• Gammelfisch@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 hours ago

          True, but when the United States Armory and Arsenal at Springfield, MA was in operation and evaluating rifles, they used the term Assault Rifle in their photos.

            • Gammelfisch@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 hours ago

              The last photo I saw was HK G-3 produced in Spain by CEMTE and it was full auto. I believe the 3 round burst was developed during the 1980’s for the M-16A2 and I am not sure when the Warsaw Pact developed for their AK-74 rifles.

        • the_crotch@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          14 hours ago

          Yeah, oof. They’re probably just confused by “assault rifle/assault weapon” and bought an AR-15 or something (in which case, imo this new gun owner is obligated to spend some time learning more about guns). But even if that’s true, saying “I just bought an assault rifle last week” is going to get some attention from whichever agencies in DC are monitoring Lemmy lol

          • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            13 hours ago

            AR-15 rifles also covers select fire variants. The original AR-15 made by Eugene Stoner was select fire only. The assault rifle/assault weapon distinction is functionally meaningless, and really only applies to the military. Oh, you’ll get fudds that will claim otherwise, but they’re also the ones claiming that a 1911 is the best gun ever because “TwO WorLD wARs!”.

            • TehWorld@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 hours ago

              No, the 1911 is the best because it fits in the hand. #singlestackgang. Also because it’s “cool” and pretty darn reliable.

              • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                5 hours ago

                I would not ever call a 1911 “reliable”. You need to keep up with the spring replacement (500-2000 rounds for the recoil spring), and you need to make sure that you’re keeping them very clean. I’ve had the slide stop walk out on mine in the middle of a stage, which created a stoppage that couldn’t be fixed on the clock.

                It would not be my first recommendation for a carry gun.

                For reliable, I’d go with a major-name striker-fired polymer framed pistol. And by “reliable” I mean a gun that you can forget to clean for 2000+ rounds, and it still works well.

                That said, my carry gun is a CZ Shadow 2 Compact. It’s also not ‘reliable’; it’s going to take a lot more work than a Glock 19. I’m okay with that. And I knew that going in.

            • the_crotch@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              12 hours ago

              The original AR-15 made by Eugene Stoner was select fire only

              Sure, but that’s not the one people are buying today. I’d bet this is another case of someone mistakenly believing that the AR stands for assault rifle.

              The assault rifle/assault weapon distinction is functionally meaningless, and really only applies to the military.

              I disagree. Assault rifle has one standard legal definition at the federal level. It’s functional in that it makes select fire guns effectively illegal for your average citizen. Assault weapon can apply to nearly anything because has been defined by a multitude of varying laws in different states and municipalities mostly targeting aesthetic features.

              Oh, you’ll get fudds that will claim otherwise

              …like the ATF

      • the_crotch@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        15 hours ago

        Assault rifles are full auto or burst fire. They’re not legal for civilians without a specific form of FFL, which is difficult and expensive to get. Even with an FFL you will probably run into problems with state and local laws. That’s why you’ll pretty much only see assault rifles at places like the ones outside Vegas where they let you pay to fire one for a few minutes.

        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_rifle

        • SSTF@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 hours ago

          Fully automatic weapons can be legally owned after a mere $200 application to the ATF.

          The real hurdle is the closed nature of the full auto registry creates artificial scarcity and pushes the price of the gun itself up.

          But, assuming you have the money, it is a straightforward process no more complicated or time consuming than legally owning an SBR.

          Edit: Not sure why I’m being downvoted. Here is the transfer form. Block 4B is where you list what type of NFA item you are buying.

        • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          12 hours ago

          I think they call em “assault weapons” and they’re basically anything high capacity and semi auto and black and scary. Basically no recent discourse about assault whatever has actually referred to burst or auto weapons.

          • the_crotch@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            12 hours ago

            I think you’re probably right that those are what the law is targeting, and Newsweek is simply lying in this article.

            • SSTF@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              11 hours ago

              I went and read the text. The TLDR is the law was targeted to semiautomatic weapons, but the text itself defined those as “assault rifles”.

              The text proposed banning “assault rifles” and within the bill it laid out a definition for the purposes of the bill:

              “Assault rifle” means a semiautomatic rifle

              (1) With an overall length less than thirty inches;

              (2) That has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than ten rounds, except for an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition; or

              (3) That accepts a detachable magazine or that may be readily modified to accept a detachable magazine and has one or more of the following characteristics:

              (A) A folding, telescoping, or detachable stock, or a stock that is otherwise foldable or adjustable in a manner that operates to reduce the length, the size, or any dimension, or otherwise enhances the concealability of the weapon;

              (B) A pistol grip or thumbhole stock;

              © Any feature capable of functioning as a protruding grip that can be held by the non‑trigger hand;

              (D) A flash suppressor;

              (E) A shroud that is attached to or partially or completely encircles the barrel and permits the shooter to hold the firearm with the second hand without being burned, but excluding a slide that encloses the barrel;

              (F) A bayonet mount;

              (G) A grenade launcher; or

              (H) A threaded barrel capable of accepting a barrel extender, flash suppressor, forward hand grip, or silencer.

              https://legiscan.com/HI/text/SB401/id/3226101