[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

When I was in the predominant weapon for the Canadian Forces was the FN-C1-A1. A 7.62 semi automatic rifle with a 30 round magazine and a aperture rear sight. It had two settings on its selector switch, safe and fire.

It was a gas operated semi automatic rifle with a muzzle velocity of 2700 fps.

The AR-15 is a 5.56 semi automatic gas operated weapon with a 30 round magazine capability with an adjustable rear iron sight. It has two setting on it, safe and fire.

It has an effective range of about 550 feet and a muzzle velocity of about 3300 fps.

To me there's not a whole lot of difference.

If the definition of an assault rifle is that it has to have select-able fire options as defined by the US army, then I would argue that the biggest change that should happen is defining what a civilian assault weapon would be and differentiating it from a military assault weapon.

Like undercover brother, I can simply state that I assaulted a lot of stuff with an FNC1A1, it was a military style rifle, the AR-15 has a faster muzzle velocity, and I bet it has a faster rate of fire.

Whether its automatic or semi-automatic at this point shouldn't matter when judging what is and isn't an assault rifle as I bet you can fire an AR-15 faster then an F1A1C1 because the colt has a more effective firing design.

C1 had a 20 round mag, the C2 had a 30 round mag and a bipod for section fire support.


I agree with you that there is no logical reason the civilian populace would need either or any of these weapons.