Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: A different way of defining what an assault weapon is [View all]The Mouth
(3,285 posts)32. For some, it would be any weapon not
in existence when the constitution was ratified.
I would *NEVER* want to own an Assault Weapon. No weapon I even want will ever assault another human being, be it a slingshot or a Barrett.
I happen to have a diverse and inclusive variety of defensive weapons, however. Don't fuck with my life, liberty or property and someone will never know I have them.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
48 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Simpler: Any semiauto centerfire rifle or brace-equipped-pistol capable of accepting detachable mags
JoeStuckInOH
Oct 2017
#4
Same way Machine Guns can be Short barreled rifles without dual registration.
JoeStuckInOH
Oct 2017
#12
My definition (or post content) suggests banning nothing. It's just a definition.
JoeStuckInOH
Oct 2017
#21
Most every term in relation to guns is well understood except for assault weapons
Kaleva
Oct 2017
#31
Have you considered why that term is misunderstood and ill-defined?
discntnt_irny_srcsm
Oct 2017
#33
re: "Wouldn't it make sense to adapt a definition that addresses your main complaint...
discntnt_irny_srcsm
Oct 2017
#37
"Simple, short, easy." And impossible. But by all means try for your 'Prohibition 3.0'
friendly_iconoclast
Nov 2017
#44