My mistake.USN_Hokie wrote:Nope. On the contrary, tallness runs in the family.ip_law-hokie wrote:
I️ believe you’ve stated on here that you are short
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
My mistake.USN_Hokie wrote:Nope. On the contrary, tallness runs in the family.ip_law-hokie wrote:
I️ believe you’ve stated on here that you are short
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No worries.ip_law-hokie wrote:My mistake.USN_Hokie wrote:Nope. On the contrary, tallness runs in the family.ip_law-hokie wrote:
I️ believe you’ve stated on here that you are short
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
LOL I never said they weren't small caliber. I said intermediate cartridge. Small Caliber/High Velocity fits the bill for an intermediate cartridge.USN_Hokie wrote:Cute is watching you google things you don't know about. Congrats though, you found a blog post which calls it a small caliber round.HokieFanDC wrote: Awww, you're upset that I called AG little white knight. Cute.
5.56x45. There are lots and lots of references like this...
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2016 ... 5-56x45mm/
As for saying there was no definition, I said that about the term assault weapon. You're the one that took it in a different direction.
Hold on for the ride, folks - DC is going to to be a lot more fun by the 4th quarter.
That's a fine definition. It's from a Army foreign service manual for identifying communist block weapons. Again, the army does not use the term. And again, let the record show that DC has now arrived, after much googling and copy/paste from Wikipedia, at a definition which excludes the weapons he termed as assault rifles at the beginning of this thread.HokieFanDC wrote: And here's the NRA definition, which they claim is the US army Definition.
"By U.S. Army definition, a selective-fire rifle chambered for a cartridge of intermediate power. If applied to any semi-automatic firearm regardless of its cosmetic similarity to a true assault rifle, the term is incorrect."
It is indeed kinda fun. No one calls them assault rifles, except for a bunch of people.
https://www.nraila.org/about/glossary/
What weapon did I term as an assault rifle?USN_Hokie wrote:Let the record now show that DC has googled himself into a position where none of the legal firearms he termed as assault rifles actually fit the definition. That was my point, thank you for making it, DC. It's quite hilarious, really.
That's a fine definition. It's from a Army foreign service manual for identifying communist block weapons. Again, the army does not use the term. And again, let the record show that DC has now arrived, after much googling and copy/paste from Wikipedia, at a definition which excludes the weapons he termed as assault rifles at the beginning of this thread.HokieFanDC wrote: And here's the NRA definition, which they claim is the US army Definition.
"By U.S. Army definition, a selective-fire rifle chambered for a cartridge of intermediate power. If applied to any semi-automatic firearm regardless of its cosmetic similarity to a true assault rifle, the term is incorrect."
It is indeed kinda fun. No one calls them assault rifles, except for a bunch of people.
https://www.nraila.org/about/glossary/
I never denied that people incorrectly used the term. Shame that you broke your copy/paste button on a fool's errand.
Refer to page one.HokieFanDC wrote:What weapon did I term as an assault rifle?USN_Hokie wrote:Let the record now show that DC has googled himself into a position where none of the legal firearms he termed as assault rifles actually fit the definition. That was my point, thank you for making it, DC. It's quite hilarious, really.
That's a fine definition. It's from a Army foreign service manual for identifying communist block weapons. Again, the army does not use the term. And again, let the record show that DC has now arrived, after much googling and copy/paste from Wikipedia, at a definition which excludes the weapons he termed as assault rifles at the beginning of this thread.HokieFanDC wrote: And here's the NRA definition, which they claim is the US army Definition.
"By U.S. Army definition, a selective-fire rifle chambered for a cartridge of intermediate power. If applied to any semi-automatic firearm regardless of its cosmetic similarity to a true assault rifle, the term is incorrect."
It is indeed kinda fun. No one calls them assault rifles, except for a bunch of people.
https://www.nraila.org/about/glossary/
I never denied that people incorrectly used the term. Shame that you broke your copy/paste button on a fool's errand.
Been there. Trying to figure out what you’ve misconstrued and twisted is pretty tough in obvious situations.USN_Hokie wrote:Refer to page one.HokieFanDC wrote:What weapon did I term as an assault rifle?USN_Hokie wrote:Let the record now show that DC has googled himself into a position where none of the legal firearms he termed as assault rifles actually fit the definition. That was my point, thank you for making it, DC. It's quite hilarious, really.
That's a fine definition. It's from a Army foreign service manual for identifying communist block weapons. Again, the army does not use the term. And again, let the record show that DC has now arrived, after much googling and copy/paste from Wikipedia, at a definition which excludes the weapons he termed as assault rifles at the beginning of this thread.HokieFanDC wrote: And here's the NRA definition, which they claim is the US army Definition.
"By U.S. Army definition, a selective-fire rifle chambered for a cartridge of intermediate power. If applied to any semi-automatic firearm regardless of its cosmetic similarity to a true assault rifle, the term is incorrect."
It is indeed kinda fun. No one calls them assault rifles, except for a bunch of people.
https://www.nraila.org/about/glossary/
I never denied that people incorrectly used the term. Shame that you broke your copy/paste button on a fool's errand.
You're the only one being evasive. You know exactly what you said and what I'm talking about.HokieFanDC wrote:Been there. Trying to figure out what you’ve misconstrued and twisted is pretty tough in obvious situations.USN_Hokie wrote:Refer to page one.HokieFanDC wrote:What weapon did I term as an assault rifle?USN_Hokie wrote:Let the record now show that DC has googled himself into a position where none of the legal firearms he termed as assault rifles actually fit the definition. That was my point, thank you for making it, DC. It's quite hilarious, really.
That's a fine definition. It's from a Army foreign service manual for identifying communist block weapons. Again, the army does not use the term. And again, let the record show that DC has now arrived, after much googling and copy/paste from Wikipedia, at a definition which excludes the weapons he termed as assault rifles at the beginning of this thread.HokieFanDC wrote: And here's the NRA definition, which they claim is the US army Definition.
"By U.S. Army definition, a selective-fire rifle chambered for a cartridge of intermediate power. If applied to any semi-automatic firearm regardless of its cosmetic similarity to a true assault rifle, the term is incorrect."
It is indeed kinda fun. No one calls them assault rifles, except for a bunch of people.
https://www.nraila.org/about/glossary/
I never denied that people incorrectly used the term. Shame that you broke your copy/paste button on a fool's errand.
Doing that when you’re being evasive, almost impossible.
That's kinda what I thought, but figuring out you're made up crap is sometimes difficult.USN_Hokie wrote:You're the only one being evasive. You know exactly what you said and what I'm talking about.HokieFanDC wrote:Been there. Trying to figure out what you’ve misconstrued and twisted is pretty tough in obvious situations.USN_Hokie wrote:Refer to page one.HokieFanDC wrote:What weapon did I term as an assault rifle?USN_Hokie wrote:Let the record now show that DC has googled himself into a position where none of the legal firearms he termed as assault rifles actually fit the definition. That was my point, thank you for making it, DC. It's quite hilarious, really.
That's a fine definition. It's from a Army foreign service manual for identifying communist block weapons. Again, the army does not use the term. And again, let the record show that DC has now arrived, after much googling and copy/paste from Wikipedia, at a definition which excludes the weapons he termed as assault rifles at the beginning of this thread.HokieFanDC wrote: And here's the NRA definition, which they claim is the US army Definition.
"By U.S. Army definition, a selective-fire rifle chambered for a cartridge of intermediate power. If applied to any semi-automatic firearm regardless of its cosmetic similarity to a true assault rifle, the term is incorrect."
It is indeed kinda fun. No one calls them assault rifles, except for a bunch of people.
https://www.nraila.org/about/glossary/
I never denied that people incorrectly used the term. Shame that you broke your copy/paste button on a fool's errand.
Doing that when you’re being evasive, almost impossible.
Your entire impetus for joining this thread was to white knight elberto and defend his use of assault weapon/rifle to refer to the AR-15, which is (to bring this thread full circle) false by both the real and your invented definition.
You're welcome.
"My magazine's bigger than your magazine". "No, my magazine is bigger than yours".USN_Hokie wrote:1. DC, you've gone full retard. I gave three generalized characteristics of a classic "assault rifle." You're claiming victory like a 4yo playing monopoly because your boogeyman gun met one of those characteristics in a variant 40yrs ago which is now banned.
2. Also, stop pretending you know anything about guns. You don't know wtf you're talking about...and can't even type the characters correctly.
Arguments like this make you look like retarded ideologue. Don't be a retarded ideologue.
It is difficult keeping up with your invented arguments. Now you're purposely conflating assault weapon : assault rifle. And ...you absolutely defended him.HokieFanDC wrote:That's kinda what I thought, but figuring out you're made up crap is sometimes difficult.USN_Hokie wrote:You're the only one being evasive. You know exactly what you said and what I'm talking about.HokieFanDC wrote:Been there. Trying to figure out what you’ve misconstrued and twisted is pretty tough in obvious situations.USN_Hokie wrote:Refer to page one.HokieFanDC wrote:What weapon did I term as an assault rifle?USN_Hokie wrote:Let the record now show that DC has googled himself into a position where none of the legal firearms he termed as assault rifles actually fit the definition. That was my point, thank you for making it, DC. It's quite hilarious, really.
That's a fine definition. It's from a Army foreign service manual for identifying communist block weapons. Again, the army does not use the term. And again, let the record show that DC has now arrived, after much googling and copy/paste from Wikipedia, at a definition which excludes the weapons he termed as assault rifles at the beginning of this thread.
I never denied that people incorrectly used the term. Shame that you broke your copy/paste button on a fool's errand.
Doing that when you’re being evasive, almost impossible.
Your entire impetus for joining this thread was to white knight elberto and defend his use of assault weapon/rifle to refer to the AR-15, which is (to bring this thread full circle) false by both the real and your invented definition.
You're welcome.
In this case, I didn't defend his use of the term assault weapon and I didn't invent a definition. I said there was no definition for it, and that you and numbers hokie knew what he was referring to, regardless of the lack of a definition
I didn't say anything about an assault rifle, you're the one who fabricated that lie, and took the board on USN Hokie's Wild Ride.
That brings this thread full circle.
LOL. You're the only one conflating assault weapon and assault rifle. You are the one who brought up assault rifles in a discussion that had nothing to do with assault rifles. And you conflated the two, with this beauty, "Your entire impetus for joining this thread was to white knight elberto and defend his use of assault weapon/rifle to refer to the AR-15".USN_Hokie wrote:It is difficult keeping up with your invented arguments. Now you're purposely conflating assault weapon : assault rifle. And ...you absolutely defended him.HokieFanDC wrote:That's kinda what I thought, but figuring out you're made up crap is sometimes difficult.USN_Hokie wrote:You're the only one being evasive. You know exactly what you said and what I'm talking about.HokieFanDC wrote:Been there. Trying to figure out what you’ve misconstrued and twisted is pretty tough in obvious situations.USN_Hokie wrote:Refer to page one.HokieFanDC wrote: What weapon did I term as an assault rifle?
Doing that when you’re being evasive, almost impossible.
Your entire impetus for joining this thread was to white knight elberto and defend his use of assault weapon/rifle to refer to the AR-15, which is (to bring this thread full circle) false by both the real and your invented definition.
You're welcome.
In this case, I didn't defend his use of the term assault weapon and I didn't invent a definition. I said there was no definition for it, and that you and numbers hokie knew what he was referring to, regardless of the lack of a definition
I didn't say anything about an assault rifle, you're the one who fabricated that lie, and took the board on USN Hokie's Wild Ride.
That brings this thread full circle.
Liberals HokieFanDC always projects. Have a nice night.
Let the record show that DC has arrived, after much googling and copy/paste from Wikipedia, at a definition which excludes the weapons he defended as assault rifles/weapons at the beginning of this thread.
I mentioned that assault weapon isn't a real term and is a derivative of assault rifle - there's nothing wrong with what I said. You then latched onto the latter like an illegal onto California welfare benefits having made a fool of yourself on the more germane discussion. Nice try.HokieFanDC wrote: LOL. You're the only one conflating assault weapon and assault rifle. You are the one who brought up assault rifles in a discussion that had nothing to do with assault rifles. And you conflated the two, with this beauty, "Your entire impetus for joining this thread was to white knight elberto and defend his use of assault weapon/rifle to refer to the AR-15".
You are the one that brought assault rifles into the discussion, out of the blue. You can't joke your way out of that.
Please don't go to sleep yet, it's funny watching you do this.
You don't disappoint, this is better than Stranger Things.USN_Hokie wrote:I mentioned that assault weapon isn't a real term and is a derivative of assault rifle - there's nothing wrong with what I said. You then latched onto the latter like an illegal onto California welfare benefits having made a fool of yourself on the more germane discussion. Nice try.HokieFanDC wrote: LOL. You're the only one conflating assault weapon and assault rifle. You are the one who brought up assault rifles in a discussion that had nothing to do with assault rifles. And you conflated the two, with this beauty, "Your entire impetus for joining this thread was to white knight elberto and defend his use of assault weapon/rifle to refer to the AR-15".
You are the one that brought assault rifles into the discussion, out of the blue. You can't joke your way out of that.
Please don't go to sleep yet, it's funny watching you do this.
This is incorrect.USN_Hokie wrote:You're the only one being evasive. You know exactly what you said and what I'm talking about.HokieFanDC wrote:Been there. Trying to figure out what you’ve misconstrued and twisted is pretty tough in obvious situations.USN_Hokie wrote:Refer to page one.HokieFanDC wrote:What weapon did I term as an assault rifle?USN_Hokie wrote:Let the record now show that DC has googled himself into a position where none of the legal firearms he termed as assault rifles actually fit the definition. That was my point, thank you for making it, DC. It's quite hilarious, really.
That's a fine definition. It's from a Army foreign service manual for identifying communist block weapons. Again, the army does not use the term. And again, let the record show that DC has now arrived, after much googling and copy/paste from Wikipedia, at a definition which excludes the weapons he termed as assault rifles at the beginning of this thread.HokieFanDC wrote: And here's the NRA definition, which they claim is the US army Definition.
"By U.S. Army definition, a selective-fire rifle chambered for a cartridge of intermediate power. If applied to any semi-automatic firearm regardless of its cosmetic similarity to a true assault rifle, the term is incorrect."
It is indeed kinda fun. No one calls them assault rifles, except for a bunch of people.
https://www.nraila.org/about/glossary/
I never denied that people incorrectly used the term. Shame that you broke your copy/paste button on a fool's errand.
Doing that when you’re being evasive, almost impossible.
Your entire impetus for joining this thread was to white knight elberto and defend his use of assault weapon/rifle to refer to the AR-15, which is (to bring this thread full circle) false by both the real and your invented definition.
You're welcome.
Now you're talking about something completely different - show some integrity.HokieFanDC wrote:You don't disappoint, this is better than Stranger Things.USN_Hokie wrote:I mentioned that assault weapon isn't a real term and is a derivative of assault rifle - there's nothing wrong with what I said. You then latched onto the latter like an illegal onto California welfare benefits having made a fool of yourself on the more germane discussion. Nice try.HokieFanDC wrote: LOL. You're the only one conflating assault weapon and assault rifle. You are the one who brought up assault rifles in a discussion that had nothing to do with assault rifles. And you conflated the two, with this beauty, "Your entire impetus for joining this thread was to white knight elberto and defend his use of assault weapon/rifle to refer to the AR-15".
You are the one that brought assault rifles into the discussion, out of the blue. You can't joke your way out of that.
Please don't go to sleep yet, it's funny watching you do this.
Actually I'm the one that said assault weapon doesn't have one definition and is used to describe different things. You're the one that tried to tie it to assault rifles (you know, conflate). And then, in one of your best bullshirt moments, made the awesome claim that there is "really only" one assault rifle. It's been pure comedy gold from that moment on.
Keep 'em coming. It's early here.