re: #139 Anymouse 🌹

It is a weapon of war. It was designed to be a counter in the Vietnam War for the AK-47. The existing field rifle at the time, the M-14, was too bulky and slow for effective combat in those conditions.

Thus, the AR-15 was designed as a lightweight, easily-maintained weapon for the Army as a counter to the AK-47. With a burst-fire selector, it becomes the M-16.

It is in fact a weapon of war, no matter how many times they try to deny it. The term “weapon of war” should be kept in the arguments about why this weapon should not be in the hands of untrained civilians. Weapons of war are not protected under the II Amendment for civilian use.

Conservatives will always try to redirect terminology of any issue they are on the wrong side of (see also pro-life, pro-family, &c). The term “weapon of war” should not be given up because that is what it is.

This morning, after Googling AR-15, I learned that it was used in VietNam so that was the response I sent to him. You are so right about conservatives. Frank Luntz is the master of that.