What Makes a Gun an Assault Weapon?

[SecularMotion]

Aside from questions about whether a new assault-weapons ban can be passed (probably not), the post-Newtown push for stricter gun control has sparked debate about what an "assault weapon" even is. Some argue that it's just a scary term concocted by gun-control advocates, but according to the New York Times, the term "assault rifle" was first used to describe a weapon produced by the Nazis, and decades later it was adopted by the firearms industry to sell guns modeled after new military rifles. However, it's true that the practical definition of an assault weapon is determined by lawmakers; with the new legislation before Congress, it could change again. For those whose gun knowledge starts at James Bond movies and ends at watching roommates play Call of Duty, here's a primer.

President Obama has called on Congress to reinstate the 1994 assault-weapons ban, which expired in 2004. Last week a group of congressional Democrats, led by Senator Dianne Feinstein and Representative Carolyn McCarthy, introduced the Assault Weapons Ban of 2013.

[center][/center]

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/01/what-makes-a-gun-an-assault-weapon.html

Assault Weapons Ban of 2013

Mass shootings in Newtown, Aurora, and Tucson have demonstrated all too clearly the need to regulate military-style assault weapons and high capacity ammunition magazines. These weapons allow a gunman to fire a large number of rounds quickly and without having to reload.
What the bill does:

The legislation bans the sale, transfer, manufacturing and importation of:

• All semiautomatic rifles that can accept a detachable magazine and have at least one military feature: pistol grip; forward grip; folding, telescoping, or detachable stock; grenade launcher or rocket launcher; barrel shroud; or threaded barrel.
  
• All semiautomatic pistols that can accept a detachable magazine and have at least one military feature: threaded barrel; second pistol grip; barrel shroud; capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip; or semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm.
  
• All semiautomatic rifles and handguns that have a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.
  
• All semiautomatic shotguns that have a folding, telescoping, or detachable stock; pistol grip; fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 5 rounds; ability to accept a detachable magazine; forward grip; grenade launcher or rocket launcher; or shotgun with a revolving cylinder.
  
• All ammunition feeding devices (magazines, strips, and drums) capable of accepting more than 10 rounds.
  
• 157 specifically-named firearms (listed at the end of this page).
  

The legislation excludes the following weapons from the bill:

• Any weapon that is lawfully possessed at the date of the bill’s enactment;
  
• Any firearm manually operated by a bolt, pump, lever or slide action;
  
• Assault weapons used by military, law enforcement, and retired law enforcement; and
  
• Antique weapons.
  

Assault Weapons Ban of 2013

[onehandle]

1. Down the road, guns, clips, and ammo will be 'well regulated' based on performance.

Count on it.

[kwolf68]

2. Assault

is supposed to mean fully automatic. These are not illegal, but heavily regulated. And almost no crimes are committed with them, because of this regulation and the cost of said guns.

We ALREADY have gun control. Been on the books for 70 whatever years now. I am now CHALLENGING my Facebook friends to ask for the removal of these controls and M50 machine guns should now be sold in WalMart.

[jmg257]

8. "Assault is supposed to mean fully automatic". Says who?

Not Gun Digest when they wrote a book about them in in 1986.

Included all kinds of semiautos...AR-180, AUG, Uzi, SAR-48, .22 AK, Daewoos...

ya know - all those great semiauto "Assault Weapons"

[kwolf68]

13. Maybe I am thinking of "assault rifle"

I do know the term exists and THOUGHT it had that meaning, though in looking it up just now definitions are all over the map.

I do not deny it is used by gun control advocates as a form of propaganda. Just calling it "a gun" isn't good enough.

Disclaimer: I am in total support of gun control and am actually quite sick of the gun fetish native to our nation.

[jmg257]

20. You are right about "assault rifle", and it typically being distinguishable from "assault weapon"

but these days those terms are getting muddied, possibly innocently, but especially by anyone with an agenda.

[Paladin]

21. Back Then, Military-Style Semi-Autos Were Openly Marketed As "Assault Rifles"

A fact that our Gun Enthusiast types do their best to conceal.

Like I keep saying, I see no reason for a firearm to have to adhere to a narrow, Wayne LaPierre/Ted Nugent-approved definition to be considered an "assault rifle." The gun militants are attempting to control the vocabulary and thus the argument. I see no reason to continue that practice, post-Sandy Hook.....

[Deep13]

102. Anyone who has participated in a military assault...

...in the last 50 years.

[Bandit]

22. I can tell you have NEVER been anywhere near a real assault

NO ONE uses their rifle in the full auto mode when engaged in an assault. Do you know how long it takes to burn through your 300 rounds if you fired in full auto mode. When engaged in Combat you try and preserve your ammo the best you can because you have no idea when you will be resupplied....An assault weapon is one that is light weight and has rapid fire capabilities. An M-60 machine gun can be considered an assault weapon and so can an M-1 Carbine....It is what you can carry easily and put out a lot of suppressive fire power. that is the reality no matter what "official" NRA people say it is...It is all about accurate suppressive fire power and semi auto rifles fill that bill if they have detachable magazines..

[11 Bravo]

87. Yup, three-round bursts are what we were taught. You might go full-balls rock and roll ...

during a mad minute, but that was only inside the wire and only when you had a shit load of ammo on hand.

[Motown_Johnny]

24. Wrong. Assault means military style. Fully automatic means nothing.

You can switch these weapons from fully auto to semi auto. They do not cease to be assault weapons when in semi automatic mode.

The fact that you need to lie to support your point of view is proof that you are wrong on this issue.

[jmg257]

25. Can you clarify this? Assault RIFLE - traditionally has select fire.

Assault Weapon, typically and as codified in numerous bans is semiauto only.

is that what you meant?

[Motown_Johnny]

27. Yes

My point being that when an assault rifle is not in fully automatic it is still an assault rifle. The idea that a weapon that is semi automatic can't be an assault weapon is ludicrous.

[Recursion]

35. Legally, no gun can ever be both an "assault weapon" and an "assault rifle"

If it's capable of selective fire, it's an assault rifle. If it's not, it may or may not be an assault weapon, but cannot be an assault rifle.

[Motown_Johnny]

42. .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_weapon

^snip^

The Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act of 1994, more commonly known as the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, expired after ten years in 2004. It banned the manufacture or importation of certain semi-automatic firearms that it defined as assault weapons. Any firearms so defined that were already possessed at the time the law took effect were grandfathered in, and could be legally owned or transferred. The law also banned the manufacture or importation of magazines that could hold more than ten rounds of ammunition, with existing magazines grandfathered in as legal.[2]

The Federal Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 defined certain firearms as assault weapons based on the features they possessed. This included semi-automatic rifles with a detachable magazine and at least two of these features: a pistol grip, a folding or telescoping stock, a flash suppressor or threaded barrel, a bayonet mount, or a muzzle-mounted grenade launcher. It also included semi-automatic pistols with a detachable magazine and at least two of these features: a magazine that attaches outside the pistol grip, a threaded barrel, a barrel shroud, or an unloaded weight of 50 ounces or more. Additionally defined as assault weapons were semi-automatic shotguns with a rotating cylinder, or with at least two of these features: a pistol grip, a folding or telescoping stock, a detachable magazine, or a fixed magazine that can hold more than five rounds.[2][15]

The ban also prohibited 19 specifically named models of firearms, as well as copies of those guns. These included the AK-47, Uzi, Galil, AR-15, FN FAL, MAC-10, Steyr AUG, TEC-9, and Armsel Striker.[2][15]



At this point we may just be playing word games but it seems to me that the rifles being classified as an assault weapon under the ban are assault rifles.

[Recursion]

43. Yes, that's what I said

A semi-automatic weapon may be an assault weapon, and cannot be an assault rifle.

[Motown_Johnny]

45. I'm confused.

So you are saying that the assault rifle ceases to be an assault rifle once it is classified as an assault weapon?


That just seems like a word game to me.

[Recursion]

47. No. I'm saying it has to be capable of automatic fire to be an assault rifle. Here's a Venn diagram.

Any weapon capable of automatic fire is legally considered "automatic", even if it has a semi-automatic mode it can also fire in: the weapon is classified at its fastest possible mode of operations.

Assault weapons are all semi-automatic. Nothing that is legally an assault weapon is capable of automatic fire, period. So nothing that is legally an assault weapon can be an assault rifle. Here's a Venn Diagram:



My Venn diagram aesthetic skills clearly need some work, but there you go.

[Motown_Johnny]

88. That is crazy

The "gun" is still a rifle, and still a weapon.

The thing does not stop being a rifle because it is semi auto.

[Recursion]

89. Of course it's crazy. Our gun laws are not sane.

My post was meant as a description, not endorsement, of the laws.

[X_Digger]

94. Yes, rifles can be full auto or semi, "assault weapons" or not, and some pistols can also be "AW"s

But as a descriptive demonstration of the difference between "assault rifle" and "assault weapon", it's accurate.

All "assault weapons" are semi-automatic, but not all semi-automatics are "assault weapons". Similarly all "assault rifles" are full auto, but not all full auto firearms are "assault rifles".

[X_Digger]

95. This help any?

[Recursion]

96. Thank you

Is there an API for that? Or just knowing how to use The Gimp/Photoshop?

[X_Digger]

98. Just threw it together in photoshop..

Let me know if you think it needs revision, I saved the psd.

[Recursion]

99. Just as a former topology grad student, "full auto" should be contiguous and include some shotguns

With spheres rather than circles that could be done.

But, yes, absolutely right.

[X_Digger]

100. Yeah, hard to do in 2d.. also nevermind DDs & SBRs, 'cane' guns, etc etc.

I would model it in bryce 4, and do a cutaway / fly through animation, but that's going a bit far, lol.

[slackmaster]

3. The part labelled "Barrel shroud" is actually a handguard or forestock

A part that has existed on every long gun that has ever made, going back centuries.





A "barrel shroud" sometimes called "That shoulder thing that goes up" is a ventilated metal heat shield found some fully automatic machine guns and a few handguns. Its purpose is to protect the user from getting burned by the barrel.

A pistol grip is merely an ergonomic item that gives the user a more comfortable and secure, therefore safer, grip on the weapon.

A collapsible stock allows the shooter to adjust the length of the rifle for a proper fit. It also provides for storage in smaller spaces. Neither that nor the pistol grip make the weapon any more dangerous.

[Animal Chin]

9. Have to disagree with you about collapsible stocks

They are one of the "military" features that I do think goes beyond cosmetic, because they make a rifle more concealable.

[slackmaster]

11. A person would have to be pretty big and wear very loose clothing to conceal any rifle

[librabear]

15. They also make it fit multiple people

Like a small woman and a larger man that may want to shoot the same rifle.

[X_Digger]

26. 4" difference makes it concealable?!?

36" = fine, but 32" = concealable?

That's quite a stretch (of more than 4&quot .

[jmg257]

10. You might want to read the Bill...

‘‘(38) The term ‘barrel shroud’—
16 ‘‘(A) means a shroud that is attached to, or
17 partially or completely encircles, the barrel of a fire
18 arm so that the shroud protects the user of the fire
19 arm from heat generated by the barrel; and
20 ‘‘(B) does not include—
21 ‘‘(i) a slide that partially or completely en
22 closes the barrel; or
23 ‘‘(ii) an extension of the stock along the
24 bottom of the barrel which does not encircle or
25 substantially encircle the barrel.


Sure sounds like the handguards on that AR to me.

[slackmaster]

17. Further proof that the bill is mindless and probably not written with any intention of passing

A rifle of any kind without something to protect the shooter's off hand would be useless.

[Hangingon]

46. How long do you think it will take?

To design the "work around" for that?

[jmg257]

48. Not sure - but this part should make it a little harder...

‘‘(H) All of the following rifles, copies, dupli
20 cates, variants, or altered facsimiles with the capa
21 bility of any such weapon thereof:

[Recursion]

54. '94 ban had that too

ATF had to rule that it couldn't literally mean that, because that would ban every firearm made in the past 100 years.

[jmg257]

58. Ahh - I thought they used..

"any of the firearms, or copies or duplicates"

Not sure if that matters.

[GreenStormCloud]

77. Too vague. Law has to be precise. N/T

[montanto]

4. The part labeled "suppressor"

is a "flash suppressor," not to be confused with a noise suppressor or "silencer" as some would say.

[slackmaster]

5. Yes, and the purpose of a flash suppressor is to deflect the flash out of the shooter's field...

...of vision to prevent temporary blindness. It doesn't do anything to make the weapon more dangerous.

[librabear]

12. Correct

And a silencer keeps people from going deaf. It makes a big gun sound like a smaller gun, not silent.

[quakerboy]

112. What is the purpose of that?

Ive never shot a gun that blinded me. Under what circumstances does that become an issue?

[slackmaster]

113. When the combination of firearm and ammunition produce a brilliant flash at the muzzle

Try shooting an M44 Mosin-Nagant bolt-action rifle with surplus standard ball ammunition some time.

[iiibbb]

6. by definition capable of automatic fire = assault rifle

assault weapons is a not a technical term

[jmg257]

16. But it does describe a class of weapons.

Originally semiauto versions of select-fire military arms.

[iiibbb]

19. the class is arbitrary

guns that are mechanically identical are not in the class

[jmg257]

23. As codified in law - yes - I agree. But not as likely orginally used.

I think it would have been a stretch for Gun Digest to place a traditional ranch-style Mini-14 or 7400 in with an AUG or AR.

[Animal Chin]

7. Barrel Shroud

It's annoying when the pro-gun folks claim that any factual error or lack of knowledge about a gun disqualifies you from having an opinion about them.

But it also annoying when the press makes these kind of mistakes because they are easy to avoid (i.e., basic fact checking).

I may be wrong, but that's not what I would consider a barrel shroud.

[jmg257]

14. Doesn't matter what you think a barrel shroud is...only what Feinstein says it is...

‘‘(38) The term ‘barrel shroud’—
16 ‘‘(A) means a shroud that is attached to, or
17 partially or completely encircles, the barrel of a fire
18 arm so that the shroud protects the user of the fire
19 arm from heat generated by the barrel; and
20 ‘‘(B) does not include—
21 ‘‘(i) a slide that partially or completely en
22 closes the barrel; or
23 ‘‘(ii) an extension of the stock along the
24 bottom of the barrel which does not encircle or
25 substantially encircle the barrel.

Sounds like those AR handguards to me.

[librabear]

18. I see a big list of cosmetic features.

None of those items listed make a rifle more dangerous.

[JoePhilly]

28. How many people can you kill with it within a 20 foot radius, in 1 minute.

That's an objective measure which ignores what the weapon looks like.

The radius is selected to determine if people can escape quickly.

The time limit determines a set time period for comparison across weapons.

If you can kill 5 people in a minute in a 20 foot radius, that's all the weapon you need.

[slackmaster]

30. We have a document called the Bill of Rights. I've never heard of a Bill of Needs.

If you can kill 5 people in a minute in a 20 foot radius, that's all the weapon you need.

What if you are being pursued by seven zombies?

[JoePhilly]

33. I say .... Screw the semantics of "need".

That's a common dodge.

Try this ... the 2nd Amendment says you can "keep and bear" arms ... it says NOTHING about the SALE and PURCHASE of such arms.

The SALE and PURCHASE of items are covered in the COMMERCE CLAUSE.

And so, Congress can regulate the SALE and PURCHASE of the these items that you can "keep and bear" AFTER you purchase them under the relevant commerce regulations.

[slackmaster]

36. The federal government already regulates commerce in firearms

Last edited Thu Jan 31, 2013, 05:27 PM - Edit history (1)

It has since 1934.

[hack89]

29. The stupidity of the AWB in two pictures

This gun is specifically called out in the legislation as being illegal under the AWB:




This gun is specifically called out in the legislation as being legal under the AWB:



They are both Ruger Mini-14s

http://www.ruger.com/products/mini14TacticalRifle/models.html

[k2qb3]

31. "Assault" is a verb, not an adjective.

The bill wouldn't do anything to reduce violence, if passed it's a certainty violence would increase significantly..

What it would do is put you and your child at risk of a felony no-knock if you handed down grandpa's 70 Y/O m1 carbine.

This is, and always was, a very foolish approach that will have significant political cost.

[jmg257]

39. Except of course that grandpa's M1 carbine is specifically exempt.

FWIW - So is his Garand.

Curious - why would violence increase significantly?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

91. Oddly enough the SKS, the Russian Garand is included in the ban.....nt

[Fresh_Start]

32. there is no such things as global warming

because the weather today is colder than average...

Besides there were emails between researchers as they tried to figure out how to communicate their findings and concerns.

Bullshit smoke-screens are still bullshit.

[JoePhilly]

34. +10000

[bowens43]

37. the ability to fire bullets.......

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

38. Legislative imagination.

Just ask anyone if they'd rather be shot by gun with or without a folding stock or pistol grip.

[NCTraveler]

40. "Assault weapons used by military, law enforcement, and retired law enforcement"

Why would the bill exclude assault weapons used by "retired law enforcement".

[X_Digger]

60. All these laws carve out exceptions for law enforcement and retired law enforcement

Often, that's the "cost" to get law enforcement groups behind them.

[NCTraveler]

83. Thanks for the reply. I understand it is that way for current law enforcement.

But retired kind of baffled me. Your reasoning makes sense. I don't think it should be that way, but I see how it would get their support. As long as we can keep ours kind of thing.

[X_Digger]

85. Really makes you think about all those who tout 'supported by law enforcement' re new bills, eh? n/t

[TheCowsCameHome]

41. If it causes an erection quickly.

[NoOneMan]

44. Any firearms that can allow a novice to kill 20 children in a blink of an eye

I don't care what you call them ("mean" guns works for me), but I think we are smart enough to figure out what these are and get rid of them.

[Recursion]

52. OK, that technology is called a "gun", unfortunately

Lanza killed 26 people in 10 minutes. Even with a single-shot deer rifle or six-shooter, that rate of fire is very easy.

I know this is very upsetting and everybody wants to do something. The unfortunate fact is there's not nearly as much difference among different firearms in terms of lethality as people think there is.

[NoOneMan]

65. "not nearly as much difference among different firearms"

Then get rid of everything except a bow and arrow. If someone manages to kill 20 children in a flash with a bow, get rid of those too. If we are that keen of hunters, we can figure out how to hunt deer with rocks. You make a great argument.


But no, I don't believe you. A novice cannot deal that type of damage with a bolt-action rifle at close range because people would run. But why would people run from a gun that will spray down the majority of the runners at close range? Its kind of pointless. Thats the interesting thing about these firearms people don't want to mention: the psychological assessment of potential victims. The run vs hope-you-live assessment facing an AR15 vs a bolt-action rifle are dramatically different; the later potential victims would generally assess a greater chance of survival by fleeing in random directions between shots, whereas the AR15 may encourage a crowd of sitting ducks (or deer in a spotlight) that do not see a dramatic advantage to running. It takes more than a novice to effectively use a bolt-action rifle at close range and cause this damage, because people will run for their lives; hence, that's why its not used.

[Recursion]

66. What about Virginia Tech?

That was even more people, in the same amount of time, with ordinary handguns.

I think the victim's mentality generally doesn't come into play in a mass shooting: there are people who get caught before they realize what's going on, and then the people who do realize what's going on and get out of there. *shrug*

[NoOneMan]

68. Did he use a bolt-action rifle?

Did his handguns look like this:

[Recursion]

69. No, he used semi-automatic handguns, like 95% of people who kill with guns

The last time a bolt action rifle made any big crime news was that guy in Texas.

[NoOneMan]

72. So maybe those qualify as "mean" guns

Fuck em.

[Recursion]

74. I don't have an argument in principle against banning pistols

I think it would be as effective as banning drugs has been (and cause the same problems that banning drugs has) but that at least addresses what I think the "real" problem is.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

92. I do

It is the primary means of self defense and the most effective.

We have had semi automatic pistols for over a century and revolvers for many more years than that. Somehow I don't believe that the hardware is the "real issue"

[morningfog]

97. Bullshit. Utter and complete NRA bullshit.

[Recursion]

101. Hm. OK. Tell me what you think was wrong with what I said (nt)

[morningfog]

103. You derailed with this:

"Even with a single-shot deer rifle or six-shooter, that rate of fire is very easy."

Not to many, not to most, not to the average.

[Recursion]

104. 26 in 10 minutes? One shot every 23 seconds?

Name me a firearm that cannot be pretty easily fired that quickly.

That's slower than the standard rate of fire of a musket back in the day.

[morningfog]

106. Your attempt to muddy the water is still failing.

How many bullets were actually fired in that 10 minutes?

How many at a time?

How many marksmen could put 3 or more bullets in every one of the 26 people killed?

You disgust me.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

55. It wasn't a blink of an eye... it was several minutes.

Someone can shoot 20 targets at a gun range with a 6-shot .357 revolver in just a couple minutes. Try the same thing with a 7 shot semiautomatic pistol and 4 loaded magazines. Or a 10-shot rifle with 4 magazines. Go to a range, rent one for $10 and give it a try... that level of skill isn't difficult.

What is so hard to grasp that legislation like this won't save any of our children. We need meaningful legislation that might ACTUALLY have a significant impact on gun crime. I'm convinced just about any design of gun from the last century could have been used for the carnage witnessed in CT. It's not the type of guns that are the problem... it's the type of people that have access to them.

[Recursion]

61. If someone can be trusted with a gun, they can pretty much be trusted with any gun

And if someone can't be trusted with a gun, they can't be trusted with any gun.

*shrug*

Then again if I knew how to keep bad people from getting things they want, I'd be king right now.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

70. I agree. Feinstein's bill says a Glock with 15 rounds is too unsafe but 10 rounds is acceptable.

Excuse me, but if I felt someone carrying a gun near me with a 15-round magazine is simply too much of risk then why the hell would I feel safer if they only had 10 bullets?!? I don't want shot at all... not even once! It's not kind of gun held by a person near me that I worry about, it's the kind of gun owner.

That's like saying I don't trust drunk drivers who have consumed liquor, but if they only drank beer it's OK. Or perhaps, that guy that drives home from the bar after 12 drinks is unacceptable but after 10 drinks that's OK.

[NoOneMan]

67. Im convinced that's just nonsense

I'm convinced just about any design of gun from the last century could have been used for the carnage witnessed in CT.

A single-shot .22 pistol would fail miserably

[Recursion]

71. People haven't made single-shot pistols since the mid 1800s.

What kind of gun are you thinking of?

[NoOneMan]

75. Yes they have

[Recursion]

76. Aren't those air pistols? (nt)

[NoOneMan]

78. Single-shot .22 pistols

They appear like air pistols because they jacked the popular design.

[Recursion]

79. Fair enough. So there are break-action pistols.

If we want to talk about going back to just those, I'm all ears.

[NoOneMan]

81. Oh, I was just nit-picking the "any design" comment :)

And honestly, I don't know. Hell, when they first started making revolvers, they got nicknames like the Widow Maker for a reason, right? And those have become relics. We are so far down the rabbit hole that we can't even judge what is "reasonable" any more for general utility. Honestly, I think applying my '20 children dead from novice' criteria isn't a bad start.

[NoOneMan]

82. And improved upon in the 20th Century

There are numerous "guns from the last century" that were single shot 22s. So I don't understand what your point is. I think you are trying to move goalposts or something. There are numerous designs made within the last 100 years that do not enabled them to be tools of mass carnage by relatively unskilled users.

Basically most any common revolver or magazine-fed firearm, regardless of how scary/paramilitary it looks, can kill dozens of people in a few minutes

Sure, then get rid of them. Go back to my original post. If any idiot can use some firearm to do that damage that quickly, get rid of it.

This 2013 Assault Weapons ban won't save our children

I understand that. My original post doesn't mention "assault weapon". I think we need to create a new criteria based on the real world.

[morningfog]

107. Your NRA gun apologia is telling.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

49. The only feature on that picture that effects lethality in any way is the magazine.

The pistol grip, barrel shroud (sometimes lovingly referred to as the-shoulder-thing-that-goes-up), adjusdtable stock, and the flash hider/suppressor don't do anything 'extra' for the gun. It's like wood-checkering, butstock pads, sling swivels, or bipod attachments on your grandad's hunting rifle - completely cosmetic and/or user preference accessory items.

This bill overreaches by specifying absurd shit on guns that makes little to no sense.

[deathrind]

50. AW's

The Fedorov Avtomat is considered by most to be the world’s first “Assault Weapon”. The second one (made by Germany) is the Sturmgewehr-44. If I am wrong about this I am sure someone will correct me. What gets lost in translation here of “Assault Weapon” is not how the weapon looks or its size but its ability to enable one person (1) to inflict damage to multiple people quickly and alone. One could not reasonably take out an MG nest or Pillbox in WW2 with an M1 or 1911 unless they were very good and lucky. Hence the "Assault Weapon" was born which allowed one person to put alot of bullets in the air and in a general direction in a very short period of time. Spray and pray.....

[Recursion]

53. The term "assault weapon" is legally defined, though

And ironically neither the Fedorov nor Sturmgewehr fall under that legal definition.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

51. Markedly better definition here

http://www.assaultweapon.info/

[Zoeisright]

56. It becomes an assault weapon

when it's used to assault someone.

You can have as many fucking muskets as you want. Beyond that, forget it. THAT is the true intention of 2A.

[dairydog91]

62. Second Amendment has never been read to only protect muskets.

No majority has ever held that only Revolutionary-era weapons counted as "arms" under the 2nd. SCOTUS does not apply "technological originalism" to any Amendment (Or the First wouldn't protect any electronic or electrical communication), so why do you think it applies to the Second?

[Zoeisright]

109. You're fucking wrong.

Those were the only weapons available at that time, so that is original intent.

Buh-bye, because I don't need people like you in my life.

[friendly_iconoclast]

111. You lot get *so* angry when we decline to sing from your hymnal...

[DainBramaged]

84. (sigh) didn't take long did it Mikey........

I figured it out way before today's post. You guys come and go and try again and you go and you just don't get it.


This is OUR playpen, we who ARE LIBERALS and PROGRESSIVES NOT Regressive.


Have a nice evening.

[derby378]

86. That's why I'm here...

And just because I've strayed from the official script doesn't make me any less of a liberal, does it?

[Recursion]

64. Basically, yes: if you want to make mass shootings impossible you have to go back to muskets

The technology mass random shooters use has been around for 150 years or so, but the motivation for some reason wasn't there until more recently.

There were even a lot of mass random murders during that time, but they were mostly arsons and poisonings. It's somewhat mysterious.

I'd also point out that the murder rate in 1789 was significantly higher than it is today.

[guardian]

73. If it comes with a

crocheted barrel shroud

[TransitJohn]

90. If it's designed to assault an opposing force,

i.e., go on the offensive rather than defend against an opposing force. Seems pretty basic.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

93. Armies do not assault anything these days with semi automatic rifles

regardless of cosmetic features

[longship]

105. If it shoots bullets, it can assault people at a distance. That's sufficient. nt

[Deep13]

108. Whatever the law says it is. It has no historic meaning.

"Rifle" means something. "Pistol" and "handgun" mean something. "Battle rifle" means something. "Assault rifle" means something. "Assault weapon" doesn't.

The reason is because all those other terms are technical terms that grew out of the development of firearm technology. The term "assault weapon" was invented by politicians who were not making any progress restricting hand guns, so they shifted focus to scarey-looking guns that look like they belong in the military, but don't.

[mwrguy]

110. Can you assault people with it? Yes?

Then it's an assault weapon.