View Full Version : Stoner Family claims AR15 was never intended for civilian use... and should not be.
Digital_Damage
06-16-16, 08:37
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/family-of-ar-15-inventor-he-didnt-intend-it-for-civilians/ar-AAh7hM9?ocid=spartanntp
Conveniently they wanted their names to stay anonymous.
The AR-15 is the most talked about gun in America.
But the AR-15's creator died before the weapon became a popular hit and his family has never spoken out.
Until now.
"Our father, Eugene Stoner, designed the AR-15 and subsequent M-16 as a military weapon to give our soldiers an advantage over the AK-47," the Stoner family told NBC News late Wednesday. "He died long before any mass shootings occurred. But, we do think he would have been horrified and sickened as anyone, if not more by these events."
The inventor's surviving children and adult grandchildren spoke exclusively to MSNBC by phone and email, commenting for the first time on their family's uneasy legacy. They requested individual anonymity in order to speak freely about such a sensitive topic. They also stopped short of policy prescriptions or legal opinions.
Related: AR-15 Style Rifle Used in Orlando Massacre Has Bloody Pedigree
But their comments add unprecedented context to their father's creation, shedding new light on his intentions and adding firepower to the effort to ban weapons like the AR-15. The comments could also bolster a groundbreaking new lawsuit, which argues that the weapon is a tool of war — never intended for civilians.
Eugene Stoner would have agreed, his family said.
The ex-Marine and "avid sportsman, hunter and skeet shooter" never used his invention for sport. He also never kept it around the house for personal defense. In fact, he never even owned one.
And though he made millions from the design, his family said it was all from military sales.
"After many conversations with him, we feel his intent was that he designed it as a military rifle," his family said, explaining that Stoner was focused on making the most efficient and superior rifle possible for the military."
He designed the original AR-15 in the late 1950s, working on it in his own garage and later as the chief designer for ArmaLite, a then small company in southern California. He made it light and powerful and he fashioned a new bullet for it — a .223 caliber round capable of piercing a metal helmet at 500 yards.
The Army loved it and famously renamed it the M16.
But after Stoner's death in 1997, at the age of 74, a semi-automatic version of the AR-15 became a civilian bestseller, too, spawning dozens of copy-cat weapons. The National Rifle Association has taken to calling it "America's rifle."
The bullets that tore through the Pulse nightclub in Orlando were Stoner's .223 rounds, fired from a AR-15 spin off made by Sig Sauer.
In all, an AR-15 style rifle has been used in at least 10 recent mass shootings — including at an elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut, a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, and a work party in San Bernardino, California.
"What has happened, good or bad, since his patents have expired is a result of our free market system," Stoner's family said. "Currently, a more interesting question is 'Who now is benefiting from the manufacturing and sales of AR-15s, and for what uses?'"
That's the question for the rest of us.
BoringGuy45
06-16-16, 08:41
I'm calling bullshit on this one. Stoner himself was alive to see civilians buying AR-15s, and I don't recall him ever protesting it. Besides, even if he did, that's not his call.
I can't believe how much the left uses the "if they were alive today they'd be on my side," argument about everything.
I could have sworn he originally invented it for small game and varmint hunting...
The fact it was made for warfare makes it exactly the same as every operating design of every firearm ever made.
Revolver.
Bolt.
Lever.
Semi-auto
This is stupid and irrelevant.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The fact it was made for warfare makes it exactly the same as every operating design of every firearm ever made.
Revolver.
Bolt.
Lever.
Semi-auto
This is stupid and irrelevant.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Bingo!
The Left lies through its teeth yet again. Editing, photoshopping, outright fabrication, it's all justified for the Greater Good.
I call bullshit on this too. But even if it were true, it doesn't mean the AR-15, and the M16 for that matter, don't belong in free citizens' hands.
If Henry Ford said, gee I never intended for assembly lines to be used for making Sybian machines, hat doesn't mean we can now ban that Satanic contraption.
The Left lies through its teeth yet again. Editing, photoshopping, outright fabrication, it's all justified for the Greater Good.
I call bullshit on this too. But even if it were true, it doesn't mean the AR-15, and the M16 for that matter, don't belong in free citizens' hands.
If Henry Ford said, gee I never intended for assembly lines to be used for making Sybian machines, hat doesn't mean we can now ban that Satanic contraption.
Sure they do, but that's what happens when your opponent doesn't fight honestly, and you do. What's the old saying: "If you find yourself in a fair fight, you planned poorly". To defeat the Left, you will have to take it to them by any and all means, even if it's crooked, dishonest, mean spirited, full of lies, etc. When your enemy is trying to destroy you, remove ALL Rules of Engagement.
Over the past decade, I have evolved to this way of thinking in the political realm. If they stuff ballot boxes, you stuff twice as many. If they intimidate at voting locations, you intimidate just as much or greater. I saw the face of the American Left in October 2008 when I went to a John McCain speech at the University of New Mexico campus. I was cursed, threatened with violence and the crowd was separated from me by a police barricade. I saw the same thing in the past month when I went to see Trump at the Albuquerque Convention Center; pure evil who will resort to violence. This is a New America; the old one disappeared some time back.
Maybe I'm wrong but I recall reading an article years back where Eugene Stoner(peace be upon him) actually did have an original AR-10. He most certainly had an original SR-25. I have this sinking feeling they talked to sorry ass grandkids who barely knew him. I'm certain the good people at KAC could clear this up.
Eugene Stoner(peace be upon him) created the SR series as an improvement over the AR and going by AR lore the initial use of the AR15 by SF advisors were commercial purchases.
I do not care of the opinions of his progeny. Eugene Stoner (peace be upon him) wanted us to have a good rifle and by all recorded accounts had no issue with its commercial sale to fellow Americans
JackFanToM
06-16-16, 10:02
Reality check - the 2nd amendment does not make distinctions or qualifications, it merely states the right to bear arms to protect oneself from tyranny. Pretty sure that it doesn't say except ar15, Eugene Stoner rifles.
Reality check - the 2nd amendment does not make distinctions or qualifications, it merely states the right to bear arms to protect oneself from tyranny. Pretty sure that it doesn't say except ar15, Eugene Stoner rifles.
This.
Reality check - the 2nd amendment does not make distinctions or qualifications, it merely states the right to bear arms to protect oneself from tyranny. Pretty sure that it doesn't say except ar15, Eugene Stoner rifles.
That doesn't matter to the Left. They say or write something...and declare it fact; no discussion. You oppose it and you're demonized, vilified and made to look like an enemy of the State and Civil Society.
Failure2Stop
06-16-16, 10:40
I have never heard of any anti-commercial sales sentiment of the SR-25 or SR-15 by Mr. Stoner, and I would venture that KAC provided the most direct expression of Mr. Stoner's intent to the commercial market most recently.
JackFanToM
06-16-16, 10:40
No matter what their irrelevant argument is, simply state " Educate yourself, and read the 2nd Amendment". They like to state all sorts of irrelevant nonsense and argue with emotion and not logic, so just repeat the same thing. I'm willing to bet 99 out of 100 think they know what the 2nd amendment states, but have never read it.
titsonritz
06-16-16, 10:51
And Mikhail Kalashnikov wished he had invented a lawn mower. https://notevenpast.org/kalashnikovs-lawn-mower-the-man-behind-the-most-feared-gun-in-the-world/
And Mikhail Kalashnikov wished he had invented a lawn mower. https://notevenpast.org/kalashnikovs-lawn-mower-the-man-behind-the-most-feared-gun-in-the-world/
I call BS - he was a Communist because it was expedient to be a Communist for HIS survival and prosperity. He chose his path. He knew what he was doing.
The only opinion I'd care to hear on the matter out of simple curiosity would be Eugene Stoner himself, and his opinion on the matter is just that and would change nothing. Don't give a flying you know what his family thinks on the matter. I'd bet people who actually knew Stoner well and worked with him over the years would know far better what Eugene Stoner thought on the matter.
Mikhail Kalashnikov was well known for having some mixed feelings on his weapon O war too. I would too. So what?
trackmagic
06-16-16, 13:00
It was designed before the FOPA so he would have known that not only civilians could have owned his rifle, they could have owned the select fire version for a $200 stamp tax. I seriously doubt he would have objected to civilian sales. In those days nobody questioned "why do you need to own one of those evil assault rifles".
Sure they do, but that's what happens when your opponent doesn't fight honestly, and you do. What's the old saying: "If you find yourself in a fair fight, you planned poorly". To defeat the Left, you will have to take it to them by any and all means, even if it's crooked, dishonest, mean spirited, full of lies, etc. When your enemy is trying to destroy you, remove ALL Rules of Engagement.
Over the past decade, I have evolved to this way of thinking in the political realm. If they stuff ballot boxes, you stuff twice as many. If they intimidate at voting locations, you intimidate just as much or greater. I saw the face of the American Left in October 2008 when I went to a John McCain speech at the University of New Mexico campus. I was cursed, threatened with violence and the crowd was separated from me by a police barricade. I saw the same thing in the past month when I went to see Trump at the Albuquerque Convention Center; pure evil who will resort to violence. This is a New America; the old one disappeared some time back.
Agreed.
Reality check - the 2nd amendment does not make distinctions or qualifications, it merely states the right to bear arms to protect oneself from tyranny. Pretty sure that it doesn't say except ar15, Eugene Stoner rifles.
The Left don't care. They reject the premise of the entire Constitution.
For all his dunce relatives know, Mr. Stoner may not have personally owned a fully auto weapon based on his design. What he possessed or did not own is not relevant.
FromMyColdDeadHand
06-16-16, 21:14
I get tired of this line of BS because:
The .223/5.56 is just a modded .222 varmint round
The military bitched that the lethality of the 55gr ammo sucked
Put a 5.56 next to a 7.62x51 or a .50Cal and tell about how awesome it is. This 'velocity' is like them talking about how many RPMs a hollow point bullet is turning at- like it is a buzz saw.
The fact that civilians saved the AR platform and made it what it is today:
-From the first civy procured ones in Vietnam
-The Use of Red dot sights.
-The use of ARs in anything approaching accurate fire thru
--Two stage triggers
--Free floated barrels
--Match grade ammo
Including 75/77 grain ammo for sniping and short barrel rifles.
Didn't Stoner also produce the AR-180 and then go on to develop rifles for Knights?
The only opinion I'd care to hear on the matter out of simple curiosity would be Eugene Stoner himself, and his opinion on the matter is just that and would change nothing. Don't give a flying you know what his family thinks on the matter. I'd bet people who actually knew Stoner well and worked with him over the years would know far better what Eugene Stoner thought on the matter.
Mikhail Kalashnikov was well known for having some mixed feelings on his weapon O war too. I would too. So what?
Yep, and if they have a problem with it they should refuse any inheritance associated with Eugene Stoner.
Yep, and if they have a problem with it they should refuse any inheritance associated with Eugene Stoner.
Yeah, well, but $$$$, bro.
Seriously though, even if Stoner himself was against AR's in civvie hands, it still wouldn't mean civvies shouldn't have them.
Gawdamn, if my family spoke for me, they'd disavow 99.999999% of my beliefs. Who gives a flying f@ck what Stoner's family supposedly thinks.
(I'm still calling bullshit on this whole story).
lawusmc0844
06-17-16, 01:33
Sure they do, but that's what happens when your opponent doesn't fight honestly, and you do. What's the old saying: "If you find yourself in a fair fight, you planned poorly". To defeat the Left, you will have to take it to them by any and all means, even if it's crooked, dishonest, mean spirited, full of lies, etc. When your enemy is trying to destroy you, remove ALL Rules of Engagement.
Over the past decade, I have evolved to this way of thinking in the political realm. If they stuff ballot boxes, you stuff twice as many. If they intimidate at voting locations, you intimidate just as much or greater. I saw the face of the American Left in October 2008 when I went to a John McCain speech at the University of New Mexico campus. I was cursed, threatened with violence and the crowd was separated from me by a police barricade. I saw the same thing in the past month when I went to see Trump at the Albuquerque Convention Center; pure evil who will resort to violence. This is a New America; the old one disappeared some time back.
+1000 I've just about given up on debating gun issues with libtards and respond to their insults with far worse insults. The left can NOT be reasoned with so enough with "taking the high road", screw them.
patriot_man
06-17-16, 05:32
Man, they will drag anyone into this fight to bring out an emotional response...
OH58D saw evil at McCain and Trump events. I saw it continuously during the late 60s and early 70s with so called peace demonstrators who showed up at airports to spit on and curse guys returning from Vietnam. They flat out did not care about the dead ones who rode back in the same plane with the baggage and freight.
Eugene Stoner didn't make the Armalite Rifle-15 into a "weapon of war" Robert McNamara did...
Eugene Stoner didn't make the Armalite Rifle-15 into a "weapon of war" Robert McNamara did...
This. And screwed it up for a bit by meddling.
This merely encourages my XM16E1 clone build even more
.46caliber
06-17-16, 22:07
Yep, and if they have a problem with it they should refuse any inheritance associated with Eugene Stoner.
"Well now... he made the fortune from military sales and that's OK"
For all we know, they may not have actually interviewed Stoner's family.
Eugene Stoner didn't make the Armalite Rifle-15 into a "weapon of war" Robert McNamara did...
Every documentary and piece of literature on the history of Vietnam and the adoption of the M16 said the AR-15 was being developed by Stoner for small game and varmint hunting. The military got wind and adopted it, first within the Air Force.
But, we all know the media does not investigate or fact check anymore. Gone has the ways of true journalism and investigating journalism/reporting.
Like .46 said, could be a fake.
Every documentary and piece of literature on the history of Vietnam and the adoption of the M16 said the AR-15 was being developed by Stoner for small game and varmint hunting. The military got wind and adopted it, first within the Air Force.
But, we all know the media does not investigate or fact check anymore. Gone has the ways of true journalism and investigating journalism/reporting.
Like .46 said, could be a fake.The mainstream media caters to the stupid voted class of people.
Don Robison
06-18-16, 18:20
Considering Colt started selling it on the civilian market in 1963 I'll call their claims BS speculation based in fantasy.
The_War_Wagon
06-18-16, 19:20
I could have sworn he originally invented it for small game and varmint hunting...
I heard it was for repelling bears and wild indians... :rolleyes:
VooDoo6Actual
06-18-16, 19:45
I call BS on the whole story. Propaganda since the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012.
No way to prove the veracity with no transparency.
Ain't it just great.
Yep, it's on MSLSD so you can trust they're full of shit. This whole weapons of war argument is pure horse pucky. I have bolt actions that were designed over 100 years ago specifically for fighting wars, and they're in calibers way more powerful than 5.56, but so f'n what? The whole point of the 2nd amendment is citizen ownership of military grade hardware.
horseman234
06-21-16, 06:23
http://www.vox.com/2016/6/20/11975850/ar-15-owner-orlando
http://www.vox.com/2016/6/20/11975850/ar-15-owner-orlando
I was literally speechless when I saw that yesterday. Granted, it's not a Vox writer, but they still published it.
http://www.vox.com/2016/6/20/11975850/ar-15-owner-orlando
I would debate a few very small statements, but honestly, small enough that it's like splitting frog hairs. Overall pretty objective, unemotional, and factual. How it got past the editors is beyond me.
KalashniKEV
06-21-16, 14:47
Every documentary and piece of literature on the history of Vietnam and the adoption of the M16 said the AR-15 was being developed by Stoner for small game and varmint hunting.
That's weird... they didn't mention, like... the AR-10... or Stoner's patent for "Gas operated bolt and carrier system" that he filed while working for a major defense contractor (Armalite Division of Fairchild Aircraft Corporation)... or Gerald A. Gustafson's ".22 Carbine" that shortened a .222 and gave us the SCHV concept in Infantry weapons?
Varmint hunting??? LOL
Your documentaries and pieces of literature must suck...
Yeah that "varmint" spiel gets old.
A 7.62x39 is a bulldog but can be a through and through.
A center mass 55gr bullet will not.
People romanticise the gruff MACV guy chomping a cigar and toting a souvenired AK but yet the AR15 was highly desired and had a bounty by the NVA. No coincidence the Soviets came up with 5.45 in 1974.
The through and through does nothing unless it hits something important.
That's a big part of why 62gr 855 pretty much sucks unless it's 1985 and you're popping Ivan wearing a steel helmet.
Plus Stoner really preferred the AR-10, at least at first. Then there is the AR-16 that no one talks about. A piston AR-180 looking 308.
Just like people try to say the 5.56 was designed to wound. Why would you think that a potential adversary who used wave tactics and bullet spongery in WWII against the Germans really, honestly care about dragging Pvt. Golikov off the battlefield during WWIII because he got an owie?
A 55gr silvertip 5.56 or even just 193 can make a mess.
At the end of the day, it is what it is. And despite the romance behind steel and wood; it would suck to have to tote an M14 or an M1 Carbine all day.
Stoner was a genius and he made a great rifle.
Digital_Damage
06-21-16, 15:06
the AR-16 and AR-18 were monstrosities that should have never made it to prototype, should have died on the drawing board.
http://www.vox.com/2016/6/20/11975850/ar-15-owner-orlando
I must say, that was a good article.
Not because I agree, but because the author had a cogent thesis and structure that the Kuntzman article did not.
I especially liked where he touched on the simple fact that people want something that works. Like computers. Lotsa peole have nice computers but back in the day you had Apple II, Kaypro, and Commodore.
I consider the Commodore 64, rightly or wrongly, to be the XM-16E1 of computers.
And if you disagree then I challenge you to a game of Zaxxon!
the AR-16 and AR-18 were monstrosities that should have never made it to prototype, should have died on the drawing board.
I have an AR-180 and love it.
And I think the AR-16 only was a prototype.
KalashniKEV
06-21-16, 15:24
the AR-16 and AR-18 were monstrosities that should have never made it to prototype, should have died on the drawing board.
AR-18 laid the foundation for pretty much all the 3rd gen carbines.
It's a fantastic rifle.
AR-18 laid the foundation for pretty much all the 3rd gen carbines.
It's a fantastic rifle.
See, I can count on you to understand.
Fun story. This one guy wanted to show off his 2500 ACR to me. So I bring my AR-180.
He raves about it(this was when people still cared about the ACR) and brags on it.
So we're shooting and the ACR certainly looks futuristic but is kinda lame and not fun and makes me miss my AR. He tries my AR-180 and it blows his damn mind.
"Man, this thing is light and handy. Where can I get one?" and I say "30 years ago or gunbroker. No longer made".
He asks me about the funky 'pmag' and I tell him it is a Thermold and that AR-180s use different mags. I use thermolds because they work and AR-18 mags are hard to find(and expensive when you do).
Then he asks if I'm up for a trade and I say "not just no, but hell no".
Digital_Damage
06-21-16, 17:39
AR-18 laid the foundation for pretty much all the 3rd gen carbines.
It's a fantastic rifle.
I get why you like it.
But is was still a stamped steel, welded, reciprocating charging handled, ergonomic abortion.
Now the 63 and 62 were genius.
cougar_guy04
06-21-16, 20:19
I find it funny that he "never meant for them to be civilian weapons" or "never owned one" . . . bull****
He built the freaking prototypes in his garage FFS.
That's weird... they didn't mention, like... the AR-10... or Stoner's patent for "Gas operated bolt and carrier system" that he filed while working for a major defense contractor (Armalite Division of Fairchild Aircraft Corporation)... or Gerald A. Gustafson's ".22 Carbine" that shortened a .222 and gave us the SCHV concept in Infantry weapons?
Varmint hunting??? LOL
Your documentaries and pieces of literature must suck...
What makes you think such information eliminates any other conclusion? Because he happened to be working for said company, who happen to have had defense contracts? That immediately limits the use and market for said patents and designs for military only?
KalashniKEV
06-22-16, 07:01
...is was still a stamped steel, welded, reciprocating charging handled, ergonomic abortion.
The reciprocating charging handle in the correct position is vastly superior to the AR-15's T-handle because it eliminates the need for a forward assist, and allows the shooter to manipulate the action without unshouldering the rifle.
Also, the ambi safety as standard equipment helps both left and right handed shooters get the gun on and off safe faster and more reliably while they shoot, move, and communicate.
Ergonomically, it was the best design of it's time, and is still quite good.
You are correct that it's a stamped gun... which is a good thing, IMO.
What makes you think such information eliminates any other conclusion?
*sigh*
There's a book out there called "The Black Rifle," as well as several other good ones if you're truly interested.
If not, Cliff Notes:
Post WWII, FN-FAL was the truly groundbreaking design that took the 4 piece stock set of the StG-44 and AK and introduced the hinged upper and lower and the buffer-in-stock. Armalite took that and added DGI system + aluminum alloy construction in their AR-10. AR-15 took the AR-10, made some evolutionary design changes, and added Gustafson's SCHV concept from his trials at Aberdeen Proving Ground.
http://66.media.tumblr.com/46cde5735245bf6d99a764a9872cd595/tumblr_nhoqdrHlUE1s57vgxo1_500.jpg
Don't feel bad, the DoD invented everything from the zipper on your pants to the internet we're communicating on.
*sigh*
There's a book out there called "The Black Rifle," as well as several other good ones if you're truly interested.
If not, Cliff Notes:
Post WWII, FN-FAL was the truly groundbreaking design that took the 4 piece stock set of the StG-44 and AK and introduced the hinged upper and lower and the buffer-in-stock. Armalite took that and added DGI system + aluminum alloy construction in their AR-10. AR-15 took the AR-10, made some evolutionary design changes, and added Gustafson's SCHV concept from his trials at Aberdeen Proving Ground.
http://66.media.tumblr.com/46cde5735245bf6d99a764a9872cd595/tumblr_nhoqdrHlUE1s57vgxo1_500.jpg
Don't feel bad, the DoD invented everything from the zipper on your pants to the internet we're communicating on.
I understand all that but none of it means Stoner did noy have the civilian market in his intentions, whether first or second.
How often are things made with both markets in mind, pretty often, or with one in mind and it carries over to the other.
I did know about the StG-44, the FAL, and the AR-10, briefly, but not the rest. Good to know.
KalashniKEV
06-22-16, 07:16
I understand all that but none of it means Stoner did noy have the civilian market in his intentions, whether first or second.
Armalite was already making the AR-5 for downed airman kits.
Stoner was brought on as part of a push to submit a proposal for the Service Rifle Trials that included the T-48 FAL and M-14.
He developed the AR-10 for submission with weight as a key factor- and the weapon that went into trials even had an alloy barrel!
(obviously that didn't work out too well)
They tried to substitute a conventionally barreled gun, and... well the rest is history. You know who won. Armalite got the Portuguese and Sudanese sales... other little small sales...
http://soldiersystems.net/blog1/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/img_4159.jpg
Source: http://soldiersystems.net/2016/06/21/a-1963-colt-ar-15-advertisment/
1963 Ad. So by the date, Colt was advertising and selling to civilians, targeting "...hunters, campers, and collectors..." before US military adoption - so much for "Weapon of War" false narrative.
That would be almost 1500 in todays money.
It's just a good rifle, you can use it for anything.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.