The Liberty Hawk

This is Part 5 of my series on military-grade weapons. As I laid out in Part 1, the focus of this series is discussing the idea of “military-grade” weapons. This assumes a definition of military-grade as of particular need and near-exclusive usage by the military. Our endeavor has been to decide if we can regard any weapon owned by civilians in America as military-grade based on this definition. Specifically, we have been discussing the various features of the AR-15 to determine if we can class it as military-grade. We have done this to see if the AR-15 can be subject to distinct regulations while avoiding an impact on the majority of civilian-owned firearms. 

In Part 1, I conceded that, using our working definition of military-grade, full-automatic fire would make a weapon military-grade. We based this idea on the conclusion that machine guns are area weapons with a specific military application and go beyond the personal need for self-defense. However, I laid out the intense regulations on machine guns under current US law. I also pointed out these laws have proven sufficient to keep such weapons from being used to perpetrate crimes. 

In Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4, I began laying out each notable feature of the civilian AR-15 to figure out if any of them allowed us to class the AR-15 as military-grade and subject to distinct regulations. We discussed semi-auto fire in Part 2, ammo capacity in Part 3, and caliber (bullet size) in Part 4. In each case, I established that each feature is common in the bulk of civilian-used firearms over the last century. I concluded that we could not use any of the three features discussed to class the AR-15 as military-grade without likewise classing most civilian-owned firearms. 

Here in Part 5, we are going to discuss the rest of the AR-15’s features. Once more, we will discuss military-grade using our working definition of particular need and near-exclusive usage by the military. 

The final major features of the AR-15 are light-weight construction, length, and accessories. 

Leight-Weight  

The typical AR-15 uses a light-weight polymer construction. In its early military application, this allowed for several things. First, it lowered the cost of weapon manufacture. Second, it freed up weight in a soldier’s basic combat load for other necessities and options, including more ammunition. Third, the polymer construction was better suited for humid climates (The wood stocks of the M14 would often crack in the early years of the Vietnam War, one of the main factors leading to their replacement by the M16). 

However, in the last fifty years, light-weight polymer construction has become a main-stay in the civilian market. Some of the most popular pistols on the market, including the Glock and S&W M&P, are predominantly constructed of polymer. Every type of firearm, including shotguns, hunting rifles, and even revolvers, can be purchased with a polymer frame. Females especially purchase and use polymer weapons for recreation and self-defense due to their light-weight. 

Maybe in the early days of the military’s adoption of light-weight polymer weapons, an argument could be made for it being a military-grade feature. But polymer weapons have flooded the civilian market over the last fifty years and is now a typical, if not prevalent, feature in civilian firearms.  

Length  

Unbeknownst to many outside the firearms world, length is probably the most lethal feature in a civilian firearm. Statistics estimate that the United States has averaged around 33,000 firearm-related deaths over the past decade. Two-thirds of those deaths are suicides. Of the remaining deaths, firearm-related homicides, most are perpetrated with handguns. This is because the criminal element is better served by firearms they can easily conceal, both before and after the crime.   

The AR-15 is a tactical weapon. This means it can be altered significantly for different applications. While a shortened barrel and butt-stock may decrease an AR-15’s effective range, it makes the weapon easier to conceal and more effective in close-quarter situations. The AR-15 can be designed or altered to be extremely short. 

The National Firearms Act of 1934 designates such a weapon as a Short-barreled Rifle or SBR. Anyone who purchases or creates a weapon fitted with a butt-stock that has a barrel shorter than 16 inches must register that weapon with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF). Possession of an SBR that an owner has failed to register is a felony. Moreover, no one can transport an SBR over state-lines without filing proper documentation with ATF. 

These regulations have ensured that criminals have largely been unable to use SBRs in their crimes. Most SBR owners have modified their weapons aftermarket and register them appropriately. Mass shooters have typically used their weapons as they were when they purchased or obtained them. The notable exception is the AR pistol. 

Since an SBR definition requires a butt-stock, an AR-15 with its butt-stock removed is legally considered a pistol.   

Such a weapon has only been used once in an active shooting (Dayton). There is currently an open debate about whether we should close the AR pistol “loophole” in SBR laws. However, this topic is beyond our present discussion. Our focus is on whether the features of the AR-15 can allow for a designation of military-grade. The danger and lethality of easily concealed weapons factor mainly in civilian use. While the military does use the M4 Carbine with a 14.5-inch barrel, it applies it as a carbine for tactical situations and not for its ability to be concealed. There is little need to conceal a weapon on a battlefield.

I would argue that it would make more sense to designate weapons with barrels between 14 and 16 inches as carbines. I don’t think a weapon becomes truly a functional SBR until the barrel is shorter than 14-inches. I handled M4s often in the military, and I would not confidently say that the 3.5-inch difference between an M16 and M4 makes it that much easier to conceal, even with the telescoping butt-stock.   

So, given that lethality by-way-of length is a specifically civilian application, we cannot consider it a feature that allows a designation of military-grade. Further, handguns are what law-abiding gun owners carry for self-defense and what criminals typically use to perpetrate crimes. Going singly after the AR-15 for its length options, while leaving handguns alone, would do little to deter firearm violence. And, going after handguns would once more target some of the most prevalent types of civilian-owned firearms. 

While the length of long guns is concerning for their lethality in criminal use, current laws already deal with that concern, and there are ongoing debates about updating those laws. Specific to the question of designating the AR-15 itself as military-grade, the options of varying lengths do not meet the threshold.  

Bells and whistles  

The final feature of the AR-15 we will discuss is the accessory options for the firearm. For the most part, these accessories break down into optics, grips, flashlights, and lasers.  

The AR-15 is indeed one of the most versatile weapons for attachments and upgrades. It can be outfitted with various types of attachment rails, the most common of which are Picatinny rails. 

However, Picatinny rails and similar attachment points are general innovations in firearm technology. They are far from unique to the AR-15. When it comes to civilian firearms, Picatinny rails have become a standard form of attachment point for optics and other attachment options on most civilian firearms. 

Since most AR-15 accessories are designed to attach to Picatinny rails or similar attach point tech, they can be attached to any weapon likewise equipped. Once more, we’re talking about trying to class an AR-15 as military-grade using a feature that more or less every firearm on the civilian market could have. 

Part 5’s Verdict  

We have discussed the remaining features of the AR-15: light-weight construction, length, and accessories. In all three instances, we have determined that these features have become standard across all weapon types on the civilian market. Combined with the discussions in Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4 on semi-auto fire, ammo capacity, and caliber, we can reach our first significant conclusion: 

Assuming the definition of military-grade as of particular need and near-exclusive usage by the military, the AR-15 cannot be considered military-grade by way of any single feature. Each major feature of the AR-15 is not only present in other common civilian firearms; they are prevalent. There is no way to classify the AR-15 as military-grade based upon any one of its features without similarly designating the vast majority of civilian firearms.  

In Part 6, we will discuss the last recourse for defining the AR-15 as military-grade: by seeing if we can build a definition of military-grade through a combination of its features. Those familiar with the former Federal Assault Weapons ban may recall that is exactly what that law tried to do with its legal definition of an assault weapon. 

• About
• Latest Posts

Justin Stapley

Justin Stapley is the owner and editor of The Liberty Hawk and the voice of the Self-Evident Podcast. His principles and beliefs are grounded in the idea of ordered liberty as expressed in the traditions of classical liberalism, federalism, and modern conservatism.

Latest posts by Justin Stapley (see all)

• The Liberty Hawk is Now on Medium - December 9, 2020
• Betraying Allies Is Not the Way to Avoid Being the World’s Police - August 14, 2020
• The Last Full Measure of Devotion - August 13, 2020