Via Jeff, comes Ted Diadiun, Reader Representative (whatever that is) trying to answer that question. He’s wrong. Trouble for Ted is he starts off using the term assault rifle. An assault rifle differs from an assault weapon in that an assault rifle is a medium-powered, select-fire rifle. Since it is select-fire, it is a machine gun in the legal sense. The term assault weapon is made up. It’s propaganda from anti-gun people. It used to have a legal definition but no longer does. The anti-gun Violence Policy Center summed it up best:

The weapons’ menacing looks, coupled with the public’s confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons—anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun—can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons. In addition, few people can envision a practical use for these weapons.

Ted continues with unsourced claims:

The pro-gun people say that an “assault weapon” is a term that applies only to a fully automatic weapon (one that keeps firing as long as you hold the trigger back). They say it’s inaccurate to use the term for a semi-automatic weapon (one that fires a single round each time you pull the trigger). They say the only difference between a semi-automatic hunting rifle and an “assault rifle” is cosmetic: Take an ordinary hunting rifle, switch out the stock, slap on a banana clip, put a flash suppressor over the barrel, give it a camouflage paint job, and presto — it’s an assault weapon.

Well . . . yes, says the ATF, which defines it like this: “In general, assault weapons are semi-automatic firearms with a large magazine of ammunition that were designed and configured for rapid fire and combat use.”

Note that Ted uses assault rifle but says ATF defines assault weapon. It’s interesting. Because the ATF is a law enforcement agency. As part of enforcing laws, there would have to be one with respect to assault weapons for them to have a definition for one. And they have such a definition written in past tense because the term no longer applies since the ban expired. So, I’d be curious to see where Ted gets his alleged ATF definition. It likely does not exist.

Next Ted breaks out the AP playbook err style book:

Taking its cue from that, the Associated Press Stylebook defines assault weapons as “firearms that feature two or more accessories such as a detachable magazine, folding or telescopic stock, silencer, pistol grip, bayonet mount or a device to suppress the flash emitted while shooting in the dark.”

Again, the term assault weapon is used. Not assault rifle, as Ted as used before. Now, that AP definition is, pretty much, verbatim what ATF said the law was. Which is that ergonomic features define what an assault weapon is. Now, it’s been a bit since I’ve seen the AP playbook err I mean stylebook. But last I looked assault weapon wasn’t in it. The term assault-style weapon was and the definition was exactly the one ol’ Teddy gave us. And that is unusual because the AP never actually follows its own stylebook with respect to reporting assault weapons. If they did, they would have been accurate. Five years ago. Now, they’re just taking dictation from the Violence Policy Center.

Posted in uncategorized on April 27th, 2009 by SayUncle | RSS 2.0 |