These weapons are not created to plant trees and grow peace in developing countries. These weapons are created with the intent, ability, and power for assault and therefore are rightfully called assault weapons. People can and do use these weapons for a different purpose on a regular basis but that does not alter their ability to kill easily.
I don't see how you can't call it an assault weapon if it can mow people down as effortlessly as some of these rifles do. With that acknowledged, it's not a good definition for legislation, something much more specific and clear needs to be put into place. We can't ban assault weapons if we can't case by case determine what one is, the last ban was pointless for that reason.
It is unfair to assign a name intended to mislead ignorant people to guns which, no matter how they may look, function just like any other. AR15's are not machine guns or "high powered", they're just rifles that fire a small bullet from a magazine. Rather like a handgun. Feinstein is a moron.
I think it is not at all fair to call them assault weapons. Not everyone who owns one of these weapons has the capacity or wants to assault anything or anyone. A lot of these weapons are not used for direct assault, but they are used for defending what is ours, our country and our freedom. Not everyone just goes around assaulting other people with these types or guns,.
No, it is not fair to call them assault weapons because that is not what they are all used for. What about defense weapons? Not everyone with a weapon whats to immediately just start assaulting people. MOST people carry a weapon because they fear that person and want to defend themselves if worse comes to worse.