A Motion - re: The Term "Assault Rifle"

[sig228]

I second that motion.

 

[ArfinGreebly]

Humpty Dumpty

When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.

While I can understand the inclination to have the freedom to choose one's own terminology, it should be understood that, in the context of law, words mean things.

If the law, or a derivative regulation says that special permits are required for specific firearms, and one asserts that he does indeed own such a firearm, one cannot then be shocked & amazed when the powers that be show up for their pound of flesh.

The military does, in fact subscribe to a fairly precise definition for Assault Rifle. The ATF enforces certain regulations in accordance with that definition.

So, no, I'm not going to go all "macho" and dare the Bureau to come dispute definitions with me.


Modern black self-loaders are not "assault anything" and I'm not going to recommend that folks stick out their chests an declare their AR15s to be "assault [whatevers]" to prove some kind of point.

And I'm not inclined to give the grabbers any more ammunition than I have to.

 

[sig228]

My point is this:

The gun grabbers are not stupid people. We are fooling no one by calling them "modern sporting rifles" as the NSSF suggests or some other newly created term. When I hear these terms its almost as irritating to me as the Brady reference to "assault clips". To me it seems like we re trying to hide something. Calling them something other than assault rifles will not prevent repeated future attempts to ban them. If the non-informed public thinks of these as assault rifles so be it. Let's instead focus on educating the non-informed public that these are no worse and probably less lethal than your grandfather's 12 gauge or .30-30 and a whole lot more fun to shoot with a useful hunting purpose.

With that said, I appreciate everyone's comments to my recent posts and do understand the negative implications of "assault (anything)" as the above mod points out and probably will restrict my use of this phraseology in the future.

Plus per my poll over in the rifles section, semi automatic rifle doesn't sound so bad, does it?

 

[Warp]

My point is this:

The gun grabbers are not stupid people. We are fooling no one by calling them "modern sporting rifles" as the NSSF suggests or some other newly created term. When I hear these terms its almost as irritating to me as the Brady reference to "assault clips". To me it seems like we re trying to hide something. Calling them something other than assault rifles will not prevent repeated future attempts to ban them. If the non-informed public thinks of these as assault rifles so be it. Let's instead focus on educating the non-informed public that these are no worse and probably less lethal than your grandfather's 12 gauge or .30-30 and a whole lot more fun to shoot with a useful hunting purpose.

With that said, I appreciate everyone's comments to my recent posts and do understand the negative implications of "assault (anything)" as the above mod points out and probably will restrict my use of this phraseology in the future.

Plus per my poll over in the rifles section, semi automatic rifle doesn't sound so bad, does it?

Don't worry about convincing the antis or the gun grabbers of anything.

Worry about the fence sitters.

 

[Skribs]

The gun grabbers are not stupid people. We are fooling no one by calling them "modern sporting rifles" as the NSSF suggests or some other newly created term. When I hear these terms its almost as irritating to me as the Brady reference to "assault clips". To me it seems like we re trying to hide something. Calling them something other than assault rifles will not prevent repeated future attempts to ban them. If the non-informed public thinks of these as assault rifles so be it. Let's instead focus on educating the non-informed public that these are no worse and probably less lethal than your grandfather's 12 gauge or .30-30 and a whole lot more fun to shoot with a useful hunting purpose.

What you aren't getting, though, is that we're not saying "hide behind the term". We're saying "know the term and use it correctly."

We're not saying assault rifles are bad, either. We're just saying that the majority of gun owners in the US don't have them. It's something we're hiding behind, it's a simple fact.

Let's instead focus on educating the non-informed public that these are no worse and probably less lethal than your grandfather's 12 gauge or .30-30 and a whole lot more fun to shoot with a useful hunting purpose.

That's what we are trying to do, just not in this thread.

 

[Warp]

What you aren't getting, though, is that we're not saying "hide behind the term". We're saying "know the term and use it correctly."

We're not saying assault rifles are bad, either. We're just saying that the majority of gun owners in the US don't have them. It's something we're hiding behind, it's a simple fact.



That's what we are trying to do, just not in this thread.

YES! This exactly!

I fully support the legalization of Assault Rifles (select fire). I'd settle for opening up registration again for $200 (and not more!) just like suppressors. We could try to improve that later, of course.

 

[CZguy]

I make a motion to lock this thread. It is meaningless bovine flatus. Much ado about nothing. We can call our weapons/guns/rifles whatever we please. Thank you. I am not about being PC.

Just so you know it's very easy for you to unsubscribe from this thread. Just click the thread tools tab.

I for one was enjoying it.

 

[Fred Fuller]

The footpath around this particular mulberry bush is getting about deep enough at this point, I think.