A simple question,if assualt weapons,are termed by the industry as"firing tubes" or magazines are redefined as “limited size boxed transport or movement devices” etc you get the point. Can legislation become ineffective ?if the terms change “wholesale change” does that break the legislation or law can cycle?
What battle would ensue over terms and applicability?
I’m calling our brother @MikeBKY for this one!
Are you trying to turn the table on progs with their newspeak, @Dr_Richard?
My rifle is considered a “projectile relocation device”, and my mags are “portable cartridge filing cabinets”! Can’t be too much problems with that nomenclature.
Think you may be onto something!
How about a “Stoner’s device”? Sounds medicinal.
BTW, this is a real photo.
You need to remember that “assault weapon” is a term created to describe military style semi-automatic rifles coined in the mid to late 80s. “High capacity magazines” followed soon after, another contrived term. Some states defined these, CA and NJ amongst them, to limit civilian ownership of such weapons. In 1994, a national assault weapons and high capacity magazine ban was put in place that was limited to 10 years unless reenacted by congress. After 10 years with rising crime rates, studies proved that the ban had no effect (unless you count the increasing crime rates) on crime since only a minuscule number of crimes were committed with assault weapons and height capacity magazines. In 2004, the law was allowed to sunset and these “weapons of war” became publicly available again.
But that didn’t stop other states from joining in on the fun by banning these devices.
Can changing a name make these legal, it all depend on the definitions used in statutes. Below is the bill that is in front of the Kentucky Legislature that has not been given the time of day and I doubt it will. But that doesn’t stop them from trying. Constitutional carry was presented for years in KY before it actually passed last year only to have it assaulted by left leaning legislators calling for its repeal this year.
In the end, it doesn’t matter if you call it a high capacity magazine or a cow fart, if it meets the definition in the statute and the law passes, it still would be prohibited.
A rose by any other name is still a rose? In the name of that rose, all my time fighting communism abroad during the Cold War should allow me to fight the same fight here at home and aggressively take out the communist that sit in OUR house of representatives.
Communists do not represent me. Furthermore the communist that dresses in solidarity, slump in their seats and tear up State of the Union speeches shouldn’t they be considered enemy combatants, a rose by any other name.
Cow farts can be plenty menacing
This is for real. Does anyone know what a mucus retention system is? It’s a $2.00 charge on a hospital bill for a tissue, go figure!
A couple days ago, just because I was curious, I asked Uncle Internet WHO COINED THE TERM ‘ASSAULT RIFLE’, and the top result was Wikipedia and this info:
The term assault rifle is generally credited to Adolph Hitler, who, for propaganda purposes, used the German word Sturmgewehr (which translates to assault rifle) as the new name for the MP43, later known as the StG 44.
I was curious and checked for myself after hearing mention of that origin elsewhere (don’t recall who or where). I’m not certain the current use of the term for the purpose of propaganda is coincidental, although Hitler probably intended to inspire confidence while today’s use may be to inspire fear. Either way, propaganda is propaganda…
There is a significant difference between and “assault rifle” and an “assault weapon.” Assault rifles are actually a thing and have been a thing. An M-16 is an assault rifle, an AR-15 is not. Assault rifles are intermediate-range, magazine-fed military rifles that can be set for automatic or semiautomatic fire. M-16s have a selector that allow them to be fired as single shot, 3 round burst or full automatic. While AR-15s look like M-16s, they are semiautomatic only. Assault rifles are very highly regulated.
The more recent “assault weapon” definitions have been developed around military style weapons, like semiautomatic AR-15s and AK-47s that look like their military counterparts but do not have selectable fire and generally can include any semiautomatic rifle with certain cosmetic attributes or attachments including, threaded barrels, pistol grips, forward grips or adjustable stocks, among many others.
And yes, the MP43/StG 44 would fall into the assault rifle classification.
I thought it was frighteningly ironic that anti-gun Americans have chosen an old Hitler propaganda term for their own propaganda today
Hitler wanted to scare the enemy. Progs want to scare themselves.
Despite @MikeBKY’s explanation, I am still not sure “assault rifle” is a thing - all examples were of a carbine, chambered for intermediate caliber. Brits and Argentinians went into Falkland war armed with the same FN FAL rifle, only the Brits’ was semi-auto, and the Argentinians had it fully automatic. Need I remind who won.