Assault rifle

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
One of you gun nutters tell me what that actually is. I always thought any gun could be used to assault someone, but apparently I was wrong and only certain guns can assault.

What does a gun have to do to be considered "assault"?
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
What does a gun have to do to be considered "assault"?

Short Answer Black Guns ... any weapon deemed 'scary' by Media and Congress Critters


Media Contrived: Assault weapon is a term used in the United States to define some types of firearms.[1] The definition varies among regulating jurisdictions, but usually includes semi-automatic firearms with a detachable magazine and a pistol grip, and sometimes other features such as a flash suppressor or barrel shroud.[1][2] Some firearms are specified by name.[3] At the time that the now-defunct Federal Assault Weapons Ban passed in 1994, the U.S. Department of Justice said, "In general, assault weapons are semiautomatic firearms with a large magazine of ammunition that were designed and configured for rapid fire and combat use."[3] The origin of the term has been attributed to legislators, gun control groups, the media, and the firearms industry itself.[1][4][5][6] It is sometimes conflated with the term "assault rifle", which refers to selective-fire military rifles that can fire in automatic and / or burst mode.[5]

Definitions and usage

Drawing from federal and state law definitions, the term assault weapon refers primarily to semi-automatic rifles, pistols, and shotguns that are able to accept detachable magazines and possess one or more other features.[2][9][10] Some jurisdictions define revolving cylinder shotguns as assault weapons.[11][12] Legislative definitions do not include fully automatic weapons, which are regulated separately as Title II weapons under federal law.[13][n 1] A key defining law was the now-defunct Federal Assault Weapons Ban of 1994.[13] At that time, the United States Department of Justice said, "In general, assault weapons are semiautomatic firearms with a large magazine of ammunition that were designed and configured for rapid fire and combat use."[3]

Common attributes used in legislative definitions of assault weapons include:

  • Semi-automatic firearm capable of accepting a detachable magazine[10][13]
  • Folding or telescoping (collapsible) stock,[13] which reduces the overall length of the firearm[15]
  • A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon[13]
  • Bayonet lug,[13] which allows the mounting of a bayonet
  • Threaded barrel, which can accept devices such as a flash suppressor, Suppressor,[13] compensator or muzzle brake
  • Grenade launcher[13]
  • Barrel shroud, which prevents burning of shooter's arm or hand as a safety device.[citation needed]

Dictionary definitions vary from legal definitions. Dictionary.com defines "assault weapon" as "any of various automatic and semiautomatic military firearms utilizing an intermediate-power cartridge, designed for individual use."[16] Merriam-Webster's online definition is "any of various automatic or semiautomatic firearms; especially: assault rifle."[17]


Military: An assault rifle is a selective-fire rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine.[1][2][3][4][5] Assault rifles were first used during World War II.[6][7][8] Though Western nations were slow to accept the assault rifle concept, by the end of the 20th century they had become the standard weapon in most of the world's armies, replacing full-powered rifles and sub-machine guns in most roles.[8] Examples include the StG 44, AK-47 and the M16 rifle.[8]

The term assault rifle is generally attributed to Adolf Hitler, who for propaganda purposes used the German word "Sturmgewehr" (which translates to "storm rifle" or "assault rifle"), as the new name for the MP43, subsequently known as the Sturmgewehr 44 or StG 44.[6][8][9][10][11][12][13][14] However, other sources dispute that Hitler had much to do with coining the new name besides signing the production order.[15] The StG 44 is generally considered the first selective fire military rifle to popularize the assault rifle concept.[6][8] Today, the term assault rifle is used to define firearms sharing the same basic characteristics as the StG 44.[6][8]

Characteristics

The U.S. Army defines assault rifles as "short, compact, selective-fire weapons that fire a cartridge intermediate in power between submachine gun and rifle cartridges."[16] In a strict definition, a firearm must have at least the following characteristics to be considered an assault rifle:[2][3][4]

  • It must be capable of selective fire.
  • It must have an intermediate-power cartridge: more power than a pistol but less than a standard rifle or battle rifle, such as the 7.92×33mm Kurz, the 7.62x39mm and the 5.56x45mm NATO.
  • Its ammunition must be supplied from a detachable box magazine.[5]
  • It must have an effective range of at least 300 metres (330 yards).

Rifles that meet most of these criteria, but not all, are technically not assault rifles, despite frequently being called such.

For example:

  • Select-fire M2 Carbines are not assault rifles; their effective range is only 200 yards.[17]
  • Select-fire rifles such as the FN FAL battle rifle are not assault rifles; they fire full-powered rifle cartridges.
  • Semi-automatic-only rifles like the Colt AR-15 are not assault rifles; they do not have select-fire capabilities.
  • Semi-automatic-only rifles with fixed magazines like the SKS are not assault rifles; they do not have detachable box magazines and are not capable of automatic fire.

Distinction from assault weapons

The term "assault rifle" is sometimes conflated with the term "assault weapon". According to the Associated Press Stylebook, the media should differentiate between "assault rifles," which are capable of fully automatic firing, and "assault weapons," which are semiautomatic and "not synonymous with assault rifle."[90] Civilian ownership of machine guns (and assault rifles) has been tightly regulated since 1934 under the National Firearms Act and since 1986 under the Firearm Owners Protection Act.[91]
 
Last edited:

Kyle

ULTRA-F###ING-MAGA!
PREMO Member
They’re not assault weapons.

They superficially resemble the M16 and others only.
 

glhs837

Power with Control
Simple key.

Assault "Weapon" - Doesnt exist except where legally defined as a certain combination of features on a rifle that makes it look like one a soldier might carry. One trigger pull equals one bullet fired.

Assault Rifle - Military rifle capable of firing continuoulsy or in bursts when the trigger is depressed.
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Semi-automatic firearm capable of accepting a detachable magazine[10][13]

A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon[13]


So that would be the majority of handguns in America?

What would the grip have to do with anything? Because it looks scary?

What is meant by "conspicuously"?

At that time, the United States Department of Justice said, "In general, assault weapons are semiautomatic firearms with a large magazine of ammunition that were designed and configured for rapid fire and combat use."[3]

What was the exact specification for "large"? How many rounds is considered "large"?

My understanding of "assault weapon" (before the media started making up their own definition) was a machine-gun type weapon, fully automatic, sustained fire. The description above sounds like almost every gun I've ever seen at the range.
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Simple key.

Assault "Weapon" - Doesnt exist except where legally defined as a certain combination of features on a rifle that makes it look like one a soldier might carry. One trigger pull equals one bullet fired.

Assault Rifle - Military rifle capable of firing continuoulsy or in bursts when the trigger is depressed.

Thank you - that's what I was looking for. :yay:
 

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
My understanding of "assault weapon" (before the media started making up their own definition) was a machine-gun type weapon, fully automatic, sustained fire. The description above sounds like almost every gun I've ever seen at the range.

Exactly. The media and many politicians routinely use incorrect terminology, accidentally and intentionally. The one that gets me every time is their routine use of the descriptive "military" or "military style" when in fact..no military forces actually use AR-15s and clones.
 

nutz

Well-Known Member
Exactly. The media and many politicians routinely use incorrect terminology, accidentally and intentionally. The one that gets me every time is their routine use of the descriptive "military" or "military style" when in fact..no military forces actually use AR-15s and clones.

What do you expect, they all use semi-auto and automatic interchangeably :shrug:
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
Semi-automatic firearm capable of accepting a detachable magazine[10][13]

A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon[13]



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pistol_grip


1024px-Caroline-pontet-p1000527.jpg

Mosin-Nagant_M1939_-_Finland_-_AM.006968.jpg

1920px-Mosin-Nagant_karbin_m1938_Ryssland_-_AM.032891.jpg
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
We Can’t Have A Debate About Guns If Liberals Keep Lying About Them
The falsehoods or misleading statistics offered by gun-control advocates makes it virtually impossible to have a genuine discussion about violence.


It’s an endless task, but let’s just take Joe Scarborough’s Washington Post column on the Parkland shooting as an example, since he uses a couple of the most fraudulent talking points about modern gun ownership.

The former GOP congressman, who once voted to repeal the “assault weapons” ban and never once “stood up” to the boogeyman NRA when there was any political risk, tells us he’s a “reasonable” conservative who believes in the Second Amendment. “I was relieved the court confirmed that citizens have a constitutional right to possess handguns at home for the purpose of protection,” Scarborough writes about the 2008 Heller decision.

That’s nice. But while Scarborough’s exceptionally narrow definition of Heller — possess handguns at home for the purpose of protection – might be convenient for a political argument, it’s misleading. The Heller decision found that the Second Amendment was an individual right to keep and bear arms for any “lawful purpose,” not merely home protection. It found that the Second Amendment “guarantee the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation.” (Italics mine.) And it specifically struck down a portion of a DC law that required rifles and shotguns be kept “unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock.”

It is not just about home protection or “handguns.”

Scarborough then offers this paragraph:

If Trump and the NRA try to tell you it is your God-given, constitutional right to stockpile weapons of war, they are lying. But don’t take my word for it. In District of Columbia v. Heller, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia ruled that the regulation of gun ownership was compatible with the Second Amendment. That “important limitation . . . is fairly supported,” Scalia wrote, “by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of ‘dangerous and unusual weapons.’ ”

No one is stockpiling weapons of war, unless they’ve illegally gotten their hands on fully-automatic M-16s. Moreover, Scarborough takes Scalia out of context. Of course there are limitations on gun ownership — there are over 10,000 gun laws being ignored by criminals as we speak. Many of these laws ban or put severe restrictions on “dangerous and unusual weapons.”
 

BOP

Well-Known Member
One of you gun nutters tell me what that actually is. I always thought any gun could be used to assault someone, but apparently I was wrong and only certain guns can assault.

What does a gun have to do to be considered "assault"?

Why I "Need" an AR-15

https://medium.com/@jonst0kes/why-i-need-an-ar-15-832e05ae801c

No, this article is for the genuinely curious — those who assume that 5 million of their fellow Americans are not inhuman or insane, and who want to understand what set of rationales, no matter how flawed and confused they may ultimately turn out to be, could make an otherwise normal person walk out of a gun store with an “assault weapon.”
 

Merlin99

Visualize whirled peas
PREMO Member
One of you gun nutters tell me what that actually is. I always thought any gun could be used to assault someone, but apparently I was wrong and only certain guns can assault.

What does a gun have to do to be considered "assault"?

I think it was just the two scariest words they could come up with to fit the AR in AR-15.
 

Kyle

ULTRA-F###ING-MAGA!
PREMO Member
They're not assault weapon, weapon of war or any other scary thing.

Theyre Modern Muskets!


IMG_0247.jpg
 

PsyOps

Pixelated
The gun control crowd has figured out that if they can make a gun scary enough, just by sitting there, people will become afraid of it. That's the society we have today: always fearful, always offended, and overly emotional. Prey on those fears. So, call them 'assault' rifles, because the word conjured up fear. Call them 'weapons of war' because people can only view our military using such weapons.

The truth is, these are assault weapons. They are weapons of war. That's what our founders intended for the people; to be just as armed as our military in the event we have to go to war to protect our way of life against a tyrannical government. We're allowing activists to be our history teachers; omitting the importance of being well-armed. Even worse, casting a person who is well-armed as dangerous to the security of this country. We're allowing what the extreme minority does to dictate how the rest of the country should live.
 

Kyle

ULTRA-F###ING-MAGA!
PREMO Member
The gun control crowd has figured out that if they can make a gun scary enough, just by sitting there, people will become afraid of it. That's the society we have today: always fearful, always offended, and overly emotional. Prey on those fears. So, call them 'assault' rifles, because the word conjured up fear. Call them 'weapons of war' because people can only view our military using such weapons.

The truth is, these are assault weapons. They are weapons of war. That's what our founders intended for the people; to be just as armed as our military in the event we have to go to war to protect our way of life against a tyrannical government. We're allowing activists to be our history teachers; omitting the importance of being well-armed. Even worse, casting a person who is well-armed as dangerous to the security of this country. We're allowing what the extreme minority does to dictate how the rest of the country should live.
Really believe that? Try to get the military to except them instead of their M-16s, M4s and SCARs.
 
Top