Abraham Lincoln famously asked in a debate:
"How many legs does a dog have, if we call it's tail a leg?"
After some heming and hawing by his opponent, he spoke up and said:
"It has four legs, because no matter what we call its tail, a tail is not a leg".
And similarly, a Garand is not and never will be an assault rifle no matter what we call it's tail...
A Garand is a Service Rifle
, correctly defined in it's subgrouping as a Battle Rifle
*no matter how it's configured*. If it were full auto .30-06 and had a removable magazine (such as certain pre-M-14 prototypes were set up), it would correctly be called an "Automatic Rifle
". Didn't Mr. Browning design one of those critters in about 1918?
Anything of full size caliber
fails to meet *any* definition of an assault rifle, as defined by anyone with any working knowlage of firearms.
Let's not fall into the nomenclatural traps set forth by our enemies.