Definition of an assault weapon

The so called assault weapons that were banned during the Clinton administration, a ban which expired during the Bush administration and has not since been renewed, are simply guns with certain cosmetic features. For instance, a semi automatic rifle that has features such as a pistol grip and an adjustable stock. Now, a semi auto rifle that had just a pistol grip was fine. A semi auto rifle that had just an adjustable stock was fine. But, if the semi auto rifle has both a pistol grip and an adjustable stock all of a sudden it becomes an assault weapon and is subject to the ban. So for anybody who is in favor of banning so called assault weapons, why would you want to ban a gun simply because it has both a pistol grip and an adjustable stock?

A weapon used for assaulting things.



Like my penis.

DebateChallenge said:

The so called assault weapons that were banned during the Clinton administration, a ban which expired during the Bush administration and has not since been renewed, are simply guns with certain cosmetic features. For instance, a semi automatic rifle that has features such as a pistol grip and an adjustable stock. Now, a semi auto rifle that had just a pistol grip was fine. A semi auto rifle that had just an adjustable stock was fine. But, if the semi auto rifle has both a pistol grip and an adjustable stock all of a sudden it becomes an assault weapon and is subject to the ban. So for anybody who is in favor of banning so called assault weapons, why would you want to ban a gun simply because it has both a pistol grip and an adjustable stock?

Click to expand...

Many of who actually support the 2nd amendment know that lethal and functionality of these so-called assault weapons are no different than the semiautomatic firearms not deemed to be assault weapons. However so do the anti-2nd amendment trash who push for these bans. The term assault weapon is nothing more than a term invented by anti-2nd amendment trash to ban semiautomatic firearms by falsely equivocating them with firearms the military uses in order to ban them. Many people who actually 2nd amendment proponents just assume that anti-2nd amendment trash are just stupid ****tards who don't know anything regarding firearms. Its not stupidity on their part. Its a attempt to control the language in order to make it easier to ban guns. Its why they falsely claim that 10 to 30 round standard capacity magazines are high capacity or that certain semi-automatic are "assault weapons". They invent these scary terms because they would be laughed out if they just flat out said they want to ban all semi-automatic firearms.

DebateChallenge said:

The so called assault weapons that were banned during the Clinton administration, a ban which expired during the Bush administration and has not since been renewed, are simply guns with certain cosmetic features. For instance, a semi automatic rifle that has features such as a pistol grip and an adjustable stock. Now, a semi auto rifle that had just a pistol grip was fine. A semi auto rifle that had just an adjustable stock was fine. But, if the semi auto rifle has both a pistol grip and an adjustable stock all of a sudden it becomes an assault weapon and is subject to the ban. So for anybody who is in favor of banning so called assault weapons, why would you want to ban a gun simply because it has both a pistol grip and an adjustable stock?

Click to expand...

I agree that these definitions are confusing and don't help, which is why I advocate that each bullet costs two hundred dollars. At that point, whether something is defined as an assault rifle, automatic, semi-automatic, or plasma phase rifle with a laser scope doesn't matter.

"Assault weapon" is a term coined by gun control advocates used to describe scary looking cosmetic details on firearms that have nothing to do with that actual operation of the firearm itself.

Can't verify, but looks about right ...

KevinKohler said:

A weapon used for assaulting things.



Like my penis.

Click to expand...

The military term of assault must be examined. During the fast moving street fighting in Russian-especially Stalingrad, both Russian and Nazi patrols would run into fixed positions manned by the enemy. The normal response was to hose the defensive position down with a crew served Machine gun while soldiers closed with the fixed position and wiped it out with satchel charges, bazookas or flame-throwers. however, in this environment, the heavy Russian Maxim Machine guns and the German MG42s often could not keep up with the infantry. So the idea of an "assault rifle" was born. It was designed to serve as the primary infantry battle arm, thus replacing bolt action higher powered rifles. It was also designed to replace the pistol cartridge submachine guns. Those SMGS were useful for suppressing movement at close range but fairly worthless for engaging targets passed a couple hundred yards or targets behind cover. So this new weapon was born that would allow it to function in several roles-one of them being-allowing several infantrymen, with their assault rifles set on full auto, to suppress defensive fire from a fixed position when a machine gun or a tank was not available

Gun banners know that most Americans don't understand this concept of "assault". Semi auto rifles don't even have the feature that makes them useful for a military assault-select (automatic fire). The gun banners cared not. they intentionally tried to insinuate that "assault weapons" are designed for CRIMINAL assault.

its more proof that the gun control movement is based on lies and dishonesty

Polar Bum said:

"Assault weapon" is a term coined by gun control advocates used to describe scary looking cosmetic details on firearms that have nothing to do with that actual operation of the firearm itself.

Click to expand...

see post 7

Cardinal said:

I agree that these definitions are confusing and don't help, which is why I advocate that each bullet costs two hundred dollars. At that point, whether something is defined as an assault rifle, automatic, semi-automatic, or plasma phase rifle with a laser scope doesn't matter.

Click to expand...

so you want to end competitive shooting, recreational shooting or hunting? do you understand why we who support such activities give zero respect to the anti gun side?

jamesrage said:

Many of who actually support the 2nd amendment know that lethal and functionality of these so-called assault weapons are no different than the semiautomatic firearms not deemed to be assault weapons. However so do the anti-2nd amendment trash who push for these bans. The term assault weapon is nothing more than a term invented by anti-2nd amendment trash to ban semiautomatic firearms by falsely equivocating them with firearms the military uses in order to ban them. Many people who actually 2nd amendment proponents just assume that anti-2nd amendment trash are just stupid ****tards who don't know anything regarding firearms. Its not stupidity on their part. Its a attempt to control the language in order to make it easier to ban guns. Its why they falsely claim that 10 to 30 round standard capacity magazines are high capacity or that certain semi-automatic are "assault weapons". They invent these scary terms because they would be laughed out if they just flat out said they want to ban all semi-automatic firearms.

Click to expand...

thread winner; Josh Sugarman-one of the gaping assholes in American politics-sent out a position paper telling the anti gun press leaders to deliberately lie to the American public and tell them semi auto rifles like the AR 15 are the same as machine guns that were starring in the bloody action films that were popular when that paper was released (Rambo, Scarface, DeltaForce etc)

Cardinal said:

I agree that these definitions are confusing and don't help, which is why I advocate that each bullet costs two hundred dollars. At that point, whether something is defined as an assault rifle, automatic, semi-automatic, or plasma phase rifle with a laser scope doesn't matter.

Click to expand...

So only the rich have the means to protect themselves. Why do you hate poor?

Nap said:

So only the rich have the means to protect themselves. Why do you hate poor?

Click to expand...

many gun control schemes are attempts by the rich to disarm the poor. The 200 dollar tax on machine guns in the depression era was designed to prevent poor people or even middle class from owning them.not rich fat cats and not rich gangsters

A couple of points that need to be pointed out before some people go totally out of whack:

- The AR in “AR-15” rifle stands for ArmaLite rifle, after the company that developed it in the 1950s. “AR” does NOT stand for “assault rifle” or “automatic rifle.”

- AR-15-style rifles are NOT “assault weapons” or “assault rifles.” An assault rifle is fully automatic — a machine gun. Automatic firearms have been severely restricted from civilian ownership since 1934.

TurtleDude said:

many gun control schemes are attempts by the rich to disarm the poor. The 200 dollar tax on machine guns in the depression era was designed to prevent poor people or even middle class from owning them.not rich fat cats and not rich gangsters

Click to expand...

I was being sarcastic and making fun of the type of ad homs generally used against the Right. It is funny though that the policies that the people who are supposedly the champions of the poor adversely effects them.

DebateChallenge said:

The so called assault weapons that were banned during the Clinton administration, a ban which expired during the Bush administration and has not since been renewed, are simply guns with certain cosmetic features. For instance, a semi automatic rifle that has features such as a pistol grip and an adjustable stock. Now, a semi auto rifle that had just a pistol grip was fine. A semi auto rifle that had just an adjustable stock was fine. But, if the semi auto rifle has both a pistol grip and an adjustable stock all of a sudden it becomes an assault weapon and is subject to the ban. So for anybody who is in favor of banning so called assault weapons, why would you want to ban a gun simply because it has both a pistol grip and an adjustable stock?

Click to expand...

What you fail to realize is that a pistol grip allows even an unskilled shooter to make consistent head shots at 650 yards while maintaining a 1200 RPM rate of fire. A flash hider effectively silences the weapon so that police can't hear it. The black stock makes the weapon invisible to metal detectors. A foregrip creates an ergonomic effect that increases the shooters aggression. A collapsible stock allows the shooter to hide the weapon in their back pocket. An magazine which extends below the receiver not only provides the shooter with hundreds of rounds of ammunition but makes the rounds explode on contact. The type of ammunition used in assault rifles is specifically designed to tumble when it hits soft tissue thus ripping off limbs and blowing out arteries.

Lutherf said:

What you fail to realize is that a pistol grip allows even an unskilled shooter to make consistent head shots at 650 yards while maintaining a 1200 RPM rate of fire. A flash hider effectively silences the weapon so that police can't hear it. The black stock makes the weapon invisible to metal detectors. A foregrip creates an ergonomic effect that increases the shooters aggression. A collapsible stock allows the shooter to hide the weapon in their back pocket. An magazine which extends below the receiver not only provides the shooter with hundreds of rounds of ammunition but makes the rounds explode on contact. The type of ammunition used in assault rifles is specifically designed to tumble when it hits soft tissue thus ripping off limbs and blowing out arteries.

Click to expand...

I collapsed the stock on my rifle once.....I still cannot find it.

Nap said:

So only the rich have the means to protect themselves. Why do you hate poor?

Click to expand...

Well, one thing you'd have to admit: if somebody got shot with a full clip of $200 bullets in an automatic rifle, you'd have to agree that the dude might have had it coming. In an AR-15 that's...what...$4520 worth of bullets?

Cardinal said:

Well, one thing you'd have to admit: if somebody got shot with a full clip of $200 bullets in an automatic rifle, you'd have to agree that the dude might have had it coming.

Click to expand...

As morbid as that is, I have to admit I laughed.

Cardinal said:

Well, one thing you'd have to admit: if somebody got shot with a full clip of $200 bullets in an automatic rifle, you'd have to agree that the dude might have had it coming. In an AR-15 that's...what...$4520 worth of bullets?

Click to expand...

$6200 in a standard magazine for an AR-15.

Also, if you can afford an automatic rifle then $200 a bullet isn't going to be that big of a deal for you.

Nap said:

$6200 in a standard magazine for an AR-15

Click to expand...

So 31 bullets in a clip at $200 a bullet? On second thought, that's really not as cost prohibitive as I would have hoped. If I really wanted to take out a dude and meant business, $6200 wouldn't slow me down for an instant. I think if you really wanted to make sure that the target had it coming, $50,000 for a clip would slow down everybody but Bruce Wayne. Therefore each bullet should cost $1600. In fact, you could probably bet on the shooter going up to his victim and asking for the bullets back.

Cardinal said:

So 31 bullets in a clip at $200 a bullet? On second thought, that's really not as cost prohibitive as I would have hoped. If I really wanted to take out a dude and meant business, $6200 wouldn't slow me down for an instant. I think if you really wanted to make sure that the target had it coming, $50,000 for a clip would be fair would slow down everybody but Bruce Wayne. Therefore each bullet should cost $1600. In fact, you could probably bet on the shooter going up to his victim and asking for the bullets back.

Click to expand...

It really isn't a feasible idea. It would simply create a black market. Lol, it would make me and several of my friends pretty rich though. Especially since I have all the equipment to make bullets, charge people $100 + a shell casing per bullet.

Edit: 30 bullets in the magazine, 1 in chamber.

Nap said:

It really isn't a feasible idea. It would simply create a black market. Lol, it would make me and several of my friends pretty rich though. Especially since I have all the equipment to make bullets, charge people $100 + a shell casing per bullet.

Edit: 30 bullets in the magazine, 1 in chamber.

Click to expand...

I never claimed that there wouldn't be a black market. You seem to be assuming that I'm making the Nirvana Fallacy. I'm not.

DebateChallenge said:

The so called assault weapons that were banned during the Clinton administration, a ban which expired during the Bush administration and has not since been renewed, are simply guns with certain cosmetic features. For instance, a semi automatic rifle that has features such as a pistol grip and an adjustable stock. Now, a semi auto rifle that had just a pistol grip was fine. A semi auto rifle that had just an adjustable stock was fine. But, if the semi auto rifle has both a pistol grip and an adjustable stock all of a sudden it becomes an assault weapon and is subject to the ban. So for anybody who is in favor of banning so called assault weapons, why would you want to ban a gun simply because it has both a pistol grip and an adjustable stock?

Click to expand...

The damage I can do.....

https://www.amazon.com/Nerf-N-Strik...&qid=1518758000&sr=1-12&keywords=nerf+blaster

Cardinal said:

I never claimed that there wouldn't be a black market. You seem to be assuming that I'm making the Nirvana Fallacy. I'm not.

Click to expand...

If you are serious, the cons far out weigh the good.

Cardinal said:

I agree that these definitions are confusing and don't help, which is why I advocate that each bullet costs two hundred dollars. At that point, whether something is defined as an assault rifle, automatic, semi-automatic, or plasma phase rifle with a laser scope doesn't matter.

Click to expand...

That will work real well for those of us who roll our own.