I spent 20 years in the Navy as a Gunner's Mate, dealing mostly with small arms (weapons that can be carried/held and fired by one person). In the military, no weapon I've ever heard of has ever been referred to as an assault weapon. Technically, the phrase "assault weapon" is slang. That term was coined by a civilian and in regards to civilian weapons that look like military weapons but are not fully automatic; AR-15 (civilian - semi auto) vs M-16 (military - full auto).
Weapons can be defensive in nature, and many weapons which are now called 'assault-style' weapons can, in certain circumstances, be used defensively. These situations are in battlefield combat, however. When applied to civilian life, weapons which may be designed to lay down cover fire or defend stations in combat do not serve this purpose. Their only role here is to spray as much lead as fast as possible. Their role is to kill as many as possible.
I would say yes, because I consider a weapon that is used for its sole purpose to shoot people an assault weapon. If you assault another person and you use a weapon in the assault, then that is a simple enough reason to use the term "assault weapon". I think that when society uses a term and it becomes recognized my the main stream public to have a specific definition, then you have to consider it valid.
There are assault weapons, in the same sense that there are pit bulls. I always get my hackles up when I hear about a pit bull ban, because the term pit bull covers a large number of breeds of dog. In the same sense, the term assault weapon covers a large number of weapons.
The English language is ever evolving, if everyone started calling cars by a new name, then both titles would be acceptable.
I agree, anyone using a gun or any other weapon could be considered an assault weapon. A gun would be an assault weapon because its purpose is to kill for sport or another person. I am not against guns because anything can be turned into an assault weapon, such as a knife, hammer, and chainsaw.
Assault weapons have been defined as such at both the state and federal level. Yes, The term was "coined" out of thin air, Like pretty much all words and phrases. And the word "assault" is both a verb and a noun. Just like the word "murder" or "battery. " This is called nominalization, And it's super common in just about every language. Please stop using this as a valid argument for why they don't exist. It makes no sense.
Light weight, high capacity, meant to fire many rounds, Rambo looking.
There is a reason why SWAT teams do not use sniper rifles when they rush into a house. The Secret Service does not hide biathlon rifles under their suit jackets. There is a difference.
If you are hunting deer with an AR-15 they you are an idiot that just wants to look like a bad-ass. If you need a high capacity rifle to protect your property then you should move to a new area and you should read (or re-read) the New Testament.
There's no logic behind saying there isnt, it's just a word. If a particular style of weapon whether in looks or functionality becomes widely known as something such as an "assault weopon" then it is an assault weopon, humans dictate language and the meaning of words.. You can call it anything you want if it catches on you have changed or added to the definition of that term. People who say there's no such thing are just politically motivated
The term assault weapon is a variation of the term assault rifle that was translated from the Nazis who used the term storm rifle for a particular light machine gun.
Since light machine gun replica ban, assault rifle look alike ban or any variation of what a semi automatic variant actual was didn't sound scary enough so politicians had to come up with a term that Would scare the public and other politicians to support a ban on nothing more then a very common and multipurpose semi automatic rifle.
Chew on this ... Why is it when the military orders M16s they are order by the Department of DEFENSE and not by the Department of ASSAULT. And if a civilian wants to buy a semi automatic look a like, its an assault rifle and not a defense rifle.
There is no difference between my semiauto 12 gauge hunting shotgun Winchester 1300 or my semiautomatic 22 ruger 10/22 or my Winchester 750 semiauto 30/06 compared to a AR 15 or AR 10. AR does not stand for Assault Rifle. That's the media being stupid. There is a big difference in a M16 and a AR15. Military weapons can be full auto or have a 3 round burst.
You CAN NOT purchase any firearm known as an 'Assault Rifle' anywhere on Planet Earth because one does not exist. Politicians 'coined' the term in their quest for votes from ignorant voters too lazy to invest a couple minutes in research. We ALL must RESEARCH FOR OURSELVES rather than BLINDLY BELIEVING! Firearms, For all or for none including the law makers. Take them from you, Keep for themselves. Hmmmm? If they're bad, Why should a select few want them? Think about that, Please. For Love, Joy and freedom for all.
It shouldn't be such a difficult argument. Anything can be an assault weapon if the person "assaults" with it. I have a pen..It's a normal pen..However, if I start stabbing everyone with it, it's now an assault pen, but no one will ever call it that. They would call me (the person doing the assaulting) the assailant who attacked with a pen. The media should use the word assailant more. "The assailant attacked today with a rile or knife or what ever weapon" Pointless to ban "assault weapons" when there none. Or ban everything that an assailant can use as a weapon.
The word “assault” in an action not word used to describe something. You wouldnt say that a tactical bag is an “assault bag” you would say that it is a “tactical bag” (I am referring to the typical type of bag useful by the military and other armed forces.) Assault rifles do not exist. There are tactical rifles that have things like keymod or Mlok rails on them, picitiny rails, adjustable stocks, (bump stocks, crane stocks, etc.) laser sights, vertical fore grips, and other things used by the military to make firing more accurately, effectively, and quickly. Technically you can get any firearm you want with the right forms, paperwork, and training. Also the military doesn’t call them “Assault” rifles. They call them “service” or “combat” rifles, not assault rifles.
An Assault Weapon is a term aimed towards the civilian weapons. Little did you know most of the time people use civilian weapons for hunting or targets. Little usage for against humans is self defense. Only sometimes people us civilian weapons to attack people for no good reason. That could be mainly because a mental disorder. Other times people use them to rob banks and gas stations etc. Those are still not assault weapons. If you defend yourself its a "Defense Weapon". Now lets get onto the machine gun ride. Machine guns are illegal to own unless registered within the ATF. Full Auto weapons are as close as you can get to a fictional assault weapon. Plus muzzle breaks, bayolugs, folding stocks, etc. are made for some guns. Overall assault weapons are fictional. Machine guns are as close as you can get to a real assault weapon, but even those arent assault weapons. For further backing, reply to this argument.
Assault is defined as a physical attack. To my knowledge there isn't a weapon (pistol or rifle) that has the capability of walking around by itself with the purpose of assaulting anyone. With the technology we have available to us, you would think people would do some research before speaking on issues they have knowledge about. The 28 years I spent in the military handling all types of small arms, I've never run across anything titled "Assault Rifle". People need to separate their emotions before trying to make decisions for others.
Assault weapon is a made up term. Put a extended mag in a hunting rifle and there'd be no difference. So the next take away would be semi-auto rifles, then handguns. It's cascade of take aways that can't be allowed to start. The 2nd amendment would be history and so would the guns of free law abiding citizens.
AR does not stand for assault rifle, it stands for Armalite Rifle the company that created the first AR. Another reason is that assault is a verb not a noun, if i have a golf club it is called a golf club, if i take that golf club and assault someone with it it becomes an "assault club". If i have an AR-15 it is an AR-15, if I take that rifle and assault somebody with it then it becomes an assault rifle.
Like many negative debaters in this argument, assault is a verb, not an adjective. The rifle has not "assaulted" someone on its own. A rifle is not a living being. Here are some examples: "She assaulted the officer with a knife. " "Henry assaulted Bob by punching him 10 times in the face."
Therefore, an affirmative debater in this argument would be arguing that there is such thing as an "assault rifle", meaning that they believe a rifle is a living being. You CANNOT put the verb "assault" before the noun "rifle". In conclusion, I negate today's resolution.
The verb Assault describes an action, I was assaulted, he is assaulting someone, she used a gun to assault him. Assault is the action taken. Johnny used a knife to assault Jimmy, this does not make the knife an assault knife. Johnny used a big knife, a blue knife, etc... Big, blue are adjectives, they describe the knife, assault cannot describe something because it is an action word, a verb. The anti-gun movement used the verb "assault" simply to scare people, to make people perceive the weapon (gun) as its own entity capable of action in its own right, making it appear almost alive; therefore an "assault weapon" appears as though it could almost act on its own, that is a scary thought indeed, but it can't. Words do matter, and using them correctly matters even more when it comes to protecting the Rights of an individual. There is no "assault" weapon, only weapons used in the act of assaulting someone, in the act of an assault. When my grandmother was punishing me she wasn't using an assault spoon, she was using a wooden one, think about it.
Stop allowing the manipulation of words by politicians to manipulate our fear so they can create monsters that don't exist, i.e. "assault weapons" because the weapon is not what is doing the assaulting, the human is. Be careful what rights you are willing to give away after they manipulate you with fear, because next it will be, you can’t use those, they are “assault words,” Oh, wait, it’s “hate words…” too late…
I understand that an Assault Rifle has come to define a specific rifle concept; “Sturmgewehr 44
The Germans were the first to pioneer the assault rifle concept, during World War II, based upon research that showed that most firefights happen within 400 meters and that contemporary rifles were over-powered for most small arms combat. They would soon develop a select-fire intermediate powered rifle combining the firepower of a submachine gun with the range and accuracy of a rifle;” Key phrase being select-fire.
So let’s use the name of the specific rifle, gun, weapon, used and stop with the generic “assault” label because it is not being used in a manner that befits the weapon but in a manner that demonizes it, instead of demonizing the real issue; which is the human who is holding the weapon. Any weapon that someone uses to kill, maim or injury another, to commit the act of assault; it is the human that is the real problem here, not the inanimate object.