Stop Calling the AR-15 An Assault Rifle or a Weapon of War (statistics, crime rates)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why does it upset gun owners that people call them "assault" rifles when they are indeed different than other kinds of rifles?
Are you offended by the word "assault"? Does it upset you because it's not completely "accurate" in that you can use them for other things besides assaults?
If so we probably need to find another word to describe these type of rifles that you feel more comfortable with. Or do we have to call them by their brand names and list each brand if we want to talk about them collectively.
Give me a proper name for them and I'll call them that. Because I support "political correctness".... and that is sure as hell what this is. LOL.
The term you should use is, "modern sporting rifle."
All this matters because with scant exception since WWII, until the left wing distortion machine got involved "assault rifle" very clearly, even officially, meant select fire rifles chambered for intermediate cartridges with detachable magazines.
___________
You wouldn't refer to a Corvette as an SUV or a 4x4.
Man, when I retire I'm chucking my laptop in the ocean. That's no way to retire.
If it were a fact that I am "bored out of my gourd" or in fact "lecturing" anybody and if it were a fact I enjoy only "three hours of sunlight"; you'd still be stepping up your game emulating me and thusly reducing your normal amount of time spent on here.
BUT, those are not facts nor are they in any way indicative of my retirement activities. I spend far less time on here than the usual cadre of infantile posters choosing to resort to personal insults.
Ah yes. The "Stoner" carbine. When Colt made it they designated it CAR 15. The Stoner rifles also were the first ones with 3 round burst if memory serves. It was called "stitch fire" by guys in the field.
Anyway, civilian market AR rifles look outwardly the same as in M16/M4 but looks is where any similarity ends. The AR 15 is nothing more than a semi auto with modern ergonomics. The pistol style grip muzzle brake scads of various fore endswhich offer scads of mounting space for various other modern feature such as fast acquisition optics, lasers, lights etc. In short, it's a modern rifle. Nothing special.
Historically US armed citizens have always had access to and used the very same firearms the military used. Going back from the Brown Bess and Charllevill muskets Springfield rifle/muskets Sharps and Springfield 45 70 rifles and carbines, the 30 40 Krag 03A3 Springfield 30 06 the M1 Garand which is where identical models to the military end for we citizens.
We then had the Springfield M1A (civilian version M14) and now the A 15 (civilian version of the M16/M4.) We citizens having rifles that the military uses goes back a long way but when the military went to select fire rifles that changed as we are only readily allowed semi auto versions. I'm OK with that. Full auto is a waste of ammo for the biggest part.
If it were a fact that I am "bored out of my gourd" or in fact "lecturing" anybody and if it were a fact I enjoy only "three hours of sunlight"; you'd still be stepping up your game emulating me and thusly reducing your normal amount of time spent on here.
BUT, those are not facts nor are they in any way indicative of my retirement activities. I spend far less time on here than the usual cadre of infantile posters choosing to resort to personal insults.
Good night.
Really wasn't directed at you sir. I see this over in the retirement forum and just SMH. I am not working for this long to be arguing on a board when I don't have to.
All this matters because with scant exception since WWII, until the left wing distortion machine got involved "assault rifle" very clearly, even officially, meant select fire rifles chambered for intermediate cartridges with detachable magazines.
I wouldn't call NATO 7.62x51 an "intermediate cartridge". I would call H&K G3 an assault rifle.
Anyway, I'll happily agree that the assault weapons ban is a terrible piece of legislation, for two reasons:
1. It's vague and convoluted. People aren't sure if they're breaking the law or not, and that's a terrible thing in lawmaking.
2. People kill each other with handguns, anyway.
To pass a real law, they would need to be intelligent. But if they were intelligent, they would not be the Left. Makes it difficult.
Well, they could not because of our wonderful Constitution. I bet they hate hate hate it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
