Explain this to me as if I am a 5 year old.

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Colt556

    Rating - 100%
    64   0   0
    Feb 12, 2009
    I haven’t read this thread for a few days so I’m a bit behind. But anyways….

    You, the 5 year old: Why

    Me the 66 year old: Because I said so that’s why!!! Now shut up and watch cartoons, if you can find any.


    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    33   0   0
    Feb 28, 2009
    Some say alimony, some say exorbitant child support while the minds of those very children are being poisoned with the idea that you're an unloving abandoning deadbeat, some just say divorce court rape. Tomato, potato....

    Can't figure out why these young men don't want to get married anymore. Sure is a mystery.


    Rating - 100%
    12   0   0
    Aug 15, 2008
    Posting for the benefit of others who may be interested, since I don't think the OP has been back, and 5 year olds don't tend to listen very well anyway . . .

    The whole "designed for use in war," and "weapons of war" idea one hears/sees various is places is a red herring and nonsense.

    For one, no one objects to "civilian use" of the Springfield 1903, yet those in civilian hands are often the exact same rifle our military used from 1903 to 1975. Same for the M1 Garand. Same for the M1 Carbine. Other so-called "weapons of war" could be cited with which very few seem to have dificulties. Furthermore, in the case of the AR platform it is in fact NOT the same rifle as used by our military.

    Also, the original letter from the ATF (then known as the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax Division as this was pre-1968 GCA) for the Colt AR-15 shows it was specifically submitted for civilian use. It was also specifically approved by the pre-ATF for civilian use in a 1963 classification letter.

    It should also be noted the Colt AR-15 went on sale in 1964, before the M16 was issued/deployed to troops in 1965, before it was standardized as the M16A1 in 1967, and before the M16A1 officially replaced the M14 in 1969. [1] In other words, it's not unlikely there were AR-15s in the hands of civilians in the U.S. BEFORE they were deployed widely to troops in Vietnam.

    So, in the case of the AR (but not in the case of the 1903, M1 Garand, M1 Carbine, etc.), if we take deployment to our troops as our guidepost the "weapons of war argument" is exactly backwards. As if it really matters given its speciousness.

    [1] - https://www.ammoland.com/2021/12/or...-rifle-not-meant-for-civilians/#axzz7xH01Pgd6
    Last edited:


    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    41   0   0
    May 30, 2009
    To the o.p., if he/she/it is still lurking,

    "There are at least two sides to every argument. Unfortunately I have neither the time, nor inclination to listen to yours".

    I heard my dad tell dozens of people that during my "formative years ".
    Probably explains a lot...


    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    Honestly, if we would have explained it like he’s 5, he’d have gotten huffy about being talked down to like he’s a child. He was always going to get mad and leave. The only question was for which excuse.

    Max Volume

    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Jul 26, 2008
    da region
    One of the truest signs of maturity is the ability to disagree with someone while still remaining respectful.
    He must literally be a 5 year old.
    Top Bottom