Associated Press AP
Shutterstock
Previous Post
Next Post

From the Second Amendment Foundation . . .

After years of incorporating the terms “assault rifle” and “assault weapons” into news reports involving firearms, especially when used in crimes, journalists are now advised by the Associated Press to avoid the “highly politicized terms,” and the Second Amendment Foundation says it’s a “smart gun change.”

“It’s about time the media realized the terms ‘assault rifle’ and ‘assault weapon’ are inflammatory and meaningless,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “Those terms have become part of the gun prohibition lobby’s lexicon, and unfortunately, journalists across the country have been all-too-willing to adopt their vocabulary and repeatedly use it in their reports.

“I’m glad to see the AP Stylebook now recognizes that these firearms only fire one round each time a trigger is pulled,” he continued, “and really function no differently than any other semi-auto rifle, pistol or shotgun, all of which have been in common use in this country for more than a century.”

According to an AP Style Tip, “The preferred term for a rifle that fires one bullet each time the trigger is pulled, and automatically reloads for a subsequent shot, is a semi-automatic rifle. An automatic rifle continuously fires rounds if the trigger is depressed and until its ammunition is exhausted.

“Avoid assault rifle and assault weapon,” the AP adds, “which are highly politicized terms that generally refer to AR- or AK-style rifles designed for the civilian market, but convey little meaning about the actual functions of the weapon.”

As noted by Gottlieb, “The gun prohibition lobby has always used ‘assault rifle’ or ‘assault weapon’ to confuse and frighten the public and make people think it’s a fully automatic ‘weapon of war.’ Now we’ll have to see how intellectually honest journalists will be in adopting this correct terminology, rather than continuing to use these deliberately misleading references.

“This laudable effort by the Associated Press may help restore the level of trust the public should have in the media,” he observed. “It will be interesting to see if the media now challenges politicians and anti-gun lobbyists whenever they use such terms, especially since ‘AR’ never referred to ‘assault rifle’ but to Armalite Rifle, and the gun control crowd has always known it.”

Previous Post
Next Post

133 COMMENTS

  1. FWIW –

    “The U.S. Army defines assault rifles as “short, compact, selective-fire weapons that fire a cartridge intermediate in power between submachine gun and rifle cartridges.”[18] In this strict definition, a firearm must have at least the following characteristics to be considered an assault rifle:[2][3][4]
    It must be capable of selective fire.
    It must have an intermediate-power cartridge: more power than a pistol but less than a standard rifle or battle rifle, examples of intermediate cartridges are the 7.92×33mm Kurz, the 7.62×39mm and 5.56×45mm NATO.
    Its ammunition must be supplied from a detachable box magazine.[5]
    It must have an effective range of at least 300 metres (330 yards).
    Rifles that meet most of these criteria, but not all, are not assault rifles according to the U.S. Army’s definition. For example:

    Select-fire M2 Carbines are not assault rifles; their effective range is only 180 metres (200 yd).[19]
    Select-fire rifles such as the Fedorov Avtomat, FN FAL, M14, and H&K G3 main battle rifles are not assault rifles; they fire full-powered rifle cartridges.
    Semi-automatic-only rifles like the Colt AR-15 are not assault rifles; they do not have select-fire capabilities.
    Semi-automatic-only rifles with fixed magazines like the SKS are not assault rifles; they do not have detachable box magazines and are not capable of automatic fire.”
    (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_rifle)

    • Sam,

      Thank you for posting that.
      Learned something new.

      Not sure what fell out of my brain to make room. How would I know?

      • “Not sure what fell out of my brain to make room. How would I know?”

        As the old saying goes, “You don’t know what you don’t know. Or even when you didn’t know it.”

      • anything beyond 200 metres is a bit of a push for 5.56…not because of ballistics but rapid energy loss…

    • I second LifeSavor’s “thank you”. I maybe could have answered a multiple choice question about full-powered rifles not qualifying as assault rifles, but it actually never crossed my mind. The term has a strict definition, and the lesson is, not every scary looking rifle is an assault rifle.

      • That’s why the newest ” thing” is to insert a number of adjectives in front of semi-auto rifles, such as : fully, high-powered, high-velocity, clip-fed, large capacity, sniper- style, compact, home-assembled, yadda, yadda, yadda. No subterfuge here, folks.

  2. Now, if we could get the term “suspect” replaced with, at least, “suspected criminal” or just “criminal” in news stories, we’d be making real progress.

  3. I remember when the “right” labeled Manufacturing Consent” as conspiracy theory nonsense pushed by commies. Now the “left” calls it disinformation pushed by Russians.

    And here it is once more. Plain as day. Admitted as practice by the presstitutes themselves and still, to far too many people, it’s just a “conspiracy theory.”

  4. Perhaps it was Assault Weapon but what’s heard everyday is, “Weapons if Waaaaarrr.” It’s just like Jim Crow Gun Control kkk democRats looking for bigot support went from Negro to using the N-word.

    • if they would just preface it with “similar to”…they’d be on firmer ground…but they do hate it when you correct them…all the more reason to do it as often as possible…..

  5. News writers and politicians, plus the gun-grabbers need to be educated further. When the Second Amendment was written, the “assault weapon” of the day was a short barreled shoulder fired firearm used primarily when assaulting the enemy. The reason is, that it could be loaded much more quickly than a long barreled rifled barrel firearm and long range did not matter much in that situation. Firepower did matter.

  6. AP is probably going to go for something like “murder death machine”

    And they won’t even bring up the 2 shells.

  7. “Avoid assault rifle and assault weapon,” the AP adds, “which are highly politicized terms that generally refer to AR- or AK-style rifles designed for the civilian market, but convey little meaning about the actual functions of the weapon.”

    I’d *really* like to think it’s an admission of defeat, but something tells me there’s something else going on here we’re not fully aware of yet.

    While the ‘Leftist Scum ™ on High’ might be waking up to the fact that semi-auto firearms with detachable standard-capacity magazines are about be declared perfectly legal to own by us ‘little people’ and there’s no law that’s gonna change that, Leftist Scum ™ never give up, never surrender in their mentally-ill, incessant drive for totalitarian power.

    So, is it, “If we can’t beat ’em, join ’em?” or is something else percolating below we just don’t know about yet?

    H’mm… I just don’t know… 🙁

    • Geoff PR,

      I share your reticence. Time will tell.

      I can only imagine that a giant portion of the public has rejected legacy news sources which means their viewership and hence revenue has cratered–so much so that many/most legacy news sources are facing extinction. Perhaps that has motivated them to try winning back some of their lost viewership–which requires an end to their obvious peddling of Progressive material.

      Oh, who am I kidding?!?!?!? Legacy news sources are deep adherents of Progressive dogma and they will go down with the proverbial ship if it comes to that. There must therefore be some nefarious explanation for this shift in terminology.

      • not sure what it takes for the faithful to stop mopping up what their spilling. as a kid i could watch garfield goose after school, but at 16:30 prompt, the 2, 5, 7, 9newsies came on. mom still watches all this baloney.. they were both solid, god fearin’ jesus lovin’ ‘publicans. two years ago at 92 i had to drive her to register as a donkeycrap. time magazine had much to do with that.
        sad to see one of the smartest folks i ever knew duped by all this nonsense. mass hypnosis.

        • people watch local news because it’s, well…”local”…network news is a whole different kettle of fish…obviously biased,..and most folks know it…the days of Cronkite are long gone….

    • After one is used in a high profile shooting, the conversation always leads to the ban talk. The ban talk isn’t really specific due to the jumbled reporting. I think they want to educate the public on what should be banned. They’re planting seeds.

    • They want to use new terms to stir fear that all firearms are too dangerous. They found that calling them assault weapons did not work, now they want to move on to another way to describe things.

      They have a plan, they are implementing that plan. They are still working the emotional plea, now it includes all firearms, not just the scary ones.

      • “They have a plan, they are implementing that plan.”

        This is more likely the truth of the matter, no question.

        The actual stats prove that MSRs, SBRs, etc. actually contribute little to the total number of firearms deaths and injuries and overall crime rate across the nation, and such is being recognized by the red and purple states in their legislative crafting, as well as by SCOTUS and other appellate courts in various districts. MSRs, et al, don’t even figure into the stats of the largest number of deaths- suicides. With the public finally waking up to the reality of the actual truth, as well as now being constantly reminded that in this milenium, there is no guarantee that either Federal, state or local governments will protect its citizens from criminals or riots, a new strategy must be implemented if the news “reporters” are to remain the “news drivers”

        Alan G. knows better.

        I appreciate SAF’s efforts, but by Gottlieb’s words lauding this reassignment of terms, the “article” seems to me primarily intended to make it appear SAF had something to do with this and therefore, is primarily a fund-raising ploy.

        • all those cops standing around in that hallway is just another reason to buy one…becoming increasingly obvious we’re on our own….

      • I agree with this line of thinking. The people at AP know well that words matter, and whenever a word or phrase becomes tired and no longer evokes the same emotional response, they must coin a replacement or lose momentum. Let there be no doubt that the AP is foisting a shell game on the public, yet again.

  8. Let me know when the AP sh1tcans “gun nut” and “right wing extremist” and then I’ll agree that there has been progress.

    Until then, the MSM remains enemy Number One.

    • I get emails from Dem politicians, mostly asking for money. I amuse myself by replying to those emails. I always turn the tables on them, calling them “left wing extremists”, or whatever nonsense they used in their email.

      My favorite is the question that leaves “other” open, and I can type in, “Keep that senile bastard occupying the White House out of sight!”

      No, I don’t believe anyone actually reads my replies, but I enjoy telling them all the same.

      • post on their websites…and correct them at every opportunity…really tends to annoy them…this may be an outgrowth of that….

  9. Has anyone seen a photo or a description of the ” high powered rifle ” used in the parade massacre ?

  10. This from the NY Post: “Police find weapons cache of 17 guns in Bronx housing development: NYPD”

    Whoa. I remember when 17 guns was an arsenal. Now it’s a cache. Maybe there is something happening here, but what it is ain’t exactly clear.

    And FYI, the NY Post has a right wing bent, but it’s as anti-gun as the NY Slimes.

    • Well, don’t you know that a cache has only one use? Terrorists cache stuff! Normal people store stuff in one of those rental cubicles.

    • A better question would be: How many units were in the “housing development”? 20 or more? 30?

      This fiigure could easily be fewer than one per household…

      Again, stay with the stats…

  11. It matters not. Under this definition the UK Forces do not use ASSAULT weapons as standard issue because the SA80 series whilst if t does have a selective 3-shot facility is not fully automatic. If the UK Infantry Forces do not use, according to this definition, assault rifles then they are NOT nessessary. In the meantime all semi-automatic rifles have only ONE logical use and that is to kill PEOPLE they are definitely NOT suitable for hunting, or not that is, for a competent one. Nobody actually needs anything more than a five shot BOLT action rifle of a suitable calibre for any legitimate purpose and certainly NOT for hunting.
    It should be noted that UKRAINE has chosen the UK ARMY INFANTRY Training Teams to start training schemes to update and wean it’s Infantry from Soviet Era inefficiencies with 10,000 or more already in the UK. NOT the French, not the USA, not Germany and not Poland. Meanwhile the RUSSIANS have called in, would you believe IRAN to help them cope with, and sell them, DRONE technology IRAN for flocks sake! Is that or is that not desperation??

    • Funny. Ian at Forgotten Weapons notes the SA80/L85 has full-automatic fire mode.

      I heard in Gulf War 1 (1990s) British troops would use the L85s mostly in automatic fire because they jammed less.

      • AJH is a fake. He posts the same tripe about his “qualifications” in nearly every post, and it’s all lies. He’s probably not even a real bong.

    • Albert Hall,

      … UKRAINE has chosen the UK ARMY INFANTRY Training Teams … NOT the French, not the USA, not Germany and not Poland.

      And?

      Let’s be honest: France, Germany, and Poland are basically pacifist countries with pathetic excuses for what we cannot even call a military. The only remaining NATO countries with respectable militaries are the U.K. and the U.S. Given that the U.K. is a LOT closer to Ukraine than the United States, it makes total sense that the U.K. would take on training the Ukrainian military. Reading anything else into the choice of having the U.K. rather than the U.S. training Ukraine is foolishness.

    • “…and that is to kill PEOPLE they are definitely NOT suitable for hunting, or not that is, for a competent one….”

      Except for the whole hog and yote hunting right? I mean I suppose you could call it not hunting, but anyway…Challenge accepted on behalf of all farmers whose fields/crops have been destroyed by feral hogs.

      Go ahead and show us how your old Enfield is the tool to use to take on a herd of hogs. ..snicker

      • Apparenty you don’t actually know much about the Lee Enfield. Newage oncegreatbritain is unworthy of such a fine rifle.

      • Lee-Enfield does have a 10 round magazine and can be loaded by stripper clips (two thing Prince among kings Albert fails to realize). Look up “mad-minute”. The best I’ve done is slightly more than 30 rounds with all hitting a 4-foot target at 200m. I ran out of ammo on clips and was single loading the last few.

    • “In the meantime all semi-automatic rifles have only ONE logical use and that is to kill PEOPLE they are definitely NOT suitable for hunting, or not that is, for a competent one.”

      Semi-automatic rifles (esp. AR-10 and AR-15 rifles) are perfect for hog hunting in Texas, especially from a helicopter (pork chopper).

      You’ll be hoping to have an AR platform rifle with as large a magazine as can be had if you run into herd of feral hogs while on foot.

    • Albert Hall is NTexas, NTexas is dacian.
      dacian owns all kindsa weapons, AR’s, AK’s, M14’s and you name it, he’s got it.
      And at the same time he wants everyone else to be disarmed.
      Hate to tell you this dacian, but taking away my gunms ain’t going to make you any safer. To do that you’d have to take the gunms away from the criminals, good luck with that.
      Oh and btw hows that constitutional carry doing in ohio? Wading in blood yet?
      Didnt think so.

    • @Albert

      “Under this definition the UK Forces … ”

      Who gives a rats butt. We don’t care what the “the UK Forces” of HER Majesties government uses to protect HER Majesties government form of modern day tyranny that you live in.

    • “It matters not.”

      Oh, yes it does- here in the US.

      The majority of us live as free citizens. You don’t. At some point you may live to regret your sentiments, like when the Islamists you’re allowing to take over begin to regularly remove your hair below your chin for your non-Allah infidel beliefs.

      And- for many years, my M1-A was my “drive rifle” while hunting deer with my injun pals here in northern Minnesota. Very effective, most were one-shot stops.

  12. Well, the media and the anti gun politicians, along with the disarmament industry made up the terms, so it is fitting they decide they were wrong, or made much ado about nothing.
    The basic design for the gas or recoil operated self loading firearms have been on the market for around a century. Fully automatic weapons have been around for about the same length of time. The major difference being fully automatic weapons have been restricted by law to those who paid the extra tax and in recent years, passed the background requirements.
    In short, unless you have a bit more cash and don’t mind the bureaucratic foolishness, the average person is not going to be able to buy an Assault Rifle/Assault Weapon.

  13. I think the article is mostly bullshit as the News Media will continue to call these weapons of mass destruction for what they really are, Assault Rifles. The difference in the amount of time it takes to empty a full auto assault rifle and and a semi-auto rifle so so mynute it’s totally asinine to argue about it. As a matter of fact the semi-auto assault rifle is usually MORE DEADLY as the shooter is far more likely to aim with every shot rather than just spray and pray. IN VIETNAM it was commonly practiced by SEASONED TROOPS to put their M16’s on semi-auto to conserve ammo and assure more hits.

    The Assault rifle is also widening the gap between the constantly waring Far Right Stormtroopers and the average American because the average American who does not own such weapons of mass destruction is now too terrified to even go shopping or go to a 4th of July celebration or a movie because of the fear of a maniac with an assault rifle with a 100 round drum magazine ready to lay down a hail of gunfire on a crowd of innocent people. The consequences of all this is that the assault rifle now threatens all gun owners with more draconian gun bans which are widely supported by the general population fed up with massacre’s practically every week.

    All this is not lost on foreign vacationers either as they have been comming less and less to a country that is viewed to have begun to disintegrate socially and on the brink of civil war thanks to Trump’s deliberate political strategy of pitting the American people against each other.

    • “…the average American who does not own such weapons of mass destruction…”

      Uh- a bit behind in the stats, aren’t you?

      When the average price of a generic AR got well below $600, just about everyone I know ended up with at least one. They were cheaper than just about any bolt or lever action firearm, and the ammo to just go out and shoot for fun was also cheap, as compared to quality “hunting” ammo, particularly for the casual shooter who does not reload.

      In 2022, just about every average American who owns a firearm either owns an MSR/SBR, or is contemplating buying one when the price comes back down. Looking at the millions of them on tables at the gun shows, that should be pretty darn soon, too.

      • Why Ruger stopped production of the M77 Scout in 5.56. Couldn’t compete with the AR clones. Ironically they were popular downunder but no one wanted to pay $1000 for one. Now on used gun websites they are selling for $2000-3000.

        I did buy one because it was a short, light rifle that took 10 round magazines, had iron sights, and would be great for my son to learn on.

  14. Personally I can’t stand the term modern sporting weapon or MSR’s. Weapons of war is cool by me when used in certain sentences. Yes you stupid bastard (insert asshole politician’s name here) try to take it away from us and you will see how fast they become weapons of war.

    • yeah, that’s real good. Continue to post threats (e.g. “see how fast they become weapons of war.”) in the form of rhetoric, that’s sure to make the point their fears are unjustified.

      • Wow ok, like we haven’t been threatened enough. Where’s the freaking compromise’s? It past time to let the left tell us what the rules are. I’m really surprised at your response. Keep letting them walk all over us I guess right? How about letting them know and saying it out loud that the 2nd Amendment is for killing tyrants so don’t be one!

      • I suppose you’re fine with an asshole politician like swalwell threatening to nuke US citizens. At what point do you make your intentions known? If they don’t fear us then what’s to stop them from doing as they wish to us?

        • what they need to fear is the steady progress we’re making in the courts…that’s what really scares them…..

  15. The real question here isn’t if journos will follow the new guideline.

    It’s if other people will point out when they don’t.

    Being able to point to the AP Stylebook seems like a small thing but it’s really not, it’s pretty big particularly if your target audience is normies.

    As Geoff like to point out: Rule #4, make the enemy live up to its own rules.

    • “Being able to point to the AP Stylebook seems like a small thing but it’s really not, it’s pretty big particularly if your target audience is normies.”

      They’ve gone through a few generations of ‘fear whistle-words’, like how they evolved from ‘Gun Control’ in the early 80s into ‘Common-sense gun safety’ today.

      Could they be about to try a new tactic? A new re-framing to hide what they really want?

      • Like how they always seem to have ‘New! Improved!’ on boxes of laundry soap, when it’s the same stuff all along, with a minor formula tweak of some sort?

        • Usually that is the same box/bottle with a reduced volume of soap at the same or increased price. I think the 25 lb bag of dog food I buy now holds something like 17 pounds…

        • shrinkflation. you would not believe how big a nickel candy bar once was.
          i will say though, when municipalities banned the sale of quarts, the marketers countered with fotays. sort of analogous to the thirty pack. why else would we pound stroh’s?

      • Guess what the new scary thing is going to be? Not a “weapon of war” or “assault rifle,” but a semi-automatic rifle.

        • they’ll lose on that one too…unless they include “with a large capacity, detachable magazine”…..

      • I suspect that the recent massive demographic shifts in gun ownership are causing them to consider a recalibration on the messaging front, yes.

        In 2019 about 14% of annual “new gun owners” were women. According to Harvard that jumped to 33% in 2021 and 42% this year, so POTG have added on the order of 3.5 million new, female gun owners.

        You don’t have to be a biologist or a gun nut to see that this is bad for the anti’s normal messaging strategy.

        The top cited reasons for buying a gun are 1. increased awareness of the potential for civil unrest and 2. children have left the home (i.e. they wanted one before but didn’t trust their kids… which kinda brings up questions about their parenting but that’s another topic).

        • they keep pushing the false narrative that owning a gun is more dangerous than not owning one…particularly for women…even though they have to know many people are not buying into it….the increasing sales prove that

  16. The vast majority of people here do not own an assault weapon, we all have defense weapons. The armed leftists among us, they have assault weapons and are insurrectionists who want us reeducated or dead.

    Whenever people ask if I own an assault weapon, I tell them truthfully I do not. I ask them, what makes a weapon a defense weapon. They have no answer, I tell them it is whatever you use to defend yourself. Whether it has a bayonet lug, or is a random piece of wood you see when you are attacked.

    • According to United States v. Miller (1939), we have firearms that have “military utility” and those are the only firearms that are protected by the 2nd Amendment.

      • In United States v. Miller – “military utility” only means something that the military could use in a general sense of availability in terms of the times in which United States v. Miller happened.

        For example, the military could use a car or a truck, the military could use a civilian rifle if the situation is dire enough and they needed firearms during a conflict but were running low (like what Ukraine is doing now for its civilian volunteers).

        It does not mean, for example, the civilian grade MSR is a military firearm.

    • “The vast majority of people here do not own an assault weapon, we all have defense weapons.”

      Perhaps, but I think the primary reason so many people own MSRs is because they became cheap in price as compared to other platforms, were cheap to feed, and because shooting them actually is a lot of fun…

    • to Storm Trooper

      quote————-The vast majority of people here do not own an assault weapon, we all have defense weapons. The armed leftists among us, they have assault weapons and are insurrectionists who want us reeducated or dead.——–quote

      You are still pushing the narrative that the Far Right JackBooted Stormtroopers that stormed the capital were led by the Proud Boys who were really antifa in disguise. Would you have us believe also that Trump is a Liberal.

      Your posts become more bizarre by the hour.

      • “You are still pushing the narrative that the Far Right JackBooted Stormtroopers that stormed the capital were led by the Proud Boys who were really antifa in disguise. Would you have us believe also that Trump is a Liberal.”

        I have never made such a claim.

        What I posted made no mention of any of the groups or incident you mentioned. Nor did I mention Trump.

        Either you are mistaken, or you are a liar.

        I did mention your friends, but never made claim to them being part of Jan 6. I did call them insurrectionists for wanting to change our form of government. Thats what you are, an insurrectionist. I do not want to change the form of government we have, so I would not belong to an insurrectionist ideology.

        Are you mistaken or are you a liar?

        • seeing mobs run rampant while the cops stand by and do nothing…is a great sales motivator for this type of weapon…that, and the fact private security guards hired to protect private property [successfully] are often equipped with them….

  17. lol
    The AP

    Sometimes I think that The Associated Press feels like they are above the law. Like all the have to do is ‘proclaim’ whatever they like and it’s takin as gospal. Like they don’t need the three branches of our government because what THEY say goes.

    The AP acts as if these things only have these definitions because THEY say it. Regardless of what these words actually mean. it doesn’t mean what it means until THEY deliver their proclimation.

  18. Now if we can get them to stop calling everything that floats and is painted gray from a patrol boat to an aircraft carrier a “battleship”. I saw a headline that said “A navy battleship destroyer escort lost at the battle of Samar was discovered……” A battleship is a specific class of ship armed with 16″ guns like the New Jersey or Missouri as used by the US Navy. Are they armed with .9mm pistols?

  19. Democrats know that they’re about to get their proverbial sh*t kicked in in the mid terms. They’re pretty obviously using their influence to try and drag ‘gun control’ off the table of talking points out of the general conversation.

  20. Bill Clinton started the assault weapons sht.
    Besides wtf does it matter what kinda gunm was used. Well it does if your pushing an agenda I guess.
    My next question is since Our constitution says we have the right to be armed are we going to get zzzzap beams and light sabers, that’s the future of weaponry.
    No, only the military will have those.
    Kinda defeats the whole purpose of the second amendment doesn’t it.
    Long Live King Biden

    • My dream is to be the first person to commit a mass possuming.

      Run into a school with a bag of possums, start lobbing at everyone I see and raise all kinds of Hell.

      When they realize that there are no dead guys to eat they’ll start making dead people! That is how your species works, right?

      And the cops, lacking an F350 with light bars to run over all these marsupials will be powerless to do anything. They won’t even make it to the handsan station. Mwahahahahahaahaha!

      • Strych9 you madman you.

        We have one come to the bird feeders and back patio now and then. He seems to be a mild-mannered gent, kinda reminding me of a shabby down-on-his-luck aristocrat. He shuffles around politely, cleaning up the odd sunflower seed, and if he finds a few stray peanuts, he always leaves the shells in a neat pile on the concrete after eating the nuts and before he shuffles off to the neighbor’s pond for a drink. He doesn’t tear up the flower pots and crap in the yard like the coons do. Five of them rascals have become buzzard poop recently (I really like those CCI Quiet Segmented Hollow Points–pop thunk. Don’t even need a light if the moon is out.).

        You may have to put on your chemist hat to induce the desired result. They all tend to be like this one, although they are susceptible to the effects of various chemicals, especially ‘shine. However, I can catch a few in a live trap to add to the passel if you attempt to realize your dream, might make a good show!

    • “Bill Clinton started the assault weapons sht“

      Well, in all fairness there were a few more Presidents involved.

      “In May 1994, former presidents Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, and Ronald Reagan, wrote to the U.S. House of Representatives in support of banning “semi-automatic assault guns.” They cited a 1993 CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll that found 77 percent of Americans supported a ban on the manufacture, sale, and possession of such weapons“

      “Gerald R. Ford, Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan sent a letter to all House members expressing their support for the measure, effectively joining President Clinton in urging approval of the ban.“

      https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-05-05-mn-54185-story.html

      • Don’t ya’ll love how I Cut And Paste fake polls from fake news MSM sites like the highly discredited “LA Times”?

        Just goes to show ya fake news networks are not anything new, it just took President Donald Trump (our greatest American president in the modern era) to expose their treachery.

        • “Don’t ya’ll love how I Cut And Paste fake polls from fake news MSM sites like the highly discredited “LA Times”?“

          Fake Miner, your reading comprehension is rather weak. I did not cite any “polls”.

          I cited actual facts wherein your Republican presidents signed on to the AWB.

          Of course, being the hypocrite that you are, it is impossible for you to acknowledge the fact that Republican president Reagan agreed with the assault weapons ban and joined Republican President Gerald Ford in demanding its passage.

          Of course you don’t like it when I cut and paste actual historic fact that proves you are a constant liar, it makes you look rather silly and ignorant.

          https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-05-05-mn-54185-story.html

      • Oh Lordy I am all caps… DUMB.

        Just… D..U..M..B..

        There was a reason my mama said I was “special”.

        Miner reply— “Fake Miner, your reading comprehension is rather weak. I did not cite any “polls”.

        1st Miner Post—“They cited a 1993 CNN/USA Today/Gallup >>POLL<<"

        PLEASE PEOPLE.. stop me when Miner posts without my Biden pills!!!

        But there's more,

        Miner reply—"I cited actual facts wherein your Republican presidents signed on to the AWB."

        1st Miner Post—"“Gerald R. Ford, Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan …effectively joining President Clinton"

        Jimmy Carter and Clinton are Republicans?

        I'm to stupid for words.

        Finally Fake Miner read this; Miner doesn't really care what any former presidents said on an AWB, it's wrong and violates the 2A, and therefore the Laws of Nature and Nature's God.

        Period.

    • the debate about what to do about these type of guns actually began back in the eighties during the Reagan years….but nothing was done until O’l Bubba [and his witch wife] came along….

  21. Its a trick

    Think about it, they used “assault rifle” and “assault weapons”, anti-gun/gun-control used it, for many years to refer to a specific type of civilian grade rifle, the AR platform AR-15 (more properly called the MSR today), that was not an “assault rifle” or “assault weapon”, and contrary to the media and anti-gun/gun-control hype, has never actually been in military service. The gun community for years has been telling them how wrong they are, and it was ‘us’ against ‘them’ on this point.

    Now they will go after ALL semi-automatic rifles, because we as a community for years have been saying that what they wrongly and falsely called “assault rifle” and “assault weapons” (and also “weapons of war”) were only semi-automatic rifles with the SAME CAPABILITIES of all civilian grade semi-automatic rifles in that the civilian grade AR platform pattern rifles they “only fire one round each time a trigger is pulled … and really function no differently than any other semi-auto rifle, pistol or shotgun rifles”

    So now we (gun community) have “compromised” or “agreed” (indirectly and inadvertently, and unintentionally) that we are all talking about the same thing now, thus a point of contention gone and now they will start going after ALL semi-automatic rifles then ALL semi-automatic firearms because now they are all on equal footing because they all “only fire one round each time a trigger is pulled … and really function no differently than any other semi-auto rifle, pistol or shotgun rifles”.

    “assault rifle” and “assault weapons” were terms of ’emotional response excuse’ used to blame a ‘boogy man’ – every “criminal shooting” story MSM spun had a ‘villain’, at least most, and it was either their “assault rifle” and “assault weapons” or some other semi-auto firearm (e.g. a ‘ghost gun’). Now that are switching to the fact based and away from the ’emotional response excuse’, and thus MSM and the gun community now agree on the fact that the “assault rifle” and “assault weapons” MSM has been using was wrong and they are just ‘semi-automatic rifles’ so the new ‘villain’ for MSM becomes ALL ‘semi-automatic rifles’

    • “and contrary to the media and anti-gun/gun-control hype, has never actually been in military service“

      Why do you keep posting this intentional disinformation, when the facts prove otherwise?

      “Colt then renamed and rebranded the rifle “Colt ArmaLite AR-15 Model 01”. After a Far East tour, Colt made its first sale of Colt ArmaLite AR-15 rifles to Malaya on September 30, 1959. Colt manufactured their first batch of 300 Colt ArmaLite AR-15 rifles in December 1959.[40] Colt would go on to market the Colt ArmaLite AR-15 rifle to military services around the world.

      In July 1960, General Curtis LeMay, then Vice Chief of Staff of the United States Air Force, was impressed by a demonstration of the AR-15 and ordered 8500 rifles.[41] In the meantime, the Army would continue testing the AR-15, finding that the intermediate cartridge .223 (5.56 mm) rifle is much easier to shoot than the standard 7.62×51mm NATO M14 rifle.[42][43] In 1961 marksmanship testing, the U.S. Army found that 43% of AR-15 shooters achieved Expert, while only 22% of M14 rifle shooters did so. Also, a lower recoil impulse, allows for more controllable automatic weapons fire.[42][44]
      In the summer of 1961, General LeMay was promoted to Chief of Staff of the United States Air Force, and requested an additional 80,000 AR-15s“

      “In October 1961, William Godel, a senior man at the Advanced Research Projects Agency, sent 10 AR-15s to South Vietnam. The reception was enthusiastic, and in 1962, another 1,000 AR-15s were sent.[46][47] United States Army Special Forces personnel filed battlefield reports lavishly praising the AR-15 and the stopping-power of the 5.56 mm cartridge, and pressed for its adoption.[46][31]“

      Perhaps you’d care to read the actual confidential report regarding the early use of the AR 15 by the special forces in RVN:

      “1. (C) Forward herewith is the final report of the test of the Armalite Rifle (AR-15). It should be noted that the report proper in its present form reflects the views of the U. S element of CDTC only. It is being handled in this fashion to avoid the inference that the Vietnamese, in seeking a newer weapon, might have influenced the recommendations in the report.
2. (C) However, combat evaluations in Vietnam are necessarily joint ven- tures and the results’must be made known to appropriate GVN authorities. This report will now be coordinated with the Vietnamese element in CDTC ad will be
officially closed out as a combined report“

      https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/2859676/ARPA-AR-15.pdf

      • ““Colt then renamed and rebranded the rifle “Colt ArmaLite AR-15 Model 01”.

        False.

        Colt, using the Armalite patent design for a general modular platform rifle Armalite called the AR-15, redesigned and that is what Colt introduced to the military. The “Colt ArmaLite AR-15” was only because Colt had agreed to carry forth the “ArmaLite AR-15” in their agreement for the purchase of the patent.

        The term ‘ArmaLite AR-15’ actually stands for ‘Armalite Armalite-Rifle 15’

        Its the 15th in a series of all their rifle designs. It was never created to be a military rifle, it was created to be a design series. The application to military use of the general patent design came when Colt purchased the patent, their re-design was a military only firearm.

        ““1. (C) Forward herewith is the final report of the test of the Armalite Rifle (AR-15). It should be noted that the report proper in its present form reflects the views of the U. S element of CDTC only.”

        Before Armalite sold the patent to Colt, they tried to market a military only version of their ‘AR-15’ to the military. But Armalite didn’t actually have the rifles when the military said they wanted to try them out. So Armalite modified some prototype rifles they had and provided them to the military – these were not actually AR-15’s, but rather they used a lower portion that had AR-15 stamped on them because Armalite had intended the prototypes to actually be the next in their design series (the AR-16 which was in its early stages of potential development) but had not changed the tooling to stamp AR-16 as they needed these to be rushed out to the military for their testing. The military used the designation to refer to the rifle. And that is what you are seeing in your ‘report’, it is not actually an AR-15. The prototypes were actually AR-10’s that had been modified and scaled down, and used a lower that was stamped AR-15.

        After Armalite sold the patent to Colt, Eugene stoner started working on developing the Armalite AR-16 to maturity.

        the AR-16 was a more advanced rifle, it was a 7.62 mm rifle that used a more conventional piston and a lot of the parts were stamped to reduce cost of manufacture. It only got developed to the prototype stage, then it was adapted for .223 which resulted in the somewhat successful Armalite AR-18.

        I got my information from Eugene Stoner. I had an opportunity to meet him in 1990 and he related the information to me in the telling of his career in response to my questions about how the AR-15 came to be.

        So yeah, contrary to the media and anti-gun/gun-control hype, the AR-15 has never actually been in military service.

        • and today the term ‘AR-15’ has become synonymous with that general modular design, and is used as a marketing term mostly today in reality. Anyway, the term AR-15 entered our lexicon and today its associated.

        • Clarification:

          “Armalite had intended the prototypes to actually be the next in their design series (the AR-16 which was in its early stages of potential development)…”

          Armalite had produced a few of early stage prototypes of the AR-16 they had thought about. These were in .223 and they would scale up later. They used some of the tooling they already had at the time and that caused AR-15 to be stamped in the lowers. In reality these protypes sent to the military for testing as you reference were modified and scaled down AR-10’s with the “AR-16” protype lowers stamped AR-15 due to the tooling use. The military used that designation in its reports. These were not actual AR-15’s.

      • 40 oz why do you taking me to the shed and wooping my ass?

        I cut and pasted as best I could!

        Am I Miner a joke to you?

      • You do know that in 1963 Colt advertised the “new AR-15 Sporter”?

        That was kind of left out in your timeline.

        There wasn’t much interest in a small caliber rifle and not many units sold from about ’63 to ’89. Sales picked up when gun control advocates started making a big deal about their availability, then the market increased. Once the market starting wanting them, manufacturers started making more and redesigning them into the many variations we see know.

        History repeats itself, there have been talks about more bans, AR type rifles are in larger demand. Prohibition always seems to work that way.

        • “You do know that in 1963 Colt advertised the “new AR-15 Sporter”?“

          Yep, the SP 1, I bought one new in 1983.

        • …another reason for the increased popularity in the eighties was how easy it was to convert it to full-auto…parts kits, manuals and drop in auto-sears were easy to come by and because of that many did not believe it was illegal….

      • because a bunch of British SAS grab a rifle and call it an AR-15 does not mean its actually an AR-15.

        https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/progress-ap-stylebook-now-advises-against-using-assault-rifle-and-assault-weapon-in-news-reports/#comment-6007415

        https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/progress-ap-stylebook-now-advises-against-using-assault-rifle-and-assault-weapon-in-news-reports/#comment-6007426

        contrary to the media and anti-gun/gun-control hype, the AR-15 has never actually been in military service.

        No one today has an actual AR-15, except maybe a few ‘collectors’ who managed to get their hands on a few of Armalite AR-15’s prototypes.

        Since the Armalite patent was sold to Colt, there has not been one actual AR-15 made by any company. A couple of guys made a rifle in the 1980’s they stamped AR-15 but it was based on the civilian version redesign by Colt so it too was not an actual redesign.

        • Colts civilian and military versions were a complete redesign of Armalites patent Colt purchased for the Armalite general modular design rifle Armalite called the AR-15. The Colt rifles are also not actual AR-15’s, they are complete redesigns.

        • correction ..

          “A couple of guys made a rifle in the 1980’s they stamped AR-15 but it was based on the civilian version redesign by Colt so it too was not an actual redesign.”

          should have been

          A couple of guys made a rifle in the 1980’s they stamped AR-15 but it was based on the civilian version redesign by Colt so it was not an actual redesign or AR-15.

        • Your attempts to obscure the issue are hilarious.

          “It was never created to be a military rifle, it was created to be a design series.“

          Tell that to the Green Berets who had 1000 in use in the Mekong Delta in sunny Vietnam.

          Tell that to the Malaysian soldiers who were fighting communist terrorists, I imagine they’ll be quite surprised.

          I included a link to the once confidential report on the weapons being used in the Republic of Vietnam by American soldiers in combat, and yet you ignore that in favor of some word play.

          “Since the Armalite patent was sold to Colt, there has not been one actual AR-15 made by any company”

          Colt bought the patent to the AR-15.
          They modified the design to suit their needs, built prototypes and sale samples, marketed the rifle to military across the world and sold them to several nations.

          The company that owns the patent to the rifle manufactured them with the name AR15 stamped, the United States Army’s official designation was AR15, it’s an AR15.

          Colt manufactured rifles with the official designation of ‘AR15’ have been used in combat for 60 years.

          JFK even tested one out himself, firing off the deck of his yacht. Research the ‘coconut AR-15’.
          I bet many of you folks thought the AR-15 was only semi auto…

          “COLT AR-15 MODEL 1 ORIGINAL SELECT FIRE TEST RIFLE KNOWN AS “THE COCONUT RIFLE”. SN 000106. Cal. 223. Extraordinary AR-15, the sixth one ever made by Colt with 20″ tapered rnd bbl and orig 3-pronged brush catcher flash hider.“

        • @Miner
          I can call a Volkswagen beetle a Porsche, that doesn’t mean the vw is a porches.

          And…. that is what you keep saying… that because someone said it was an AR-15 that makes it an AR-15.

          You specifically said Ar-15…. so I will repeat.. contrary to the media and anti-gun/gun-control hype, the AR-15 has never actually been in military service.

          When you get your facts straight come on back and we’ll discuss.

        • 40oz, your denial of reality is breathtaking.

          “because Colt had agreed to carry forth the “ArmaLite AR-15” in their agreement for the purchase of the patent“

          Colt didn’t agree to “carry forth” the name, they bought the name along with the patent, modified it to suit their needs, and marketed it to countries such as Malaysia who armed their soldiers with the colt AR-15.

          Friend, if the company that owns the patent and the rights to the name manufactures the rifle under that patent and puts that name on it, that’s what it is.

          You know, I think in this very thread, you folks quote the US Army definition of an assault weapon as the final word.

          I draw your attention to the once confidential report I quoted in an earlier posting, dated ‘20 August 1962’ wherein ARPA-DoD states:

          “The suitability of the AR-15 as the basic shoulder weapon for the Vietnamese has been established. For the type of conflict now occurring in
          Vietnam, the weapon was also found by its users and by MAAG advisors to be
          superior in virtually all respects to the – a. M-1 rifle, b. M-I and M-2 SCarbines, c. Thompson Sub-machine gun and d. Browning Automatic rifle.“

          “Because of its availability and the results of extensive studies and previous testing by military agencies, the Colt Armalite AR-15
          Rifle was selected in July 1961 as the most suitable weapon for initial tests. This weapon was developed by the Armalite Division of Fairchild Aircraft
          Corporation to meet the military characteristics for a lightweight rifle utilising the high velocity small caliber principle. It was first tested by
          the US Army Infantry Board in 19S6 (Ref 1. c.). Since then, the weapon and its ammunition have undergone extensive engineering and service tests by: Aberdeen Proving Ground; the Combat Development Experimentation Center, Fort Ord, California; and the US Air Force at Lackland Air Force Base, Texas, (Refs l.d., I.e., l.f.). The rifle, with several modifica- tions resulting from these tests, is presently being manufactured by Colt’s Patent Firearms Manufacturing Company, Hartford, Connecticut. (Prior to completion of this report, the U. S. Air Force adopted the AR-15 as its basic shoulder weapon, replacing the M2 Carbine, the Browning Automatic Rifle and the M3 Sub-Machine Gun).“

          The in-country tests were done with 1000 rifles issued to MACV special forces units where the rifle was used in combat against Vietcong and regular NVA.

          And you might notice that last sentence I quoted:

          “Prior to the completion of this report, the U.S. Air Force adopted the AR-15 as its basic shoulder weapon, replacing the M2 Carbine, the Browning Automatic Rifle and the M3 Sub-Machine Gun.”

          General Curtis “Bomb them back to the Stone Age!“ LeMay procured 8500 Colt AR-15s for the USAF security forces, he wanted 80k more but got shut down, I guess the right people weren’t making money on it.

          https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/2859676/ARPA-AR-15.pdf

          This is a great report, you can see the seeds of the feud between JFK and the army brass here, AR-15 v. M-14, it’s like an early version of 9mm v. .45 ACP.

        • Fake Miner, here’s something interesting from the ARPA report:

          “(i) (C) The functioning capability of the AR-15 is less affected by prolonged exposure to tropical weather than that of the M2 Carbine.”

          That didn’t work out so well…

    • Exactly what I came down here to say. They’re going to (continue to) go after *all* semi-automatic weapons, not just MSRs. We’re going to hear that some “40,000 people a year die from semi-automatic guns” and “96% of all gun violence is committed with semi-automatic guns” and such

      • Tori B,

        It will be utterly fascinating to see if the gun-grabbers try to portray revolvers as semi-automatic firearms since they meet the strict definition of a semi-automatic firearm. If that is the case, gun-grabbers must be seriously salivating at the prospect of banning effectively ALL handguns as well as many rifles and shotguns.

        Important notes:

        1) The only handguns which fail to meet the definition of a semi-automatic firearm are single-action revolvers–very few people own single-action revolvers thus banning all semi-auto firearms would result in banning virtually all handguns.

        2) How much of a “win” is banning all semi-automatic rifles–at least with respect to claims of hampering spree-killers–when a pump-action shotgun would not be banned and a spree killer could easily kill just as many people just as quickly with a pump-action shotgun?

  22. Don’t think for a moment that this brave new flash of accuracy was meant to favor gun rights. The notion now is to demonize ALL semi-automatic firearms. Why ban those evil ARs and AKs, when you can demonize and advance the cause of banning your AR-15, your Ruger Ranch Rifle, Grandpa’s Browning, or your kid’s 10-22?

    At the moment, it seems like a good thing to use proper terminology, but the media are not our friends. Be careful what you wish for….

  23. going after “semi-auto” will backfire…as most of the pistols now sold would fall into that definition…and people are not going to give them up or their access to them…nor the old semi-auto hunting rifles that have been around forever…..

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here