In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

sporting rifle vs assault rifle

remingtonoaksremingtonoaks Member Posts: 27,192
edited February 2019 in General Discussion
I don't know why a person that believes in the second amendment would call a semi-automatic rifle an assault rifle.... It's not, it's a sporting rifle

The liberal scumbags that want to take away your firearms are the ones that invented the word assault rifle for semi automatics to make them look like human killing machines. Why are you playing into their hands?

Comments

  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 23,133 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Not seeing how it has anything to do with the 2nd Amendment.

    Word play may be important to lawmakers, the NRA, and folks that want legislated access to different types of firearms.

    The 2nd Amendment does not distinguish between muzzle loaders, bolt action, lever action, semi-auto, select fire or full auto.

    It seems the average American is content to call an AR-15 an assault rifle. The average American also knows that AR-15s are fairly efficient human killers. Playing with the definition does not change the discussion, and IMO, is a waste of time.

    Better to defend private ownership of 'assault rifles' than to waste time challenging the definition.
    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • bobskibobski Member Posts: 17,868 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    assault rifles have characteristics used to take a position or move forward in (an assault.)
    sporting rifles don't have pig stickers, NV rails, short bbls and folding stocks for in close use, and grenade launchers. nor do sporting rifles have the ability to be more than a rifle in combat. many assault rifles are used to pry things, lift soldiers over walls, smash heads with steel buttplates, etc....

    so there is a difference, but the line is vague and always will be.

    id venture to say the last combat rifle was the M14. seems everything else today is (assault)
    Retired Naval Aviation
    Former Member U.S. Navy Shooting Team
    Former NSSA All American
    Navy Distinguished Pistol Shot
    MO, CT, VA.
  • Mr. PerfectMr. Perfect Member, Moderator Posts: 63,779 ******
    edited November -1
    I love pointing out to the derpy libs that these death machines are so underpowered that many states have outlawed them for hunting deer.
    Some will die in hot pursuit
    And fiery auto crashes
    Some will die in hot pursuit
    While sifting through my ashes
    Some will fall in love with life
    And drink it from a fountain
    That is pouring like an avalanche
    Coming down the mountain
  • remingtonoaksremingtonoaks Member Posts: 27,192
    edited November -1
    As pulled from the dictionary

    "as??sault ri??fle
    noun
    a rapid-fire, magazine-fed automatic rifle designed for infantry use."

    It doesn't say anything about semi-automatic
  • shilowarshilowar Member Posts: 38,807 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by bobski

    sporting rifles don't have pig stickers, NV rails, short bbls and folding stocks for in close use, and grenade launchers. nor do sporting rifles have the ability to be more than a rifle in combat. many assault rifles are used to pry things, lift soldiers over walls, smash heads with steel buttplates, etc....

    so there is a difference


    The only difference is the fire control group....all the things you said weren't on sporting rifles, aside from the authentic grenade launchers are available, over the counter no special forms needed.
  • remingtonoaksremingtonoaks Member Posts: 27,192
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    Not seeing how it has anything to do with the 2nd Amendment.

    Word play may be important to lawmakers, the NRA, and folks that want legislated access to different types of firearms.

    The 2nd Amendment does not distinguish between muzzle loaders, bolt action, lever action, semi-auto, select fire or full auto.

    It seems the average American is content to call an AR-15 an assault rifle. The average American also knows that AR-15s are fairly efficient human killers. Playing with the definition does not change the discussion, and IMO, is a waste of time.

    Better to defend private ownership of 'assault rifles' than attempt to challenge the definition.


    I suppose that you're fine using gender-neutral terms, lockers and restrooms too... With your way of thinking, it shouldn't matter[V][V]
  • dfletcherdfletcher Member Posts: 8,154 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    We let the other side get away unchallenged using the term "assault weapon" for so long - and "hi-capacity magazine too - that they've gained legitimacy. And gun companies sometimes use the phrase themselves, which I don't think helps us.

    The courts need to reign in any legislature using this term as a pretext to restricting or prohibiting. Because it has no meaning as currently being used. It's as though a state could redefine aspirin as methamphetamine and in doing so restrict or prohibit.

    I'm encouraged that in a 3rd Circuit Court decision then Judge Kavanaugh in effect said that an "assault weapon" is nothing more than a semi-auto firearm, which are protected by Heller.
  • 0rangeD0rangeD Member Posts: 115
    edited November -1
    I suggest the term "intermediate carbine",sounds very un-buzzword
  • mnrivrat48mnrivrat48 Member Posts: 1,715 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:It seems the average American is content to call an AR-15 an assault rifle. The average American also knows that AR-15s are fairly efficient human killers. Playing with the definition does not change the discussion, and IMO, is a waste of time.


    I see your point, but words do matter. To the average crowd, using the word "assault" has the connotation of being assaulted, or the purpose of assaulting in the case of rifles like the AR-15. The use of the word is important in the how people perceive the rifle.

    It is that connotation that makes it easier for anti gun people to sell their philosophy of the AR-15 and other military look alike rifles as being somehow an evil object.

    If it was not for the use of that word the anti gun people would have less impact when talking about a ban on a semi-auto rifle. The same is true when they use the word auto leaving out the word semi in the prefix. It can also bring about a different connotation to those who do not know the difference.
  • mjrfd99mjrfd99 Member Posts: 4,571 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Libsuk media pounds into the heads of morons "assault weapon" and demonrat goo gobblers parrot the same. Like I said brainwashing morons is easy.
  • babunbabun Member Posts: 11,497
    edited November -1
    My take on this whole thing about terms and names is totally BS.

    The 2nd Amendment, just like the rest of the Constitution, is for the
    government to abide by. NOT the citizens. It doesn't give the right of the people to bear arms, "rights" can be changed or removed.
    IT TELLS THE GOVERNMENT NOT TO INFRINGE ON GUN OWNERSHIP.

    It didn't matter 200 years ago, or 2 years ago what type of firearm
    the people had. The government shall NOT infringe on the bearing of them.
  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 23,133 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by remingtonoaks
    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    Not seeing how it has anything to do with the 2nd Amendment.

    Word play may be important to lawmakers, the NRA, and folks that want legislated access to different types of firearms.

    The 2nd Amendment does not distinguish between muzzle loaders, bolt action, lever action, semi-auto, select fire or full auto.

    It seems the average American is content to call an AR-15 an assault rifle. The average American also knows that AR-15s are fairly efficient human killers. Playing with the definition does not change the discussion, and IMO, is a waste of time.

    Better to defend private ownership of 'assault rifles' than attempt to challenge the definition.


    I suppose that you're fine using gender-neutral terms, lockers and restrooms too... With your way of thinking, it shouldn't matter[V][V]


    Not seeing the connection, but no, I like things I can understand, and I do not understand the gender-neutral thing.

    Bottom line is when someone says assault rifle, everyone knows what they are referencing. Self-appointed purists challenge the definition, but we all know that when someone talks about an assault weapons ban they are not referring the Class 3 weapons. They are referring, in general, to magazine fed military style weapons.

    If one is having a discussion with someone who supports such a ban, you make zero headway when you whine about how an AR-15 or clone is not an assault rifle.

    You know what is being discussed.

    They know what is being discussed.

    The goal is to address the underlying concept, not the trivialities of the words being used.
    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 23,133 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by mnrivrat48
    quote:It seems the average American is content to call an AR-15 an assault rifle. The average American also knows that AR-15s are fairly efficient human killers. Playing with the definition does not change the discussion, and IMO, is a waste of time.


    I see your point, but words do matter. To the average crowd, using the word "assault" has the connotation of being assaulted, or the purpose of assaulting in the case of rifles like the AR-15. The use of the word is important in the how people perceive the rifle.

    It is that connotation that makes it easier for anti gun people to sell their philosophy of the AR-15 and other military look alike rifles as being somehow an evil object.

    If it was not for the use of that word the anti gun people would have less impact when talking about a ban on a semi-auto rifle. The same is true when they use the word auto leaving out the word semi in the prefix. It can also bring about a different connotation to those who do not know the difference.


    While I fully agree that calling a semi-auto rifle an automatic rifle could sway a conversation, I seriously doubt that the term assault rifle causes more concern than the term AR-15. Anti-gunners are after control, but they are not necessarily stupid.
    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • Mr. PerfectMr. Perfect Member, Moderator Posts: 63,779 ******
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    quote:Originally posted by remingtonoaks
    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    Not seeing how it has anything to do with the 2nd Amendment.

    Word play may be important to lawmakers, the NRA, and folks that want legislated access to different types of firearms.

    The 2nd Amendment does not distinguish between muzzle loaders, bolt action, lever action, semi-auto, select fire or full auto.

    It seems the average American is content to call an AR-15 an assault rifle. The average American also knows that AR-15s are fairly efficient human killers. Playing with the definition does not change the discussion, and IMO, is a waste of time.

    Better to defend private ownership of 'assault rifles' than attempt to challenge the definition.


    I suppose that you're fine using gender-neutral terms, lockers and restrooms too... With your way of thinking, it shouldn't matter[V][V]


    Not seeing the connection, but no, I like things I can understand, and I do not understand the gender-neutral thing.

    Bottom line is when someone says assault rifle, everyone knows what they are referencing. Self-appointed purists challenge the definition, but we all know that when someone talks about an assault weapons ban they are not referring the Class 3 weapons. They are referring, in general, to magazine fed military style weapons.

    If one is having a discussion with someone who supports such a ban, you make zero headway when you whine about how an AR-15 or clone is not an assault rifle.

    You know what is being discussed.

    They know what is being discussed.

    The goal is to address the underlying concept, not the trivialities of the words being used.
    Don, you're being too generous when you assume the banner has any iota what they are discussing. I don't believe it. Not for one moment.
    Some will die in hot pursuit
    And fiery auto crashes
    Some will die in hot pursuit
    While sifting through my ashes
    Some will fall in love with life
    And drink it from a fountain
    That is pouring like an avalanche
    Coming down the mountain
  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 23,133 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Mr. Perfect
    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    quote:Originally posted by remingtonoaks
    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    Not seeing how it has anything to do with the 2nd Amendment.

    Word play may be important to lawmakers, the NRA, and folks that want legislated access to different types of firearms.

    The 2nd Amendment does not distinguish between muzzle loaders, bolt action, lever action, semi-auto, select fire or full auto.

    It seems the average American is content to call an AR-15 an assault rifle. The average American also knows that AR-15s are fairly efficient human killers. Playing with the definition does not change the discussion, and IMO, is a waste of time.

    Better to defend private ownership of 'assault rifles' than attempt to challenge the definition.


    I suppose that you're fine using gender-neutral terms, lockers and restrooms too... With your way of thinking, it shouldn't matter[V][V]


    Not seeing the connection, but no, I like things I can understand, and I do not understand the gender-neutral thing.

    Bottom line is when someone says assault rifle, everyone knows what they are referencing. Self-appointed purists challenge the definition, but we all know that when someone talks about an assault weapons ban they are not referring the Class 3 weapons. They are referring, in general, to magazine fed military style weapons.

    If one is having a discussion with someone who supports such a ban, you make zero headway when you whine about how an AR-15 or clone is not an assault rifle.

    You know what is being discussed.

    They know what is being discussed.

    The goal is to address the underlying concept, not the trivialities of the words being used.
    Don, you're being too generous when you assume the banner has any iota what they are discussing. I don't believe it. Not for one moment.


    I don't think the average gun banner cares if it is a Mini-14, a Remington 7400 or a AR-15. The overall goal is to remove any semi-auto rifle from general use. They pretend they only want the evil-looking guns, but they will not be happy until we are reduced to bolt or lever action rifles, and then they will go after them.

    It is a battle of principle and liberty vs. tyranny. While there are no doubt many that are ignorant, those that are attempting to impose their will upon us know exactly what they are doing.
    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • wpagewpage Member Posts: 10,203 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    A matter of classification. 4F like Frank Sinatra Vs 1A like others that served. Or Disabled for gov benefits vs healthy and not benefits with obvious problems. So your dads winchester 100 308 carbine is harmless and your m1 carbine is a mass murder machine?

    Only your lawmaker knows for sure?
  • Mr. PerfectMr. Perfect Member, Moderator Posts: 63,779 ******
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    quote:Originally posted by Mr. Perfect
    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    quote:Originally posted by remingtonoaks
    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    Not seeing how it has anything to do with the 2nd Amendment.

    Word play may be important to lawmakers, the NRA, and folks that want legislated access to different types of firearms.

    The 2nd Amendment does not distinguish between muzzle loaders, bolt action, lever action, semi-auto, select fire or full auto.

    It seems the average American is content to call an AR-15 an assault rifle. The average American also knows that AR-15s are fairly efficient human killers. Playing with the definition does not change the discussion, and IMO, is a waste of time.

    Better to defend private ownership of 'assault rifles' than attempt to challenge the definition.


    I suppose that you're fine using gender-neutral terms, lockers and restrooms too... With your way of thinking, it shouldn't matter[V][V]


    Not seeing the connection, but no, I like things I can understand, and I do not understand the gender-neutral thing.

    Bottom line is when someone says assault rifle, everyone knows what they are referencing. Self-appointed purists challenge the definition, but we all know that when someone talks about an assault weapons ban they are not referring the Class 3 weapons. They are referring, in general, to magazine fed military style weapons.

    If one is having a discussion with someone who supports such a ban, you make zero headway when you whine about how an AR-15 or clone is not an assault rifle.

    You know what is being discussed.

    They know what is being discussed.

    The goal is to address the underlying concept, not the trivialities of the words being used.
    Don, you're being too generous when you assume the banner has any iota what they are discussing. I don't believe it. Not for one moment.


    I don't think the average gun banner cares if it is a Mini-14, a Remington 7400 or a AR-15. The overall goal is to remove any semi-auto rifle from general use. They pretend they only want the evil-looking guns, but they will not be happy until we are reduced to bolt or lever action rifles, and then they will go after them.

    It is a battle of principle and liberty vs. tyranny. While there are no doubt many that are ignorant, those that are attempting to impose their will upon us know exactly what they are doing.


    I still believe it's a valid strategy to undermine any of their arguments by demonstrating their lack of any knowledge on the topic.
    Some will die in hot pursuit
    And fiery auto crashes
    Some will die in hot pursuit
    While sifting through my ashes
    Some will fall in love with life
    And drink it from a fountain
    That is pouring like an avalanche
    Coming down the mountain
  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 23,133 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Mr. Perfect
    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    quote:Originally posted by Mr. Perfect
    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    quote:Originally posted by remingtonoaks
    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    Not seeing how it has anything to do with the 2nd Amendment.

    Word play may be important to lawmakers, the NRA, and folks that want legislated access to different types of firearms.

    The 2nd Amendment does not distinguish between muzzle loaders, bolt action, lever action, semi-auto, select fire or full auto.

    It seems the average American is content to call an AR-15 an assault rifle. The average American also knows that AR-15s are fairly efficient human killers. Playing with the definition does not change the discussion, and IMO, is a waste of time.

    Better to defend private ownership of 'assault rifles' than attempt to challenge the definition.


    I suppose that you're fine using gender-neutral terms, lockers and restrooms too... With your way of thinking, it shouldn't matter[V][V]


    Not seeing the connection, but no, I like things I can understand, and I do not understand the gender-neutral thing.

    Bottom line is when someone says assault rifle, everyone knows what they are referencing. Self-appointed purists challenge the definition, but we all know that when someone talks about an assault weapons ban they are not referring the Class 3 weapons. They are referring, in general, to magazine fed military style weapons.

    If one is having a discussion with someone who supports such a ban, you make zero headway when you whine about how an AR-15 or clone is not an assault rifle.

    You know what is being discussed.

    They know what is being discussed.

    The goal is to address the underlying concept, not the trivialities of the words being used.
    Don, you're being too generous when you assume the banner has any iota what they are discussing. I don't believe it. Not for one moment.


    I don't think the average gun banner cares if it is a Mini-14, a Remington 7400 or a AR-15. The overall goal is to remove any semi-auto rifle from general use. They pretend they only want the evil-looking guns, but they will not be happy until we are reduced to bolt or lever action rifles, and then they will go after them.

    It is a battle of principle and liberty vs. tyranny. While there are no doubt many that are ignorant, those that are attempting to impose their will upon us know exactly what they are doing.


    I still believe it's a valid strategy to undermine any of their arguments by demonstrating their lack of any knowledge on the topic.


    Conceptual knowledge is important, and if you truly believe the person doesn't know what he is saying, I would agree. Most of the time, however, people who use the term 'assault rifle' as in an Assault Weapons Ban, are referring to a semi-auto military style weapon. It is more important, IMO, to try to educate them as to why the concept of banning in incorrect than to try and score style points as to an improper use of a term that has widely become accepted in its meaning in the general population.
    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • Mr. PerfectMr. Perfect Member, Moderator Posts: 63,779 ******
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    quote:Originally posted by Mr. Perfect
    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    quote:Originally posted by Mr. Perfect
    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    quote:Originally posted by remingtonoaks
    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    Not seeing how it has anything to do with the 2nd Amendment.

    Word play may be important to lawmakers, the NRA, and folks that want legislated access to different types of firearms.

    The 2nd Amendment does not distinguish between muzzle loaders, bolt action, lever action, semi-auto, select fire or full auto.

    It seems the average American is content to call an AR-15 an assault rifle. The average American also knows that AR-15s are fairly efficient human killers. Playing with the definition does not change the discussion, and IMO, is a waste of time.

    Better to defend private ownership of 'assault rifles' than attempt to challenge the definition.


    I suppose that you're fine using gender-neutral terms, lockers and restrooms too... With your way of thinking, it shouldn't matter[V][V]


    Not seeing the connection, but no, I like things I can understand, and I do not understand the gender-neutral thing.

    Bottom line is when someone says assault rifle, everyone knows what they are referencing. Self-appointed purists challenge the definition, but we all know that when someone talks about an assault weapons ban they are not referring the Class 3 weapons. They are referring, in general, to magazine fed military style weapons.

    If one is having a discussion with someone who supports such a ban, you make zero headway when you whine about how an AR-15 or clone is not an assault rifle.

    You know what is being discussed.

    They know what is being discussed.

    The goal is to address the underlying concept, not the trivialities of the words being used.
    Don, you're being too generous when you assume the banner has any iota what they are discussing. I don't believe it. Not for one moment.


    I don't think the average gun banner cares if it is a Mini-14, a Remington 7400 or a AR-15. The overall goal is to remove any semi-auto rifle from general use. They pretend they only want the evil-looking guns, but they will not be happy until we are reduced to bolt or lever action rifles, and then they will go after them.

    It is a battle of principle and liberty vs. tyranny. While there are no doubt many that are ignorant, those that are attempting to impose their will upon us know exactly what they are doing.


    I still believe it's a valid strategy to undermine any of their arguments by demonstrating their lack of any knowledge on the topic.


    Conceptual knowledge is important, and if you truly believe the person doesn't know what he is saying, I would agree. Most of the time, however, people who use the term 'assault rifle' as in an Assault Weapons Ban, are referring to a semi-auto military style weapon. It is more important, IMO, to try to educate them as to why the concept of banning in incorrect than to try and score style points as to an improper use of a term that has widely become accepted in its meaning in the general population.
    Generally, it is something specific that they want to ban (obviously on their way to total bans) and when they don't know anything about the specific thing they want to ban, or what it's even properly called. There can be no strength to their argument as to why it should be banned. They want to ban an "assault rifle" without having any clue as to what an assault rifle is. I still contend that terms are important even if the meaning is supposedly understood, primarily because the law does not operate on understandings, but on factual considerations.
    Some will die in hot pursuit
    And fiery auto crashes
    Some will die in hot pursuit
    While sifting through my ashes
    Some will fall in love with life
    And drink it from a fountain
    That is pouring like an avalanche
    Coming down the mountain
  • remingtonoaksremingtonoaks Member Posts: 27,192
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    quote:Originally posted by Mr. Perfect
    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    quote:Originally posted by Mr. Perfect
    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    quote:Originally posted by remingtonoaks
    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    Not seeing how it has anything to do with the 2nd Amendment.

    Word play may be important to lawmakers, the NRA, and folks that want legislated access to different types of firearms.

    The 2nd Amendment does not distinguish between muzzle loaders, bolt action, lever action, semi-auto, select fire or full auto.

    It seems the average American is content to call an AR-15 an assault rifle. The average American also knows that AR-15s are fairly efficient human killers. Playing with the definition does not change the discussion, and IMO, is a waste of time.

    Better to defend private ownership of 'assault rifles' than attempt to challenge the definition.


    I suppose that you're fine using gender-neutral terms, lockers and restrooms too... With your way of thinking, it shouldn't matter[V][V]


    Not seeing the connection, but no, I like things I can understand, and I do not understand the gender-neutral thing.

    Bottom line is when someone says assault rifle, everyone knows what they are referencing. Self-appointed purists challenge the definition, but we all know that when someone talks about an assault weapons ban they are not referring the Class 3 weapons. They are referring, in general, to magazine fed military style weapons.

    If one is having a discussion with someone who supports such a ban, you make zero headway when you whine about how an AR-15 or clone is not an assault rifle.

    You know what is being discussed.

    They know what is being discussed.

    The goal is to address the underlying concept, not the trivialities of the words being used.
    Don, you're being too generous when you assume the banner has any iota what they are discussing. I don't believe it. Not for one moment.


    I don't think the average gun banner cares if it is a Mini-14, a Remington 7400 or a AR-15. The overall goal is to remove any semi-auto rifle from general use. They pretend they only want the evil-looking guns, but they will not be happy until we are reduced to bolt or lever action rifles, and then they will go after them.

    It is a battle of principle and liberty vs. tyranny. While there are no doubt many that are ignorant, those that are attempting to impose their will upon us know exactly what they are doing.


    I still believe it's a valid strategy to undermine any of their arguments by demonstrating their lack of any knowledge on the topic.


    Conceptual knowledge is important, and if you truly believe the person doesn't know what he is saying, I would agree. Most of the time, however, people who use the term 'assault rifle' as in an Assault Weapons Ban, are referring to a semi-auto military style weapon. It is more important, IMO, to try to educate them as to why the concept of banning in incorrect than to try and score style points as to an improper use of a term that has widely become accepted in its meaning in the general population.


    It is important to educate. But then how many of their minds are so twisted against an AR-15 sporting rifle because it has been falsely deemed an "assault rifle" that they'll never listen... A vast majority of them that I've run across are like this.

    The first part of education is not calling the alphabets the numbers, and the numbers the alphabets
Sign In or Register to comment.