The term "Modern Sporting Rifle"

[IdahoG36]

What is your opinion of the recently coined term "Modern Sporting Rifle"? My personal belief is that it was created to appease the anti gun crowds by using it in place of "assault rifle". As if by giving it a neutral, non-threatening sounding name somehow makes it ok in the eyes of some.

I know that many people mistakenly believe that the AR in AR 15 stands for assault rifle. Many people believe that "assault rifles" are evil and dangerous, when the term doesn't even apply to semi-auto military style rifles available for civilian purchase. This has led to the creation and use of MSR to describe modern, magazine fed, military style rifles.

Out of curiosity, I wanted to poll my fellow TFL members and see what the general opinion is for the term Modern Sporting Rifle. I feel it is a term that was created to try and be politically correct, which is why I don't like it and don't use it. What's next? Will Glocks and M&Ps become Modern Sporting Pistols?

If a rifle is capable of firing, ejecting, and loading another cartridge with a single pull of the trigger; it is simply a semi automatic rifle regardless of configuration.

Now I fully understand that with the political climate being what it is, and the uneducated general public's perception of these types of rifles, flying under the radar can be a good thing. But to those of us that know better, it just looks like a weak attempt to be politically correct.

[emcon5]

My personal belief is that it was created to appease the anti gun crowds by using it in place of "assault rifle". As if by giving it a neutral, non-threatening sounding name somehow makes it ok in the eyes of some.

Assault Rifle is a term for a military select fire weapon.

I think it is a more accurate name than the scary "Assault Weapon" tag coined by the anti-gun asshats. Calling the guns what the anti's call them gives them credibility.

[turtlehead]

You mean America's Rifle?

That's what I say.

[kilimanjaro]

The term is a feeble attempt at reclaiming the language of gun control. We should call them what they are: self-loading rifles, or semi-automatic rifles. When someone calls our guns 'assault rifles', tell them they have confused millions of law-abiding citizens with insane killers. They need to address their concerns to those people, not the entire country.

[Pathfinder45]

MSR: It's a vague term that only has definite meaning in the context of how it is used. A model 70 Winchester is a modern sporting rifle. An antique rifle that was used in the Creedmoor matches of the 1870's is not a modern sporting rifle, even though it once was. A military rifle is not a modern sporting rifle until it gets used as such, and then it is. When I hear that term, I don't even think of the AR genre of rifles, probably because my interests lie elsewhere. I'm one who did think that AR stood for Assault Rifle. If that's not correct, perhaps someone could enlighten me.

[Blindstitch]

AR means Armalite the company who made them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ArmaLite

It's like in some circles I hear people talk about the BAR. The Browning Assault Rifle. And then I have to correct them that it's the Browning Automatic Rifle.

[Rattlehead]

I'm not a fan of people dancing around their words. That said, I think it's more appropriate than "assault rifles/weapons"...

[Brit]

Terminology is a little strange, how you describe something can make it sound harmless, or dangerous, or even scary.

Different armies carried a Belgian made 7.62X51 rifle the Brits (I am one of them) called it a SLR (Self Loading Rifle) press the trigger, one round fired, reloading mechanism came into play, till it was empty.

Worked pretty well, heavy!

It did not do anything automatically, nothing! You know it did not even load itself either! That would make one think of some huge mechanism, all on it's own working away, no one near it? It did not do that.

We need a huge media Blitz, An ASSAULT RIFLE, IS A MILITARY WEAPON, CAN NOT BE OWNED BY CITIZENS, EXCEPT IN SWITZERLAND They Have a Citizen Army. A definition of what an assault rifle is? It is a select fire rifle, with a selector switch, that converts said Rifle to full auto mode, we sports shooters can not go to the local gun store, and purchase one of those!

You want to give this Rifle? for instance a name, how about what the company puts on the box? The model Number. Whatever.

[kcub]

I don't like terms like "modern" for any reason because it's relative. Everything modern will someday be outdated. Bolt action rifles were once modern, now it's debatable. Most state hunting laws consider modern weapons to be anything that's not a muzzle loader which means it could be an 1860 Henry rifle as far as they're concerned. Back in the 1960s people used the contraction "mod" for modern. It's not quite so mod anymore.

I get tired of people who endlessly argue the minutiae of semantics as though they were substantive. Even when technically right they're really just splitting hairs.

[Johannes_Paulsen]

"Modern sporting rifle" is too much of a mouthful.

"Sporting rifle" probably would do just fine.

Or even just "rifle".

[Blindstitch]

My wife doesn't like the term BLACK rifle in the media and wonders if it would have the same validity if it was PINK rifles.

[Guv]

I like Brit's answer on this.
In the 50's were Garand's and M1 Carbine's called assault rifles? I know of a few feral hogs that would have called my 444 an "assault rifle".

[rickyrick]

It is our attempt at pacifying anti-gun groups by sugar-coating.... never a great policy... shows that you are giving in.

[emcon5]

It is our attempt at pacifying anti-gun groups by sugar-coating.... never a great policy... shows that you are giving in.

No, it is an attempt to counter the emotion laden "Assault Weapon"name coined by the anti-gunners to try and convince the uneducated masses that these guns are military weapons.

"Modern Sporting Rifle" is a mouthful, but it is better than the old one, "Military Pattern semi-automatic rifle"

[Glenn E. Meyer]

We discussed this quite a bit. Rickyrick and I have commented repeatedly that this is an surrender to PC for various reasons.

I have also cited antigun sources (like the NYTimes) that have analyzed the MSR argument and made light of it, convincingly.

1. If you buy into it - you are arguing the gun is a sporting toy or for hunting. That is not protected by the 2nd Amend.

2. If you say it is for hunting - you don't need the 30 round mags.

3. It has an implicit attack on NFA guns. Look it is not a machine gun! So let me have it.

a. Thus, full auto is bad!

b. If you see competitors with that platform, they shoot so quickly that the uninformed public will not think it is a nice gun.

-- You can compete with airsoft if you want to play a gun game.

c. It's semi auto - it's nice! Gen. Patton - the 8 shot Garand is the finest battle rifle, etc. So a 30 round semi is not a gun that can be used in battle.

4. The vast majority of gun bought never see a match or a hunt. They are bought for SD.

The Australians and in the UK - the gun defense was that the guns were for sport. That didn't work. Australia is sliding down the slippery slope with more types banned.

5. The semis and full look identical. Many departments only issue semis. It looks like and is used as a lethal weapon.

Lethal weapons are protected by the 2nd Amend. Toys and sporting instruments are not. They are protected for their lethal intent for SD, protection against tyranny and foreign invasion. Toys and bowling bowls don't do this.

You cannot wish away their lethality. Recent state laws and lower court decisions are buying into the fact that banning them constitutes a reasonable restriction. SCOTUS won't go near it and it could get worse with a new court.

By going MSR - why allow them? You can hunt with a bolt action gun. They are too dangerous for the small number of carbine or three gun competitiors out there.

It is only in the gun world that folks think you can change the emotional valence of the gun through the name change. It is not a good advertising ploy and will fool only fools.

The support for an AWB is dropping because folks see the need for a lethal gun and not a toy.

[zukiphile]

Originally Posted by Johannes_Paulsen

Or even just "rifle".

Indeed.

Originally Posted by Blindstitch

My wife doesn't like the term BLACK rifle in the media and wonders if it would have the same validity if it was PINK rifles.

Black rifles matter.

Originally Posted by Glenn E. Meyer

It is not a good advertising ploy and will fool only fools.

Given the quality of journalism on these issues and the 94 AWB, fooling the fools seems to have sufficed.

[gyvel]

Different armies carried a Belgian made 7.62X51 rifle the Brits (I am one of them) called it a SLR (Self Loading Rifle) press the trigger, one round fired, reloading mechanism came into play, till it was empty.

I believe the L1A1s were originally issued as select fire weapons then later modified by HM government to semi auto only. FA fire was found to be relatively ineffective and definitely wasteful of ammunition.

[wogpotter]

Its a rifle. Just like any other rifle.

[zukiphile]

Its a rifle. Just like any other rifle.

I thought that was the Stg 44.

[44 AMP]

Adolph Hitler coined the term Stumgewehr. This is usually translated into English as "assault rifle". It could also be translated as "storm rifle" (as in a military assault, storming an objective.

It is has the capacity for full auto fire, which is very useful for a military assault. The select fire capability (semi or full auto) has been THE defining feature of the assault rifle since it's creation.

Half a century later, the gun banners focused on the semi auto look alike rifles, and tried to call them assault rifles. When they were informed that they could not be assault rifles, because they were semi auto NOT selective fire, they anti's came up with the phrase assault weapon.

Add into this mix those people who simply did not have enough of an understanding of English, and chose to focus on the use of the weapon to define its nomenclature, thus any weapon used to assault someone was to them, an assault weapon.

Blend together the proper use of terms, outright lies, and misinformed and under informed slang use and today every military looking rifle is an "assault rifle" to someone.

Hitler was a big supporter of the Volkswagen, too. But very, very few people who own them in the USA are Nazis.

Modern Sporting Rifle is a bow and scrape attempt to make the people who hate us like us a little more...

In my book, it fails on every account.

[Unlicensed Dremel]

The proper term is:

***HOMELAND DEFENSE RIFLE***

[Regular Joe]

To me, the term "MSR" defines the gun as a popular firearm that doesn't require some qualifying purpose. "Sporting" could mean competitive events, but it more commonly means "what I like to take out to the desert to blow stuff up".
I wore out my first AR upper just playing around with different hand loads, shooting at paper. That upper never appeared at any "real" gun range, and neither did it ever shoot more than maybe 50 rounds of factory loaded ammo.
My trio of Ruger 10/.22's are "MSR's" as well. I use them for almost exactly the same thing as I use my AR's for.
I have no problem at all with calling all of my long guns "MSR's", because that's what they are to me. To me, that's more appropriate than calling any of them "weapons", because that's not what I use them for. My rifles have not been used as weapons, any more than any knife, or blunt instrument, or flame producing article in my possession have been used as weapons, though they all have that potential.

[Pond, James Pond]

I just call it a semi-automatic. It applies to a pistol or a rifle where one shot fired prepares the next to be fired if the trigger is pressed again.

When someone says its a military rifle. I tell them "No,it isn't".

When someone says it looks like a military rifle I tell them "So what?".

I then ask them if anyone driving a Land Rover, a Hummer H2 or one of those boxy Mercedes Benz 4x4s is driving a military vehicle? The answer is usually "no, but...", at which I swiftly and deftly interrupt with "Precisely! I rest my case!" and walk away.

[Panfisher]

While I do like the term Modern Defense Rifle and a couple of others, in the end it simply makes no difference whatsoever what we decide to call them. Unless we all quit our jobs and become writers for mainstream media it will never change from Assault Rifle to anything else.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

My rifles have not been used as weapons, any more than any knife, or blunt instrument, or flame producing article in my possession have been used as weapons, though they all have that potential.

However, the blunt instrument, flame producing article and knife are not constitutionally protected for their role in SD, protecting against tyranny and foreign invasion.

That you want to play gun games with yours is irrelevant to the argument.

There is process called concept formation and part is the core identity of the object. The core identity of the EBR is as a weapon to the vast majority of folks and that core concept is the reason for its protection. That is not true for most knives, blunt instruments or firestarters. Their use as weapons is secondary.

The sporting or game use of the EBR is secondary. In fact, the organized sporting use (as compared to shooting a rock at the ranch) are derivatives of training to use lethal force.

That's why MSR is stupid as a defense to keeping a very dangerous item.