What’s An ‘Assault Rifle,’ Anyway?

For Governments and Criminals Only...

For Governments and Criminals Only…

Disarming the U.S. public is a Lefty thing; the Right clings to the Second Amendment explicitly preventing that act. More or less, anyway. The usual lies, damn lies and statistics are held up in support of whichever side one may favor but one question has been annoying me: All the Lefties are hemorrhaging over guns but reserving their public bile for ‘assault rifles.’ What the Hell is an ‘assault rifle’ anyway? I mean, can’t you assault someone with any old rifle that happens to be laying around?

If you go by today’s ‘debate’ on gun ownership, you have to conclude that no, certain types of guns are no danger in public hands whereas others are horrendous risks and besides that, prima-facie evidence of ill intentions. With this, the definition of ‘assault rifle’ becomes very important, right? So what is and what isn’t an ‘assault rifle’?

A simple-minded soul might suppose that an assault rifle is a firearm for use in assaults except that any firearm meets that designation. So let’s back up: an assault rifle is any rifle that is limited to use in assaults. Is that better? Well, not really; the standard military AR-15 is certainly a generic assault weapon but hunters and home defense folk also use it. I thought that the pictured weapon above, with its multiple military weaponry built into one package might qualify until someone mentioned stopping charging elephants.

Some legislators seem to think semi-automatic operation or magazines holding more than “X” bullets should define the case but do you want to hunt bears with a single shot rifle? That’s what I thought. And should someone be a criminal over his rifle holding 13 rather than 12 bullets? How many lives will that save?

Seems to me, the Left wants all guns gone, but knowing that the gun tradition is still too strong for that, is just chipping away to establish the idea of limiting firepower. Like the 5,000 lawyers at the bottom of the sea: a good start.

Forget that police departments everywhere are acquiring military weapons to deal with the bad guys who already use them. And especially, forget that the whole point of guns in civil hands is to hold off government. The entire ‘assault weapon’ shtick is just to weaken civilian firepower in the face of government. For the Left, a legal weapon is any in the hands of government, pointed at civilians. An ‘assault weapon’ is any in the hands of civilians, that just might some day, be pointed at government. Yes, that’s politically very incorrect; the guys who first said and wrote it are all dead now. They’re called: “America’s Founders.”.

Some still think they were onto something…

About Jack Curtis

Suspicious of government, doubtful of economics, fond of figure skating (but the off-ice part, not so much)
This entry was posted in Assassination, Big Brother, Constitution, Domestic Policy, Guns, Homeland Security, Hunters, Liberty, Politics and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to What’s An ‘Assault Rifle,’ Anyway?

  1. Rawclyde! says:

    Pretty hard getting past the 1st sentence here when common sense gun regulation is the lefty thing. Disarming the U.S. public is an NRA misinformation thing about the lefty thing.

    An assault weapon in the hands of a nutcake killed 20 first graders and their teachers. So what else are these weapons good for?

    I don’t mean to be blunt, but…

    • Jack Curtis says:

      Blunt is good, saves time and foolishness.Your views are welcome. My view assigns disarming the public to the Left since that’s where the leaders of the present push are located. In general, Right wing folk share the goal, and with the same motives. I don’t think it started with the NRA though of course, it uses it. Governments have kept the masses of population unarmed throughout history. My point is, all guns are useful for assault so all guns are assault weapons. The military AR-15 was created for war but used for may other things in private hands.. Which is the ‘assault weapon between the AR-15 used for targets and the old, single-shot revolver used to murder someone? If you disagree with the Founder’s views on an armed populace to restrain government, so be it; we disagree. And I still don’t know what is honestly an assault weapon…

      • Rawclyde! says:

        The anti-assault weapon venom, I think, is derived from the quantity of innocents murdered. The lefties want to, many of them have said, limit the quantity. 12 dead is better than 20 dead. I believe that’s their number one argument for getting rid of semi-automatic weapons with the capability of high-capacity magazine or drum enhancement…

        The 2nd Amendment’s purpose is obviously to provide for a “well regulated militia”. Thomas Jefferson, in some other piece of writing, brought up the idea of an additional purpose of the amendment being to discourage tyranny…

        The proposed ban of assault weapons is often considered to be too high on the totem-pole of the left-wing wish-list to be valid. But its presence in the proposals make the other proposed gun regulations more likely…

        There. I believe I got pretty objective here. I appreciate extremely this dialogue. Thank you, Mr. Curtis.

        Oh, I almost forgot. We both believe the 2nd amendment is a pretty good cushion against tyranny…

      • Jack Curtis says:

        You likely got about as objective as is available, seems to me. I suspect the anti-gun folk (not, by any means, limited to the Left) divide into those wishing to limit mayhem as you mention, and those wishing to disarm as the ultimate goal. Since even the local police now need military weapons to face the bad guys, plus body armor and light tanks, those espousing the anti tyrant view will have to defend private missles pretty soon, seems to me…We have a nice little arms race between the government and the governed; wonder what that will lead to?

  2. dakwolf55 says:

    Why do the local police need military weapons to face the bad guys, now?

    • Jack Curtis says:

      As I understand it, military surplus has been equipping U.S. bank robbers, Mexican drug merchants and African Islamists with AK-47’s, AR-15’s etc. to the point that cops now equip themselves with body armor, military weapons and so on or are outgunned. It seems notable here that U.S. Homeland Security was just reported to have ordered 2,700 light tanks. For that, your guess is as good as mine…

  3. dakwolf55 says:

    As the US Military does not use AK-47s or AR-15s, and since all automatic/burst fire weapons (i.e. M-16s, SAWs etc) are tightly controlled under federal legislation, as is importing such weapons, so federal failure to enforce already existing laws is to blame?

    • Jack Curtis says:

      To blame for what? Nuts killing people? Seems to me, that requires dealing with the nuts, their choice of tools is secondary at best. Anyway, I’ll believe a government can prevent guns as soon as one prevents drugs. We kicked all the nuts out of the asylums into the streets decades ago and public nutty behavior is a side effect of that money-saving measure by government. As stated, automatic guns have been illegal for a long time but those who want one can find one because government keeps them in production for its wars.. and if someone you fear has one, then you need one, right?

      • dakwolf55 says:

        Well if someone (other than the nuts killing people, I mean), is to be blamed then it should be….the attorney general for not enforcing already existing laws.

        You are correct, of course, that the people doing the killing are to blame for killing, I’m merely stating since people like the senator from California, who are desperate to place blame on someone, they need only look in the mirror.

        As far as needing one if someone you fear has one, I dare say that is the basis of the whole M.A.D. theory. While its validity is debatable, it has been used successfully in the past.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s