Please define ASSAULT RIFLE

[Mr.357Sig]

It's as if some drunk crashed his Yukon into another car, killing a family, and the newsperson says "and the gas storage tank still contained 20 gals of gas!!!"

But wait, the best part is that the lazy news reader won't report that the drunk killed the family. They'll report that the SUV did it! LOL

 

[tb556]

I just don't see myself getting too worked up about any of it.

All I know is if I was in the assault business, I'd probably go with a different rifle. Maybe only slightly different, but different nonetheless.

And it would be totally scary looking. Oh yes it would.

 

[AKguy1985]

by definition an "assualt rifle" is select fire, only a few people on this board with the $$$ own a true assualt rifle, everything else is semiauto only, on some police chase video the narrarator called the SKS a automatic assault rifle. NEVER has there ever been a select fire sks!!!

 

[PteBurdenR]

I've always gone by the post-Second World War definition which says that an Assault Rifle is a self-loading or automatic weapon that fires an intermediate power cartridge.

However, these days as mentioned the press definition is "anything that looks remotely assault rifle-ish", same as every Uzi-totting, or Tec-9 wielding hoodlum owns a "Machine Gun" according to the press. Annoys me greatly.

 

[aeropb]

The best kind to have!

 

[ez bake]

I've always gone by the post-Second World War definition which says that an Assault Rifle is a self-loading or automatic weapon that fires an intermediate power cartridge.

My wife's uncle brought this up to me last time I spoke to him and he said that fully-automatic carbines shooting an intermediate cartridge (pretty much what you said) weren't "rifles", so they would have to be "assault weapons". His example was the Thompson Sub-machine gun - it isn't a rifle by definition.

I guess my question is isn't it then a machine-gun and not a carbine - I guess if an assault rifle is technically considered a machine-gun, then an assault weapon would be a fully-automatic non-rifle (which includes machine-pistols or carbines)?

 

[Glocktogo]

My wife's uncle brought this up to me last time I spoke to him and he said that fully-automatic carbines shooting an intermediate cartridge (pretty much what you said) weren't "rifles", so they would have to be "assault weapons". His example was the Thompson Sub-machine gun - it isn't a rifle by definition.

I guess my question is isn't it then a machine-gun and not a carbine - I guess if an assault rifle is technically considered a machine-gun, then an assault weapon would be a fully-automatic non-rifle (which includes machine-pistols or carbines)?

To me a machine gun is a fully automatic firearm firing a rifle cartridge or larger. They are divided into light, general prupose and heavy. A sub-machine gun can be either fully automatic or select fire, and fires a sub-rifle cartridge, examples of which are 9mm, .45ACP, 7.62X25 Tokarev, etc. A Thompson would be correctly be categorized as a sub-machine gun.

An assault rifle would be a select fire rifle or carbine firing an intermediate cartridge. Examples would be the original German Sturmgewehr StG 44, M2 Carbine, M-16, AK-47, etc. An assault rifle by definition cannot be semi-automatic only.

Some people would argue that the M2 should be categorized as a sub-machine gun, but the cartridge was developed for the M1 carbine and not a pistol, even though it's only nominally more powerful than the 7.62X25 Tokarev when fired out of a PPSh-41 subgun. That cartridge was developed for a pistol and adapted to a long gun.