture them.[62]
Adoption

In July 1960, General Curtis LeMay was impressed by a demonstration of the ArmaLite AR-15. In the summer of 1961, General LeMay was promoted to U.S. Air Force, Chief of Staff, and requested 80,000 AR-15s. However, General Maxwell D. Taylor, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, advised President John F. Kennedy that having two different calibers within the military system at the same time would be problematic and the request was rejected.[63] In October 1961, William Godel, a senior man at the Advanced Research Projects Agency, sent 10 AR-15s to South Vietnam. The reception was enthusiastic, and in 1962 another 1,000 AR-15s were sent.[64] United States Army Special Forces personnel filed battlefield reports lavishly praising the AR-15 and the stopping-power of the 5.56 mm cartridge, and pressed for its adoption.[46]

The damage caused by the 5.56 mm bullet was originally believed to be caused by "tumbling" due to the slow 1 turn in 14-inch (360 mm) rifling twist rate.[46][63] However, any pointed lead core bullet will "tumble" after penetration in flesh, because the center of gravity is towards the rear of the bullet. The large wounds observed by soldiers in Vietnam were actually caused by bullet fragmentation created by a combination of the bullet's velocity and construction.[65] These wounds were so devastating, that the photographs remained classified into the 1980s.[66]

However, despite overwhelming evidence that the AR-15 could bring more firepower to bear than the M14, the Army opposed the adoption of the new rifle.[52][46] U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara now had two conflicting views: the ARPA report[67] favoring the AR-15 and the Army's position favoring the M14.[46] Even President Kennedy expressed concern, so McNamara ordered Secretary of the Army Cyrus Vance to test the M14, the AR-15 and the AK-47. The Army reported that only the M14 was suitable for service, but Vance wondered about the impartiality of those conducting the tests. He ordered the Army Inspector General to investigate the testing methods used; the Inspector General confirmed that the testers were biased towards the M14.

That is incorrect. When they have only semi-auto capability, they are just an ordinary regular rifle.



"That a semi-auto-only AR-15 is just an ordinary regular rifle" is a fact, not an opinion.

I do realize that progressives don't like facts, and facts make them start to cry. But facts are not opinions.

hey, it's a start...

(cnn)

It's a rifle perfectly perfectly capable of commiting mass murder in less than thirty seconds. As it has done (and that doesn't require a 100 round magazine. A 10 rounder in it and two ten round mags n the hand take only about thirty seconds to kill thirty [peoplr. That's mass murder from a garden variety assault style rifle. Too lethal to too many to be so available. And too used to do it too often.

The NRA does no such thing. They won't allow the banning of semi-auto guns, and they backed the banning of the bump-stock. You are not being truthful.


No one here is "getting off" on anything. I read those posts and the only thing he did push back against the blatant use of an injured child to elicit sympathy and get him to agree to more gun laws.


You've never been right about anything in your entire liberal life. I never said I was or wasn't offended by anything he has said, I don't think he means 3/4 of what he says, he's somewhat of a provocateur and you emotion packed fools fall for everything he says. I don't take everything people say literally.

You will notice I hardly ever reply to anything typed by those you associate me with.

Let me fix that for you... The Electoral College elected the President as it states in the Constitution, just as it has for the last 243 years.

I hadn't read the comment you were referring to, I've since found it and I get what he is saying in the context it was used. Do I really think he's going to piss on dead people? No, I don't think he's going to piss on dead people, and if he did or does, I hope he goes to jail for it. Did I find the comment offensive? No, I found it silly and bombastic.


Appealing to emotion won't get me to agree with you. As for his comment as it's related to my family? Sticks and stones will break my bones but words will never hurt me. I learned that one in kindergarten, it's a good saying.

I wasn't trying to get you to agree with me, I was trying to gauge the sort of person you are.

So he was right, it was nothing but virtue signaling?

Human beings have something called empathy.

If you don't understand that and need to make up phrases like virtue signalling to mask your own deficiencies there is something seriously wrong with you.

I'm a member of the NRA, let me see what I can do to help.
1> Using a gun in the commission of crime should lead to a heavier sentence than not using a gun.
2> Murder, attempted murder or threatening murder should be against the law and have severe penalties associated with it.
3> A background check should be done when purchasing a gun to assure buyer is not a mass murderer, crazy or a known violent criminal.
4> Auto-fire or select fire weapons should require stringent licensing requirements and be generally inaccessible by the public.
5> Selling weapons from the back of a car should be illegal.
6> Fire arm laws should be controlled by the Federal Government because states have repeatedly shown their inability to regulate firearms properly. (One of the few times I would wish the Fed to be in charge of something)

In general, I believe these common sense gun control laws should be enough, but criminals do not obey laws so they will be criminals.

Why are you telling us that and not Wayne La Pierre?

Yes, they do. Not everyone's level of empathy is the same, considering some of the comments I've seen on this site, they vary dramatically.


Virtue signalling isn't a made up phrase, it actually means something. You and many on the left are guilty of it. It's use has shifted from the religious to the political.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtue_signalling

also:


If you prefer the Urban Dictionary:

Where did you pick up "Virtue Signaling"? I read pretty extensively and this is the first time I have seen this. Does the NRA send you this b s to post in places like this? And when did you acquire any virtue?

Probably don't see that kind of language in comic books.

By reading, like you claim to do.


There are lots of things out there you haven't read, including the Constitution.


NRA? Did you miss the Wikipedia link?


Weak response, much like your mind.

The NRA released its statement about Walmart's decision:



It fails to acknowledge the mass shootings that happened in their stores. What I see the NRA doing is being more worried about profits than they are Public Safety.

I agree with the philosophy that guns, ammo and weapons accessories belong in a more controlled environment and not in a store that sells baby food, condoms, wine and candles.

Just my take on it...

Walmart is a private business and welcome to do as it wishes. It's too bad though that future criminals will KNOW that no one else in Walmart is armed and ready to stop them should they wish to commit a crime.

You don't need a gun to commit a crime in Walmart. You can just walk right out of the store with merchandise. Their OSD department has millions of dollars that just walk out on a weekly basis.

I think the NRA is color blind in its response, as it has been in many of the situations where mass shootings has happened.

So, I ask you, what legislation DOES the NRA propose to curb this type of violence (or any of gun shootings)?