On Wednesday, January 24, 2024 at 5:28:42 PM UTC-5, Tom Kunich wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 17, 2024 at 11:18:46 AM UTC-8, Zen Cycle wrote:
> > On 1/17/2024 12:34 PM, floriduh dumbass flail about, yet again:
> > > On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 10:09:12 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 1/16/2024 4:34 PM, floriduh dumbass blatantly lied:
> > >>> On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 16:15:36 -0500, Zen Cycle
<funkm...@hotmail.com>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> Remember his original positions "the AR-15 was a weapon a
military never
> > >>>> wanted and never used", and "the ar-15 was developed as a
sporting rifle
> > >>>> v".
> > >>>
> > >>> I never made any such claim.
> > >>
> > >> You've made those claims multiple times:
> > >
> > > I don't remember saying the original AR15 was "without automatic
> > > capability."
> > The internet never forgets
> > >
> > >>
https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/DunWmygUj04/m/gcd27dJlAwAJ
> > >> "the AR15 is not a military weapon and never has
> > >> been. "
> > >
> > > I guess you could say it was a military weapon since the original
> > > version tested by the military was still officially called an AR15.
> > It's not a matter of interpretation.
> > https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a953110.pdf
> > Page 38
> > "More significant is the fact that the Department of the Army and the
> > Marine Corps procured the rifle after the Air Force brought it into
the
> > Department of Defense inventory as a standard weapon. The ARI5 was
> > designated the standard basic weapon for the Air Force on 2 January
> > 1962, and designated the M16 rifle by the Army 11 December 1963."
> >
> > >
> > >>
https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/gI2qO1I-xYU/m/lzh2-MvQAQAJ
> > >> "The AF spec for the gun required full auto which the AR15 could
not
> > >> do. The AR15 was never bought by the military."
> > >
> > > The AF did require full auto. The AR15 was ordered by the Air Force,
> > > but were delivered as m16s after modifications were made.
> > completely wrong.
> > https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a953110.pdf
> > Page 38
> > "More significant is the fact that the Department of the Army and the
> > Marine Corps procured the rifle after the Air Force brought it into
the
> > Department of Defense inventory as a standard weapon. The ARI5 was
> > designated the standard basic weapon for the Air Force on 2 January
> > 1962, and designated the M16 rifle by the Army 11 December 1963."
> > what is it about "the Air Force brought it into the
> > Department of Defense inventory as a standard weapon. The ARI5 was
> > designated the standard basic weapon for the Air Force on 2 January
> > 1962" that you don't understand?
> > >
> > >>
https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/gI2qO1I-xYU/m/RF5V5wcgAgAJ
> > >> "was never used by the military and was marketed and old as a
> > >> sporting rifle ever since."
> > >
> > > TRue, the military version was called an m16.
> > Completely wrong. The Army version was called the M16. The Airforce
took
> > delivery of AR-15s.
> > https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a953110.pdf
> > Page 38
> > "More significant is the fact that the Department of the Army and the
> > Marine Corps procured the rifle after the Air Force brought it into
the
> > Department of Defense inventory as a standard weapon. The ARI5 was
> > designated the standard basic weapon for the Air Force on 2 January
> > 1962, and designated the M16 rifle by the Army 11 December 1963."
> > what is it about "the Air Force brought it into the
> > Department of Defense inventory as a standard weapon. The ARI5 was
> > designated the standard basic weapon for the Air Force on 2 January
> > 1962" that you don't understand?
> > >
> > >>
https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/gI2qO1I-xYU/m/FV1r-GnQAQAJ
> > >> "the AR15 is, and has always been, a civilian gun the the military
> > >> had no use for."
> > >
> > > I was wrong to say the military had no use for the AR15. The Air
> > > force did think they were useful.
> > As did the DOD, since they didn't order them as M16s until after
the AF
> > bought them and declared them as the standard basic weapon
> > https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a953110.pdf
> > Page 38
> > "More significant is the fact that the Department of the Army and the
> > Marine Corps procured the rifle after the Air Force brought it into
the
> > Department of Defense inventory as a standard weapon. The ARI5 was
> > designated the standard basic weapon for the Air Force on 2 January
> > 1962, and designated the M16 rifle by the Army 11 December 1963."
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >>
https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/gI2qO1I-xYU/m/JXRe6BdNAwAJ
> > >> "the military specified a full automatic derivative of the AR15.
> > >> AR15s are not full automatic"
> > >
> > > Also true. I was wrong to say the M16 was a full automatic
derivative
> > > of the AR15. It was a derivative of the full automatic AR10.
> > Completely wrong. The AR-10 never went anywhere. It was a large
caliber
> > weapon the under performed and didn't meet the military requirements.
> > The AR-15 was designed to the military requirements for a
> > fully-automatic small caliber weapon and was adopted by the Army and
> > Marines two years after the airforce declared it their standard basic
> > weapon.
> > https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a953110.pdf
> > Page 38
> > "More significant is the fact that the Department of the Army and the
> > Marine Corps procured the rifle after the Air Force brought it into
the
> > Department of Defense inventory as a standard weapon. The ARI5 was
> > designated the standard basic weapon for the Air Force on 2 January
> > 1962, and designated the M16 rifle by the Army 11 December 1963.
> >
> >
> > >>>
> > >>> Then he and kunich tried to put on a
> > >>>> vaudville act of claiming the M16 was a complete redesign of
the AR-15.
> > >>>
> > >>> Nope, never happened.
> > >>
> > >>
https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/gI2qO1I-xYU/m/lzh2-MvQAQAJ
> > >> "What the military bought was the full automatic
> > >> derivative of the AR15 called the M16."
> > >
> > > Also true, the military made changes to the original AR15 and called
> > > it an M16
> > The army made changes, Not the military as a whole. The Air force
bought
> > AR-15s.
> > https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a953110.pdf
> > Page 38
> > "More significant is the fact that the Department of the Army and the
> > Marine Corps procured the rifle after the Air Force brought it into
the
> > Department of Defense inventory as a standard weapon. The ARI5 was
> > designated the standard basic weapon for the Air Force on 2 January
> > 1962, and designated the M16 rifle by the Army 11 December 1963."
> > what is it about "the Air Force brought it into the
> > Department of Defense inventory as a standard weapon. The ARI5 was
> > designated the standard basic weapon for the Air Force on 2 January
> > 1962" that you don't understand?
> > >
> > >>>> Every single one of those claims has been proven false, and
now he's
> > >>>> reduced to trying to claim "they were M16s when the military
took them"
> > >>>> (which has be undeniably disproven by the report) as if _that_
actually
> > >>>> made a difference.
> > >>>
> > >>> No such proof.
> > >>
> > >> https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a953110.pdf
> > >> Page 38
> > >> "More significant is the fact that the Department of the Army
and the
> > >> Marine Corps procured the rifle after the Air Force brought it
into the
> > >> Department of Defense inventory as a standard weapon. The ARI5 was
> > >> designated the standard basic weapon for the Air Force on 2 January
> > >> 1962, and designated the M16 rifle by the Army 11 December 1963."
> > >
> > > They ordered it as an AR15-601s, but except for 1000 delivered for
> > > testing, they were delivered as M16s after they'd been slightly
> > > modified
> > Completely wrong, as stated in the report:
> > "the Air Force brought it into the
> > Department of Defense inventory as a standard weapon. The ARI5 was
> > designated the standard basic weapon for the Air Force on 2 January
> > 1962, and designated the M16 rifle by the Army 11 December 1963." -
two
> > years _after_ the airfoce declared it as the standard basic weapon.
> >
> > Face it dumbass, you don't have a leg to stand on. Everything you're
> > claiming is disproved in the report. To this point, all you've
presented
> > is unsubstantiated opinion. If you have proof of anything you've
> > written, present it. You've had a year to do so, all you've done is
> > stomp your feet like petulant 3 year old.
> > --
> > Add xx to reply
>
> I wonder why you keep insisting that the military wanted a
semiautomatic weapon w3hen they wanted a fully automatic weapon.

On Thursday, January 25, 2024 at 2:01:07 PM UTC-8, Zen Cycle wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 24, 2024 at 5:28:42 PM UTC-5, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > On Wednesday, January 17, 2024 at 11:18:46 AM UTC-8, Zen Cycle wrote:
> > > On 1/17/2024 12:34 PM, floriduh dumbass flail about, yet again:
> > > > On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 10:09:12 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> On 1/16/2024 4:34 PM, floriduh dumbass blatantly lied:
> > > >>> On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 16:15:36 -0500, Zen Cycle
> <funkm...@hotmail.com>
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> Remember his original positions "the AR-15 was a weapon a
> military never
> > > >>>> wanted and never used", and "the ar-15 was developed as a
> sporting rifle
> > > >>>> v".
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I never made any such claim.
> > > >>
> > > >> You've made those claims multiple times:
> > > >
> > > > I don't remember saying the original AR15 was "without automatic
> > > > capability."
> > > The internet never forgets
> > > >
> > > >>
> https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/DunWmygUj04/m/gcd27dJlAwAJ
> > > >> "the AR15 is not a military weapon and never has
> > > >> been. "
> > > >
> > > > I guess you could say it was a military weapon since the original
> > > > version tested by the military was still officially called an AR15.
> > > It's not a matter of interpretation.
> > > https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a953110.pdf
> > > Page 38
> > > "More significant is the fact that the Department of the Army and the
> > > Marine Corps procured the rifle after the Air Force brought it into
> the
> > > Department of Defense inventory as a standard weapon. The ARI5 was
> > > designated the standard basic weapon for the Air Force on 2 January
> > > 1962, and designated the M16 rifle by the Army 11 December 1963."
> > >
> > > >
> > > >>
> https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/gI2qO1I-xYU/m/lzh2-MvQAQAJ
> > > >> "The AF spec for the gun required full auto which the AR15 could
> not
> > > >> do. The AR15 was never bought by the military."
> > > >
> > > > The AF did require full auto. The AR15 was ordered by the Air Force,
> > > > but were delivered as m16s after modifications were made.
> > > completely wrong.
> > > https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a953110.pdf
> > > Page 38
> > > "More significant is the fact that the Department of the Army and the
> > > Marine Corps procured the rifle after the Air Force brought it into
> the
> > > Department of Defense inventory as a standard weapon. The ARI5 was
> > > designated the standard basic weapon for the Air Force on 2 January
> > > 1962, and designated the M16 rifle by the Army 11 December 1963."
> > > what is it about "the Air Force brought it into the
> > > Department of Defense inventory as a standard weapon. The ARI5 was
> > > designated the standard basic weapon for the Air Force on 2 January
> > > 1962" that you don't understand?
> > > >
> > > >>
> https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/gI2qO1I-xYU/m/RF5V5wcgAgAJ
> > > >> "was never used by the military and was marketed and old as a
> > > >> sporting rifle ever since."
> > > >
> > > > TRue, the military version was called an m16.
> > > Completely wrong. The Army version was called the M16. The Airforce
> took
> > > delivery of AR-15s.
> > > https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a953110.pdf
> > > Page 38
> > > "More significant is the fact that the Department of the Army and the
> > > Marine Corps procured the rifle after the Air Force brought it into
> the
> > > Department of Defense inventory as a standard weapon. The ARI5 was
> > > designated the standard basic weapon for the Air Force on 2 January
> > > 1962, and designated the M16 rifle by the Army 11 December 1963."
> > > what is it about "the Air Force brought it into the
> > > Department of Defense inventory as a standard weapon. The ARI5 was
> > > designated the standard basic weapon for the Air Force on 2 January
> > > 1962" that you don't understand?
> > > >
> > > >>
> https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/gI2qO1I-xYU/m/FV1r-GnQAQAJ
> > > >> "the AR15 is, and has always been, a civilian gun the the military
> > > >> had no use for."
> > > >
> > > > I was wrong to say the military had no use for the AR15. The Air
> > > > force did think they were useful.
> > > As did the DOD, since they didn't order them as M16s until after
> the AF
> > > bought them and declared them as the standard basic weapon
> > > https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a953110.pdf
> > > Page 38
> > > "More significant is the fact that the Department of the Army and the
> > > Marine Corps procured the rifle after the Air Force brought it into
> the
> > > Department of Defense inventory as a standard weapon. The ARI5 was
> > > designated the standard basic weapon for the Air Force on 2 January
> > > 1962, and designated the M16 rifle by the Army 11 December 1963."
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >>
> https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/gI2qO1I-xYU/m/JXRe6BdNAwAJ
> > > >> "the military specified a full automatic derivative of the AR15.
> > > >> AR15s are not full automatic"
> > > >
> > > > Also true. I was wrong to say the M16 was a full automatic
> derivative
> > > > of the AR15. It was a derivative of the full automatic AR10.
> > > Completely wrong. The AR-10 never went anywhere. It was a large
> caliber
> > > weapon the under performed and didn't meet the military requirements.
> > > The AR-15 was designed to the military requirements for a
> > > fully-automatic small caliber weapon and was adopted by the Army and
> > > Marines two years after the airforce declared it their standard basic
> > > weapon.
> > > https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a953110.pdf
> > > Page 38
> > > "More significant is the fact that the Department of the Army and the
> > > Marine Corps procured the rifle after the Air Force brought it into
> the
> > > Department of Defense inventory as a standard weapon. The ARI5 was
> > > designated the standard basic weapon for the Air Force on 2 January
> > > 1962, and designated the M16 rifle by the Army 11 December 1963.
> > >
> > >
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Then he and kunich tried to put on a
> > > >>>> vaudville act of claiming the M16 was a complete redesign of
> the AR-15.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Nope, never happened.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/gI2qO1I-xYU/m/lzh2-MvQAQAJ
> > > >> "What the military bought was the full automatic
> > > >> derivative of the AR15 called the M16."
> > > >
> > > > Also true, the military made changes to the original AR15 and called
> > > > it an M16
> > > The army made changes, Not the military as a whole. The Air force
> bought
> > > AR-15s.
> > > https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a953110.pdf
> > > Page 38
> > > "More significant is the fact that the Department of the Army and the
> > > Marine Corps procured the rifle after the Air Force brought it into
> the
> > > Department of Defense inventory as a standard weapon. The ARI5 was
> > > designated the standard basic weapon for the Air Force on 2 January
> > > 1962, and designated the M16 rifle by the Army 11 December 1963."
> > > what is it about "the Air Force brought it into the
> > > Department of Defense inventory as a standard weapon. The ARI5 was
> > > designated the standard basic weapon for the Air Force on 2 January
> > > 1962" that you don't understand?
> > > >
> > > >>>> Every single one of those claims has been proven false, and
> now he's
> > > >>>> reduced to trying to claim "they were M16s when the military
> took them"
> > > >>>> (which has be undeniably disproven by the report) as if _that_
> actually
> > > >>>> made a difference.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> No such proof.
> > > >>
> > > >> https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a953110.pdf
> > > >> Page 38
> > > >> "More significant is the fact that the Department of the Army
> and the
> > > >> Marine Corps procured the rifle after the Air Force brought it
> into the
> > > >> Department of Defense inventory as a standard weapon. The ARI5 was
> > > >> designated the standard basic weapon for the Air Force on 2 January
> > > >> 1962, and designated the M16 rifle by the Army 11 December 1963."
> > > >
> > > > They ordered it as an AR15-601s, but except for 1000 delivered for
> > > > testing, they were delivered as M16s after they'd been slightly
> > > > modified
> > > Completely wrong, as stated in the report:
> > > "the Air Force brought it into the
> > > Department of Defense inventory as a standard weapon. The ARI5 was
> > > designated the standard basic weapon for the Air Force on 2 January
> > > 1962, and designated the M16 rifle by the Army 11 December 1963." -
> two
> > > years _after_ the airfoce declared it as the standard basic weapon.
> > >
> > > Face it dumbass, you don't have a leg to stand on. Everything you're
> > > claiming is disproved in the report. To this point, all you've
> presented
> > > is unsubstantiated opinion. If you have proof of anything you've
> > > written, present it. You've had a year to do so, all you've done is
> > > stomp your feet like petulant 3 year old.
> > > --
> > > Add xx to reply
> >
> > I wonder why you keep insisting that the military wanted a
> semiautomatic weapon w3hen they wanted a fully automatic weapon.
> I wonder why you keep lying about what you wish I wrote, rather than
> what I did write. At no time have I written or otherwise implied the DOD
> design specifications were for a strictly semi-automatic weapon.
>
> This is from page C-1 of the DOD report linked above (not some left-wing
> website, you dumb shit):
> "The development of the AR15 rifle, was initiated in mid-1957 by Mr.
> Eugene Stoner of the Armalite Corporation, Costa Mesa, California, in
> response to a verbal request from General Wyman, The request, also made
> to other gun manufacturers was for a new light-weight infantry rifle
> chambered for high velocity caliber .22 cartridges, The general
> specifications were: a maximum loaded weight of six pounds; a capability
> of firing semiautomatic or full automatic; a killing power equal to or
> better than that of the Ml (Garand) rifle up to 500 yards; and a
> capability of penetrating a steel helmet or standard body armor at 500
> yards."
> > Most people aside from you and Krygowski are smart enough to know
> that because an AR15 and an M16 look similar, that they aren't the same
> thing.
> In the early 1960's they were. Again, I've never stated or implied that
> the current civilian AR-15 is the same thing as an M16.
> > You continue to show your complete lack of intelligence
> sort of like how a dent in your top tube disappeared simply by riding
> the bike? or how you keep getting flat tires because of all the cars
> driving around with steel cords exposed? or how campagnolo makes special
> no-stretch shifter cables? or how cars with ICEs never catch fire unless
> they're in an accident? or how more people have died from the covid
> vaccine than the virus? or how there was no recession before Obama took
> office? Yeah tommy, that's real genius alright....
> > and your utter distain for the 2nd Amendment.
> I've never criticized the 2nd amendment but I do have disdain for morons
> like you who think they actually understand the 2nd amendment.
> --
> Add xx to reply

On Sunday, January 28, 2024 at 7:09:41 PM UTC-5, Tom Kunich wrote:
> On Thursday, January 25, 2024 at 2:01:07 PM UTC-8, Zen Cycle wrote:
> >
> Why do you feel the need to actually lie about what I said:?

There is not even a hint of a lie in anything I've written,

> The AR15 was already designed and submitted as a prototype. The Military NEVER ordered an AR15 but the fully automatic and modified VERSION of it which was dubbed the M16.

You're like a toddler that keeps spitting out food when it's spoon-fed to you.

From the DOD report
https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a953110.pdf
Page 38
"More significant is the fact that the Department of the Army and the Marine Corps procured the rifle after the Air Force brought it into the Department of Defense inventory as a standard weapon. The ARI5 was designated the standard basic weapon for the Air Force on 2 January 1962, and designated the M16 rifle by the Army 11 December 1963."

what is it about "the Air Force brought it into the Department of Defense inventory as a standard weapon. The ARI5 was designated the standard basic weapon for the Air Force on 2 January 1962" that you don't understand?

> A fully automatic AR15 could NEVER work because heat expansion would jam it.

Gee, the air force seemed more than happy with it. The DARPA report previously posted spoke glowingly of the AR-15 fully automatic capabilities.

> You are one of the worlds least educated persons on firearms and you want to be seen an expert.

I'm no expert on firearms, dumbass. I'm quoting from a DOD report on the history of the M16. You are no more an expert on them than I am, except that I have actual data from DARPA and DOD that supports the fact that the airforce ordered and used fully automaic AR-15s. You're just talking out of your ass, as usual.

> You weren't even in the service you coward.
And you've never owned an electric car, but insist you're an expert on them..

> By the time that they would have denied you entrance because of your drug history there were no wars for skinny little kids like you.

I'm not good at taking orders. Unlike you who blindly follows trump.