Why are gun rights supporters worried about bans on so-called assault weapons?

[yokel]

It all boils down to the fact that "common sense" gun control advocates want a toothless Second Amendment that protects the right to whatever arms the government decides to allow.

 

[hq]

They defined "assault weapon" based on how the weapon looks. For example, one attribute of an "assault weapon" was a bayonet lug -- when was the last time someone was bayonetted in this country?

As a sidenote, the history of bayonet is in hunting, not by any means in military applications. When hunters were restricted to single shot muzzleloaders, it gave an extra measure of safety against game animals that could charge when wounded, wild boar being the most common and obvious example.

Military adopted it much later.

 

[yugorpk]

I get a chuckle out of this assault weapons definition. Not theirs. Ours. The Germans came up with a "sturmgewehr" which loosely translates to "assault weapon" so now everything "assault weapon" has to be select fire even though most of us know that shoulder fired full auto is pretty much completely useless. For the purposes of US law the term "assault weapon" has been defined whether its what we like or not and it has nothing to do with select fire capability.

 

[fastbolt]

Why are gun rights supporters worried about bans on so-called assault weapons?

Well, perhaps one of the reasons might be concern over the recent trend of some people (like some college students) expressing how they think it would be reasonable to start curtailing the first amendment. How much more likely might that make curtailing the second, or even other, amendments at some point?

Ignoring the lessons of history can potentially have more dire consequences than a bad grade.

 

[Lord Teapot]

the word 'infringed' was included for a reason. they knew.

 

[Arizona_Mike]

The author of the article is a professor at UCLA and makes an awful lot of sense for someone you would assume is fairly liberal in his views (I know that to assume makes an ass out of u and me )

Prof. Volokh is a right-leaning libertarian actually. He is blogging at Pravda on the Potomac where he can do the most damage

Mike

 

[Deanimator]

For the purposes of US law the term "assault weapon" has been defined whether its what we like or not and it has nothing to do with select fire capability.

"Assault weapon" means NOTHING. It's whatever any particular anti-gun cultist wants to ban at any given instant.

"Assault RIFLE" has a fixed meaning... which NOTHING they want to ban fits.

NEVER, EVER let the other side set the terms of debate.

 

[T2K]

The literal translation of "sturmgewehr" is assault rifle. Gewehr means rifle (waffen means weapon).

So, the term assault rifle is clearly defined as a military, select fire rifle in an intermediate caliber. Someone above already mentioned this.

Assault weapon is a US media term that is not clearly defined. It seems to be most often applied to semi-automatic rifles but can also apply to pistols and shotguns. It's a nonsense political tool.

 

[psyopspec]

Nice to see Oleg Volk's work featured in the link. I haven't seen his stuff in some time.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

As a sidenote, the history of bayonet is in hunting, not by any means in military applications. When hunters were restricted to single shot muzzleloaders, it gave an extra measure of safety against game animals that could charge when wounded, wild boar being the most common and obvious example.

Military adopted it much later.

Absolutely right. Hunters in the Pyrenees Mountains on the border between France and Spain used matchlock muskets to hunt bear and wild boar. Matchlocks are very slow to reload, so they carried huge knives to defend themselves against wounded critters.

One day a hunter woke up and smelled the coffee, "If I'm close enough to the bear to use my knife, he's close enough to me to use his teeth and claws." So he designed a new handle for his knife in the form of a tapered plug, wide near the cross guard, smaller near the end.

Then he could quickly jam the hilt in the muzzle and have a spear. The wide guard of the knife kept the bear or boar from coming up the gun, and as long as the hunter could keep his feet under him, he was safe.

A lot of those modified knives were made at Bayonne, France, hence the name "Bayonet."

 

[rigger1]

Hi Deep South.
"The questions answer is so obvious, I don't even know why he wrote the article to begin with. A 6 year old can see why there's concern if they pay Just a little bit of attn."

But these days just pointing a finger at someone in school demonizes the 6 year old kid. And I suspect the teachers and classmates are also there to make it "stick" in all the kids brains forever. It's definitely the first step in indoctrinating our kids to fear gun ownership, planned and approved by the Obama administration.

 

[Arkansas Paul]

Well, perhaps one of the reasons might be concern over the recent trend of some people (like some college students) expressing how they think it would be reasonable to start curtailing the first amendment. How much more likely might that make curtailing the second, or even other, amendments at some point?

Ignoring the lessons of history can potentially have more dire consequences than a bad grade.

I didn't really intend the thread to be for you guys answering the question in the title.

It was more to get you to read the article and tell what you thought about that.

I certainly agree with your statements on the matter, no doubt.

 

[yugorpk]

"Assault weapon" means NOTHING. It's whatever any particular anti-gun cultist wants to ban at any given instant.

"Assault RIFLE" has a fixed meaning... which NOTHING they want to ban fits.

NEVER, EVER let the other side set the terms of debate.

Assault weapon has a definition in US code. Or at least it did prior to the clinton ban sunset. Sturmgewehr is a German word that CAN be translated at assault weapon but like many translations it can also be translated differently. Given that German and English arent terribly different in the grand scheme of things it is a bit inconvenient that we already have the word "storm" in English as in "storm the parapets" . It is synonymous with "Assault" but "storm weapon" doesnt roll off the tongue. In any case just because "Modern Sporting Rifles" do not have a select fire ammo wasting switch doesnt make them any less deadly in the hands of a killer. Personally I don't have any issue with referring to any of my firearms as assault weapons.

 

[hq]

Assault weapon has a definition in US code.

So did "Untermensch" in German code, as a very harsh analogy. The fact that a political lobby has managed to define an artificial term into legislation doesn't mean it has any relevance with meaningful and objective facts or reality. Purely political buzzwords for whatever the powers that be wish to object have a bad name for a very good reason. "Assault weapon" is just one of many.

 

[Deanimator]

Assault weapon has a definition in US code.

So did "slave".

Not anymore.

Sturmgewehr is a German word that CAN be translated at assault weapon but like many translations it can also be translated differently.

It can be INCORRECTLY translated as "assault weapon", just as "Halbkettenfahrzeuge" can be INCORRECTLY translated as "cuff link".

"Assault RIFLE" ALWAYS means the same thing.

"Assault weapon" means whatever firearm any given anti-gun cultist wants to ban at any given instant.

I simply refuse to allow craven LIARS to define MY vocabulary to conform to their LIES.

 

[Tommygunn]

So what does "Halbkettenfahrzeuge" really mean??

 

[herrwalther]

Look at restrictive states like NY, NJ, and CA. Their assault weapons are anything they don't like and have banned successfully. Compare their lists of banned firearms to a "free" state. If that comparison scares some people here and say "I am glad I don't live in that state," consider the fact that national laws will pass in Congress making millions of felons seemingly overnight. That is exactly why we need to fight weapon and "assault weapon" bans.

 

[yugorpk]

"So what does "Halbkettenfahrzeuge" really mean??"

Ha Ha. Its a half track.

Just got back from a shooting session with my boss and her wife ( Yeah, I know ) who happens to be a former cop and firearms instructor and the subject of the term "assault rifle" came up as she was shooting one of mine. I had a full auto P90 dumping mags. I told her I was considering stenciling the words "Assault Rifle" on the buttstock of one of my SBR AR's so I could answer people who are always asking what it is.

 

[Drail]

Well maybe the Germans used the term "assault rifle" - but we should keep in mind that they lost the war even though they had the world's only "assault rifle". Any military leader who even considers the concept of "assaulting" an enemy position with only rifles as a valid tactic is either extremely desperate - or stupid.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Well maybe the Germans used the term "assault rifle" - but we should keep in mind that they lost the war even though they had the world's only "assault rifle". Any military leader who even considers the concept of "assaulting" an enemy position with only rifles as a valid tactic is either extremely desperate - or stupid.

That's hardly a valid point.

The Germans did not assault enemy positions with only rifles -- they had a very sophisticated combined arms system. The StG44 was simply an attempt to give combat troops BETTER arms. And the concept -- a selective fire weapon chambered for an intermediate cartridge -- has proven sound.

 

[Deanimator]

Well maybe the Germans used the term "assault rifle" - but we should keep in mind that they lost the war even though they had the world's only "assault rifle". Any military leader who even considers the concept of "assaulting" an enemy position with only rifles as a valid tactic is either extremely desperate - or stupid.

You might want to read the Collector Grade books "Sturmgewehr!" and "MG34-MG42: German Universal Machineguns".

They might clear up some misconceptions that you seem to have...

 

[mgkdrgn]

you are aware of the story of the "Camel's nose under the tent flap"?

 

[Vern Humphrey]

I am reminded of our most recent Democrat candidate for Governor of Arkansas, Mike Ross. He said he was in favor of "common sense" gun control.

I had the pleasure of telling him, "Mike, you don't HAVE common sense."

And he didn't get elected.

 

[jarhead]

I think the author was spot on... I also get very concerned when a SCOTUS justice opines that a "perceived benefit" to public safety, which may not in reality have any benefit is nonetheless of substantial benefit to the public [I'm paraphrasing].

Effectively stating that if the public perceives something to increase their safety or benefit their welfare - even if it isn't true, the perceived benefit is in fact real. To me, this is an awful like "the end justifies the means"...

They want to ban assault weapons, but can't define them - We've apparently had a pandemic of a Glaucoma strain that can only be treated by 39 flavors of weed - We must have "common sense" gun laws, but if you don't agree with their opinion you are by definition a demon with no common sense - eliminating witches that threaten Salem will be "perceived by the public" as a substantial safety benefit - Affordable Healthcare will be "deficit neutral" if you trust our new math - it is fine to order sending our 18 year old boys to a war zone, though our 18 year old girls need a safe zone if you hurt their feelings - if someone illegally enters my country I can't make them leave, but if they illegally enter my home they could be shot, as determined by a government that has also handed me a gun and shipped me to a foreign country to fight to defend our way of life and to secure our borders... And if being sent to a foreign country to fight a war causes post trauma, my gun rights can be taken away.

So yes, I find it difficult to trust the left agenda...

 

[Vern Humphrey]

I think the author was spot on... I also get very concerned when a SCOTUS justice opines that a "perceived benefit" to public safety, which may not in reality have any benefit is nonetheless of substantial benefit to the public [I'm paraphrasing].

You may recall one of our Justices described herself as "a wise Latina" implying that her "wisdom" trumps the Constitution.