Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Is there any way to fight against the spread of the term "assault weapon"?

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by Golden Hound, Jan 19, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Golden Hound

    Golden Hound Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2008
    Messages:
    778
    The use of the term "assault weapon" seems to have multiplied by orders of magnitude in the past month. It seems like the media has taken this term and run with it like never before, possibly even more than they did when the first AWB was passed and when it expired. This fictitious term, created entirely by the antis and the media, seems to have now gained mainstream acceptance even though all it really means is "guns that look scary".

    In the past, I used to try to correct people whenever they used the term. But then I feel like it was rarely used except in the context of the ban. Now it is being used constantly and everywhere.

    Is it even worth it for us to try to clarify this term in public debates and discussions, or is it a losing battle?
     
  2. BHP FAN

    BHP FAN Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2008
    Messages:
    5,810
    Location:
    Northern California
    If we can't even educate our own people on the difference between a magazine [goes in an AK, AR, etc. and a clip [goes in an SKS, Mauser pistol, etc.] then no, I doubt it.
     
  3. Romeo 33 Delta

    Romeo 33 Delta Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2011
    Messages:
    402
    Take a page out of the Left's own handbook ... just keep repeating what one is and what one is not. Do it over and over and over and over and over ... until you're sick of repeating it ... then do it until everyone's sick of it ... then do it some more.
     
  4. gc70

    gc70 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Messages:
    2,980
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Bravo! Every firearm I own is a "home defense gun."
     
  5. Drail

    Drail Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,301
    Hey, it could be worse. At least they're not calling them "mass killing psycho rifles" yet.:scrutiny:
     
  6. Texan Scott

    Texan Scott Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2012
    Messages:
    3,184
    Location:
    The Texas Hill Country
    Yup.... OWN ONE. When enough of us do, it won't be such an issue anymore.
     
  7. c1ogden

    c1ogden Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2003
    Messages:
    270
    Location:
    NJ
    I usually ask them what an assault weapon is. Nobody has ever been able to give me a proper definition. Since I retired I don't get as many opportunities to educate the public and it was impossible for them to dismiss me as just another gun nut when I was wearing my police uniform. No anti-gunnner I ever confronted has ever been able to give a correct answer to any gun control question!
     
  8. OptimusPrime

    OptimusPrime Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2012
    Messages:
    573
    Location:
    The Old Dominion
    Every time I hear someone say that, I ask them to define it. Different answers every time, even from the same people. Just keep asking for the definition and they'll stop.
     
  9. BHP FAN

    BHP FAN Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2008
    Messages:
    5,810
    Location:
    Northern California
    An "assault weapon" is capable of fully automatic fire. these have always [well, since 1934 anyway] been tightly controlled and highly regulated, and are generally not seen in civilian hands. What the media is actually talking about are ''SCARY guns''.
     
  10. joeschmoe

    joeschmoe Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2012
    Messages:
    1,291
    My recent conversation with a rabid anti;
    I told him AW were registered in 1934 and banned in 1986. What are you moving onto now? Cosmetic features again? How many people are killed by bayonets and barrel shrouds? Also why the hype about AP ammo that was banned years ago and have never been used to commit murders except on TV dramas?
    Then told him that the largest mass school shooting was virginia tech, were he used 10 round pistols, but the largest mass school killing used a homemade bomb (1935?), not a gun.
    How many guns were used on 9/11 to kill 3000 Americans? Did you ban box cutters?

    Do you care more about CT shooting because it was an AR15 or because they were suburban white kids?
    How about the 500 inner city youths killed in chicago last year? Mostly black, poor and urban, so you don't care? Mexico has a total ban on peasants with guns, yet they find 50 bodies a day in most medium sized cities. Don't care about mexican peasants either huh?

    Why do people who get caught with illegal guns get probation instead of jail in the same cities with high murder rates? Chicago, philly, detroit, DC all give probation for repeat offenders caught commiting gun crimes. Even those on probation for gun crimes, get probation for repeat offenses. Then you're surprised they have high murder rates?

    I haven't heard you complain about those issues. But I guess AR15's scare you, and your arguments are based on emotion, not facts.
    In the end it won't matter because your arguments are emotional and the fact is the government simply does not have authority to ban arms, which are protected by the 2nd Amendment. You will, and should, fail to ban the AR15. Get over it.

    No comeback.
     
  11. HorseSoldier

    HorseSoldier Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2006
    Messages:
    5,297
    Location:
    Anchorage, AK
    An "assault rifle" is partly defined by being selective fire and capable of fully automatic fire or bursts.

    An "assault weapon" is a vaguely defined term that came into being with the 1994 AWB and is basically a catch all for anything the framers of that legislation thought were guns intended primarily for crime. (And skipping any discussion of that silliness in and of itself.)

    Unfortunately, the ship sailed a long, long time ago on "assault weapon" entering the lexicon in modern American English. We may not like it, but fighting against it is about as productive as trying to correct people who say "e-mail" that the proper term is "electronic mail."

    The best route I see is not trying to fight it head on -- semantic precision usually comes across as prissy and turns audiences off. Undermine it with ridicule. There are millions of firearms out there that fall under the "assault weapons" rubric as usually defined. Given that most firearms crimes are committed with some other type of weapon, it's hard to conclude anything except that "assault weapons" are either the most poorly named products on the market, or that they are among the least successful products ever marketed. I mean, counting legally defined "fear assault," the M4 I carried downrange as a soldier assaulted the hell out of a whole lot folks, but sadly my couple ARs and other "assault weapons" back here in the US -- not one single assault, not even a fear assault. I guess some guns are lazier than others.
     
  12. jamesbeat

    jamesbeat Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2009
    Messages:
    610
    The problem is leftist media.
    They love the term 'assault weapon' because it sells news stories.
    Rational gun owners know that it is a ridiculous and misleading term, and the rest of the general public are probably smart enough to see it for what it is if it was explained to them honestly, but where is our outlet?
    How would we get this information across with the media against us?
    Social media is probably the best bet, but as the poster above stated, we have to continuously repeat it ad nauseum until enough people get it.
     
  13. 9mmforMe

    9mmforMe Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2010
    Messages:
    940
    Location:
    IN
    I would refer to the firearm in question as it is...a rifle. Its a damn rifle. And as the gentleman who posted earlier stated...use the term ad nauseum.
     
  14. Mobuck

    Mobuck member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2012
    Messages:
    285
    I would own an assault rifle if I could afford it. Since that's not going to happen, I'll have to settle for a magazine fed semi automatic sporting rifle.
    Correct the flawed terminology every chance you get and don't be subtle about it. Tell the speaker it's like calling a house cat a tiger simply because they both have claws, teeth, and a tail.
     
  15. NOMERCY-OOB

    NOMERCY-OOB Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2013
    Messages:
    3
    Location:
    western canada
    The anti gun advocates seem to be forgetting the fact that there are countless lives saved because of firearms in general , from private citizens defending their homes against invaders, military personel who defend our freedoms every day & the police who respond to situations every second of every day . Just think how these tree huggers would feel if the police responded to their home invasion call carrying nothing but plastic toy baseball bats instead of a short barreled ar 15 or mp5.. Bloody hipocrites..lets try banning scum not tools of the trade...
     
  16. BHP FAN

    BHP FAN Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2008
    Messages:
    5,810
    Location:
    Northern California
    Seems to me it's already against the law to go around killing folks.....
     
  17. Njal Thorgeirsson

    Njal Thorgeirsson Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2011
    Messages:
    234
    Location:
    Colorado, USA
    I think part of it has to do with the unfortunate fact that "AR15" has an "AR" in it- many people just assume "AR" stands for "assault rifle", thus calling similar weapons "assault weapons" doesn't seem incorrect.
     
  18. Old judge creek

    Old judge creek Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2012
    Messages:
    160
    Location:
    1881 Ranch, Nevada & California
    I am a civilian. I do not own any weapons. Weapons are what the military and police have.

    I own firearms, rifles, handguns and shotguns.
     
  19. jamesbeat

    jamesbeat Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2009
    Messages:
    610
    Gentlemen, can we please stop and think about the 'sporting use' argument?
    This is the corner that the antis are hoping to drive us into.

    They say that semiauto rifles are ok as long as they are not 'assault weapons', ie they don't have certain cosmetic military features.
    'sporting' rifles are ok, even though they are functionally identical.

    Once they have us admit that we only need rifles for sport, we lose them.
    How can you justify owning a sporting rifle when one is used in a massacre?

    Once they have us backed into the 'sporting use only' corner, a full ban is the next step.

    Don't believe me?
    Look at what happened in my homeland- the UK.

    Hunting is great, but is an incidental use of a firearm.

    I own firearms because they are the most logical means of protecting my family from people who would do them harm.
    If I can also hunt with them, that's great, but it's not my justification for owning them.
     
  20. danez71

    danez71 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    3,640
    Location:
    CAAZ

    And yet, many forum members use the same term while chastizing another for saying clip instead of mag.

    Seriously.... which term has a negative connotation in the media with the general population?

    We are sometime our own worst enemy.
     
  21. On__Target

    On__Target Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2012
    Messages:
    2
    One line of thought is to simply embrace the term "assault weapon" and argue that we have a natural right to life and thus the right to own weapons to defend our life, as recognized by the second amendment.
     
  22. MICHAEL T

    MICHAEL T Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2004
    Messages:
    6,011
    Location:
    outback Kentucky
    The assault rifle term was used in 1968 gun control act They were trying then to get rid of them . Was only a few but were all ready in their sights. By saying they serve no sporting purpose.

    Here some of LBJ remarks upon signing the 1968 act. Nothing has changed

    Congress adopted most of our recommendations. But this bill--as big as this bill is--still falls short, because we just could not get the Congress to carry out the requests we made of them. I asked for the national registration of all guns and the licensing of those who carry those guns. For the fact of life is that there are over 160 million guns in this country--more firearms than families. If guns are to be kept out of the hands of the criminal, out of the hands of the insane, and out of the hands of the irresponsible, then we just must have licensing. If the criminal with a gun is to be tracked down quickly, then we must have registration in this country.

    The voices that blocked these safeguards were not the voices of an aroused nation. They were the voices of a powerful lobby, a gun lobby, that has prevailed for the moment in an election year.

    But the key to effective crime control remains, in my judgment, effective gun control. And those of us who are really concerned about crime just must--somehow, someday--make our voices felt. We must continue to work for the day when Americans can get the full protection that every American citizen is entitled to and deserves-the kind of protection that most civilized nations have long ago adopted. We have been through a great deal of anguish these last few months and these last few years-too much anguish to forget so quickly.

    So now we must complete the task which this long needed legislation begins. We have come a long way. We have made much progress--but not nearly

    http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=29197
     
  23. jamesbeat

    jamesbeat Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2009
    Messages:
    610
    Someone who 'gets it'!

    Unsavory as it may be, firearms are our best defense against those who would harm us, our loved ones, or an innocent third party who cannot defend themselves.

    Firearms prevent murder, rape, and bodily harm.
    It has nothing to do with their suitability for hunting.

    I hope to hell I never have to fire a gun in anger, but as a parent I have a duty to own one.
    If I can kill a deer with a gun, that's handy but incidental.

    The antis can argue against the private ownership of firearms for sporting purposes, but they cannot argue against self defense.
     
  24. Sheepdog1968

    Sheepdog1968 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2009
    Messages:
    3,516
    Location:
    CA
    No there isn't. When folks say assault weapon they mean a semi auto AR or AK rifle. We know this isn't correct but when we start to argue the differences I think it doesn't cast us in the best light. This is just my opinion and I know many will disagree.
     
  25. 1911 guy

    1911 guy Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2005
    Messages:
    6,291
    Location:
    Garrettsville, Oh.
    I just ask them to define "assault weapon". When they start babbling incomrehensively, I start educating. "Assault" is a verb, not an adjective. Go from there.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page