The term "military-'style' assault rifle" was invented by a gun control propagandist for the intent of confusing the public into believing that "if it looks like a machine gun, it must be a machine gun".
"Assault weapon" was already a defined term. It referred to a military weapon that is capable of selective fire. A switch can go from safety, to semi-auto, to full-automatic, and in some cases, three shot burst. But tagging "military-style" to the existing term gave the false impression that common, semiautomatic rifles were actually military. It allowed the propagandists to brand them as "weapons of war", "mass murder machines", and even "weapons of mass destruction".
I was already illegal to sell automatic weapons (machine guns) to the general public. The gun control propagandists knew that.
Their efforts to nullify the Second Amendment failed in the Supreme Court, so they embarked on a different tactic, which was to ban certain common guns. Their goal is to ban civilian ownership of guns and they'll do it by hook or by crook.
When Ronald Reagan and Jim Brady were shot, it was with a.22 cal revolver. What did Brady do? He knew that banning.22 cal revolvers was out of the question, so he set out to ban certain common rifles with the intend of setting a precedent. If he could succeed in getting the courts to allow a small set of everyday guns to be banned, the list could be expanded.
What's interesting is, all long guns combined (every type of shotgun and rifle) account for something like 4% of all firearm related homicides, and those scary looking, black, "assault rifley" things are a small subset of that. 300 or so people a year might be killed with those kinds of guns. So why is it treated as a national emergency to ban them?
Nicely put, some states are already nurturing the magazine capacities to 10 but whatever not the worst thing that can happen but criminals won't obey this law or any other for that matter
First of all, its political speech and not intended to be taken literally in most cases.
That said, lets examine the generally accepted definitions of an assault rifle.
1: It must be capable of selective fire.
2: It must have an intermediate-power cartridge: more power than a pistol but less than a standard rifle or battle rifle.
3: Its ammunition must be supplied from a detachable box magazine.[5]
4: It must have an effective range of at least 300 metres (330 yards).
The AR-15 fulfills every one of those criteria except for the select fire. The Glock you mentioned earlier fail on the cartridge, select fire and effective range so the fact that you even brought it up as a "reasonable comparison" is silly and shows your lack of understanding about basic firearms.
So, lets just consider for a moment what the difference is between a standard AR-15 and an assault rifle. The selective fire capability... The ability to choose between single and burst/automatic. Not a great deal of difference if you ask me. Furthermore, how could you overcome this to achieve a burst or automatic fire option with a standard AR?
How about bump fire? Install a bumpfire modification (or use a method of shooting that achieves the same result) and the AR-15 would fulfill every criteria to be categorized as an assault rifle.
You are arguing semantics I dont care what the antigun people call assault or not assault it doesn't matter one fuck to me. What matters to me is when they legislate anti 2’d amendment laws
You are specifically asking regarding semantics and then complaining when I explain the semantics. Also my reply goes beyond semantics and touches on some real problems behind the AR-15 (meaning how similar it is to being an assault rifle and how it could function as one).
That said, you and people like you are going to be the reason the 2nd amendment will be changed in the future.
Im just presenting the asinine logic liberals use against ar-15s which are basically long barrel pistols
I know a lot about guns but I'm not a liberal, so this makes me laugh because you don't leave a choice on your Pole that says I know a lot about guns but I'm not a liberal either. Haha. I have a few family members that work at the same place in which they manufacture guns, my dad has a class A firearm permit which allows him to have a fully automatic firearm, which is I'm assuming is what the Liberals referred to as an assault rifle. I think the general rule of thumb is if it's a fully automatic weapon it's an assault rifle. However I think the argument it's kind of a silly one due to the fact that if you get shot by a handgun you're not going to be any less dead than if you get hit by a bullet from an M4 (M16), or an Uzi. The bullet use is the same kind of bullet a lot of the time, and if the bullet is a larger caliber it's not going to kill you anymore then a smaller caliber, unless we're talking about the 22 or a pellet gun or something of course then in some cases a bullet can fail to kill someone but in most cases it's a 9 mm and whether that comes from an Uzi or a handgun you're going to be just as dead either way. The strength of the bullet isn't different but the amount of bullets unloaded as of course is different, so if you really wanted to you could probably take out more people faster but even a handguns clip holds an entire clip full of bullets so if you wanted to kill a crowd of people you could still do that with a handgun oh, it would just take you about 10 seconds longer.
Why is sawing off shotguns and rifles illegal? Because concealment is deadly so pistols are deadlier than AR-15s
It’s because they don’t know the actual criteria for a firearm to qualify as an assault rifle and mistakenly believe AR stands for assault rifle. It does not. The “A” stands for Armalite, the company who first developed it. They went belly up and sold the patent to Colt, who now owns the name AR-15. This is why any AR platform rifle not manufactured by Colt is not called AR-15, but given some other model name by the manufacturer.
Opinion
35Opinion
They are the same crowd who refer to tactical pens as “assault pens”.
They are ignorant when it comes to discussing weaponry. They like to put the word “assault” behind any weapon they think is scary looking.
I dont care what they call it, i just care what laws they pass
What they call something can eventually lead to laws being passed based on that terminology. That’s why pinko states like California have all kinds of ridiculous restrictions on what kinds of self defense tools a person can buy.
Anything that upsets their plans to take over is an "assault this" or "assault that". Gotta have those magic scary words.
They haven't even figured out the difference between semi-auto and fully-auto (yet alone single-action).
An assault rifle is any kind of military rifle that has a switch (normally located on the side of the weapon) that allows the operator to select between three different firing modes: semi-automatic, fully automatic, or three-round bursts.
Functionally, these are normally only used in tactical or military settings, so they are not very common (or at all) among civilian populations.
Note that misunderstanding of this term is why you hear gun control pundits talk about “assault rifles” and how they’re responsible for civilian killings or mass shootings.
In actuality, assault rifles typically have NOT been used in these events.
Additionally, the “AR” for AR-15s and the like does not stand for an assault rifle. Instead, it stands for “ArmaLite Rifle,” which is the company that first created the AR-15 and its cousins.
An AR-15 is a semi-automatic weapon, not an assault rifle or a fully automatic firearm/machine gun.
ref AGA
Because pistols, having a short barrel and, like you said, easy to conceal, are handguns and are generally more difficult to obtain and have more restrictions on them. Rifles do not have those restrictions since they are used for hunting and are legitimate tools on a farm.
But an _A_ssualt _R_ifle ("AR" as in AR-15) is a rifle not meant for use on a farm or for hunting. It's a military weapon designed to efficiently kill humans. There is no need for the general population to have one. Unfortunately, legal access to these weapons is too easy. And that's a problem.
You do realize that an M4 isn’t the same thing as an Ar 15 right?
www.pewpewtactical.com/ar15-vs-m4-difference/
@ADFSDF1996 Yes, but I don't care because it's irrelevant.
Look, I am not anti-gun. I am just explaining part of the overall problem.
There are other aspects of the overall problem too, of course.
The bottom line is that these weapons are not needed by the rank and file citizen.
That said, they should not be denied to citizens who have a warranted need for one. Persons such as law enforcement, active or reserve military, mercenary security forces... people who are vetted and can be licensed.
@abc3643
You do realize that AR 15s are marketed as self defense tools but since you don’t seem to support a law abiding citizen’s right to self defense, your attitude towards AR 15 ownership is not surprising.
Whenever a law abiding citizen successfully defends themselves, others or personal property with a self defense tool, it’s the left wingers who show more sympathy towards the perpetrator instead of the victim all while they criticize the victims for simply defending themselves.
Second of all the AR in AR 15 doesn’t stand for “assault rifle” it stands for Armalite rifle. And it only fires in semi auto, not full auto like an M4.
@ADFSDF1996 Actually, I don't have problems with people defending themselves. I support concealed carry.
Look, the question isn't guns or not. The question is appropriateness...
How would you feel if you were my neighbor and I had "for self-defense" any of these:
1) a 20-kiloton nuclear weapon
2) an anthrax bomb
3) VX nerve gas cannisters
They are all "arms", right? Arms control treaties exist regarding these weapons, so they must be arms, so, under the 2nd Amendment's "right to bear arms", I should be allowed to own these things. Lord knows my freedom and ability to "stand my ground" against annoying neighbors or the authorities gets a lot stronger if I tell them that if they piss me off or threaten me then I will explode my 2nd Amendment nuke... or 2nd Amendment anthrax bomb... or 2nd Amendment VX nerve gas cannisters... or...
I'll answer that question for you. You'd be nervous as shit living in fear and not exactly feeling free because of it.
And that's why it's illegal to possess such weapons.
One reason the judicial system exists is to intelligently strike a balance between the needs of the society/government vs. the needs of individuals.
Well, people do have a legitimate reason for owning handguns or rifles, including self-defense. But the question to be asked is "How much firepower and weaponry does the individual need to accomplish his or her objectives (hunting, self-defense, farm tool...) and how much is too much?"
I live in a rural part of a red state and I appreciate my neighbors' desire for guns for hunting and self-defense. So, I am not anti-gun.
(more)
Every gun is designed to effectively kill humans you numbskull
That said, a weapon such as an AR-15 is not necessary for hunting or self-defense. There is no justifiable reason for a rank and file citizen to own one without just cause or special need (such as being in law enforcement or military). Such weapons are not defensive weapons; they are offensive weapons (hence "assault"). They are overkill for hunting - unless you are hunting humans.
So, if you feel that you need one for "self-defense", you need to look in the mirror and ask yourself "What I am defending myself FROM that I need this level of firepower? If I really need that much firepower for self-defense, then I really need to move to a safer neighborhood."
@abc3643
Now you are over exaggerating things, I never said that there should be unrestricted access to every type of weapon. AR 15s are not considered military grade weapons by todays standards. And as such they are understandably available to civilians. That’s a thing you don’t seem to understand. The up to date weapons that are available to the military are not available in the civilian market, they never have been.
“Just move to a safer neighborhood” right because crime is non existent there. Anyone with common sense knows that no neighborhood is 100% safe. Which is where the castle doctrine comes into play.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gy_wrTVIuqM
@ADFSDF1996 I am not "overexaggerating" things because that's how logic works.
Furthermore, if you're a "strict constructionist" like Conservative Supreme Court judges, then you have to agree to that. Otherwise, we'd have "activist judges legislating from the bench". The 2nd Amendment says "arms". It didn't say "guns" or "pea shooters" or "trebuchets" or "slingshots" or "swords" or "beam weapons" or... So, a "strict constructionist" judge interprets the laws literally and, in their view, "arms" is "arms"... that's it.
As for home defense, you really don't need that level of weaponry. If you did, you'd be hearing news reports of their use for just that purpose. But you don't.
@abc3643
You have a really skewed idea of what logic is. Did you not read the part where I said there have always been restrictions on what kind of weaponry a US citizen can own? Not to mention that you don’t seem to understand that there is a difference between military grade weaponry and the weaponry available on the civilian market. Difference in quality and capabilities.
And by “news” I’m assuming you mean your left wing news sources. First of all, since when have news stations been the number one source on gun ownership discussions? Second of all, there are many times credible news sources talk about a person using an AR-15 in self defense.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna739541
@ADFSDF1996 my sense of logic isn't skewed. I get paid 6 digits because of it
But yes there have always been restrictions and I think we qre in agreement that there needs to be a line. For me, assault rifles cross the line into unnecessary for most people. For you, apparently not.
@abc3643 Your career is irrelevant, mentioning it is nothing more than a sign of a superiority complex.
Again the AR 15 is not an “Assault rifle”. I’m not even a “gun expert” yet even I know that AR 15s can’t be classified as assault rifles primarily because they are only semi auto. They aren’t even classified as “Battle rifles” such as the M1 Garand, Gewehr 43 or G3. And as such, the AR 15 is a unique firearm.
Assault rifle is direct translation from German. StG-44 was first intermediate cartridge rifle. StG-44 = Sturm (Assault) Gewehr (Rifle) was called MP-44 (Maschinenpistole 1944) before Hitler wanted more dangerous name for this weapon and called it StG
Ar-15, M16, M4... Ak-47/74/100.. are intermediate cartridge rifles and liberals love Nazi nomenclature
Yep the MP-44 made kalashnikov scared to death so he made the AK-47 for his country, and the Vietnamese using AK-47s on American troops scared Eugene Stoner to death leading him to design the AR15 (M16) so blame those crazy Germans 😂
They lack a proper understanding of firearms being that the liberal ideology isn't as favorable to firearms as the conservative is. "Assault Rifle" has the more political connotation that the 'rifle' is used to 'assault' and in their minds it brings up images of M4A1s.
Everyone that understands weapons, understands that bladed weapons can be much more deadly than handguns.. and handguns much more deadly than rifles. But this doesn't make sense to someone that's generally against weapons and particularly firearms.
https://crime-data-explorer. app. cloud. gov/pages/explorer/crime/crime-trend
That says it all, people who don't own guns are the ones most in favor of banning them and they fear a type of firearm (rifles) that were used in about 1% of aggravated assaults, homicide, rape, and robberies reported in 2020. Most liberal states don't participate in NIBRS which causes us to have to rely on the very outdated UCR system to track their crime rates, but departments on the other hand reported their crime rates to the FBI for us.
They are classified as assault rifles because of the characteristics they have. Military style, high capacity magazines, and a fair part of baloney. Also a Glock with a 30 round magazine does not make it accurate or stable firing platform at a high rate of fire as a rifle has for most people.
How accurate do you need to be in close quarters? Not very accurate at all
You know there are hunting rifles that have wood furniture instead of synthetic with the exact same internal parts, exact same ammo capacity, exact caliber that aren't called assault rifles. It's uneducated people who are using visual and cultural movie references to determine how they think and feel instead of self educating.
Well why do you need a gun when a baseball bat will work?
A baseball bat against a couple thugs packing 9mm pistols?
OMG, Kyle Rittenhouse is here on GaG as CreamySeed!
It’s a generic term used by civilians and media for pretty much any semi auto or auto rifle that is used by the military.
it’s a term used in other countries.
In this case it’s wrong, saying that it’s a bollox word.
The AR is Armalite Rifles.
An Assault Rifle would be full Auto with selectable to semi, rounds (R/A).
Its also personally a stupid term.
Also if those are firing.22 or.223 then they are legal in the UK (.223 single shot only)
semantic drift. Just the evolution of words and how we use them. languages are ultimately a utility and seeing how you and any reasonable individual would recognized "assault rifle" as being your rifle. It's just semantically putting connections from words to objects with everyone roughly being on the same page.
They figure (and probably correctly) if they can ban a semi-automatic rifle that looks like an assault rifle then later they can ban all semi automatic rifles. After that they will get all the rest of the rifles and shotguns banned. Guess what gets banned next?
Freedom
Fortunately America has an extremely strong gun culture unlike the rest of the world it would be politically unpopular and difficult to take handguns away unless we lost our republic which is possible
Here is how liberals actually see the concept of "assault rifles"... Go read and learn something so you don't look stupid.
https://mises.org/wire/latest-panic-over-assault-weapons
https://mises.org/power-market/problem-assault-weapons
They think sticking their head in a hole in the ground or up someone's ass is the exact same thing, can't tell the difference.
Semi auto's are not assault weapons, far as I'm concerned it has to be full auto to be considered that.
Ask any soldier which they'd rather have in a war zone, a real assault weapon or the civilian version that isn't one.
Because unlike you, they can read?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15_style_rifle
Only some models (illegally moded and/or fully auto) are classed as "assault rifles".
and you don't know much about ar vs glock either. it's the speed of which the ar fires vs the speed of which a glock fires along with the distance and type of ammo each take. the ar-15's are good for long distance and sniper type attacks an ar-12 is good for raw stopping power since that would use a 12 guage bullet. The barrel length on the ar has a minimum requirement of 18" and those glocks use a much shorter barrel. it's true most liberals don't know their ass from their elbows when it comes to guns but a lot also do. and just for the record ar doesn't stand for assault rifle like liberals think it stands for armalite (had to look up the correct spelling because i always screw up the spelling)
furthermore an ar12 for example can use a 00 buckshot and an ar15 can use a.22 or a.223 where as a glock can range anywhere from.375 or.38 to.45 and even.50 depending on the glock and type of handgun
oh and by the way ruger makes some of the best damn rifles out there. so do rock island armory with the vr60 for their 12guage and remington 870 police savage arms 212 and their previous 210 were good also beretta colt smith & wesson benelli mossberg 590 and winchester. there was a turkish one i used to know a while back but forgot it's name it was similiar to rock island armory vr60 only the back of the ar was different
there's also some lower rank guns like gforce and tristar the mediocre ones. panzer hi-point and sig sauer mauser. charles daly (which i had to look up the name because i was drawing a complete blank on the damn name) sucks. lot of people who used charles daly hated that gun especially the ar-12 those things break so easily with cheap parts from what i read and heard by many people who used it and complained about it
the thing about your ruger ar556 that i don't like is the back of it. when i tried to test out the charles daly ar12 which has a similar back to your ruger i didn't care for it. granted it felt better then the savage arms 212 and 210 bolt action gun felt but the rock island armory vr60 that was a dream gun it felt so natural when i went to hold it felt like second nature to me and felt much better in my hands then savage arms did
ruger was also heavy with their guns in terms of weight even their bb guns weigh a lot but they have good build quality so do the berettas and winchesters and smith and wesson and colt
also the ar-12 and ar-15 tend to have far more accuracy especially with a scope then compared to a glock a hand held glock
a 12 guage can only travel 75ft to 100 maybe 200-300 ft tops for any ar-12 or 12 gauge shot gun bolt pump or whatever. an ar-15 and other.22 .223 caliber guns are designed for long range from 700ft to about 1200ft usually 1000ft a glock at the most if you're lucky 700 to maybe 800ft usually 500ft
sorry i stand correct.. the ar-15 can go from 400 meters to 600 meters which is 1300ft to 1900 ft and a glock can go from 50 yards to 300 yards 150ft to 900ft for efficient shooting anything past that and the bullet starts to stray from it's trajectory ie 1500 yards. but you also got to take into consideration the size and weight of the bullet and the speed at which it's traveling and the distance to the target and factor in wind resistance and how much moisture is in the air weather conditions and the velocity from the moment that firing pin is pushed and the bullet exiting the barrel to the time it takes to reach the target with the velocity slowing down the further away from the target the bullet is
plus ar-12 ar-15 ak-47 and other rifles bolt pump semi's also have a scope where as a glock usually doesn't have a scope unless that particular handgun has a rail on the top or side of the gun where a scope can be mounted whether it be a laser scope or regular non laser scope
for better accuracy
me personally i perfer the rock island armory vr60
They the DNC/liberals know bugger all about firearms, there are many Democrat voters who are knowledgeable about firearms but the politicians are woefully ignorant and use emotional language and images to sway voters if they looked at the facts they would see that more people are killed with screwdrivers and other hand tools than all of the firearms together.
You DO understand that any weapon with more than one round in the magazine is an assault weapon? AK, AR, Glock, even revolvers can be classified as an assault weapon when it's used for assault.
But the designation of "assault weapon" is usually assigned to anything that could have been used in warfare.
Ar15s are based on the concept of a rifle capable of semi and automatic fire with a 30 round magazine firing an intermediate round, its a ww2 term and as the AR15 is designed to do this it fits as the civilian AR15 and military m16 are the exact same even with interchangeable parts except automatic fire capability.
In fact the orginial designation for the M16 was the AR15.
Anything you wouldn't use, to hunt, is considered an assault rifle. you're KILLING PEOPLE
Remember one of the commandments that Christians take oh so dearly in the bible, right? THOU SHOU NOT KILL
wheres that? Wheres that when it comes to "CHRISTIANITY"
Liberals don't. The media does. Not the liberal media. Just the media. I guess they figure any rifle is an assault rifle if you assault someone with it.
The problem is whenever they use the word “assault rifle” to push for regulation
They think A stands for assault and R stands for Rifle... rather than Armalite.
Seriously I've talked to people that think AR stands for Assault Rifle.
Oooo I have the perfect gif to explain this one... no caption needed :)
I know right.. get more recoil out if a.22 LR 😂
It might if it was on full auto.
@Daniela1982 AR-15s use direct impingement gas to cycle the action, it takes an already mild round NATO 556 and uses excess gases in the barrel to move the bolt. This lowers the recoil energy they are extremely mild low recoil guns
Then why do a lot of them have front pistol grips?
If an AR is an assault rifle literally any semi auto long gin with detachable magazine is. The old Marlin 795 would be one according to such a definition 😂
Yea it’s so dumb, guess cuz it’s black and scary and has a movable butt stock GASP!!!🤯
It's a technique the media has been using on stupid people for decades. It's called,
"brainwashing".
What’s the definition of assault rifles? Ar 15s are rifles that fire quixkly with large magazines used for mass assault. Handguns do take more lives by far. So don’t worry we hate them all.
Civilian models dont fire any quicker than a pistol not that it matters one bullet kills
Both those weapons should be illegal. Anyone who owns one is a psychopath.
Just because you are not interested in guns doesn't mean you get to take them away from people
More people die from car accidents than firearms. Should we ban all vehicles?
There are no health benefits to consuming tobacco. Should we outlaw it?
People drink and drive should we ban vehicles, bars, and alcohol?
People text and drive. Should we outlaw cellphones and vehicles?
There are people who feed their kids unhealthy food and the kids have no say. Should we ban all unhealthy food?
Tobacco and living an unhealthy life style is one of the biggest costs to the American tax payer due to the effects on healthcare. Just because something can be misused doesn't mean it should be illegal. Look up fbi crime states. More people are killed by hammers and bats than firearms.
Pistols are generally designed for defence, rifles for attack?
Interesting military personnel carry pistols as a side arm
AR is LITERALLY in the name…it must be ASSAULT RIFLE /s
Unfortunately Armalite could not see this coming
For people who can't take verbal hits, I'd say a glock is like assault rifle.
Because they think at stands for that and not armalite
Because they're idiots.
Like wasn't there a video of a politician going around, where she claim that an ar 15 fires 50 cals?
They’re not. They’re just the next evolution of rifle. Remember muskets used to be assault rifles as did lever actions and bolt actions
Hmm, I don't know. i just can't figure that out.
https://www.youtube.com/embed/BSizVpfqFtw That's an M4, the military successor to the AR-15.
Civilian AR-15s do not have select fire so they are not assault rifles.
@AllThatSweetJazz tell that to the guy in the video who named it "ultimate ar-15 meltdown"
The M4 is a kind of AR-15, and he has it because he's in the military.
@AllThatSweetJazz oh so now it's a kind of ar 15. Got it. 🙄
Yes, that's what I said. The M4 is like a grandson to the AR-15.
The original AR-15 was from the early 60s and was a family of rifles, it was adopted by the US military as the M16 which also has a kind of subfamily with variations. The modern military version is the M4. So yes, an M4 is a kind of AR-15, as in it's part of the AR-15 family, and also the successor to the older types of AR-15 rifles.
Does that clear it up for you or are you just going to choose to continue being ignorant on purpose?
@AllThatSweetJazz you said the m4 is the "successor" to the ar 15, not grandfather. Something can be a successor without being related.
Well it’s both and that’s what I meant. But only the M4 is an assault rifle.
That super duper.22 caliber is something they can't comprehend.
Typical liberals anything big and black is threatening so they cave in.
They don’t know anything about guns, they base their decisions on emotions not logic
Gorgeous Ruger you got there.
thanks fam had a couple thugs try to kick my door down thats the only reason I bought it home defense went a little overboard on the attachments tho 😂
Hey, it’s a fun hobby and great for self defense regardless 🤷🏻♀️
they are gun illiterate
You can hide any gun if you're good
Deepthroating doesn’t count
They also call them high caliber rifles
What does the AR stand for?
@Soteris Ahh okay, just a "happy" coincidence... learn something new every day! :)
liberals know fuck all about guns.
It’s like calling a miata a sports car😂
You can also add your opinion below!
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
Most Helpful Opinions