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.
Well this educational institution...
Mr. Perfect
Member, Moderator Posts: 66,381 ******
... should offer a lot of folks refunds.
"Assault weapon
“An assault weapon is generally defined as something that was originally used in the military,” McDevitt says. Assault weapons have “very large bullets that do a lot of damage,” and can be semi-automatic (like an AR-15) or automatic (like an AK-47)."
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
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
Comments
The AR stands for Assault Rifle. Don
Well after injesting all of that maybe now I'll be allowed on th expert's forum!
You’re kidding, right?
AR stands for Andy Rooney
That's what the libtards will tell ya.
Well, they did appropriate the term, "Assault Rifle" from Hitler, so I guess they can use it how they want. I pretty much know what the libbies are describing, inaccurately, when they use that term. I wish somebody could explain what geriatric Joe means by High Caliber though. Of course he admits that he has a couple of shotguns and those have a lot more oomph that that lung destroying High Caliber 9mm that he was talking about. So is a 12 GA slug load a High Caliber, Higher Caliber, totally awesome caliber, Corn Pop killer? I am so confused....! Bob
Sorry, no. "Sturm" is German for storm (as in Storm Trooper, i.e., "Sturmtruppen"), not "assault". That the StG-44 has been retroactively attributed by a number of gun rag hacks as the "first assault rifle" is a bunch of hooey. Fact is, there is not a single military or civilian document in either German or English which, contemporary to its design and issue, refers to the Stg-44 as an "assault rifle". Not one. Nor is there now, nor has there ever been, any rifle in any world military with the nomenclature "assault rifle".
An "assault rifle" is a linguistic invention, first used to describe the Beretta BM-59 in its sales literature in the early 60's. The term was later used in the 70's, again by gun rag hacks, to demarcate medium-caliber military rifles (5.56mm, 7.62x39mm, etc.) from their full-power brothers or "battle rifles" (7.62x51, 30-06, etc.). People have been puking up this gratuitous distinction for nearly half a century, yet the practical purpose and use of both are indistinguishable
Then in the 80's, politicians (primarily in California) used the term "assault rifle" to describe a rifle with a certain aggregate of features or components (e.g., semi-automatic fire, detachable magazine exceeding ten rounds, pistol grip, bayonet lug, etc.). Labeling a rifle with these features an "assault rifle" made them more amenable to control (i.e., easier to legislate against).
Assault rifles exist only in language, not in the world. In this regard, the term "assault rifle" is no different than the term "unicorn", wherein, on basis of one knowing what the term means, wrongly believes it must actually exist.
You didn't hear the dripping sarcasm in that sentence?
Of course I did. Just jerking dcon’s chain.
Don doesn't have a chain. He has a sequined collar with "I❤️BRUNO MARS" inscribed on it.
Well, there has been some debate about that over the years. The German civilian usage does mean storm as in weather, The German military usage can also mean to rush or attack. That is where storm trooper gets its most likely definition. A synonym for attack is assault. I guess you can see where I am going with this.
However, our big worry is not whether or not it is a made-up term, but the fact that our government has recognized it as far back as 1994 with the 10 year assault weapons ban. If you go back and read that act it defines an assault weapon as a semiautomatic rifle with certain characteristics like a folding stock or pistol grip. So no matter what you and I think, our ill informed politicians decided what an "assault rifle" was 28 years ago. The ship has sailed as far as getting rid of the assault rifle term I am afraid. Bob
You obviously have a gift for non sequitur.
Well no, I don't think so. If you are referring to my comments about stormtroopers then I think you are mistaken. The Nazi party had 3 military organizations before Hitler assumed power. The SS which was charged with protecting the party and its leaders. The Gestapo or secret police who's exploits are infamous and the SA or storm troopers charged with being the offensive force, attacking (assaulting) the jews, gypsies and any of their sympathizers. Hence the military usage of Sturm meaning attack. The military usage of the word sturm does predate the Nazi party by quite a bit which is easy to research.
If you are referring to my saying the ship has sailed on being able to get rid of the inaccurate term assault rifle or weapon, I wish you could explain how it can be done. Language unfortunately evolves, sometimes in a good way and quite often in ways that are unfortunate. Bob
Thanks for again proving my point.
FYI, the term "Stormtrooper" or "Sturmtruppen" literally meant "shock" or "shove" truppen and issued from the Imperial German Army of WWI, not the Nazi party of WWII. Retrofitting word meaning to fit popular disinformation re: the StG-44 is irrelevant; what is relevant is that the view that the StG-44 was the "first assault rifle" did not rise until forty years after WWII. Contemporary historical records for the StG-44 refer to the "sturm" designation only as "shock" or "shove", exactly as with the bolt action 98 that preceded it decades before.
California had an assault rifle ban in 1989.
"Water under the bridge"? You mean like Jews being called "Golem" in 30's Germany? As for "assault rifles", I suppose education would be a good start, starting with self-professed gun people who are as guilty of acceptance and use of the misnomer "assault rifle" as the most devout anti-gunner.
AR stands for automatic rifle.
Every time DancesWithSheep posts, I have to get out the dictionary.
Not sure what point was made as we seem to agree on more than we disagree. Languages evolve and the context in which a word is used is important. Here is the history of the word storm ;
You will notice it is the old or middle English equivalent of the word sturm. In one context it means a weather condition and in a military context it means attack. For instance; A storm on the beach means rain, wind, etc... To storm the beach means to attack. Same word, same location, two different contexts and two different meanings. I am aware of the WW1 usage of the term Sturmtruppen and doesn't shock or shove in that context refer to assault on either ideology or persons?
We both agree that the term assault rifle is an incorrect and made up term. It is the more modern day interpretation of sturmgewehr. Unfortunately, that is the way languages evolve. We both disapprove of the use of the term but understand what those that use it are referring to. Your point about California enacting a ban strengthens the point that I made about our "glorious leaders" already accepting and thereby strengthening the usage and definition of the term to influence the uneducated masses. Trying to change that term now used by the masses, while it may be a noble effort, would be futile and a waste of time. Bob
I always thought AR stood for ArmaLite.
This is an empirical issue, not an etymological one. Nor is begging the question reasoned rejoinder. If you have any civilian or military record contemporary to release of the Stg-44 that translates or otherwise assigns meaning of the word "sturm" differently than that of the Imperial German Army, you need only present it. If you have evidence that the last-ditch Walther Volkssturmgewehr VG 1 is NOT a manually operated bolt-action rifle, you need only present it. If you have any document, civilian or military, that before the early 80's refers to the StG-44 as "the first assault rifle", you need only present it. If you can find any world military who uses the term "assault rifle" as nomenclature for its issued shoulder weapons, you need only present it.
As for what you consider noble but futile and a waste of time, that is merely your personal sentiment on the matter, wholly void of logic, reason, argument or evidence. Anyone can share their feelings; a child can do as much, and as little,
This thread is a prime example of why the left keeps handing us our butts on gun control issues. We get bogged down in minutia and they just plow recklessly along.
"Can't we all just get along?"
'Prolly not...
More mindless, unsupported sentiment. Widespread misuse of the term "assault rifle" is not an example of minutia; it is bedrock to the demonization of guns in America. Why the left keeps handing us our butts on gun control is precisely the kumbaya, can't-we-all-get-along attitude among supposed pro-gun people who believe that merely having an opposing view is the same as having an intelligent argument.
From the Posting Guidelines:
"In general we expect everyone to act like adults and to show respect for each other, just as you would if the other parties were guests in your home...."
That certainly was gratuitous. That you consider the above exchanges childlike or disrespectful renders any disagreement with cause a violation of posting guidelines. If you would have cited the offense prompting your post, it would have helped understand what on your view constitutes "not acting as adults" and/or "not showing respect for each other".
You evidently missed where I said " modern day interpretation" in my comment; Here is an article in Military Today describing the stg44 as the first successful assault rifle;
Here is an article from War History Online mentioning that the Storm rifle, stg44 is often translated to assault rifle;
You can stay hung up and frustrated on when the term was first used but the fact is the term assault rifle is more than a half century old and was based on the stg44 and the influence it had on modern weapons. The fact that politicians and the general public now use that term to describe a semi automatic firearm based on its appearances is the problem. Good luck getting the politically or emotionally involved to accept the term modern sporting rifle instead. The anti gunners and even Bubba the gun owner have fought the change. The anti gunners use it because it is an evil emotionally charged term that furthers their cause. Bubba uses it because it sounds cool and inflates his ego by saying he owns an assault rifle. We agree that the term is incorrect, and I don't use it when talking about the modern sporting rifle. Unfortunately, as long as anti gunners and Bubba's exist the term will stick with us. If you have a viable solution for this, I am all ears. Your hostility towards my opinion seems to to be a personal sentiment that you are giving without knowing my firearms background, education or experience. Since you are unwilling to accept anything outside of your narrow viewpoint, I'm done here. Have a great day. Bob
Agreed @jimdeere the way this thread has been going along with a couple of others, is really starting to beg to be closed and/or deleted....I've been restraining myself from closing threads that have disagreements as long as folks are civil, but the incessant back and forth for no real reason except to argue is getting boring....
Nice back-pedal. And still not one word to counter points presented. And still more iterations of same unsupported sentiment.
Imagine that.
Buh-bye
That you characterize the above exchanges as "incessant back and forth for no real reason except to argue" and "getting boring" is to completely misread (I can't even say "misinterpret") the exchanges. That the subject is more complicated than a quip and an emoji and may not be to your interest speaks only to your level of moderation, not the facts of the matter. It is unfortunate that an ongoing colloquy about a topic of considerable importance to pro-gun people with different views is seen as something to be shut down. By all means, let's have more on-topic threads about chicken harvesting and rainbows.
Please do not. The dialog on this topic is something I have wanted for a while on this forum, thus my post. The confusion about the origin of terms has led us to where we are: without effective arguments to counter the left who are "sturmtruppen" all over us currently.
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
Thanks!
Well, ArmaLite Rifle, as I think you know and meant. But, of course folks with a vested interest in not having their rights infringed continue to allow the infringers to re-frame every argument and term, to our detriment, because "we know what they mean". I would argue we have no fricken clue what they mean, because we keep letting them set the rules. Which is, of course a large part of their strategy.
Confusing your opponent is a key strategy that has been used in all manner of warfare and debate for thousands of years and we just keep letting them do that.
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
I'm all for good debates and expressing one's opinions as long as folks are respectful of others and their opinions also. As my fellow moderator pointed out in his post, there are guidelines you are expected to follow, Stay within those and the post will remain.
Well said, Mr. P.
I don't have to explain anything but calling someone "mindless" denigrates an otherwise thought provoking post.
I did not call anyone mindless. Suggest you reread what I said and perhaps look up what the word "mindless" actually means; a misreading (I can't even say "misinterpretation") on your part does not constitute an instance of denigration on my part. And perhaps the attitude expressed in your remark "I don't have to explain anything" accounts for your low intervention threshold in this instance, which in turn may be motivated by personal factors having nothing whatever to do with enforcement of board policy. In any case, I find it amusing that what you as one moderator now consider "an otherwise thought-provoking post" another moderator viewed as an instance of "the incessant back and forth for no real reason". That posts often do not survive prolonged frequentation here based on uneven moderation rather than topic merit and participant interest is unfortunate.
That's it. Two weeks to cool off.
And another one gone. Guess we better keep gun topics to a minimun.
Whew! I didn't see that minor meltdown coming and I apologize for any part I may have had in making it happen.
To get back to the point I was trying to make about the so called "scholars" definition that Mr. P linked to in his original post. Because language, terminology and symbolism are always evolving, I don't know how we can change anyones opinion about the term assault weapon or rifle that the anti-gunners have co-opted.
When I was younger it was perfectly acceptable to use the O.K. sign by making a circle with my thumb and forefinger. Now if I do that I am accused of flashing a white power sign. For thousands of years the swastika was used by many cultures. India for example considers it a good luck symbol. What do you think people would say today if I put that Indian good luck symbol on the gate to my driveway? When I was in math class googol meant 10 to the 100th power. Today if I say that word in a conversation 99% of the people who hear me will think I am using a computer term for a search engine. If you think about it I bet you can come up with many more examples that meant one thing not so long ago and now mean something totally different.
There is way to much misinformation out there about guns, from both sides, and about the only thing we can do is educate ourselves. I have read numerous places that the term assault rifle is a term made up in the 80's. Here is an article that has an excerpt from a 1945 U.S. intelligence report that uses the term;
Historical Firearms - Historical Trivia: How Hitler Coined the Term...
They were referring to a select fire medium caliber military weapon. Now through either malice or ignorance that term has been co-opted and evolved to mean, at least to the anti-gunners, what we gun folk call modern sporting rifles. Will we ever be able to change the opinions of people who have no desire to own or understand firearms that their definition is wrong? They won't let us because it is one of the foundations of their ant-gun rhetoric. We will keep pointing out the erroneous information like the "scholars" article but the only ones listening will be our fellow gun owners. Bob
Why?
No reason to stop posting about gun topics, it wasn't the topic that was boring, it was the peeing contest between members that caused the issue, as you can see the post is still open. what needs to be kept "to a minimum" is disrespect for each other.