|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
July 8, 2016, 09:42 AM | #1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 22, 2016
Posts: 2,192
|
I think I liked the term assault rifle better
In the many discussions about gun control the term assault weapon seems to have been at the forefront. While we liked to argue about the proper or improper use of that term we all knew what we were talking about. That "evil black rifle" with the detachable magazine.
In his recent response President Obama used the term "powerful weapons" I think I liked the use of the term "assault rifle" better |
July 8, 2016, 09:53 AM | #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 23, 2009
Posts: 3,963
|
Is there a 'low-powered assault rifle'?
Are there 'non-powerful weapons'? Conditioning by the use of pejorative words has been around for a long time. When a scoped deer rifle becomes a 'high-powered sniper rifle' in the media, the war of words is already lost. |
July 8, 2016, 10:05 AM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 29, 2010
Location: The ATL (OTP)
Posts: 3,946
|
I’m sure the use of “powerful weapon” is being used to condition the American people for an expansion of the number weapons these folks want to ban. I’m sure they already feel it’s just a matter of time until purchasing an AR style rifle is made illegal, so time to expand the list to include other items.
__________________
A major source of objection to a free economy is precisely that it ... gives people what they want instead of what a particular group thinks they ought to want. Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman |
July 8, 2016, 11:39 AM | #4 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,059
|
Quote:
They know that, by defining the terms, they can steer the debate.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
July 8, 2016, 01:38 PM | #5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 10, 2004
Location: Tioga co. PA
Posts: 2,647
|
The term "Assault Rifle" is well defined as a Select Fire rifle of intermediate caliber. Assault weapon not well defined. that is why the definition in law, state to state varies greatly. Mostly they cover ergonomic features not the actual internal workings of the rifle. I just bought an M1A rifle. I don't know if any state has an out right ban on the M1A. My state doesn't have any sort of AWB not that the anti gun crowd doesn't keep trying.
As an addition as most know the AR15 and the like fire a 5.56 caliber bullet ( .223 in the civilian world, where the M1A uses a 7.62 bullet (.308). In the hunting world the cartridge used in the AR15 is commonly used as a varmint round and the .308 is used on game deer size. IMNSHO calling the 5.56 "Powerful" is a misnomer.
__________________
USNRET '61-'81 |
July 8, 2016, 01:42 PM | #6 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,059
|
Quote:
In political terms, the antis have turned it into a blanket term that pretty much covers whatever firearm they want to demonize.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
July 8, 2016, 01:47 PM | #7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 15, 2010
Posts: 8,236
|
I do get a chuckle when they call the ar15 a powerful weapon with a powerful military cartridge. It's kinda ironic because gun lowers everywhere bash the 5.56 for lack of power.
|
July 8, 2016, 01:58 PM | #8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 22, 2016
Posts: 2,192
|
I did not see the entirety of the statement. What concerns me is we have changed from "assault weapon" to "powerful weapon". We can argue the technical merits of "assault rifle" all day but it seems that various laws have defined it and that definition was relatively narrow. "Powerful weapon" is a MUCH broader term that covers a much broader amount of firearms.
|
July 8, 2016, 02:17 PM | #9 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 16, 2006
Location: IOWA
Posts: 8,783
|
AR-Types works for me.
I feel that one should first be relatively knowledgeable about what they are talking about. Assault Rifle in one of those terms that get misused. ...
I first heard the term "Heavy-Weapons" as well as High-Power weapons, use by O'Reilly. It's obvious that our president is watching Bill. Neither one knows what he is talking abut when it comes to these statements. O'Reilly had admitted that he knows nothing abut rifles and it shows. Our president should admit the same. Lots of luck with that one. .... Be Safe !!!
__________________
'Fundamental truths' are easy to recognize because they are verified daily through simple observation and thus, require no testing. |
July 8, 2016, 02:37 PM | #10 | |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,820
|
Quote:
To be precise, Assault Rifle is a technical term used in the shooting community, defined as "select fire, intermediate power cartridge", etc. The origin of the term comes from the German Sturmgewehr, fielded in the last couple years of WWII. Before all the hysteria began, the shooting community itself was rather lax in applying the term, and often used it tongue in cheek referring to semi auto military lookalikes. Assault Weapon is a term coined in the early 90s, during the run up to the 94AWB. It was created by the anti gunners, because we kept pointing out how they were in ERROR using the term "assault rifle". There is no definition if Federal Law for "assault rifle", because under the law, they are machineguns, and referred to as such. ASSAULT WEAPON became defined in law in the 94 AWB, and those state laws that generally copied it. Assault WEAPONS are semi autos, with certain cosmetic features. Rifles, pistols and shotguns. Because people are sloppy in their use of language, (or are deliberately misleading) a firearm that is a rifle, and fits the law's description of an assault weapon, gets called an "assault rifle", inaccurately. And now we have come full circle. "Powerful weapon" is indeed ominous sounding. And it is ANYTHING they choose it to be. The observed "standard" for use of that term, in the journalistic (and political) community for many decades has been anything more powerful than a .22LR is a "powerful weapon". Its their default setting. A centerfire rifle is a "powerful weapon". Period, end of information, that's all the public needs to know. Everybody's deer rifle is a powerful weapon. The AR round is a powerful weapon (after all, the military uses it), etc. What we know as correct, doesn't matter to them. Their standards are not our standards. And, they WANT to frighten people.....
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
|
July 8, 2016, 02:49 PM | #11 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 22, 2016
Posts: 2,192
|
Quote:
|
|
July 8, 2016, 03:16 PM | #12 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 7,523
|
I'm willing to give the POTUS the benefit of the doubt on the "powerful weapons" thing; keep in mind that the press conference was apparently broadcast in the early morning on Friday when the events in Dallas were still unfolding, and it may have been unclear at the time that an "assault thingy" was being used.
I'll reserve judgment until we see whether the term reappears in the press and/or political speeches. Back to the broader topic... Quote:
__________________
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak Last edited by carguychris; July 8, 2016 at 03:25 PM. Reason: Had terms backwards! |
|
July 8, 2016, 03:22 PM | #13 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 22, 2016
Posts: 2,192
|
Quote:
The other is a concern that the conversation is shifting away from "assault weapons" to a much much broader category. |
|
July 8, 2016, 03:54 PM | #14 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 6, 2013
Location: SW IN
Posts: 438
|
446 that is a reason that the papers raise so much hell about AW they do not know what one is and people that do not know jest gives them fuel for the fire!! So don,t call it what it is NOT. I call my 223 by the maker name Bushmaster Arma Lite and so on
__________________
Man that likes guns. Navy. USS Ponchatoula AO 148 USS Vesuvius AE 15 |
July 8, 2016, 04:42 PM | #15 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,460
|
Quote:
Not long ago I began looking into the paradox of .223 rifles commonly being referred to by the media and the gun grabber politicians as "high powered" "military" rifles, yet many states think the .223 round isn't powerful enough to kill deer humanely. I started a thread to try to nail down how many states are in that camp: http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=577425 The thread was closed when the discussion wandered off topic and became too political, but the question was answered. Fourteen states do not allow .223 caliber centerfire ammo for hunting deer. Of course, we don't know just why they don't allow it (and I doubt they all have the same reason(s)), but the fact is that fourteen states don't allow it for hunting deer. To me that argues persuasively against it's being a "high powered" cartridge. Another very popular "assault weapon" cartridge is the 7.62x39 (AK-47). It's bigger in diameter, but in terms of ballistics IIRC isn't it roughly comparable to the good old .30-30 ("thutty thutty")? The .30-30 is a centerfire cartridge and most (but not all) states allow it for hunting deer, but it's not generally considered to be a "high powered" cartridge. |
|
July 8, 2016, 05:01 PM | #16 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 9, 2007
Posts: 1,119
|
All powerful weapons hold high capacity clips.
|
July 8, 2016, 05:21 PM | #17 |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,820
|
The news is now reporting that the suspect that was killed (by a robot BOMB!) had an SKS "semi automatic assault weapon" and a handgun.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
July 8, 2016, 07:29 PM | #18 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 18, 2013
Location: Albany Park, Chicago
Posts: 776
|
Not even Chicago lists the SKS as an "assault weapon" lol.
|
July 8, 2016, 07:33 PM | #19 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,059
|
Quote:
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
July 8, 2016, 08:14 PM | #20 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 24, 2001
Location: Down East in NC
Posts: 220
|
Quote:
|
|
July 8, 2016, 08:34 PM | #21 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 15, 2010
Posts: 8,236
|
Get accustomed to it. The image of assault weapons (semi auto) will keep getting portrayed in a negative light until they are banned. Once they get the right mix in the legislature and a tragedy perfectly timed, the ban will happen.
In the meantime, states and cities will fall to bans. |
July 11, 2016, 02:46 PM | #22 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 22, 2012
Location: Marriottsville, Maryland
Posts: 1,739
|
I heard it was Fox's News fault, in reporting the Dallas shooter had a SKS rifle...when in fact --- It was a SAIGA AK-74 Carbine in 5.45x39, with what looked like to me {picture of the AK-74 lying on the bomb debris} was some sort of red dot scope mounted atop a picatinny rail on the dust cover.
I own a SAIGA AK-74 myself. I wonder if the Dallas shooter used "poison pill" 7N6 ammo?
__________________
That rifle hanging on the wall of the working class flat or labourer's cottage is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." --- George Orwell |
July 11, 2016, 04:13 PM | #23 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 21, 1998
Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 4,307
|
The gun folks who concentrate on how semi-auto, magazine fed rifles are labeled are doing no-one any good. It does not matter what you call it, it matters what it is. Anti-gunners (most of whom are liberals and use the liberal playbook) don't want to argue the actual facts and instead argue ancillary issues, strawman tactics, etc.
When the gun lobby falls for it and argues terminology instead of substance, we lose. Some might disagree, but it looks pretty clear to me. |
July 11, 2016, 06:23 PM | #24 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 6, 2008
Location: Northeast Colorado
Posts: 1,993
|
Engaging in an argument about proper terminology when discussing incidents like the Dallas policemen being killed by a deranged wingnut with a semi-auto rifle just derails the conversation. Instead of becoming more meaningful, the terminology topic is not useful to anyone interested in what is happening to our citizens. News media anchors and reporters either create rhetoric on the fly or are fed talking points created by writers that usually don't know cow feces from wild honey.
|
July 11, 2016, 07:20 PM | #25 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 23, 2001
Posts: 1,552
|
Sugarmann Again?
Cut from NSSF page...
Quote:
__________________
A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government." - George Washington, January 8, 1790, First State of the Union Address |
|
|
|