It seems the bolt carrier group is the hard to get part for AR-15's
currently. I have found old Colt M16 A1 parts kits, "good to excellent"
minus lower receiver and barrel (plus missing auto-sear or disconnector).
Would the M16 bolt carrier group be good in an AR-15?

I found some bolt carrier groups in stock for $300 but the M16 parts kits
are available in the $500 - $600 range, seems to be a better value maybe. I
read a review of one of these parts kits being assembled, they said it was a
good shooter.

RogerN

On Sat, 2 Mar 2013 22:40:31 -0600, "RogerN" wrote:

It seems the bolt carrier group is the hard to get part for AR-15's
currently. I have found old Colt M16 A1 parts kits, "good to excellent"
minus lower receiver and barrel (plus missing auto-sear or disconnector).
Would the M16 bolt carrier group be good in an AR-15?

I found some bolt carrier groups in stock for $300 but the M16 parts kits
are available in the $500 - $600 range, seems to be a better value maybe. I
read a review of one of these parts kits being assembled, they said it was a
good shooter.

RogerN

Jesus. For a poodle shooter? I paid less than that for a classic Black
Beauty Double in 12 gauge, and the forcing cone was even relieved for
star crimps.

What are you going to do with it if you ever finish it?

--
Ed Huntress

On Mar 2, 9:40*pm, "RogerN" wrote:
It seems the bolt carrier group is the hard to get part for AR-15's
currently. *I have found old Colt M16 A1 parts kits, "good to excellent"
minus lower receiver and barrel (plus missing auto-sear or disconnector).
Would the M16 bolt carrier group be good in an AR-15?

I found some bolt carrier groups in stock for $300 but the M16 parts kits
are available in the $500 - $600 range, seems to be a better value maybe. *I
read a review of one of these parts kits being assembled, they said it was a
good shooter.

RogerN

The M16 parts WILL fit in an AR, it was common practice back in the
first days of building AR clones to use surplus M16 parts from
scrapped rifles. However, BATF eventually frowned on that because,
with some added bits you can go full-auto, or even without, a
improperly timed build can double. So, if you use the whole kit, you
need to remove the secondary sear hook from the hammer, grind back the
auto sear trip surface on the carrier, and lose the full-auto selector
entirely. Disconnector tang needs to be ground to semi-auto
configuration, too. At one time, there was an AR FAQ on the ATF site,
might be it's still there. As far as parts quality, the kits I've
seen for sale were from Colt-made commercially sold M16s supplied as
military aid to several countries, warehoused and never issued. They
can't come back as complete guns, so current practice is to strip
them, scrap the lowers and barrels and import the rest. Some kits for
sale had the auto sear and spring when they were first imported, those
were taken out with later kits. You do NOT want them unless you like
10 year vacations. Quality on those parts kits is the same as new
Colt-made parts of the same era. Barrels can no longer be imported.

So the problems with M16 parts in AR builds aren't mechanical, they're
legal. At this point, somebody starts saying that none of this is in
any law( and they're going to do it anyway). And they're right, it's
BATF's own interpretation, subject to change without notice and with
every change in administration. Since Congress has left legal
interpretation of the law to BATF, this is the result. They can do
just about anything to your gun, should they seize it, to get it to
fire more than 1 shot with one trigger pull(and have done so). Then
it's a machine gun and you go to jail. Just having M16 parts along
with an AR has been taken as having "constructive intent", it's just
flat too easy to convert. If you've got the M16 auto sear and spring,
it's just one hole's difference. So they need to be altered just as
soon as you get them. You do not want to end up in court because M16
parts kits are currently cheaper than AR parts. Just using an M16
bolt carrier with all the rest being AR parts SHOULD be safe legally,
the trip surface should probably be shortened to be completely safe.
Your choice...

Stan

On Saturday, March 2, 2013 9:20:38 PM UTC-8, Stanley Schaefer wrote:
On Mar 2, 9:40*pm, "RogerN" wrote: It seems the bolt carrier group is the hard to get part for AR-15's currently. *I have found old Colt M16 A1 parts kits, "good to excellent" minus lower receiver and barrel (plus missing auto-sear or disconnector). Would the M16 bolt carrier group be good in an AR-15? I found some bolt carrier groups in stock for $300 but the M16 parts kits are available in the $500 - $600 range, seems to be a better value maybe. *I read a review of one of these parts kits being assembled, they said it was a good shooter. RogerN The M16 parts WILL fit in an AR, it was common practice back in the first days of building AR clones to use surplus M16 parts from scrapped rifles. However, BATF eventually frowned on that because, with some added bits you can go full-auto, or even without, a improperly timed build can double. So, if you use the whole kit, you need to remove the secondary sear hook from the hammer, grind back the auto sear trip surface on the carrier, and lose the full-auto selector entirely. Disconnector tang needs to be ground to semi-auto configuration, too. At one time, there was an AR FAQ on the ATF site, might be it's still there. As far as parts quality, the kits I've seen for sale were from Colt-made commercially sold M16s supplied as military aid to several countries, warehoused and never issued. They can't come back as complete guns, so current practice is to strip them, scrap the lowers and barrels and import the rest. Some kits for sale had the auto sear and spring when they were first imported, those were taken out with later kits. You do NOT want them unless you like 10 year vacations. Quality on those parts kits is the same as new Colt-made parts of the same era. Barrels can no longer be imported. So the problems with M16 parts in AR builds aren't mechanical, they're legal. At this point, somebody starts saying that none of this is in any law( and they're going to do it anyway). And they're right, it's BATF's own interpretation, subject to change without notice and with every change in administration. Since Congress has left legal interpretation of the law to BATF, this is the result. They can do just about anything to your gun, should they seize it, to get it to fire more than 1 shot with one trigger pull(and have done so). Then it's a machine gun and you go to jail. Just having M16 parts along with an AR has been taken as having "constructive intent", it's just flat too easy to convert. If you've got the M16 auto sear and spring, it's just one hole's difference. So they need to be altered just as soon as you get them. You do not want to end up in court because M16 parts kits are currently cheaper than AR parts. Just using an M16 bolt carrier with all the rest being AR parts SHOULD be safe legally, the trip surface should probably be shortened to be completely safe. Your choice... Stan



it's not illegal to have the m16 bc installed. many transitional colts, from
(a1 to a2) were built with them.

read the gc.

the a.s. is a problem.

here's a worth while read.

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_6/739..._version_.html

"Stanley Schaefer" wrote in message
...

On Mar 2, 9:40 pm, "RogerN" wrote:
snip
So the problems with M16 parts in AR builds aren't mechanical, they're
legal. At this point, somebody starts saying that none of this is in
any law( and they're going to do it anyway). And they're right, it's
BATF's own interpretation, subject to change without notice and with
every change in administration. Since Congress has left legal
interpretation of the law to BATF, this is the result. They can do
just about anything to your gun, should they seize it, to get it to
fire more than 1 shot with one trigger pull(and have done so). Then
it's a machine gun and you go to jail. Just having M16 parts along
with an AR has been taken as having "constructive intent", it's just
flat too easy to convert. If you've got the M16 auto sear and spring,
it's just one hole's difference. So they need to be altered just as
soon as you get them. You do not want to end up in court because M16
parts kits are currently cheaper than AR parts. Just using an M16
bolt carrier with all the rest being AR parts SHOULD be safe legally,
the trip surface should probably be shortened to be completely safe.
Your choice...

Stan

I have an "95%" receiver according to americanspiritarms.com, and an AR-15
lower parts kit. That's what the M16 upper parts, along with a new barrel,
would be assembled with, no "Auto" M16 parts except the bolt carrier group.
Though I think a full-auto would be fun to play with for a little bit, I
don't want to waste that much ammo or spend time in prison. Maybe I'll go
to the Knob Creek Kentucky machine gun shoot someday, they'll let you fire
machine guns for a fee.

Thanks for the info!

RogerN

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

On Sat, 2 Mar 2013 22:40:31 -0600, "RogerN" wrote:

It seems the bolt carrier group is the hard to get part for AR-15's
currently. I have found old Colt M16 A1 parts kits, "good to excellent"
minus lower receiver and barrel (plus missing auto-sear or disconnector).
Would the M16 bolt carrier group be good in an AR-15?

I found some bolt carrier groups in stock for $300 but the M16 parts kits
are available in the $500 - $600 range, seems to be a better value maybe.
I
read a review of one of these parts kits being assembled, they said it was
a
good shooter.

RogerN

Jesus. For a poodle shooter? I paid less than that for a classic Black
Beauty Double in 12 gauge, and the forcing cone was even relieved for
star crimps.

What are you going to do with it if you ever finish it?

--
Ed Huntress

I'd probably just use it for target shooting and occasional varmints. The
cartridges are kind of cute, like miniatures of my hunting rifle Winchester
Magnum cartridges. We gave a lot of Coyotes around here, I can hear them
when a train is in the area. If it was legal to deer hunt with rifles here
I'd get a 308 version.

I think I'll complete at least the "95%" receiver, I just have to drill 3
holes and mill out a pocket for the trigger group. If I ever get a shop
building here and get my machines moved there's a better chance of me
getting the 0% lowers done. The rifles are looking pretty cheap compared to
some of the optics, I'd like to have one with good daytime optics, one with
night vision, and one with FLIR if they become more affordable than the one
I saw for $7500.

RogerN

On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 00:06:00 -0500, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Sat, 2 Mar 2013 22:40:31 -0600, "RogerN" wrote:

It seems the bolt carrier group is the hard to get part for AR-15's
currently. I have found old Colt M16 A1 parts kits, "good to excellent"
minus lower receiver and barrel (plus missing auto-sear or disconnector).
Would the M16 bolt carrier group be good in an AR-15?

I found some bolt carrier groups in stock for $300 but the M16 parts kits
are available in the $500 - $600 range, seems to be a better value maybe. I
read a review of one of these parts kits being assembled, they said it was a
good shooter.

RogerN

Jesus. For a poodle shooter? I paid less than that for a classic Black
Beauty Double in 12 gauge, and the forcing cone was even relieved for
star crimps.

What are you going to do with it if you ever finish it?


Im sure he is going to simply "collect it". Collectors are harmless
people. Not like "shooters" who are very dangerous people, according
to your friends in the DNC

Gunner, doing stock work on his 338 build



The methodology of the left has always been:

1. Lie
2. Repeat the lie as many times as possible
3. Have as many people repeat the lie as often as possible
4. Eventually, the uninformed believe the lie
5. The lie will then be made into some form oflaw
6. Then everyone must conform to the lie

On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 00:06:00 -0500, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Sat, 2 Mar 2013 22:40:31 -0600, "RogerN" wrote:

It seems the bolt carrier group is the hard to get part for AR-15's
currently. I have found old Colt M16 A1 parts kits, "good to excellent"
minus lower receiver and barrel (plus missing auto-sear or disconnector).
Would the M16 bolt carrier group be good in an AR-15?

I found some bolt carrier groups in stock for $300 but the M16 parts kits
are available in the $500 - $600 range, seems to be a better value maybe. I
read a review of one of these parts kits being assembled, they said it was a
good shooter.

RogerN

Jesus. For a poodle shooter? I paid less than that for a classic Black
Beauty Double in 12 gauge, and the forcing cone was even relieved for
star crimps.

What are you going to do with it if you ever finish it?

If that is a Baker Black Beauty I just saw one in "almost like new"
condition offered for sale. One scratch on left side of action, one on
right side of barrel and a small chip out of the butt stock. $900.

--
Cheers,

John B.

On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 00:40:40 -0600, "RogerN" wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
.. .

On Sat, 2 Mar 2013 22:40:31 -0600, "RogerN" wrote:

It seems the bolt carrier group is the hard to get part for AR-15's
currently. I have found old Colt M16 A1 parts kits, "good to excellent"
minus lower receiver and barrel (plus missing auto-sear or disconnector).
Would the M16 bolt carrier group be good in an AR-15?

I found some bolt carrier groups in stock for $300 but the M16 parts kits
are available in the $500 - $600 range, seems to be a better value maybe.
I
read a review of one of these parts kits being assembled, they said it was
a
good shooter.

RogerN

Jesus. For a poodle shooter? I paid less than that for a classic Black
Beauty Double in 12 gauge, and the forcing cone was even relieved for
star crimps.

What are you going to do with it if you ever finish it?

--
Ed Huntress

I'd probably just use it for target shooting and occasional varmints. The
cartridges are kind of cute, like miniatures of my hunting rifle Winchester
Magnum cartridges. We gave a lot of Coyotes around here, I can hear them
when a train is in the area. If it was legal to deer hunt with rifles here
I'd get a 308 version.

I think I'll complete at least the "95%" receiver, I just have to drill 3
holes and mill out a pocket for the trigger group. If I ever get a shop
building here and get my machines moved there's a better chance of me
getting the 0% lowers done. The rifles are looking pretty cheap compared to
some of the optics, I'd like to have one with good daytime optics, one with
night vision, and one with FLIR if they become more affordable than the one
I saw for $7500.

RogerN

Wow. I hope you feel you're getting your money's worth.

--
Ed Huntress

On Sat, 02 Mar 2013 23:24:23 -0800, Gunner
wrote:

On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 00:06:00 -0500, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Sat, 2 Mar 2013 22:40:31 -0600, "RogerN" wrote:

It seems the bolt carrier group is the hard to get part for AR-15's
currently. I have found old Colt M16 A1 parts kits, "good to excellent"
minus lower receiver and barrel (plus missing auto-sear or disconnector).
Would the M16 bolt carrier group be good in an AR-15?

I found some bolt carrier groups in stock for $300 but the M16 parts kits
are available in the $500 - $600 range, seems to be a better value maybe. I
read a review of one of these parts kits being assembled, they said it was a
good shooter.

RogerN

Jesus. For a poodle shooter? I paid less than that for a classic Black
Beauty Double in 12 gauge, and the forcing cone was even relieved for
star crimps.

What are you going to do with it if you ever finish it?


Im sure he is going to simply "collect it".

He builds it, and then collects it?? "RogernN, maker of collectible
poodle-shooters."


Collectors are harmless
people. Not like "shooters" who are very dangerous people, according
to your friends in the DNC

Gunner, doing stock work on his 338 build



The methodology of the left has always been:

1. Lie
2. Repeat the lie as many times as possible
3. Have as many people repeat the lie as often as possible
4. Eventually, the uninformed believe the lie
5. The lie will then be made into some form oflaw
6. Then everyone must conform to the lie

On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 19:25:35 +0700, John B.
wrote:

On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 00:06:00 -0500, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Sat, 2 Mar 2013 22:40:31 -0600, "RogerN" wrote:

It seems the bolt carrier group is the hard to get part for AR-15's
currently. I have found old Colt M16 A1 parts kits, "good to excellent"
minus lower receiver and barrel (plus missing auto-sear or disconnector).
Would the M16 bolt carrier group be good in an AR-15?

I found some bolt carrier groups in stock for $300 but the M16 parts kits
are available in the $500 - $600 range, seems to be a better value maybe. I
read a review of one of these parts kits being assembled, they said it was a
good shooter.

RogerN

Jesus. For a poodle shooter? I paid less than that for a classic Black
Beauty Double in 12 gauge, and the forcing cone was even relieved for
star crimps.

What are you going to do with it if you ever finish it?

If that is a Baker Black Beauty I just saw one in "almost like new"
condition offered for sale. One scratch on left side of action, one on
right side of barrel and a small chip out of the butt stock. $900.

Possibly it's mine. g I sold it around ten years ago. I had enough
shotguns and wasn't hunting rabbits or pheasants anymore.

I think I got $650 for mine.

If it hasn't had the forcing cones relieved, don't shoot star crimp
shells in it. I've owned two shotguns that required roll crimps, and
they're a PITA to load.

--
Ed Huntress

Because they're the weapon of choice for gun owners to kill masses of

1st grade children and theater goers. It's a cultural thing, like

outlawing the wearing of pants on Main Street, that have no crotch.




Ed,

Just curious, do you really believe banning a particular style of weapon is
going to fix the urban/social problem?

Forget politics for a bit, but just focus on the social issue. What would you
do to solve the problem?

You seem to be familiar with guns, what weapon would be a better choice for close in work?

Do you really believe it's about the weapon or people? I guess that's what
I'd like to know about you?

On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 07:58:13 -0800 (PST), wrote:





Because they're the weapon of choice for gun owners to kill masses of

1st grade children and theater goers. It's a cultural thing, like

outlawing the wearing of pants on Main Street, that have no crotch.




Ed,

Just curious, do you really believe banning a particular style of weapon is
going to fix the urban/social problem?

No. But outlawing the practice of walking through town with your dick
hanging out isn't going to stop rapes, either. I have no problem with
people who want to outlaw either one. As Robert Bork said, all laws
are legislation of morality, and many of those moral choices we have
to live with are the opinions of other people. That's democracy for
you.

Look, Roger let on that his real reason for building an AR is to be
ready to slaughter liberals in the Second Civil War. Like Gunner and
Larry, he's a Walter Mitty Minuteman, with camo and night-vision
goggles. He yearns for the opportunity to kill people he doesn't like
and he knows that an AR is both practically and symbolically the right
tool for the job.

Roger wants to flaunt the child-killing guns, the guns used for mass
slaughter of civilians. Based on the polls, most people consider those
guns to be obscene, for just that reason. I'd like to see how many
people think that walking down the street waving your wang is obscene.
I'll guess that the numbers are similar.


Forget politics for a bit, but just focus on the social issue. What would you
do to solve the problem?

The urban social problem? Sorry, that one is 'way above my pay grade.


You seem to be familiar with guns, what weapon would be a better choice for close in work?

On first graders, or on liberals?


Do you really believe it's about the weapon or people? I guess that's what
I'd like to know about you?

It's the weapons that those people choose, and it's the people
themselves. The two go together like a hand in a glove.

The obnoxious thing about ARs, particularly of those that people have
bought in the last few months, is that the big attraction is that
they're the best, proven massacre guns on the civilian market. They
have fame by association and people are paying outrageous sums for
fame, to get a little of that "Man Card" rub-off that Bushmaster
promoted before Sandy Hook. (they've taken their ads for that down. No
more "renewing your Man Card" with a Bushmaster, bub. But Bushmaster
knew their market, all right.) They're really ****ty guns for any
reasonable civilian use: ammo-sensitive, requiring stunt work to shoot
anywhere near the groups of a good bolt-action; terrible lock times
from early in the last century, like a 1917 Enfield; in .223, one of
the more useless cartridges for civilian use this side of a .25-20.

But they're great for killing kids huddled up in a classroom.

Instead of wanting to distance themselves from the guns used in Aurora
and Sandy Hook, these clowns seem to be buying them because of their
fame as slaughter-guns. They're evidence of a disease that has
permeated gun culture in the US, and my fear is that it could be
fatal.

Now, stand back while I paper-patch my smoke pole, by cracky. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 07:58:13 -0800 (PST), wrote:

The obnoxious thing about ARs, particularly of those that people
have
bought in the last few months, is that the big attraction is that
they're the best, proven massacre guns on the civilian market.

Ed Huntress

Last week I stopped by the station and took a peek at the local SWAT
team's gear. They've changed from HKs to those 'really ****ty'
massacre guns, short barrel and full auto.

On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 12:24:55 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 07:58:13 -0800 (PST), wrote:

The obnoxious thing about ARs, particularly of those that people
have
bought in the last few months, is that the big attraction is that
they're the best, proven massacre guns on the civilian market.

Ed Huntress

Last week I stopped by the station and took a peek at the local SWAT
team's gear. They've changed from HKs to those 'really ****ty'
massacre guns, short barrel and full auto.

The quote was:

'They're really ****ty guns for any reasonable civilian use:
ammo-sensitive, requiring stunt work to shoot anywhere near the groups
of a good bolt-action; terrible lock times from early in the last
century, like a 1917 Enfield; in .223, one of the more useless
cartridges for civilian use this side of a .25-20."

Now, if you consider the work of a SWAT team to be a "reasonable
civilian use," you're part of the problem.

Why did you snip that out?

--
Ed Huntress

Just curious, do you really believe banning a particular style of weapon is

going to fix the urban/social problem?



No.


Well I was just trying to figure out if you were a real "whacky" or if there
was some thought running around up there.

Yeah, I syppathize with your frustration.

I'll tell ya, it's interesting as hell to walk into a gun store and see
weapons I bought over two decades ago going for 400% of what I paid for them.

All this hype was needlessly generated by politicians.

There's crap on both sides of this debate.

On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 09:47:25 -0800 (PST), wrote:

Just curious, do you really believe banning a particular style of weapon is

going to fix the urban/social problem?



No.


Well I was just trying to figure out if you were a real "whacky" or if there
was some thought running around up there.

Yeah, I syppathize with your frustration.

I'll tell ya, it's interesting as hell to walk into a gun store and see
weapons I bought over two decades ago going for 400% of what I paid for them.

Well, the Browning Superposed my aunt bought for my uncle in 1952 (at
Abercrombie & Fitch in NYC -- another story) cost her $64. I had the
receipt. g


All this hype was needlessly generated by politicians.

There's crap on both sides of this debate.

Sure. But the crap on the two sides of the AR debate is this: From the
left, "why does anyone need an assault rifle to shoot deer?", which
causes a gag reflex when I hear it, and from the right, "what if
you're attacked by a hoard of gang-bangers?", which causes another gag
reflex.

--
Ed Huntress

It's the weapons that those people choose, and it's the people

themselves. The two go together like a hand in a glove.


You have experience with a shotgun.

Do this thought experiment, let's say every single AR and Ak type weapon is gone.

How long will it take for the "noobs" to realize that they're chose of weapons
was wrong all along?

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 12:24:55 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 07:58:13 -0800 (PST), wrote:

The obnoxious thing about ARs, particularly of those that people
have
bought in the last few months, is that the big attraction is that
they're the best, proven massacre guns on the civilian market.

Ed Huntress

Last week I stopped by the station and took a peek at the local SWAT
team's gear. They've changed from HKs to those 'really ****ty'
massacre guns, short barrel and full auto.

The quote was:

'They're really ****ty guns for any reasonable civilian use:
ammo-sensitive, requiring stunt work to shoot anywhere near the
groups
of a good bolt-action; terrible lock times from early in the last
century, like a 1917 Enfield; in .223, one of the more useless
cartridges for civilian use this side of a .25-20."

Now, if you consider the work of a SWAT team to be a "reasonable
civilian use," you're part of the problem.

Why did you snip that out?

--
Ed Huntress

For Army and Marine veterans the operation of the AR-15 is instinctive
when they jump out of bed from a loud noise in the night. It goes from
safely unloaded to fully ready to shoot in under two seconds. Perhaps
Navy and AF vets and civilians would be better off with a shotgun,
though you can't slap a mag in an unloaded one by feel. I carried a
..45ACP on duty too but didn't train enough with it.
http://everything2.com/title/Perform...at+S.P.O.R.T.S.
jsw

On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 09:54:28 -0800 (PST), wrote:


It's the weapons that those people choose, and it's the people

themselves. The two go together like a hand in a glove.


You have experience with a shotgun.

Do this thought experiment, let's say every single AR and Ak type weapon is gone.

How long will it take for the "noobs" to realize that they're chose of weapons
was wrong all along?

Maybe never. No sex in shotguns. No man cards.

Need big magazine, like big testicles. Military-style gun. Mucho
macho. Look like movie poster. Man-Card gun.

--
Ed Huntress

On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 09:18:56 -0500, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Sat, 02 Mar 2013 23:24:23 -0800, Gunner
wrote:

On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 00:06:00 -0500, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Sat, 2 Mar 2013 22:40:31 -0600, "RogerN" wrote:

It seems the bolt carrier group is the hard to get part for AR-15's
currently. I have found old Colt M16 A1 parts kits, "good to excellent"
minus lower receiver and barrel (plus missing auto-sear or disconnector).
Would the M16 bolt carrier group be good in an AR-15?

I found some bolt carrier groups in stock for $300 but the M16 parts kits
are available in the $500 - $600 range, seems to be a better value maybe. I
read a review of one of these parts kits being assembled, they said it was a
good shooter.

RogerN

Jesus. For a poodle shooter? I paid less than that for a classic Black
Beauty Double in 12 gauge, and the forcing cone was even relieved for
star crimps.

What are you going to do with it if you ever finish it?


Im sure he is going to simply "collect it".

He builds it, and then collects it?? "RogernN, maker of collectible
poodle-shooters."

Some people collect Beanie Babies, others collect Hummel porcelein,
others collect rubber bands. A "poodle shooter" has been fine for the
US military (and many other nations) for 50 yrs so far. So whats
your problem?

Your president has made many large Gifts of them to other nations and
many cartels. You mean he is a cheap ******* for handing them out
like candy?

Gunner



The methodology of the left has always been:

1. Lie
2. Repeat the lie as many times as possible
3. Have as many people repeat the lie as often as possible
4. Eventually, the uninformed believe the lie
5. The lie will then be made into some form oflaw
6. Then everyone must conform to the lie

On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 08:54:29 -0600, "RogerN" wrote:

And if the gun grabbers start confiscating guns, I hope to join the 2nd
civil war and die fighting for my country giving the anti-Americans my ammo
first.


Roger..plan to make the other poor ******* die for HIS bleeves. It
makes retirement and getting a bit of pussy now and then..so much
better when you are there to enjoy it.

Gunner

The methodology of the left has always been:

1. Lie
2. Repeat the lie as many times as possible
3. Have as many people repeat the lie as often as possible
4. Eventually, the uninformed believe the lie
5. The lie will then be made into some form oflaw
6. Then everyone must conform to the lie

On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 11:51:05 -0500, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 07:58:13 -0800 (PST), wrote:





Because they're the weapon of choice for gun owners to kill masses of

1st grade children and theater goers. It's a cultural thing, like

outlawing the wearing of pants on Main Street, that have no crotch.




Ed,

Just curious, do you really believe banning a particular style of weapon is
going to fix the urban/social problem?

No. But outlawing the practice of walking through town with your dick
hanging out isn't going to stop rapes, either. I have no problem with
people who want to outlaw either one. As Robert Bork said, all laws
are legislation of morality, and many of those moral choices we have
to live with are the opinions of other people. That's democracy for
you.

Look, Roger let on that his real reason for building an AR is to be
ready to slaughter liberals in the Second Civil War. Like Gunner and
Larry, he's a Walter Mitty Minuteman, with camo and night-vision
goggles. He yearns for the opportunity to kill people he doesn't like
and he knows that an AR is both practically and symbolically the right
tool for the job.

Roger wants to flaunt the child-killing guns, the guns used for mass
slaughter of civilians. Based on the polls, most people consider those
guns to be obscene, for just that reason. I'd like to see how many
people think that walking down the street waving your wang is obscene.
I'll guess that the numbers are similar.


Forget politics for a bit, but just focus on the social issue. What would you
do to solve the problem?

The urban social problem? Sorry, that one is 'way above my pay grade.


You seem to be familiar with guns, what weapon would be a better choice for close in work?

On first graders, or on liberals?


Do you really believe it's about the weapon or people? I guess that's what
I'd like to know about you?

It's the weapons that those people choose, and it's the people
themselves. The two go together like a hand in a glove.

The obnoxious thing about ARs, particularly of those that people have
bought in the last few months, is that the big attraction is that
they're the best, proven massacre guns on the civilian market. They
have fame by association and people are paying outrageous sums for
fame, to get a little of that "Man Card" rub-off that Bushmaster
promoted before Sandy Hook. (they've taken their ads for that down. No
more "renewing your Man Card" with a Bushmaster, bub. But Bushmaster
knew their market, all right.) They're really ****ty guns for any
reasonable civilian use: ammo-sensitive, requiring stunt work to shoot
anywhere near the groups of a good bolt-action; terrible lock times
from early in the last century, like a 1917 Enfield; in .223, one of
the more useless cartridges for civilian use this side of a .25-20.

But they're great for killing kids huddled up in a classroom.

Instead of wanting to distance themselves from the guns used in Aurora
and Sandy Hook, these clowns seem to be buying them because of their
fame as slaughter-guns. They're evidence of a disease that has
permeated gun culture in the US, and my fear is that it could be
fatal.

Now, stand back while I paper-patch my smoke pole, by cracky. d8-)

Isnt it interesting to watch the Eastern Blue State mind set displayed
publicly like that, boys and girls?

This is the sort of thing that those of us that live west of Boston so
often never see.

Read it again and again..and remember where DC is.

Gunner

The methodology of the left has always been:

1. Lie
2. Repeat the lie as many times as possible
3. Have as many people repeat the lie as often as possible
4. Eventually, the uninformed believe the lie
5. The lie will then be made into some form oflaw
6. Then everyone must conform to the lie

On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 12:30:13 -0500, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 12:24:55 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 07:58:13 -0800 (PST), wrote:

The obnoxious thing about ARs, particularly of those that people
have
bought in the last few months, is that the big attraction is that
they're the best, proven massacre guns on the civilian market.

Ed Huntress

Last week I stopped by the station and took a peek at the local SWAT
team's gear. They've changed from HKs to those 'really ****ty'
massacre guns, short barrel and full auto.

The quote was:

'They're really ****ty guns for any reasonable civilian use:
ammo-sensitive, requiring stunt work to shoot anywhere near the groups
of a good bolt-action; terrible lock times from early in the last
century, like a 1917 Enfield; in .223, one of the more useless
cartridges for civilian use this side of a .25-20."

Now, if you consider the work of a SWAT team to be a "reasonable
civilian use," you're part of the problem.

And again...we have an Eastern Blue Stater laying out his World View.
Sad isnt it?


Why did you snip that out?

The methodology of the left has always been:

1. Lie
2. Repeat the lie as many times as possible
3. Have as many people repeat the lie as often as possible
4. Eventually, the uninformed believe the lie
5. The lie will then be made into some form oflaw
6. Then everyone must conform to the lie

On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 13:15:14 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 12:24:55 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 07:58:13 -0800 (PST), wrote:

The obnoxious thing about ARs, particularly of those that people
have
bought in the last few months, is that the big attraction is that
they're the best, proven massacre guns on the civilian market.

Ed Huntress

Last week I stopped by the station and took a peek at the local SWAT
team's gear. They've changed from HKs to those 'really ****ty'
massacre guns, short barrel and full auto.

The quote was:

'They're really ****ty guns for any reasonable civilian use:
ammo-sensitive, requiring stunt work to shoot anywhere near the
groups
of a good bolt-action; terrible lock times from early in the last
century, like a 1917 Enfield; in .223, one of the more useless
cartridges for civilian use this side of a .25-20."

Now, if you consider the work of a SWAT team to be a "reasonable
civilian use," you're part of the problem.

Why did you snip that out?

--
Ed Huntress

For Army and Marine veterans the operation of the AR-15 is instinctive
when they jump out of bed from a loud noise in the night. It goes from
safely unloaded to fully ready to shoot in under two seconds. Perhaps
Navy and AF vets and civilians would be better off with a shotgun,
though you can't slap a mag in an unloaded one by feel. I carried a
.45ACP on duty too but didn't train enough with it.
http://everything2.com/title/Perform...at+S.P.O.R.T.S.
jsw

Hmm. Marines. Camo. Slappin' mags. Shoot in two seconds. 'Sounds like
candy for a mass-murdering nutcase.

Which, of course, is why they use them. That's their identity. That's
their attraction. And that's why, in a civilian environment, even in
NORTH FREAKING CAROLINA (poll reported from HPU Survey Research
Center, 2/28/13), more than half of Americans want to ban those
obscene suckers.

--
Ed Huntress

On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 12:52:15 -0500, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 09:47:25 -0800 (PST), wrote:

Just curious, do you really believe banning a particular style of weapon is

going to fix the urban/social problem?



No.


Well I was just trying to figure out if you were a real "whacky" or if there
was some thought running around up there.

Yeah, I syppathize with your frustration.

I'll tell ya, it's interesting as hell to walk into a gun store and see
weapons I bought over two decades ago going for 400% of what I paid for them.

Well, the Browning Superposed my aunt bought for my uncle in 1952 (at
Abercrombie & Fitch in NYC -- another story) cost her $64. I had the
receipt. g

And the average weekly wage was under $20 in 1952


All this hype was needlessly generated by politicians.

There's crap on both sides of this debate.

Sure. But the crap on the two sides of the AR debate is this: From the
left, "why does anyone need an assault rifle to shoot deer?", which
causes a gag reflex when I hear it, and from the right, "what if
you're attacked by a hoard of gang-bangers?", which causes another gag
reflex.

Tell that to the Koreans in LA

Gunner

The methodology of the left has always been:

1. Lie
2. Repeat the lie as many times as possible
3. Have as many people repeat the lie as often as possible
4. Eventually, the uninformed believe the lie
5. The lie will then be made into some form oflaw
6. Then everyone must conform to the lie

On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 11:33:43 -0800, Gunner
wrote:

On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 09:18:56 -0500, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Sat, 02 Mar 2013 23:24:23 -0800, Gunner
wrote:

On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 00:06:00 -0500, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Sat, 2 Mar 2013 22:40:31 -0600, "RogerN" wrote:

It seems the bolt carrier group is the hard to get part for AR-15's
currently. I have found old Colt M16 A1 parts kits, "good to excellent"
minus lower receiver and barrel (plus missing auto-sear or disconnector).
Would the M16 bolt carrier group be good in an AR-15?

I found some bolt carrier groups in stock for $300 but the M16 parts kits
are available in the $500 - $600 range, seems to be a better value maybe. I
read a review of one of these parts kits being assembled, they said it was a
good shooter.

RogerN

Jesus. For a poodle shooter? I paid less than that for a classic Black
Beauty Double in 12 gauge, and the forcing cone was even relieved for
star crimps.

What are you going to do with it if you ever finish it?


Im sure he is going to simply "collect it".

He builds it, and then collects it?? "RogernN, maker of collectible
poodle-shooters."

Some people collect Beanie Babies, others collect Hummel porcelein,
others collect rubber bands. A "poodle shooter" has been fine for the
US military (and many other nations) for 50 yrs so far. So whats
your problem?

Made by Roger? That's collectible??


Your president has made many large Gifts of them to other nations and
many cartels. You mean he is a cheap ******* for handing them out
like candy?

They're for killing people. That's who gets them -- people who are
going to kill, or threaten to kill, other people. That's what they're
for, that's what they're all about, and that's why they're out there.

How about ol' Rog? Besides, he's clearly said that he hopes to use it
for shooting people in the "Second Civil War." That isn't collecting,
unless he's planning to mount their heads for display on his wall.

--
Ed Huntress


Gunner



The methodology of the left has always been:

1. Lie
2. Repeat the lie as many times as possible
3. Have as many people repeat the lie as often as possible
4. Eventually, the uninformed believe the lie
5. The lie will then be made into some form oflaw
6. Then everyone must conform to the lie

On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 11:42:36 -0800, Gunner
wrote:

On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 11:51:05 -0500, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 07:58:13 -0800 (PST), wrote:





Because they're the weapon of choice for gun owners to kill masses of

1st grade children and theater goers. It's a cultural thing, like

outlawing the wearing of pants on Main Street, that have no crotch.




Ed,

Just curious, do you really believe banning a particular style of weapon is
going to fix the urban/social problem?

No. But outlawing the practice of walking through town with your dick
hanging out isn't going to stop rapes, either. I have no problem with
people who want to outlaw either one. As Robert Bork said, all laws
are legislation of morality, and many of those moral choices we have
to live with are the opinions of other people. That's democracy for
you.

Look, Roger let on that his real reason for building an AR is to be
ready to slaughter liberals in the Second Civil War. Like Gunner and
Larry, he's a Walter Mitty Minuteman, with camo and night-vision
goggles. He yearns for the opportunity to kill people he doesn't like
and he knows that an AR is both practically and symbolically the right
tool for the job.

Roger wants to flaunt the child-killing guns, the guns used for mass
slaughter of civilians. Based on the polls, most people consider those
guns to be obscene, for just that reason. I'd like to see how many
people think that walking down the street waving your wang is obscene.
I'll guess that the numbers are similar.


Forget politics for a bit, but just focus on the social issue. What would you
do to solve the problem?

The urban social problem? Sorry, that one is 'way above my pay grade.


You seem to be familiar with guns, what weapon would be a better choice for close in work?

On first graders, or on liberals?


Do you really believe it's about the weapon or people? I guess that's what
I'd like to know about you?

It's the weapons that those people choose, and it's the people
themselves. The two go together like a hand in a glove.

The obnoxious thing about ARs, particularly of those that people have
bought in the last few months, is that the big attraction is that
they're the best, proven massacre guns on the civilian market. They
have fame by association and people are paying outrageous sums for
fame, to get a little of that "Man Card" rub-off that Bushmaster
promoted before Sandy Hook. (they've taken their ads for that down. No
more "renewing your Man Card" with a Bushmaster, bub. But Bushmaster
knew their market, all right.) They're really ****ty guns for any
reasonable civilian use: ammo-sensitive, requiring stunt work to shoot
anywhere near the groups of a good bolt-action; terrible lock times
from early in the last century, like a 1917 Enfield; in .223, one of
the more useless cartridges for civilian use this side of a .25-20.

But they're great for killing kids huddled up in a classroom.

Instead of wanting to distance themselves from the guns used in Aurora
and Sandy Hook, these clowns seem to be buying them because of their
fame as slaughter-guns. They're evidence of a disease that has
permeated gun culture in the US, and my fear is that it could be
fatal.

Now, stand back while I paper-patch my smoke pole, by cracky. d8-)

Isnt it interesting to watch the Eastern Blue State mind set displayed
publicly like that, boys and girls?

This is the sort of thing that those of us that live west of Boston so
often never see.

Read it again and again..and remember where DC is.

Right! And check out the latest Fox News poll to see what *real*
Americans think about banning ARs and other semi-automatic weapons. In
the poll, 54% to 42% want to...uh...ummm................ban them.

sob!

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/inte...d-gun-control/

--
Ed Huntress

On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 14:45:11 -0500, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 13:15:14 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 12:24:55 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
m...
On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 07:58:13 -0800 (PST), wrote:

The obnoxious thing about ARs, particularly of those that people
have
bought in the last few months, is that the big attraction is that
they're the best, proven massacre guns on the civilian market.

Ed Huntress

Last week I stopped by the station and took a peek at the local SWAT
team's gear. They've changed from HKs to those 'really ****ty'
massacre guns, short barrel and full auto.

The quote was:

'They're really ****ty guns for any reasonable civilian use:
ammo-sensitive, requiring stunt work to shoot anywhere near the
groups
of a good bolt-action; terrible lock times from early in the last
century, like a 1917 Enfield; in .223, one of the more useless
cartridges for civilian use this side of a .25-20."

Now, if you consider the work of a SWAT team to be a "reasonable
civilian use," you're part of the problem.

Why did you snip that out?

--
Ed Huntress

For Army and Marine veterans the operation of the AR-15 is instinctive
when they jump out of bed from a loud noise in the night. It goes from
safely unloaded to fully ready to shoot in under two seconds. Perhaps
Navy and AF vets and civilians would be better off with a shotgun,
though you can't slap a mag in an unloaded one by feel. I carried a
.45ACP on duty too but didn't train enough with it.
http://everything2.com/title/Perform...at+S.P.O.R.T.S.
jsw

Hmm. Marines. Camo. Slappin' mags. Shoot in two seconds. 'Sounds like
candy for a mass-murdering nutcase.

Which, of course, is why they use them. That's their identity. That's
their attraction. And that's why, in a civilian environment, even in
NORTH FREAKING CAROLINA (poll reported from HPU Survey Research
Center, 2/28/13), more than half of Americans want to ban those
obscene suckers.


Isnt that Pesky 2nd Amendment a total pain in the ass for you Blue
staters and the Media who propagandize so well?

VBG

Gunner

The methodology of the left has always been:

1. Lie
2. Repeat the lie as many times as possible
3. Have as many people repeat the lie as often as possible
4. Eventually, the uninformed believe the lie
5. The lie will then be made into some form oflaw
6. Then everyone must conform to the lie

On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 12:29:09 -0800, Gunner
wrote:

On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 14:45:11 -0500, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 13:15:14 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 12:24:55 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
om...
On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 07:58:13 -0800 (PST), wrote:

The obnoxious thing about ARs, particularly of those that people
have
bought in the last few months, is that the big attraction is that
they're the best, proven massacre guns on the civilian market.

Ed Huntress

Last week I stopped by the station and took a peek at the local SWAT
team's gear. They've changed from HKs to those 'really ****ty'
massacre guns, short barrel and full auto.

The quote was:

'They're really ****ty guns for any reasonable civilian use:
ammo-sensitive, requiring stunt work to shoot anywhere near the
groups
of a good bolt-action; terrible lock times from early in the last
century, like a 1917 Enfield; in .223, one of the more useless
cartridges for civilian use this side of a .25-20."

Now, if you consider the work of a SWAT team to be a "reasonable
civilian use," you're part of the problem.

Why did you snip that out?

--
Ed Huntress

For Army and Marine veterans the operation of the AR-15 is instinctive
when they jump out of bed from a loud noise in the night. It goes from
safely unloaded to fully ready to shoot in under two seconds. Perhaps
Navy and AF vets and civilians would be better off with a shotgun,
though you can't slap a mag in an unloaded one by feel. I carried a
.45ACP on duty too but didn't train enough with it.
http://everything2.com/title/Perform...at+S.P.O.R.T.S.
jsw

Hmm. Marines. Camo. Slappin' mags. Shoot in two seconds. 'Sounds like
candy for a mass-murdering nutcase.

Which, of course, is why they use them. That's their identity. That's
their attraction. And that's why, in a civilian environment, even in
NORTH FREAKING CAROLINA (poll reported from HPU Survey Research
Center, 2/28/13), more than half of Americans want to ban those
obscene suckers.


Isnt that Pesky 2nd Amendment a total pain in the ass for you Blue
staters and the Media who propagandize so well?

Not at all. The Second Amerndment doesn't protect them. See D.C. v.
Heller. Where does it say ARs are protected?

--
Ed Huntress



VBG

Gunner

The methodology of the left has always been:

1. Lie
2. Repeat the lie as many times as possible
3. Have as many people repeat the lie as often as possible
4. Eventually, the uninformed believe the lie
5. The lie will then be made into some form oflaw
6. Then everyone must conform to the lie

On Mar 3, 2:29*pm, Ed Huntress wrote:


Maybe never. No sex in shotguns. No man cards.


--
Ed Huntress

Maybe but the Marines where I used to work carried shotguns. Look on
the internet for street sweeper shotgun.


Dan

On 3/3/2013 3:43 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
Not at all. The Second Amerndment doesn't protect them. See D.C. v.
Heller. Where does it say ARs are protected?


nose---tent---

On 3/3/2013 2:43 PM, Gunner wrote:

And again...we have an Eastern Blue Stater laying out his World View.
Sad isnt it?


They all have the same opinions...the ones that they are told to have.

On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 12:58:11 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:

On Mar 3, 2:29*pm, Ed Huntress wrote:


Maybe never. No sex in shotguns. No man cards.


--
Ed Huntress

Maybe but the Marines where I used to work carried shotguns. Look on
the internet for street sweeper shotgun.

NFA "Destructive device." Class 3. Unlikely to be a problem.

--
Ed Huntress




Dan

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

Maybe never. No sex in shotguns. No man cards.

Need big magazine, like big testicles. Military-style gun. Mucho
macho. Look like movie poster. Man-Card gun.
Ed Huntress

Note the leftwinger obsession with Feel instead of Think.

You were once so rational. Now you are even forgetting how to spell,
which is a sad decline for an editor.

"playwrite" instead of playwright
"hoard of gang-bangers" instead of horde

On 3/3/2013 3:02 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:

They're for killing people. That's who gets them -- people who are
going to kill, or threaten to kill, other people. That's what they're
for, that's what they're all about, and that's why they're out there.


Except for the millions and millions that are used for organized sports
and other very responsible uses.

And, they are far less lethal than originally designed, the Army's
changes ****ed that all up.

On 3/3/2013 12:20 AM, Stanley Schaefer wrote:

snip
They can't come back as complete guns, so current practice is to strip
them, scrap the lowers and barrels and import the rest. Some kits for
sale had the auto sear and spring when they were first imported, those
were taken out with later kits. You do NOT want them unless you like
10 year vacations. Quality on those parts kits is the same as new
Colt-made parts of the same era. Barrels can no longer be imported.

Stan


Why were the barrels scrapped? Why can't barrels be imported?

Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 12:29:09 -0800, Gunner
wrote:
Isnt that Pesky 2nd Amendment a total pain in the ass for you Blue
staters and the Media who propagandize so well?

Not at all. The Second Amerndment doesn't protect them. See D.C. v.
Heller. Where does it say ARs are protected?

Actually Gunner , he's just expressing his opinion of one particular model
of semi-auto rifle . While I see the utility value of a semi-auto for
certain situations ... I do not now own nor do I plan on purchasing an
AR15/M16 clone . It's long been my opinion that they're not worth the asking
price TO ME . 5.56 MM is designed to WOUND , which ties up a lot more
resources and personnel than outright killing . While that is acceptable and
in fact desirable in a military action , I for one do not want a bunch of
wounded guys hollerin' out in the front yard . Not only will that attract
more pests , it may very well disturb my sleep . I like .30 cal minimum for
defense ...
Now before y'all jump on me for "wanting to mow 'em down as they attack"
let me just say that that is ONE scenario , which if I get my stuff right
will never happen . I'd much rather slip away unseen and unheard than have
an armed confrontation . Actually , where I'm moving to pretty much
everybody is of a like mind , rendering the point moot . Country boy can
survive ...
--
Snag
Learning keeps
you young !

"Tom Gardner" wrote in message
...
On 3/3/2013 2:43 PM, Gunner wrote:

And again...we have an Eastern Blue Stater laying out his World
View.
Sad isnt it?


They all have the same opinions...the ones that they are told to
have.

PC groupthink empowers them to feel superior and forget what losers
they are. It's like medieval religion without a deity.