Boats
Broken Member
An assault weapon is whatever the law says it is.
Like women!
"we will know it when we see it"
The classic definition of an assault rifle holds that the firearm must meet five specific criteria…
1) It must be a carbine;
2) it must fire a medium power cartridge;
3) it must fire from a locked breech;
4) it must be fed by a detachable magazine,
and
5) it must be select-fire.
It doesn’t have to have a pistol grip…it doesn’t have to have a bayonet lug…it doesn’t have to have a polymer stock…it doesn’t have to have a collapsible or folding stock…it must meet the above five criteria.
Any rifle that fires high power ammunition such as 7.62x51, .30-06, .303 Brit, 7.62x54 or similar…are Main Battle Rifles such as the M1 Garand, M1903 Springfield, SMLE, 1891 Mosin-Nagant…bolt-action…Semi-automatic…select-fire…they’re not assault rifles.
No amount of legislation changes that definition…as much as antis want. To legislatively define these as assault rifles is like changing math to read 2+2=5 instead of four…but the law is the law even if wrong until it can be properly changed to reality and facts.
The pro-gun side should take at least some responsibility for the misuse of the term “assault rifle”…they’ve been promoted as such and referred to that way for years. It sounds hot and sexy to use the term…no matter how wrongly.
Sorry for the thread drift. Rant over.
You are correct. But an assault RIFLE is an actual thing. An assault WEAPON is a made up political buzzword