My definition is that it must be capable of full auto fire and in current use by one of the worlds modern armies. Civilian versions of military rifles are not assault rifles.
Posted in military assault
Why Weapons Aren't Enough to Keep Your Family Safe? Read More...
Which is the most effective home defense weapon for a home invasion:
Click Here
to learn about the pro's and con's of each as well as the biggest mistake all the "heavy artillery" guys make when choosing "terminator ammo"!
(Hint: It has nothing to do with "stopping power" but it's nearly as important to your family that you get this right! Not doing so could cost you a lifetime of grieving that no law-abiding family should suffer...EVER!) Read More...
December 3rd, 2009 at 1:14 am
Back in caveman days – the rock was an assault rifle.
Eventually the sword became the assault rifle of choice.
When the Constitution of the US was written – the muzzleloading musket was the assault rifle.
In WWI the bolt action Springfield O3A3 was an assault rifle.
In WWII the M1 Garrand was the assault rifle.
In Korea the M14 was the assault rifle
In Vietnam, Desert Storm, and Iraq War the AR-15 and other semi-autos were called assault rifles – but – these are limited versions of the main battle rifles M16 and AK. So, technically, they don’t count.
Somehow, thanks to Political Correctness, we moved as a society to relate firearms with hunting and the needs of hunters. The Second Ammendment doesn’t mention hunting at all – it was written so people could take up arms against the US Governenment if it became oppressive. For this to actually work in this day and age – that would mean ownership of full auto and select fire firearms by the civilian population. Good luck taking your semi-auto assault rifle up against a person with a full auto M4 and plenty of ammo.
Assault rifle is just a fancy term Democrats use to define guns they dislike the most so they can ban them.
December 3rd, 2009 at 1:14 am
well what i think the hippies’ definition is civilian versions of military rifles. i really don’t think that thats the true definition.An assault rifle is a selective fire rifle or carbine firing ammunition with muzzle energies intermediate between those typical of pistol and high-powered rifle ammunition.thats from wikipedia
December 3rd, 2009 at 1:14 am
well if i was a democrat. it would have to be black, a pistol grip, and a flash suppressor.
but if i were an gun loving American it would be a handheld, magazine fed, gas operated being able to fire semi auto or full auto with the flip of a selector switch or lever.
why do the Brady bunch, the hill obama gang want to limit my rights on the Constitution ?
December 3rd, 2009 at 1:14 am
My definition of an "Assault Rifle" would be the AK-47, Primarily used by all enemies of our United States. Although many other weapons would be considered assault weapons, the AK-47 is what comes to mind for me.
December 3rd, 2009 at 1:14 am
I agree, an assault rifle should be a select fire weapon in use by modern armies worldwide.
They should call what is commonly referred to as assualt rifle, tactical rifles, and leave assault rifle terminology on the battlefield where it belongs.
December 3rd, 2009 at 1:14 am
No such thing.
All rifles are inherently good.
It is the nut’s behind the trigger that can be a potential problem up to and including assault with a deadly weapon.
December 3rd, 2009 at 1:14 am
i pretty much agree with you
December 3rd, 2009 at 1:14 am
I’m with you on that one because the term assault rifle was just some phrase coined by the news media. To me, an AR-15, MAK-90 (Civilian AK-47), and the SKS are just semi-automatic rifles like the Ruger 10/22 or the Browning BAR, or other semi-automatic rifles that don’t get bashed by the politicians and the media.
December 3rd, 2009 at 1:14 am
A rifle that fires an intermediate cartridge and has select fire (burst or full auto) capability, and has high capacity detachable magazines is an assault rifle.
In my opinion semi-auto only versions of these rifles are not assault rifles, contrary to what the media and politicians (government) tells you.
December 3rd, 2009 at 1:14 am
The only correction I would make to your definition is that the gun have select fire capabilities not just full auto capability (that’s a machine gun)
The other is the requirement that it be currently in use by some military, especially modern armies
The concept of the select fire assault weapons is kind of old
Some of the early guns are obsolete now and have been abandoned by the armies but are still no less assault weapons
December 3rd, 2009 at 1:14 am
An assault rifle was any rifle that the twisted Clinton Administation found not to there liking.
December 3rd, 2009 at 1:14 am
An "Assault Rifle" is a short select-fire weapon with detachable high Cap. magazines.
An "Assault Weapon" on the other hand, is anything
that looks mean to the ‘Pol.’ speaking at the time.
December 3rd, 2009 at 1:14 am
I believe that the term "assault rifle" was termed by "Hitler" in late 1943 when he witnessed the trial of the MP-43. He coined the name of the new rifle the "Sturmgeuehr" or assault- rifle. the name was changed to the StG44. It fired a new cartridge the 7.92 kurz which was a shortened 7.92 mauser. so was born the first "assault rifle"
December 3rd, 2009 at 1:14 am
My definition is a rifle that is capable of full-auto/semi-auto select in it’s original form, or has been modified from the ability to go full-auto (like an AK that is modified to be semi only).
December 3rd, 2009 at 1:14 am
1. Fires an intermediate power cartridge, i.e. 7.62×39, 7.92x33kutz, 5.56NATO, etc
2. Is capable of burst or full auto fire. Is NOT limited to semiauto only
3. Has a detachable magazine
I don’t think that just because an army stops using the gun that it stops being an assault rifle.
I also don’t classify full powered rifles, even those with detachable mags and full auto capabilities, like the FN-FAL or G-3 or M-14 or AR-10 as assault rifles, I consider those battle rifles.