Reply to Thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="OK Corgi Rancher" data-source="post: 4206509" data-attributes="member: 45773">When people answer a legitimate argument with &quot;you&#039;re so angry&quot; or &quot;it worried you so&quot; or &quot;why are you freaking out&quot; or &quot;give Kamala a kiss&quot; or &quot;you&#039;re a liberal&quot; it&#039;s a clear sign they have nothing intelligent to contribute to the conversation.&nbsp; And that sort of thing is rampant on this forum.If you have a legitimate argument or response then make it.&nbsp; The emotional rhetoric gets really tiresome.&nbsp; Even if your best friend whose name you don&#039;t know did get killed by drug runners.Instead of arguing the M16 is a POS because it allegedly was the cause of your friend&#039;s death (whose name you don&#039;t know yet you served with him in wartime) find something objective and legitimate that&#039;s verifiable.Such as:&nbsp; Because of bureaucratic ineptitude and an Ordnance Dept that didn&#039;t want the gun anyway, the M16 suffered problems it shouldn&#039;t have such as fouling due to improper powder being used in the ammunition.&nbsp; Also, the Ordnance Dept knew rifles used in jungle environments were prone to corrosion in the chamber and barrel.&nbsp; Chamber corrosion and fouling in general contributed to malfunctions of the rifle in severe use situations and likely was a direct contributor to the deaths of American servicemen in Viet Nam in the early years after it&#039;s adoption.&nbsp; By the late 60s the issues were largely corrected and the rifle went on to arguably become the standard by which other modern combat rifles are judged.&nbsp; After over 60 years the rifle is still in use, in an updated form, by all branches of the US military and by military forces around the world.&nbsp; Even so, I prefer (insert weapon name) because it works better for me for various reasons.On the other hand, that would take some thought and effort and I know that&#039;s really asking a lot from some folks here.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="OK Corgi Rancher, post: 4206509, member: 45773"] When people answer a legitimate argument with "you're so angry" or "it worried you so" or "why are you freaking out" or "give Kamala a kiss" or "you're a liberal" it's a clear sign they have nothing intelligent to contribute to the conversation. And that sort of thing is rampant on this forum. If you have a legitimate argument or response then make it. The emotional rhetoric gets really tiresome. Even if your best friend whose name you don't know did get killed by drug runners. Instead of arguing the M16 is a POS because it allegedly was the cause of your friend's death (whose name you don't know yet you served with him in wartime) find something objective and legitimate that's verifiable. Such as: [I]Because of bureaucratic ineptitude and an Ordnance Dept that didn't want the gun anyway, the M16 suffered problems it shouldn't have such as fouling due to improper powder being used in the ammunition. Also, the Ordnance Dept knew rifles used in jungle environments were prone to corrosion in the chamber and barrel. Chamber corrosion and fouling in general contributed to malfunctions of the rifle in severe use situations and likely was a direct contributor to the deaths of American servicemen in Viet Nam in the early years after it's adoption. By the late 60s the issues were largely corrected and the rifle went on to arguably become the standard by which other modern combat rifles are judged. After over 60 years the rifle is still in use, in an updated form, by all branches of the US military and by military forces around the world. Even so, I prefer (insert weapon name) because it works better for me for various reasons.[/I] On the other hand, that would take some thought and effort and I know that's really asking a lot from some folks here. [/QUOTE]

Verification