The sad thing about tactical, combat, and assault is that nobody even seems to know what they mean anymore. I would add to that CQB or CQC for close quarters battle or combat. If a term gets used in a wrong manner long enough, the newer use becomes another accepted definition or valid use. Buying anything called "tactical" doesn't mean it is or that you are. As well as I understand it, tactical is all about application and as such, just about any product can be used in a tactical manner.
I am sick of hearing "one ragged hole," "tack driver," gun evaluations that are glowing that say things like "I have over 600 rounds through my gun and it has been flawless. I would not hesitate to reccomend this gun to anyone," etc. I would be more impressed with one smooth hole. No one ever drove tacks with a gun, right? As far as glowing evaluations, if the gun has less than 5000 rounds through it, it is still pretty much brand new in terms of mechanical wear and tear and so glowing reviews below that level really aren't telling us much other than the gun isn't screwed up.