Oh, The Orlando Killer Didn't Use An AR-15 Rifle

Now we are hearing the Orlando mass murderer did not use an AR15 rifle !!!

This story claims he had different kind of rifle as well as hand gun(s).

Who are we supposed to believe now?

The MSM has the public all in knots over this.

Oh, The Orlando Killer Didn't Use An AR-15 Rifle

Folks—the demonization of the AR-15 rifle has begun in the media. The usual talking points about its lethality, its rate of fire, and its scariness are coursing through the veins of the anti-gun Left following the Orlando attack. Omar Mateen committed the worst mass shooting in U.S. history on Sunday morning, which will likely be reclassified as a terrorist attack, when he murdered 49 people at a gay nightclub (Pulse). As Bob Owens and Streiff noted at Bearing Arms and RedState respectively, Mateen didn’t use an AR-15 rifle, but the media has a narrative to dole out (via CBS News):

A law enforcement source said that the shooting suspect legally purchased recently the two weapons used in the attack at the shooting center in Port St. Lucie near his Fort Pierce home. He had a Glock 17 handgun purchased on June 5, a Sigsauer MCX assault rifle purchased on June 4 on his person during the shootout, and investigators later found a .38-caliber weapon in his vehicle.

Owens noted that the rifle Mateen bought “has no major parts that interface with AR-15s in any way, shape, or form”:

The rifle used by the Islamist terrorist in Orlando was instead a Sig Sauer MCX carbine, a modular, multi-caliber (able to swap to different calibers, including 5.56 NATO, 300 BLK, and 7.62×39) rifle system that sometimes utilizes STANAG magazines common to more than 60 different firearms, but otherwise has no major parts that interface with AR-15s in any way, shape or form.

WHAT ?

a reply to: xuenchen

Sig MCX is still black and look scary.

All rifles operate on the same principle. A magazine clip to store unfired bullets. A hole in the barrel to load in bullets. A trigger to ignite the gunpowder. A barrel to guide the bullet out. Other things like targeting laser, eyescope, handgrip are all optional.
It's purely mechanical if it can fire one bullet or fire the whole clip.

I think it's fine to call that an AR-15. It's basically an AR-15. The distinction is about as big of a difference between a mini van and a cargo van and calling them both vans.

ETA: Oh I thought the had the same upper. Meh, if someone asked me what kind of gun it was I would say AR-15.

originally posted by: joemoe
a reply to: xuenchen

Sig MCX is still black and look scary.

Bigtime.

But the standard buzz-trigger name has been "AR-15" for a long time now.

Buzzzzzzzzz

a reply to: xuenchen

That is probably some info that will get buried way way back for it does not fit the propaganda nor the agenda.

I know, let us disarm the population and import no telling how many radicals or let the mosque turn hundreds more into religious idiots... Not to mention the cartels who are in every major city in America and certainly have no problems acquiring weapons of all kinds. The law abiding citizens can put their fingers in their ears and close their eyes when confronted with stupid evil.. Maybe cry for their mommies or talk stern will help

a reply to: xuenchen

My question is does it matter?

Many guns that a US citizen can get has a high rate of fire. I can imagine someone determined and trained could shoot a lot of rounds per minute with a good old 6-shooter and a speed loader... Are they illegal?

It seems to me a moot point to argue about what gun was used or even the calibre. Pretty much any calibre bullet is deadly vs a non armoured target and pretty much any semi-automatic weapon has the potential to kill/wound multiple targets even if you restrict the direct amount of ammunition said gun can hold ready to be chambered.

Actually I have a few questions.

Is the AR-15 being demonized?

Why such fervour about what weapons were used?

What use does a gun holding more than 5 rounds and being semi-automatic have other than a weapon of war and a fun time?

B-b-but it's the guns fault so we have ban all guns! Create more safe spaces! More government dependency! I can't be trusted to defend myself!

With the amount of time that the shooter had, I could have done the same damage with a bolt action rifle.

a reply to: xuenchen
Thats where Congress and the MSM (and the left) show their blatant extreme stupidity on firearms. AR-15 ? Which of the 30+ AR-15s were they speaking about anywhooo
AR = Assault Rifle - general term
15 - class of above

a reply to: xuenchen

I'm for gun rights but this is making a mountain out of a molehole.

a reply to: RAY1990

Some other uses include hunting wild hogs as well as varmints as an example.

It's like saying aliens, could be grays, reptilians, Hilary Clintons, Draconians, etc... They're all pretty much interchangeable for "aliens"

originally posted by: stormcell

It's purely mechanical if it can fire one bullet or fire the whole clip.

AR-15s are semi-auto. One trigger pull = one shot. If it's a 30 round magazine, it takes 30 trigger pulls to fire all 30 rounds. There is nothing fundamentally different about an AR-15 compared to most other rifles. The collapsible stock may make it slightly easier to conceal, but other than that, it just LOOKS meaner. Put a wooden stock on it and take off the rails and it would be indistinguishable from any garden variety hunting rifle. A 22 caliber Ruger 10/22 works exactly the same way.

A full auto is a machine gun. One trigger pull = many shots. That's not what this guy used. And that begs the question. How was he able to get off so many shots, including changing magazines multiple times? I don't know the answer--just asking.

originally posted by: stormcell
All rifles operate on the same principle. A magazine clip to store unfired bullets. A hole in the barrel to load in bullets. A trigger to ignite the gunpowder. A barrel to guide the bullet out. Other things like targeting laser, eyescope, handgrip are all optional.
It's purely mechanical if it can fire one bullet or fire the whole clip.

Well that's kinda why I posted, seems like utter nonsense of a point to make.

Plus if someone is determined they could always attempt to recalibrate a gun to fit larger potentially homemade drums, receiving chambers, actual mechanics... Damn, if you live in America I can imagine a LOT can be done with a gun. Heck an AR-15 could be turned into a hand-loaded single shot rifle if you really wanted to.

Why are people getting hung up on the Model.? From a few yards away most people couldn't tell what make it is. myself included. I have no interest in Guns.

The bottom line is be it a AR15 or a Sig Sauer MCX carbine, they both are capable of killing large amounts of people in a short space of time.

Take being clubbed to death with a guitar for instance, Doesn't matter if it's a Gibson Les Paul of a Fender Precision bass, both entirely different instruments, but you're still dead.

originally posted by: Konduit
B-b-but it's the guns fault so we have ban all guns! Create more safe spaces! More government dependency! I can't be trusted to defend myself!

only you right-wingers use the phrase "ban all guns"....so ridiculous, that it's just funny

originally posted by: Gothmog
a reply to: xuenchen
Thats where Congress and the MSM (and the left) show their blatant extreme stupidity on firearms. AR-15 ? Which of the 30+ AR-15s were they speaking about anywhooo
AR = Assault Rifle - general term
15 - class of above

The "AR" in all ArmaLite pattern firearms simply stands for "ArmaLite Rifle"

en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: RAY1990
a reply to: xuenchen

My question is does it matter?

Many guns that a US citizen can get has a high rate of fire. I can imagine someone determined and trained could shoot a lot of rounds per minute with a good old 6-shooter and a speed loader... Are they illegal?

It seems to me a moot point to argue about what gun was used or even the calibre. Pretty much any calibre bullet is deadly vs a non armoured target and pretty much any semi-automatic weapon has the potential to kill/wound multiple targets even if you restrict the direct amount of ammunition said gun can hold ready to be chambered.

Actually I have a few questions.

Is the AR-15 being demonized?

Why such fervour about what weapons were used?

What use does a gun holding more than 5 rounds and being semi-automatic have other than a weapon of war and a fun time?

It's funny you should say that...I posted this before in another thread but its worth a repost.....Look out they are banning the 6 shooter next!!!!

6 shots, reload and 6 more shots from a revolver in less than 3 seconds.....That man is a true deadly weapon!!! Ban Jerry!!!

originally posted by: SonOfThor
a reply to: RAY1990

Some other uses include hunting wild hogs as well as varmints as an example.

Shotgun.

You must have a real vermin problem to need more than 5 bullets I guess

Nah but honestly, I was always taught that if you want to go hunting have a few rounds ready to be shot extra, mainly to stop the animal suffering... Plus even a good hit can have undesirable outcomes it's best to have at least an extra to finish the job.

I've only ever shot air rifles .22's. It might seem bigoted of me to say this from across the pond (UK) but I've never seen a gun capable of holding more than 5 rounds useful as hunting. Unless your a piss poor shot or your literally gunning over your weight. Either way you should get a different calibre or give up your hobby.

That being said I have once saw a hoard of rats, I would have loved an AR-15 then...