TexasCHLforum.com

jimlongley wrote:

pfgrone wrote:Seriously, is there a legal definition for "assault rifle" or is it all in the eyes of the beholder?

An assault rifle, is a full automatic or select fire long gun of intermediate caliber.

Before George bush senior gave the definition a negative connotation by banning them from import in 1989, we were not sensitive about calling any military looking weapon an assault rifle. Most folks still refer to a military looking weapon as an assault rifle. Just as most folks refer to certain rifles as deer rifles. B.B. (before bush), gun shows had signs all over the place advertising assault rifles. They had the typical semi auto military looking weapons under the signs.

All that changes when you get on gun forums which are typically inhabited by a more hard core crowd. Kind of like getting on a huffington post forum and calling a liberal democrat a socialist. Everyone knows that is what they are, but it makes them uncomfortable when you say it.



edit to correct my date inaccuracies. Sorry about that.

03Lightningrocks wrote:Before George bush senior gave the definition a negative connotation by banning them, we were not sensitive about calling any military looking weapon an assault rifle. Most folks still refer to a military looking weapon as an assault rifle. Just as most folks refer to certain rifles as deer rifles. B.B. (before bush), gun shows had signs all over the place advertising assault rifles. They had the typical semi auto military looking weapons under the signs.

All that changes when you get on gun forums which are typically inhabited by a more hard core crowd. Kind of like getting on a huffington post forum and calling a liberal democrat a socialist. Everyone knows that is what they are, but it makes them uncomfortable when you say it.

I spent years before then trying to convince others that by letting the anti-gun crowd redefine the term we were losing out.

Hoosier Daddy wrote:

jimlongley wrote:

pfgrone wrote:Seriously, is there a legal definition for "assault rifle" or is it all in the eyes of the beholder?

An assault rifle, is a full automatic or select fire long gun of intermediate caliber.

Merriam-Webster has a slightly different definition.

"Main Entry: assault rifle
Function: noun
Date: 1972
: any of various automatic or semi-automatic rifles with large capacity magazines designed for military use"

Please name for me a functioning, modern, professional military the uses a semi-auto only carbine/rifle as their main small arm battle weapon?

jimlongley wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:Before George bush senior gave the definition a negative connotation by banning them, we were not sensitive about calling any military looking weapon an assault rifle. Most folks still refer to a military looking weapon as an assault rifle. Just as most folks refer to certain rifles as deer rifles. B.B. (before bush), gun shows had signs all over the place advertising assault rifles. They had the typical semi auto military looking weapons under the signs.

All that changes when you get on gun forums which are typically inhabited by a more hard core crowd. Kind of like getting on a huffington post forum and calling a liberal democrat a socialist. Everyone knows that is what they are, but it makes them uncomfortable when you say it.

I spent years before then trying to convince others that by letting the anti-gun crowd redefine the term we were losing out.

THIS

And it's already done. As seen above even dictionaries have the new inaccurate definition.

jimlongley wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:Before George bush senior gave the definition a negative connotation by banning them from import in 1989, we were not sensitive about calling any military looking weapon an assault rifle. Most folks still refer to a military looking weapon as an assault rifle. Just as most folks refer to certain rifles as deer rifles. B.B. (before bush), gun shows had signs all over the place advertising assault rifles. They had the typical semi auto military looking weapons under the signs.

All that changes when you get on gun forums which are typically inhabited by a more hard core crowd. Kind of like getting on a huffington post forum and calling a liberal democrat a socialist. Everyone knows that is what they are, but it makes them uncomfortable when you say it.

I spent years before then trying to convince others that by letting the anti-gun crowd redefine the term we were losing out.

I think a lot of the issue came into play because there were a certain segment of gun owners that figured we didn't need "those kind" of weapons for hunting. I took an AK47 to the deer lease one time. I took a ribbing like nothing I could ever describe. The big question was "what do you need that thing for". Along with ribbing about how many shots I needed and how many deer I planned to kill. Of course they were mistaken about what the RKBA was all about. They also under estimated the threat from the anti gun crowd.

Truth is... I don't really remember there being much of an issue with AK47's before the incident that caused Bush to sign the import ban into law in 1989. The label... " assualt weapon" conjures up sinister images now that did not exist before 1989. Back in the day, we use to make the distinction ... "full auto assualt weapon" or " semi-auto assualt weapon" . I remember most of us saw nothing sinister about either one. Boy has that changed! I even find myself correcting people on the terminology these days. The media calls it "assualt weapon" to dramatize the story.

You were definitely ahead of your time if you were concerned about the description of a semi auto AK 47 before that time in history. I might add... Correct about it also.


Here is some interesting history on the legal definition of assualt weapon and when it came into existance... 1994....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_As ... eapons_Ban" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


edit to correct my date inaccuracies...

Bush was signing laws in '94? That's one talented former president!

74novaman wrote:Bush was signing laws in '94? That's one talented former president!

LOL... You are obviously correct. It was Clinton. I was mixing up my dates..and presidents. I plead senior moment. George senior banned the import of "assualt weapons" iN 1989.

Thanks for catching it... Point is... Before the ban of 1994 .... We were not as sensitive to the issue.

pfgrone wrote:Seriously, is there a legal definition for "assault rifle" or is it all in the eyes of the beholder?

I believe the NRA has started using the term "sports rifle" instead of "assault rifle" in an attempt to not let the media define the conservation. Just as they call a deer rifle a "sniper" rifle, they're trying to do the same to military-type rifles.

A-R wrote:Please name for me a functioning, modern, professional military the uses a semi-auto only carbine/rifle as their main small arm battle weapon?

I didn't see anything in the definition that said "main small arm battle weapon".

A-R wrote:And it's already done. As seen above even dictionaries have the new inaccurate definition.

The attribution says '1972', I'm not sure that would be considered 'new'

Carry-a-Kimber wrote:

A-R wrote:Please name for me a functioning, modern, professional military the uses a semi-auto only carbine/rifle as their main small arm battle weapon?

I didn't see anything in the definition that said "main small arm battle weapon".

This is true in 1940s to 1970s, SKS is an example of an excellent semi-auto battle proven rifle. It was effectively used in many places over the world.

Carry-a-Kimber wrote:

Hoosier Daddy wrote:

jimlongley wrote:

pfgrone wrote:Seriously, is there a legal definition for "assault rifle" or is it all in the eyes of the beholder?

An assault rifle, is a full automatic or select fire long gun of intermediate caliber.

Merriam-Webster has a slightly different definition.

"Main Entry: assault rifle
Function: noun
Date: 1972
: any of various automatic or semi-automatic rifles with large capacity magazines designed for military use"

Note the date, and the fact that while they are a fair lexicon, they have been known to be wrong, such as when their definition of "Deep Six" was so awry. Citing them is almost like citing wikipedia these days. I wonder if Webster's is just trying to legitimize the misuse of the term for their anti-gun nut buddies.

The term "Assault Rifle" as such, appears in my "Small Arms of the World" published in 1966, which predates Webster's reference by 6 years, and that's just grabbing the first book at hand that I expected to have the term.

Time for another letter to Webster's.

jimlongley wrote:
I spent years before then trying to convince others that by letting the anti-gun crowd redefine the term we were losing out.

Exactly

Carry-a-Kimber wrote: Merriam-Webster has a slightly different definition.

"Main Entry: assault rifle
Function: noun
Date: 1972
: any of various automatic or semi-automatic rifles with large capacity magazines designed for military use"

So ....they can try to ban the "bazillion capacity" mags, rendering them all "not" assault rifles.
Then, they'll attack the pistol grip/rail/texture/color/size ...