This is What ‘Commonly Owned’ Means: Americans Have Over 24 Million Modern Sporting Rifles

1. They think they just lost 50 state shall-issue carry with Bruen.

   They lost far, far more… 🙂

   • I’m not going to harp too much on the increased usage of the term “modern sporting rifle”, but I’ve read from too many writers and organizations that we don’t want to piss off the gun control crowd or the Leftist arm of government, so we should use softer terms in our discourse and play nice.

     To me, my ARs are my “defensive main battle” or “close quarter combat” carbines. I have rifles for hunting, and I have rifles for plinking. My gunns which some insist on calling MSRs are not for sport, but specifically for a day (which I sincerely hope never comes) in which an overreaching tyrannical government needs to be reminded that We The People are in charge.

     Heck, “We The People” are the first words in our government’s very foundational document that tells it how to function.

     • A ‘Close-Quarter Carbine’ sounds good to me… 🙂

2. The “commonly owned” or “in common use” test is a old and very restrictive test for guns which could be regulated. Honestly, I don’t believe it is valid. It is an interpretation of the 2A, which includes that which the founders would not have foreseen, – to some degree an originalist interpretation. The founders expected the people to be armed, and to be armed with arms “in common usage” at the time. But in modern times, if they regulate any new technology now, they will affect what could be in common usage later. Thus defeating the “common usage” test. So the test is some degree, self defeating. If you ban something not in common usage, you prevent it’s common usage later. But regardless, even the Dems don’t support the “in common usage” test, because they want AR15s banned despite they are ubiquitous everywhere in the US and have been in common use for like 60 years now.

   • There was no ban on military-grade weapons for civilians at the founding of this country. ‘Privateers’ owned warships bristling with cannon.

     MSRs a perfectly constitutional.

     Suck on it, Leftist Scum ™… 🙂

   • “The “commonly owned” or “in common use” test is a old and very restrictive test for guns which could be regulated.”

     Actually, surplus American 98 Krags, 03 Springfields, 17 Enfields, Garands, M1 Carbines, 1911s, etc., as well as tons of surplus foreign military firearms were already in quite common use by American gun owners long before the GCA of 1968.

     • I think that was the point of the earlier post, “commonly owned” logic would have helped with owning the 1911 or M1 but if it was applied prior to AR-15 civilian sales, then there wouldn’t have been AR-15 civilian sales at all. Or if we apply it now, we get all existing common arms including the AR and AK but nothing new after In other words, we don’t want to stake our rights to “commonly owned weapons only” or as soon as the portable rail gun or laser blaster 3000 gets adopted by armed forces, we would be blocked out simply because we never got the chance to buy them and make them common, and if not commonly owned they could be banned. We don’t want restrictions on future weapons yet to be invented or perfected.

       • What weapons do modern armies issue the troops? What the normal grunt would carry(This is my rifle…..), would be common usage. MSRs are gelded examples.

       • rt66paul Nice try! Just because a rifle or gun looks like a “military weapon”, does NOT make it a “military weapon”. There are VAST differences between the two. But then I am sure you don’t want facts to get in the way of your logic.

3. 24 million reasons we haven’t yet become the new Venezuela! YET!

   • Apparently the right to keep and bear “arms” is so yesterday…Now some bozos want to box in the 2A by falling for what amounts to the right to keep and bear MSRs. When Phasers come along one day too bad too sad, the 2A referred to MSRs.

4. The progressives are screwed and most know it. Back in 1993 ARs and the like were far less prevalent in the closets and safes of average Americans. The Left really lost the battle when they allowed the NRA-led amendment to define such assault weapons, as well as the also NRA-crafted amendment for the “ban” to end (sunset) after 10 years.

   The “definition” part allowed for continued manufacture of everything from ARs to FALs so long as they complied with the new law. I can remember DiFi and others screaming about this fact after the bill they though would kill off these firearms actually increased production and variances, as well as an increased interest by average gun owners in them. When the price eventually dropped below $600, the race was on to purchase them by people who originally never considered owning one.

   There are plenty of posters around here who hate NRA but the fact is- had Neal Knox’s or Larry Pratt’s “no compromise” hard line won out, the bill would’ve passed anyway and today the only banned guns left might well be those grandfathered in by the AWB itself.

   • The same runny nosed river of tears when they realized that 10 round magazine limits resulted in manufacturers coming out with more concealable pistols sized for the smaller mags. Karma is an evil bitch, ain’t it?

     • The Saturday Night Special Laws in 1968 kept smaller handguns from being imported, but the Ring of Fire handgun manufacturers were able the manufacture copies. That is the only reason the pocket pistols are legal. They will be coming after them by trying to add to the 1968 decision.

       • “That is the only reason the pocket pistols are legal. They will be coming after them by trying to add to the 1968 decision.”

         They can’t, ‘Bruen’ stops them. *Cold*… 🙂

       • rt66paul. “The Saturday Night Special Law” was an abject failure. It did not stop anything.

   • “The Left really lost the battle when they allowed the NRA-led amendment to define such assault weapons, as well as the also NRA-crafted amendment for the “ban” to end (sunset) after 10 years.”

     Their own hubris cost them dearly on that one.

     But look at the political landscape at the time. They genuinely believed they would hold the White House after the term of ‘Slick Willie’ was over in 8 years.

     *Bzzzzzzzzt*. Wrong!

     The thing with Leftist Scum ™ is, they believe their own bullshit. They think everyone believes what they believe, and that we are just not a threat to them…

   • Very true. I bought my first AR15 (Bushmaster XM15-E2S to be exact) in 1993 for $800. I had to special order it direct from Bushmaster since none of the local gun shops sold “those kind” of rifles. Yes, an employee at one of the shops actually said that to me. Your choice back then was Colt, Bushmaster, Essential Arms (lower only) and SGW (olympic). I also bought a new 4×4 truck for the price of 20 Bushmasters. Today I now have at least 10 AR type rifles by half a dozen companies and they are better made, more features and far less expensive (adjusted for inflation) than in 1993.

     • “I had to special order it direct from Bushmaster since none of the local gun shops sold “those kind” of rifles“

       Yes, and school, concert, grocery store, Mall, etc. shootings were few and far between.

       There was a time LGS owners felt a sense of responsibility to the communities in which they operated, and they exercised reasonable care in making dangerous products available to the public.

       In those days, no gun store owner would’ve sold an AR15 to a sketchy 18-year-old with fresh razor scars on his face.

       • Well, I wrote a reply here, but TTAG deleted it for the second time in two days. Looks like comment deletion is becoming a thing now, in addition to being held for moderation without telling us why.

       • There was a time that I lived in which we could mail order guns, including military surplus, m1 carbine anyone, straight to our home.

         I went to school with student parking lots full of trucks with long guns in racks in the windows.

         When I was 13 I bought guns at yard sales and rode them home on my bike.

         Real machine guns were still openly available for sale.

         And this is that time that miner49er was talking about mass shootings being so rare.

       • Also in 1993 the society hadn’t yet been fully poisoned with the narcistic and perverted teachings of the Left.

         In 1993 the abortion death tally was at 20M versus the 60M now. When you preach for decades that life has no value then you shouldn’t be surprised when nutcases agree with you and take innocent lives indiscriminately.

       • M1 carbines and Ruger Minis were plentiful at that time, before the very act of trying to ban “assault weapons” made them far more popular than they ever had been before. While the AR type is superior in ergonomics to those more traditional offerings, the latter were never and still are not significantly less capable of being used in a mass shooting as evidenced by Minis being used at Miami-Dade, Oslo and more in between – yet even the latest new AWB proposals exclude it from being banned.

         The firearms’ capability hasn’t changed in any significant way since then, nor has the responsibility of gun store owners (on whom the legal restrictions on their businesses have increased tremendously) but many average people and the culture have, and the those at fault are the same people who think a bunch of cosmetic features make a gun more deadly. Of course, they’re loathe to acknowledge that the increase in violence tracks exactly with their ramping up promoting nihilism and narcissism masquerading as “diversity, inclusion & equity”.

5. “Commonly owned” can also mean “owned by the common people,” and the government can’t have that. The only thing the G wants the common people to do is slave away for the oligarchs, pay taxes, and die destitute.

   • “…and die destitute.”

     I’ll argue that one.

     They have a huge hard-on for estate taxes. They just want your heirs destitute… 🙁

6. industry estimate of modern sporting rifles (MSRs) in circulation in the United States to 24,446,000 since 1990..

   For every commercially manufactured AR platform rifle I own I have two completed from non-serialized 80% lowers and I own several commercially manufactured AR platform rifles of various calibers AND configurations. There MUST be at least 50/60 million AR platform weapons out there. I don’t know when they first started selling 80% lowers, but I’ve got two that are 8 years old so more than ten years?

7. Yepper. One problem with this data, even as it is correct, is that it can’t reflect the numbers of those confiscated and destroyed, and the numbers of 80% builds produced. Even with confiscated and destroyed msr’s I’d be willing to bet that those numbers are 2 maybe 3 times higher. Many believe that the government will come for firearms they can track by serial number. The 80% helps put the brakes on those actions. No matter how much they try, it’ll be a futile efforts.

   • You could count completed uppers toward that sales figure and get closer I reckon.

8. “In common use” is some real Luddite shit.
   Won’t never be no progress (lefties love progress, right?) or innovation if we get happy regulating and banning things are not “in common use.” Never mind the game of ensuring a thing never reached “common use” by banning and regulating it.

9. Apparently the writer has not visited the Armalite site lately…Armalite is pissed about knuckleheads using the Armalite name. Well I too am upset seeing the concocted sugarcoated MSR label to include the AR-10 and AR-15. The men who designed and built those arms many, many years ago don’t deserve some politically correct label being plastered on their artwork.

   With the history of racism and genocide inherent with Gun Control no one owes any damned Gun Control zealot squat or any “Call it that” form of an apology.

   • If Armalite is pissed about knuckleheads using the Armalite name, how would Kalashnikov feel about people using the moniker “AK-style?”

     If I tried to sell you a “Rolex-style” watch, you would be damn sure it ain’t no Rolex.

10. My rifles are not “sporting”, mine are “assault” type.

    • This, I own mine for combat/defensive application they’re not for sporting purpose they are for killing folks that need killing i.e tyrants and oppresses, after all this is the purpose of the second amendment.

    • All my rifles are super friendly and nice.

      • Well that is very neighborly of them.

    • In Dem controlled urban areas “assault” is “sporting”.

    • I need to add “military” style to my “assault” collection.

    • Ya’ll have MSR sporting rifle’s you use for defensive purposes also. The correct terminology in that case is “Defensive Sporting Rifle”.

      Unless your rifle has passed U.S. military testing and been accepted for use by military forces on the battle field in a military conflict and is selective fire AND (a lot of people don’t realize this) is built specifically to withstand sustained automatic fire – it is not an ‘assault rifle’ or ‘weapon of war’.

      The military only rifle supplied by Colt are different from the civilian semi-auto version – the military only version has selective fire AND is built specifically to withstand sustained automatic fire.

11. Common use means nothing. Democrats still desire that these guns be banned. Not just band, but confiscated by force using the United States military as well the mandated execution of every single United States citizen that owns one.

    • That’s the role of Dacian’s “Caravan of Death”.

12. Common use was the previous test and the anti-gun leftist scumbags couldn’t stand not to trespass on the liberty of American citizens so now we have Bruen and WV v EPA. The vile Left won’t go down without a fight, but they will go down and they will damage their cause even as they fail.

13. Never forget that the AR-15 was first classified by the federal government for civilian ownership.
    It was advertised for civilian ownership. It was first designed as a semi-automatic rifle. The United States does not use semi-automatic rifles in its military. They have a limited number of bolt-action rifles and shotguns. But all soldiers and Marines are issued select fire rifles.

    “Original ATF AR-15 Classification Refutes Claim that Rifle ‘Not Meant’ for Civilians”

    https://www.ammoland.com/2021/12/original-atf-ar-15-classification-refutes-claim-that-rifle-not-meant-for-civilians/#axzz7VSS0bcad

    • “It was first designed as a semi-automatic rifle“

      This again? Eugene Stoner designed the AR 15 for use by militaries, it was marketed across the world as a military rifle.

      The first Colt ArmaLite AR 15 rifles produced in 1959 were selective fire, classified as ‘automatic rifles’.

      “in December of 1959 Colt manufactured 20 of their new Colt ArmaLite AR-15 automatic rifles and it is documented through Colt that rifle #00106 was shipped to Cooper Macdonald Corp. on February 17, 1960. Cooper Macdonald Corp. was contracted to market this firearm“

      Among others, the national army of Malaysia utilized the colt ArmaLite AR 15 rifle for their infantry and special forces.

      JFK fired a fully automatic AR15 from the deck of his yacht, it’s estimated this rifle traveled around the world at least twice.

      https://smallarmsreview.com/display.article.cfm?idarticles=254

      • You are as misinformed as the supposed “Source material” you use as a reference. It is why gun writers end up spending lots of their own money. To file a Freedom of Information Act request. And get all of the original Source materials.

        And there are interviews with Eugene Stoner talking about his invention. Look for them.

        • “You are as misinformed as the supposed “Source material” you use as a reference.”

          Please check the link I provided, wherein you may peruse at your leisure the authentication letter from Katherine D. Hoyt, Colt Firearms Historian, wherein it is officially confirmed that Colt Firearms was involved in marketing selective-fire AR-15 assault rifles in February, 1960.

          Your “interviews with Eugene Stoner” are nothing but hearsay, I believe the above referenced authentication letter offers definitive proof of the timeline and production of selective-fire Colt ArmaLite AR-15s as a weapon of war for use by infantry soldiers.

          I agree, current semi-automatic AR-15s are not ‘assault weapons’.

          But the Colt ArmaLite AR-15 was designed as a selective-fire ‘assault weapon’ and initially marketed as a weapon of war.

        • Here’s a confidential report regarding the testing of selective-fire Colt ArmaLite AR-15s in direct combat in South Vietnam by special forces advisors and RVN soldiers:

          “Based upon favorable observations of the AR-15 by both
          US Advisors and RVNAF Commanders following limited firing demonstra- tions conducted in Vietnam during August 1961, weapons were requested in numbers sufficient to conduct a full scale combat evaluation of the AR-15
          by selected units of the RVNAF. In December 1961, the Secretary of Defense approved the procurement of 1000 AR-15 Rifles, necessary ammun- ition, spare parts and accessories for evaluation.“

          https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/2859676/ARPA-AR-15.pdf

        • RE: Miner49er Reply – I really and truly wish people would get it in their head once and for all the CAR-15 is not and has never been a Armalite 15 Sporting Rifle or a part of that family – it has always and forever will be a member of the M16 family. CAR-15 stands for Colt Automatic Rifle-15 not Assault Rifle (AR) it is a Military Automatic Rifle not a modern sporting rifle. And on the last point the rifles the RVN are referring to is the Colt Model 601/603 CAR-15 Rifles which are M16’s not AR-15’s, in its entirety it took 10 minute of mild research to accurately vet that “confidential report” and not put a spin on it. No Armalite’s MSR’s were used in Vietnam period. So lets take this from the Top – CAR-15’s are not Armalite MSR’s they are M16’s the hodgepodge brand melding doesn’t change that.

      • Most firearms started out as being designed for military service. Even if your questionable source material were accurate, by that “logic” we might as well ban bolt action rifles for being substantially similar to the Mauser.

        • That was true in Europe. But not in the USA. Gun makers made guns for anyone who could pay for them.
          Individual soldiers did purchase Winchester rifles. But the federal government never equipped military units with repeating rifles.

          The American gun industry has never totally relied on government contracts. That is why there are so many gun makers now. The civilian market, because of the 2A, has always been larger than any government contract.

          Fairchild Aviation a civilian company, created its own weapons division armalite. To make guns for airplanes. That is where the AR-15 was born out of. Not some government military contract.

        • The fed .gov did equip military units with repeaters, Chris. By the end of the civil war the most common cavalry carbine was the Spencer repeater. Some infantry units got the full length Spencer rifle as well.

        • to jwm
          You’re right. I forgot about the Spencer rifle.

        • “Even if your questionable source material were accurate“

          “Questionable source material”?

          An authentication letter from the Colt Firearms Historian showing the shipment date of selective-fire AR-15s to a military arms marketing firm is a “questionable source”?

          Fascinating.

          And I have never advocated the private ownership of semi-automatic AR-15sshould be banned.

          I do think there should be age restrictions upon their purchase, there seems to be a bit of a bad track record regarding AR 15s and young males, 18 to 25.

          I might note that the United States Army invests weeks of classroom training with experienced instructors, before any recruit is allowed near a firearm. And these soldiers are required to demonstrate proficiency with a firearm before they are permitted to employ a firearm in the course of their duties.

      • 1. What is called the AR-15 today is not an AR-15.

        2. The design was originally intended as a civilian version using the AR-10 as its inspiration and base of design. The ArmaLite AR-10 was a 7.62×51mm NATO battle rifle designed by Eugene Stoner in the late 1950s, it was a military only rifle at the time. In 1957 (not 1959) the AR-10 design was rescaled and substantially modified by ArmaLite to accommodate the .223 Remington cartridge for use as a civilian rifle with the general AR-10 military rifle styling look. The thought of applying it to military use and the 5.56 NATO did not come till later.

        3. “Among others, the national army of Malaysia utilized the colt ArmaLite AR 15 rifle for their infantry and special forces.” – no, what they got was a modified (and only sometimes re-chambered) AR-10’s that had AR-15 stamped on them because Armalite used the lowers from the AR-15 civilian rifle prototype design they had already tooled for because they did not have the complete rifles needed to fill orders.

        4. In 1959, ArmaLite sold its rights to the AR-10 and AR-15 to Colt’s Manufacturing Company. Colt also was at first going to make their ‘AR-15’ a civilian only rifle. Colt redesigned the AR-10 first, intending to capture the military market but the military desire for the 5.56 was in play by then. So Colt having the AR-15 patent for what was suppose to be a civilian rifle redesigned that to fill the military need.

        5. The Colt was not an AR-15, it was a Colt redesign using the AR-10 scaled down and modified then combined with features of the AR-15 civilian rifle. The ‘AR-15’ remained on the Colt redesign due to an agreement for the patent sale.

        6. There is no known firearms manufacturer in the world today that makes an actual AR-15.

        7. The only actual AR-15 there was is the Armalite AR-15 , they are the only ones that ever intended to make an actual AR-15 and it was originally for the civilian market intending to be semi-auto only. An actual AR-15 has never been in military service.

        8. The U.S. military did receive some rifles from Armalite that were marked and designated as AR-15. These too were not actual AR-15’s but were modified AR-10’s that had AR-15 stamped on them because Armalite used the lowers from the AR-15 civilian rifle prototype design they had already tooled for because they did not have the complete rifles needed to fill the testing order. There were actually 10 of these sent to the military, they were destroyed.

        8. The actual AR-15 ceased to exist when Armalite sold the patent to Colt.

        9. After the patent sale to Colt, Stoner went back to the original AR-16 design idea from which the idea for the AR-15 civilian rifle sprang that would use the AR-10 as its inspiration. Stoner wanted to develop the AR-16 to maturity as a military only rifle, it was actually based on a previous undeveloped design for an AR-12. It was a cheaper rifle using stamped parts and a short-stroke gas piston system (because Colt owed the patent for the gas impingement system). It had a folding stock, and was intended to be marketed to poorer nations. It never made it past a prototype stage as Stoner left Armalite. Arthur Miller took over as ArmaLite’s lead designer when Stoner left and took Stoner’s 7.62x51mm AR-16 and redesigned it to chamber the smaller 5.56x45mm round to create the AR-18.

        I got my information from Eugen Stoner himself. I had a chance to meet him in 1990 and asked him about the AR-15, he filled in all sorts of details.

        • correction:

          “The design was originally intended as a civilian version using the AR-10 as its inspiration and base of design.”

          was supposed to be:

          The design was originally intended as a civilian rifle using the AR-10 as its inspiration and base of design.

          Clarification for : “The thought of applying it to military use and the 5.56 NATO did not come till later.” – this came after the rifle was originally intended to be a civilian rifle. The Army had asked for a smaller version of the AR-10 as a potential replacement for the M1 Garand, they had asked in 1956. This request happened to coincide with the rifle going to prototype for its original civilian purpose as a semi-auto rifle, so why not take that ready and answer the military request and make some changes. Thus the first involvement with the military, after the rifles original intent of being a civilian rifle.

        • “The design was originally intended as a civilian rifle using the AR-10 as its inspiration and base of design.”

          And you offer no link with any sort of documentation of this claim, or the others that you make.

          “The actual AR-15 ceased to exist when Armalite sold the patent to Colt.“

          Colt bought the design and the name, Colt Firearms Division currently owns the trademark to the name ‘AR-15’.

          There is no question, the Colt ArmaLite AR-15 selective fire assault weapon, the only actual AR-15, (name trademark owned by colt) was a ‘weapon of war’.

          The Colt Firearms authentication letter (linked above) proves that colt manufactured AR-15s were selective fire and marketed for military use. Colts semi-auto version was a modification of this design that came later.

          “The semi-automatic civilian AR-15 was introduced by Colt in 1963.
          “To prevent a civilian semi-automatic AR-15 from being readily converted for use with the select fire components, several features were changed. Parts changed include the lower receiver, bolt carrier, hammer, trigger, disconnector, and safety/mode selector. The semi-automatic bolt carrier has a longer lightening slot to prevent the bolt’s engagement with an automatic sear. Due to a decrease in mass, the buffer spring is heavier. On the select-fire version, the hammer has an extra spur which interacts with the additional auto-sear that holds it back until the bolt carrier group is fully in battery, when the automatic fire is selected.“

          The semi-automatic AR-15 is a modification of the original selective fire AR-15, not the other way around.

          But really, we must remember the wisdom of the immortal bard,

          “What’s in a name? That which we call a rose / By any other name would smell as sweet… “

        • to .40 cal booger
          Thank you. I didn’t feel like writing all of that down for Miner49er. He has stupidly choosen to only focus on the Colt military contractor. And not the inventor Eugene Stoner. And his work at the Fairchild Aircraft company. And it’s AR-10 development. And there is a Dutch civilian/military connection to this as well.

          But he can look that up for himself.

        • 40oz sez:

          “Thus the first involvement with the military, after the rifles original intent of being a civilian rifle.“

          Holy Zeus above, where do you people get this stuff? Eugene Stoner did not design civilian weapons, his entire focus was producing military weapons for the world market.

          “Family of AR-15 Inventor Eugene Stoner: He Didn’t Intend It for Civilians
          The inventor’s surviving children and adult grandchildren spoke exclusively to MSNBC, commenting for the first time on their family’s uneasy legacy.“

          “Our father, Eugene Stoner, designed the AR-15 and subsequent M-16 as a military weapon to give our soldiers an advantage over the AK-47,” the Stoner family told NBC News late Wednesday. “He died long before any mass shootings occurred. But, we do think he would have been horrified and sickened as anyone, if not more by these events.”

          The inventor’s surviving children and adult grandchildren spoke exclusively to NBC News by phone and email, commenting for the first time on their family’s uneasy legacy. They requested individual anonymity in order to speak freely about such a sensitive topic. They also stopped short of policy prescriptions or legal opinions.“

          “The ex-Marine and “avid sportsman, hunter and skeet shooter” never used his invention for sport. He also never kept it around the house for personal defense. In fact, he never even owned one.
          And though he made millions from the design, his family said it was all from military sales.
          “After many conversations with him, we feel his intent was that he designed it as a military rifle,” his family said, explaining that Stoner was “focused on making the most efficient and superior rifle possible for the military.”

          https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna593356

          Each time I interact with conservative Trump supporters, I am continually amazed at the depth of their self-delusion. I’m beginning to more clearly understand how they were all taken in by the whole “stop the steal” “bullshit” as attorney general of the United States of America William Barr put it.

        • @Miner49er

          got my information from Eugene Stoner himself. I had a chance to meet him in 1990 and asked him about the AR-15, he filled in all sorts of details.

          No , I don’t have a stupid internet link to the words of a dead man from 32 years ago. But for some reason I’m not sorry you are disappointed.

        • @Miner49er

          Once again your confirmation bias and lack of recognizing context leads you astray. For example, do you even know what the word “actual” means, as in for example “actual AR-15”?

          and also this from you : “Eugene Stoner did not design civilian weapons, his entire focus was producing military weapons for the world market.”

          NO, Eugene Stoner’s “entire focus” WAS NOT “producing military weapons for the world market.”

          He worked for Armalie. Armalite wanted a civilian rifle with military styling cosmetics using the AR-10 as its inspiration and base of design. Armalite tasked Stoner to do that and the AR-15 design was born to respond to that which Armalite wanted to do at the time, so the ‘AR-15’ was, like I said, originally intended as a civilian rifle and not a military rifle and Stoners focus was on that at the time.

          He went to work for Armalite because he wanted to design and produce military small arms. He also designed a series of prototype small arms that never saw any significant production beyond prototype stages such as the AR-3, AR-9, AR-11, and AR-12. But the firearms landscape was changing rapidly by the time Stoner went to work for Armalite, and Armalite wasn’t doing so well at being able to land military contracts for small arms in the U.S. . So Armalite decided to try and capture the U.S. niche civilian market desires for military style firearms demographic which was a rapidly growing. Since Stoner had experience with military arms and the AR-10 was at the time a military firearm – Armalite tasked Stoner with designing a semi-auto civilian rifle with military styling cosmetics using the AR-10 as its inspiration and base of design. The AR-15 was originally intend to be a civilian semi-auto rifle by Amalite, not a military rifle even though Stoners intent was to design it as a military use rifle. The original intended Armalite name for the rifle was ‘Armalite Sportster 16’.

          Then this from you: ““Family of AR-15 Inventor Eugene Stoner: He Didn’t Intend It for Civilians”

          well, that’s true in the context that Stoner wanted to design it as a military weapon. But the original intent by Armalite, not Stoner, was that it be a civilian firearm and the company was Armalite’s (actually Fairchild aeronautics) and not Stoners so the AR-15 was, contrary to your assertion, originally intended to be a civilian firearm and not a military firearm.

14. Using the Democrats “Common Usage” criteria, you could ban F-150 pickup trucks as they are not in every driveway.

15. You could still buy a Ruger Mini-14 in 1997. It seems the gun grabbers believe that a wooden stock 5.56, is different from a plastic or polymer stock 5.56.
    You can purchase Aftermarket wood furniture for your AR-15 if you want it

    • The Dems have adopted the “AR-style” construction that we see everywhere, even in this post written by someone who should know better. And every Dem knows that “AR-style” rifles are “the favorite of school shooters” and its owners are dangerous “gun nuts.”

      • A law-abiding free citizen who is armed with an AR-15. Is certainly very dangerous to a Democrat. Or a tyrant of any political persuasion.

      • Also the term “AR style” is just as malleable as the term “assault weapon”. They mean absolutely nothing at all. They’re just invented terms by people who don’t know what they’re talking about. And actually are not even interested in being educated or getting educated on the subject.

16. “There are more MSRs in circulation today than there are Ford F-Series trucks on the road.”

    I don’t know whether possum oughta feel good about this or not. Possums are game animals that can be hunted/trapped in most places across their range.

    • I wonder about the ratio of dead possums who died from AR-15s to those who died from being hit by F series trucks. Common critter vs common usage.

      • rt66paul, That is a totally irrelevant question. I wonder how many squirrels were killed last year with a slingshot.

17. I know I own more AR-14s than any other type combined.

    • I think Dementia Joe meant to say that he owns more AR-47s than any other type of shotgun.

    • Cornpop approved! I’m keeping my black rifle…

18. We are still fighting here in NYS. The Legislature just passed a ridiculously restrictive bill prohibiting you from carrying in most places. New York State Rifle and Pistol Assoc. is going to have to go back to court to enforce NYSR&PA v Breun..

19. No kind of SEMI -AUTOIO is a flocking HUNTING RIFLE . THe idea surely in hunting is to down comestible or TROPHY game with as little damage as possible which is NOT what a Semi-Atuo is designed for. A Semi-Auto mis designed to kill very messily and to kill Fellow humans -that is it’s only purpose. Every single A Semi-Auto Rifle is a MILITARY grade weapon if it uses MILITARY grade ammunition.

    Nobody NEEDS for any legitimate purpose, including any kind of legitimate HUNTING, more than a FIVE shot Bolt action Rifle of a suitable calibre and that’s what a serious hunter uses.

    Equally nobody actually NEED’S anything other than a SINGLE decent 9mm or.38 calibre handgun for any legitimate purpose including any self-defence situation. And nobody actually needs any more than 25 rounds of ready for immediate use ammunition.

    Nobody should be allowed to,own more than ONE firearm of any calbre or use I cannot give actual figures becaause they do not appear on the net but I very much doubt the at your average.

    The average handgun owner will NOT in their life time use any weapon including a hand gun for their personal self defence or the defence of others .
    There are far more weapons used for criminal purposes that there ever were for any self defence situation.
    There are far more people becoming the victims of Gun crime that there are saved by weapon in the hands of make-believe wannabe Rambos.

    I know that those statements may not be true but I challenge anybody to prove it and I will retract at once if they do.

    • @Albert

      “The average handgun owner will NOT in their life time use any weapon including a hand gun for their personal self defence or the defence of others .”

      You know this for a fact how?

      “There are far more weapons used for criminal purposes that there ever were for any self defence situation.”

      False.

      “ANY self defence situation” ? seriously?

      Were you born stupid or did you practice real hard to be this stupid?

      “I know that those statements may not be true but I challenge anybody to prove it and I will retract at once if they do.”

      LoL. Do you know what the English language is?

      So to disprove your comments, one would need to:

      1. Know of “ANY self defence situation” that ever took place.

      2. Decided which of your statements ‘may or may not’ be true to you by some kind of mystical mind reading trick, then respond to your ‘challenge’ for some kind of proof when your post is proof enough to disprove your own statements.

    • Trophy hunting is one thing, but putting meat on the table is another. Varmint hunting is still another.
      Trophy hunting should be done with a single shot(with one more to finish it off)
      Getting meat could require 5-10 rounds for large game(with limits), maybe more for larger or no limits.
      Varmint hunting, say wild boar, should allow maximum capacity mags, since the whole purpose is to cull all of them from the area.

      • rt66paul Apparently you have not read the 2nd Amendment, the Heller decision , the McDonald decision or the NYSR&PA v Breun decision?
        Who is to decide what is “trophy hunting,” etc?

    • And the former RAF armourer chimes in with his expertise.

      WTF is a “semi-automatic machine gun”?

      I’ll give you a clue. It’s ONE or the OTHER.

      And “military caliber” is irrelevant. Your vaunted .303 is 10% less than commercial .308 Winchester, which is 10% less than .30-06.

      I can list SIX surplus military 30-caliber cartridges off the top of my head and can list more than TWENTY cartridges used by the military and citizens alike. .275 Rigby is a British trade name for 7×57 Mauser.

      The heat is obviously getting to you. Take advice from a colonial and drink your beer ice cold. Warm beer is a salmonella stew.

      • Someone is totally unaware of the tens of thousands of semi auto hunting rifles sold before 1940. Remington, Winchester and Browning all offered them.

        Insisting that any one person can only own one and no more is as absurd as being told you can only own 1 motor vehicle or one cell phone. There is no such restrictions in the Constitution.

        If that’s a standard that person actually accepts, then post from a nation like Australia, not the US where we can pretty much own what we please and we don’t ask each others permission.

        And, by the way, .303, 30-06, etc are military cartridges that were use in military arms which when sold after new arms were adopted became

        Wait for it

        The military sporting arms of the 1950s. What were they called when shortened and the military accouterments removed? SPORTERS.

        Most popular to be upgraded by gunsmiths? MAUSERS. If someone would actually adopt the nonsense they spout even the WIN 94 would be questionable, they were issued in Alaska during the construction of the Alaska highway. There weren’t enough military arms to go around. Much like the Colt Single Action >>>>>ARMY <<<<<< pistol, which many still purchase for sporting use.

        What is it with this mental block thinking older arms are somehow innocent of military use when the history books are filled with their service in wars?

    • Can TTAG award Al the “Dumber than Dacian” award?

      • I think Al was put in the armory when they found him trying to throw stones into the jet engine intakes. And they didn’t trust him with the guard dogs.

        • “they found him trying to throw stones into the jet engine intakes“

          This reminds me of a great story, GE was shipping a jet engine to the RAF for testing, one of the specs was that the engine would be capable of successfully ingesting a large bird without damage.

          The BRITs call up, “we tried it and the engine just blew apart”. GE said no problem, must be a bad casting issue with a turbine or something, we’ll send another.

          Again, the customer calls up, we tried it with this one and it blew up as well.

          GE gets suspicious, sends their own engineer with the next engine to observe the testing. The GE engineer was flabbergasted when the RAF techs fired up the jet engine and prepared to throw a large frozen turkey into the intake…

    • And if the 2nd Amendment was intended only to enable hunting, you might have something vaguely resembling a valid point. Spoiler alert: the intent of 2A is not for that purpose, no matter how often enemies of the US Constitution (foreign and domestic) repeat that it is so

20. 23 million of those are *mine*, so please take that into consideration.

    • I have taken that into consideration Tim, and I’m not giving them back.

21. Albert,

    Fire Extinguishers, roadside hazard kit, spare tire, secondary generators, tornado shelters, and my fire arms all have one thing in common. I hope to never need them, but prepared if I do.

    If I decide to hunt with an SKS, which is the rifle I took my first deer with, then I will as long it is legal where I am hunting.

    I will own as many firearms as I choose, it is not up to you or your opinion. You do not own me and I am not for sale.

    This whole no one needs argument is a childs complaint. Only children and people who blame others for their own bad decisions use no one needs or it is not fair statements. If you want to be thought of as a man, argue like a man. Logic and not emotion with the childish idioms wpould give more credence to your opinion.

22. AR sales date to well before 1990. The #?

23. Bought my first AR-15 in the ’70’s. A Colt AR-15A2. It’s been my primary varmint rifle for more than 40 years.
    Have added a couple more in the years since. The old Colt is currently wearing a night sight.
    1 of the regulars on here may be a little upset with me for shooting 1 of his relatives with the old Colt. An opossum was getting a little too interested in the chicken coop a few weeks ago.
    So, yes the AR-15 does serve a purpose does have a legitimate use beyond military, or possible militia actions.

    • “Bought my first AR-15 in the ’70’s. A Colt AR-15A2“

      In the ‘70s? Only if you had a time machine.

      “The AR-15A2 was introduced in 1986 when Colt’s started making significant numbers of M16A2s for the US military“

      https://www.cybershooters.org/?page_id=538

Comments are closed.