Jump to content

Talk:Colt AR-15

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by DHeyward (talk | contribs) at 21:46, 18 February 2018 (OneClickArchiver archived 7 Management of this article by the NRA). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Colt ArmaLite AR-15

The ArmaLite AR-15 article states that Colt branded its first AR-15 rifles the 'Colt ArmaLite AR-15'. So it seems to me that it is appropriate to note this on the Colt AR-15 page unless somebody has a valid objection. I would appreciate any comments. You might like to read an article by Jeff W. Zimba about such a rifle (serial number #000106) titled 'Colt ArmaLite AR-15 Rifle #000106 The Coconut Rifle' - http://www.smallarmsreview.com/display.article.cfm?idarticles=254 CodeBadger (talk) 03:09, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed this was introduced twice and reverted twice, most recently here. Reading the other editor's comment in the edit summary, the objection is correctly made that these are not the same rifle (while both were made by Colt, the key difference is that the Colt ArmaLite AR-15 was select-fire while the Colt AR-15 is semi-automatic only) and that it is essentially trivia. I did notice, however, that while the ArmaLite AR-15 article explains the history of how the rifle came into being, the Colt AR-15 article history section just says it was "introduced in 1963" and is the "semi-automatic version" of the U.S. M16 rifle. Thus, it might be worthwhile to instead provide some of that history here, of how Colt came to acquire the AR-15 rights from ArmaLite. Regards, AzureCitizen (talk) 19:45, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • The history of the ArmaLite AR-15, Colt ArmaLite AR-15, M16 and Colt AR-15 is simply too confusing for those with little or no firearms knowledge to understand (see all discussions on this page, the Talk:ArmaLite AR-15 and Talk:AR-15 (disambiguation) page). As a result, most people end up believing that they are the same gun. That they are ALL machineguns. That is why the original, AR-15 page was divided into the ArmaLite AR-15 and Colt AR-15 pages in the first place. Also, it's not necessary. The Chevrolet Corvette page does not discuss the complete history of the Chevrolet sports cars, it only discusses the Chevrolet Corvette.--RAF910 (talk) 20:16, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
"..is simply too confusing for those with little or no firearms knowledge to understand" - I disagree and this is a poor call to make in terms of transparency of the page. Shaded0 (talk) 20:43, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Transparency? What does that have to do with transparency? I know my limitations, which is why I don't go edit article about astronomy or genetic engineering. Everyone can't specialize in everything. Niteshift36 (talk) 00:30, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am not the only one to make that observation (please read "Armalite AR-15 and Colt Pages M-16" section on the Talk:ArmaLite AR-15 page. In this very section User:CodeBadger does not know the difference. And, he knows about the ArmaLite AR-15 page, because he has attempted to add Kennedy assassination conspiracy theory info to that page. Also, this is not a book. This is only encyclopedia article. It is meant to be a summery of the subject matter. It simply does not need an in depth history section--RAF910 (talk) 20:55, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
"It simply does not need an in depth history section" -- explain why please? Is this per your above argument that its confusing to the reader? Shaded0 (talk) 21:42, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Colt AR-15. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:55, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 15 February 2018

Due to the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting, editors are attempting to add said information to this page, even-though we have no confirmation as to what type of AR-15 was use during said shooting. And, it in no way adds to the notoriety of the Colt AR-15, which already a well known firearm. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RAF910 (talk • contribs)

"it in no way adds to the notoriety of the Colt AR-15" - maybe not, but it's certainly notable in its own right and deeply related to the topic of this article. This article appears to be routinely censored. Jamesinderbyshire (talk) 14:09, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

...but the reverse isn't true Jamesinderbyshire, that is that the subject of this article is not deeply related to the shooting. Not censored but rather maintained under guidelines. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Firearms#Criminal use. We don't mention every crime where automobiles have been used in the articles on automobiles themselves as they don't belong there. Information on the shooting isn't germane to this article.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 16:44, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. —KuyaBriBriTalk 15:10, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It may be controversial to single out Colt's brand, but it definitely makes sense to add something like "The AR-15 and its derivatives are the weapons used in most mass shootings in the USA.[1]" Feel free to add more references to any of the thousands of sources. 240D:0:4F4D:A600:F499:8B48:A2D7:5EF2 (talk) 06:16, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2018/02/14/ar-15-mass-shootings/339519002/

Semi-protected edit request on 15 February 2018 (2)

Moved to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Firearms#Use of AR-15 Style Rifles in Mass Shootings
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Remove uses section, has been added after being denied repeatedly. TastesLikeWall (talk) 21:56, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: Please give me an example. qwerty6811 :-) (talk) 22:06, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like it was taken care of here. PackMecEng (talk) 23:11, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What exactly justifies denying it's addition? The AR-15 is notable because of its use in mass shootings. There are literally thousands of media articles on that topic. It's why people come to this page. The reverted edit addresses this, is well-sourced and clear. Maybe the title of the paragraph should be changed from "Uses" (which also includes hunting apparently) but "Media coverage"? The rule quoted in the reversions seems to indicate that for an otherwise notable weapon, criminal uses are not to be expounded upon. Yet, that's not the case here. As I said above, the AR-15 is notable mostly because of its use in mass shootings.240D:0:4F4D:A600:F499:8B48:A2D7:5EF2 (talk) 08:05, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It seems entirely appropriate to begin devising a "Cultural influence and impact" section, which you see on other widely recognized firearms pages: AK-47#Cultural_influence_and_impact. Given that it is probably the second-most recognized and media-featured gun among English speakers after the AK-47, the current page looks woefully incomplete. Emoprog (talk) 16:49, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • OPPOSE adding mass shooting information.--Limpscash (talk) 05:29, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • So, how do you propose addressing the fact that the aspect surrounding the AR-15 that affects probably the largest number of people and drives the majority of its appearance in the media is its use in mass shootings? Do you propose omitting all media coverage of the AR-15, or just the parts that you don't like? Would you go ahead drafting a "Cultural influence and impact" session or similar to enlighten us to what you would have done differently from the reverted edits? Or are you just going to stand there, shaking your head, shouting "OPPOSE" in bold letters? 2400:2410:9021:8D00:4085:3942:9C5:93B4 (talk) 08:14, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The problem with your argument is it conflates the generic term "AR-15" with the specific brand and model covered by this article. We wouldn't discuss trucks in general terms in an article about the "Toyota Truck".Springee (talk) 18:12, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The problem with your argument is that AR-15 redirects here. If that redirection were changed to Modern sporting rifle I would agree with your argument. 2400:2410:9021:8D00:449F:4B57:9997:FB3D (talk) 11:45, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The association of AR-15 patern rifiles and mass shootings seems significant enough that it should be included in an article about AR-15 patern rifiles. The Colt AR-15 is a particular brand and model of a firearm. It is not a generic term/name. Thus general associations should not be in this article. Currently the article that attempts to address the generic AR-15 patern rifle is the Modern Sporting Rifle article. Personally I disagree with that title since non-AR15 patern rifles could still be called Modern Sporting Rifles. I know there has been a lot of debate about this since "AR-15" is a term that is used generically but legally is not a generic term. Springee (talk) 18:09, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - mass-shootings already have their own articles, all relevant info is, or should be, in that page and not needlessly duplicated on other articles. If we start adding info about just one shooting incident to one tenuously-connected article, we'll be opening a literal Pandora's box (figuratively speaking). We'll have to add info on numerous firearms-related incidents to multiple articles, throwing many of them out of balance. - theWOLFchild 19:18, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Whether something was "really" an AR-15 or not (maybe it had a different caliber, maybe it was a knock-off, whatever) doesn't really matter. Of course people come here for that kind of info, and technicalities miss the point (the guy who handed in his to the cops, OK so it was an AR-57, but in many important ways it was the same thing). Guitar articles have lists of notable players, and those are much more poorly verified than what we can write up here. Springee, you seem pretty close to common sense, yet at the last moment you say "legally is not a generic term"--as if you saw the truth but then your phone rang and it's Fruit Ninja. This is part of the usual response: deny, quibble over what kind of gun it was and laugh at amateurs who get it wrong, thoughts and prayers. Well, look at WP:COMMONNAME: like it or not, America calls "it" an AR-15, just like the rest of the world uses "AK-47" for a wide variety of weapons that all look the same. So a sentence like "the AR-15 is the weapon of choice for most white male mass murderers in the United States" is more than appropriate here. Drmies (talk) 02:05, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Drmies, I understand what you are saying about generic vs trademarked vs common usage names. I'm not going to get mad if the "Kleenex" you hand me is actually a generic facial tissue. The problem is not too long ago there was a big discussion about what is the correct article title for the generic "AR-15" rifle aritcle. If I can find the discussion I will post it. Anyway as I recall, the issue was Colt does have a trademark on the name AR-15 thus Wikipedia should respect the trademark over the considerations of WP:COMMONNAME. That is why I said "legally". Currently the "generic" AR-15 page is the "Modern Sporting Rifle" page. I don't like that name for a number of reasons but that is the correct place for information that applies generically to AR-15 pattern rifles (I would prefer a name like "AR-15 pattern rifle" but that's another matter. I'm normally not for including specific crimes on the pages of say the S&W version of the AR-15 because the crimes aren't associated with a specific make and model, only the generic "AR-15". The Florida shooting wasn't committed with an AR-15 (tm) but, if I'm not mistaken a S&W M&P-15 (an AR-15 pattern rifle). Since only Colt makes AR-15 I suspect we would find, technically, almost none of those crimes were committed with an "AR-15 (tm)". When articles talk about AR-15 crimes they are actually talking about crimes committed with an AR-15 pattern rifle. I think the crime information should go into a generic AR-15 article. I don't think that article should be named "Modern Sporting Rifles". The form of the crime information I'm sure will be a subject for hot debate. Springee (talk) 02:40, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
We need to do what is right for the readers. Technicalities are less important. Yes, we should maybe have a generic "AR-15" article--I can dig that. But if we do not include this kind of info somewhere we are being ridiculously inconsistent and hypocritical, as if we are defending Colt--if you've been around as long as I have you know we include this kind of info, and in this case verifying it properly will not be difficult. BTW, I didn't know it was the one (tm) or the other (tm)--like millions of people (I suspect), I don't care for those precisions. Thank you again for the suggestion; let's see how this goes. Jayron32, you know these things, don't you? What say you? Drmies (talk) 02:51, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Drmies: we do have an article for the generic "AR-15", over at modern sporting rifle (which is the industry term for this, apparently). We do include this kind of info, in that article and many others. In any case, yes, we are defending Colt (analogous to BLP), since all they've done is invent a firearm design that others copied. None of this crime stuff is relevant here, and that's what we should be telling people while directing them to the right places. That's what would be right for the readers. ansh666 04:36, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Drmies: I was in fact surprised that my addition summarizing the popularity and criminal use of the rifle was removed as "hyper-partisan". However, since I sometimes work in arbitration enforcement related to US politics, and this is sort of related, I don't intend to get into a content dispute about this. Sandstein 08:32, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Seriously, all you opposers, have you seen this? What do you think 330,000 visitors in two days are here for? And which one of you is going to put up a sign, some notice, that says to those 350,000 readers YALL WRONG AND NOT SMART ENOUGH TO REALIZE THAT WHEN THEY SAY AR-15 THEY MAY BE TALKING ABOUT A DIFFERENT SPORTING RIFLE AND THERE REALLY IS NO CONNECTION BETWEEN THIS WEAPON AND THOSE SHOOTINGS. I'm looking forward to seeing how you will phrase this in a way that is informative for the reader--and remember we're not here for you, not for the Firearms project, not for Colt, not for the NRA--we're here for the reader. And here you had 350,000 readers who were most likely not here to read up on what kinds of calibers and barrels were available for this gun. I think we should have a full-blown RfA for this, not a brief note on the Firearms project (Wikipedia:WikiProject_Firearms#Criminal_use). Berean Hunter, I am not impressed by this edit and summary: that section points at legislation (which the US has been discussing for years now for this kind of weapon, and for a while he had it) and notoriety (and it's hard to deny that that exists for this gun). Drmies (talk) 02:36, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Drmies, the people that got to this article did so by clicking on links in other articles and were informed about the AR-15 and the clones. No loss has occurred here. The info for the events doesn't need to be in this particular article. Re-evaluate my edit and you will see that is pursuant to NPOV and preventing undue weight to "Uses". Do you think it is permissible to have a "Uses" section and the only thing listed is about mass shootings and the weapon being the choice of the perpetrators? There is nothing there about target shooting, law enforcement usage (AR-15s have been used to take out perpetrators, too), varmint hunting, competitions, etc. Do you think that it is neutral to present to our readers in such a way? This isn't some kind of censorship and as the guidelines state, you write about the events and link to it in the 'See also' section. If you open up the idea of mass shootings and other crimes as being entered in the article then you can expect other editors to begin to balance or even bury those with tales of good usage. Those have been kept out also...it isn't censorship like you think. This has been a perennial issue and was more recently discussed here.
       — Berean Hunter (talk) 03:26, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • We have an article on the model rifle used in the Florida school shooting. It's Smith & Wesson M&P15. The article on the shooting should send readers there. --DHeyward (talk) 12:06, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Makes sense to put something in, considering that media generally uses "AR-15 type rifle" or something similar to refer to what we on Wikipedia call modern sporting rifles. I think having a round count and/or death count like Drmies' attempt is probably WP:UNDUE, but it captures the general idea quite well. ansh666 02:54, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    In addition, the SIG MCX isn't even related to the AR-15 in design, which may make it a poor example of MSRs, but a good example of people not doing enough research. ansh666 03:00, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose In general news reports will say anything with a STANAG magazine is an "AR-15." There are many NATO compatible rifles and this article isn't about what gets (mis)labeled by the press. Certainly within the context of current political discussion of gun control, banning AR-15s is a meaningless term. The case in point is the S&W MP15 used in the Douglas school shooting is very different from the Sig MCX. Rifles with compatible magazines can be every different, such as the IWI Tavor. There are also 9mm versions that accept Glock magazines but those pisto caliber sporting rifles are not "Glocks" simply because they accept Glock magazines. There are no set of features that would describe all the weapons the press label as AR-15s and Glocks. --DHeyward (talk) 11:25, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

So as the repeated edit wars continue to reinsert information about mass shootings we should have a discussion on what if anything should be included in this article. Should information about any AR-15 related shooting be in this article? PackMecEng (talk) 02:31, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Of course, per Wikipedia:WikiProject_Firearms#Criminal_use. There is notoriety enough (see the New Yorker article already cited) and the discussion over banning semi-automatic weapons, with the AR-15 and its clones/lookalikes as the poster child. Someone just killed 19 people with one of these, in case you missed it. Drmies (talk) 02:37, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • The place for criminal use is in the article about the crime. There is no fiscussion over banning semi-automatic weapons, No one has proposed such a ban. As for things like "assault weapons ban" it covers featurea, not models or actions. You can look at California for reference and google "California compliant ar-15". Even the "assault weapons ban" of 1994 did not ban what is generically termed an AR-15 and they were made and sold during that time. Last I checked the school shooter did not use a bayonet and the it was daytime so the flash hider wasn't really necessary. Take those off and it wasn't a "banned" rifle. If this does not make sense, we have articles on all the terms, legislation and features. --DHeyward (talk) 11:58, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Since the rifle used was not a Colt but as Drmies points out a SIG MCX this would not be the right article. It kind of sounds like more of a issue with how we redirect AR-15 to this article instead of Modern sporting rifle. Would it make sense to change the redirect to there instead or was there a previous discussion on that? So sounds like the right article is the modern sporting rifle and Mass shootings in the United States. PackMecEng (talk) 03:04, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, but in the context of "AR-15" being a generic label for a certain type of firearms, making clear that when media and even police say "AR-15", they're usually not actual AR-15s, and sometimes not even AR-15 derivatives (of course, in as much detail as sourcing allows). It could be helpful to change AR-15 from a redirect here to a disambiguation page of some sort as well, though I'm not sure there are enough possible targets for policy to allow it. ansh666 03:13, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah it is a bit of a pickle perhaps we could start with a little something at the top like the Kleenex article "For the generic item, see Modern sporting rifle." PackMecEng (talk) 03:39, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Err, well I'm an idiot. There is already a disambiguation page. Perhaps we should be having a discussion about primary topic instead. ansh666 04:36, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, generic material about "AR-15" crimes should not be in this article. I'm generally against including crime information (not in all cases) but we should always exclude it if the article is not about the crime gun in question. That said, I would suggest we change the "AR-15" redirect from this page to the disambiguation page[[1]]. That page should be edited to make it clear this is the article for the Colt AR-15(TM) rifles and that the generic AR-15 pattern rifle page is (currently) the Modern Sporting Rifle page. Note, I really dislike the "Modern Sporting Rifle" term since that could, in my opinion, include versions of the Mini-14, Sig MCX and even rifles patterned on the Stg-44. Springee (talk) 04:02, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 17 February 2018

Please add a statement detailing this weapon's use in American mass shootings, including the Douglas High School shooting earlier this week. 46.236.124.82 (talk) 22:53, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Currently being discussed above. FYI, this specific weapon is almost never used in mass shootings; instead, they're usually modern sporting rifles which are only based on its design. ansh666 02:56, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lower receiver differences from military M16/M4

All lower receivers currently made are physically different from from miltary lower receivers include the depth and width of the shelf and pocket as well as the hole for the autosear not being present. I've never seen a receiver that could accept the military autosear or even the drop-in autosear. When did Colt change the lower receiver? These details are what make it different from an assault rifle so if anyone has a date and source, we should add it. --DHeyward (talk) 11:42, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Colt_AR-15&oldid=826395644"