AR 15 Reclassification

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skypilot

I don't pretend. I stated facts and stand by them. You got anything to refute them or you just going to deflect and attempt to switch my post to an upper lower debate?

---

LOL. So pointing out how misleading your statement was is "deflecting?"

Okay.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

LOL. So pointing out how misleading your statement was is "deflecting?"

Okay.

---

The guns are simply different and that's not misleading.

Changing to an AR lower on a MCX upper doesn't change the operation, it is still the same gun design as it was originally(although using a different lower with different Serial #, OEM and City changes things WRT database info) and you now need a stock kit from Sig to plug the missing buffer tube hole on the AR lower.

Drop a loaded/chambered AR 15 in the water, immediately pull it out and shoot it. Do the same with the MCX. Then tell me they are not vastly different guns, if your able.

ROFL.

Your claim was that all these guns had in common was the STANAG magazine, and the fact they had triggers and barrels. I countered with the fact that they are designed so that the lower receiver is interoperable, so clearly they have more in common than you pretend. You accused me of "deflecting."

And this is your response? That they are "simply different?" Well, no kidding. I wasn't arguing they are the same. I was arguing that you had made a misleading statement: based on SIG's deliberate decision to make their rifle work on an AR-15 lower, not to mention their use of AR-15 ergonomics, these rifles clearly share more design features than the existence of a trigger and a barrel.

I'm not sure why anyone even thinks this matters. Perhaps you could explain what you think the MCX has to do with the topic of AR-15 classification. Just like your Second Amendment red herring, nothing to do with the topic. Are you off your meds, or are you simply making repeated attempts to derail the thread?

The 2nd amendment was to explain and educate on the FACTS, especially to seditious, idealogical chameleons.
If you would read and comprehend the threads previous posts and the conversational flow, you would see the relativity of the 2nd Amend posts.

Nothing like having an enemy inside the wire Welsh. Some of the laughable BS interviews and comments you have made here and elswhere is telling. You my ad hominem little friend are the one whom is sick, and in need of meds, could it be shell shock? Tinnitus?

Didn't you previously already publicly admit dishonesty with regards to specific firearm research?

Now, is the trigger not part of an operable lower? Oh wait, yes. But you chose to try and argue a point with me that you failed to fully comprehend. When you get a AR lower to use on an upper it is a complete lower meaning the trigger assembly is include unless you ORDER a 80% lower to be privately machined to completion or ORDER a lower with nothing else, but it won't shoot.

You have a habit of trying to pick flychit out of pepper attempting to change the meaning of a previous factual post.

The Sig is piston operated vs DI AR 15. They are not similar as you admitted.

No matter what you do with the AR lower the Sig is still a piston operated semi.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skypilot

The 2nd amendment was to explain and educate on the FACTS, especially to seditious, idealogical chameleons.

---

Seditious?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skypilot

Didn't you previously already publicly admit dishonesty with regards to specific firearm research?

---

Huh?

Anyway ... still waiting for the explanation of what the MCX has to do with this.

Another thread destroyed.