TexasCHLforum.com

srothstein wrote:Sorry Amber, but I guess I was wrong. I have to expand my gun show attendance a little. The ones I have been to, in San Antonio and the surrounding area do not have class III weapons dealers at them that I have seen. I think I will see if I can get to one of the bigger cities and see if I can find any assault weapons at a gun show for you.

Just to be clear, would you define what you meant since I think we might disagree. I use the definition of a intermediate powered rifle cartridge weapon that fires selective fire (full or semi-automatic). I don't think mine is quite the same as the military definition but it captures the gist of it. A larger caliber would be a machine gun, and a pistol caliber would be a sub machine gun. Of course there is the machine pistol for things like a selective fire MAC 11, but if they were really common MAC would still be in business making them.

But then, Steve, you would be talking about an assault rifle, a clearly defined firearm, not the ill defined "assault weapon."

amber wrote:

KC5AV wrote:What exactly is an assault weapon? I've never seen one of those.

You're not looking hard enough. I see them at every gun show.

I'm with KC5AV, I have been to a lot of gun shows, and have seen all manner of guns including class three, but have yet to see any assault weapons.

Perhaps, Amber, you meant your comment as subtle irony, or have you fallen prey to media/political hype and believe that there is actually some such thing?

The term "assault weapon" has no strict standard defintion, unlike assault rifle, submachine gun, machine pistol, or machine gun, it is a term coined by unknown persons, most likely the brady bunch, in response to outcry by those who know better against the constant description of certain firearms as assault rifles.

Whoever coined the term just chose one with enough pejorative nuance to put fear into the hearts of the unknowing and never bothered, probably by design, to provide an adequate definition. Without said definition the users of the phrase can call anything an assault weapon and no one can hold them responsible for their words - so a black military looking pistol becomes an "ASSAULT WEAPON" as does a semi-automatic (doesn't fit the definition of assault rifle) version of a current or past military gun.

The term's amorphous nature makes it virtually useless for anything beyond rabble rousers trying to stir emotional responses among the unknowing ("Save society, outlaw assault weapons") and is hardly a suitable part of a gun owner's lexicon, except for re-education of those who have fallen prey to the hype.

[/rant]