|
I guess I'm confused about what there is to discuss here.
You're absolutely right - "assault weapon" doesn't have a universal meaning - or if it does, it's so basic as to be trivial and useless (e.g. "anything that can be used as a weapon to assault someone").
But we can't force anyone to stop using it, and I believe that if we push the issue too hard from a semantic angle, we come across as pedantic, and risk a backlash against *all* semiautomatics when we "get our wish", and people finally do realize that there's no fundamental difference between them.
|