"Assault Weapon" Letters to editor

[Commander]

About a week ago, the Dallas Morning News had an article about the run on "assault weapons". No where in the article was it defined what exactly an assault weapon was. So I wrote a letter to the editor and was surprised that it was published last Sunday as I received no notice from DMN that it would be. I basically stated that most people assume that an assault weapon is fully automatic and defined what fully automatic was versus semi-automatic. I also mentioned that in a lot of cases what determines what is an "assault weapon" was cosmetic features such as a folding stock or a pistol grip and not how it functions (ie automatic) or its caliber.

Well, in todays DMN, there is a letter that refers back to my letter of last week:

Assault label is arbitrary

Re: "Use those guns in the military" by Sandy Elkins and "An Assault Weapon, defined" by Phillip Herbst

I was glad to see the comments from Mr. Herbst in the same column as those from Ms. Elkins. Most people don't understand that an assault rifle, by the government's definition, is anything that doesn't have to be manually cocked each time you fire a shot. What needs to be governed is the selector switch that changes a rifle or gun from semi-automatic to fully automatic. Military weapons and ammunition are some of the most accurate that can be bought.

Art Haynes, Gun Barrel City


At the risk of sounding dumb - Help me understand his comment about the selector switch. I was unaware that rifles with such switches were available for purchase. Does this guy know what he is talking about? Or is he referring to some after market modification of the gun?

[srothstein]

What I think he is referring to is the argument that it makes sense to restrict full auto, but semi auto is not really any different than any other repeater action type. It is still one shot per trigger pull, whether you load the next round by moving a lever, pulling a bolt, ot letting the rifle do it for you.

But, as a real answer to your question, yes there are rifles still available with the selector switch and full auto capability. They are called class III firearms and require a $200 tax, a background check with fingerprints, and signed permission from you local chief law enforcement officer. They also require a lot more cash than the average person is willing to spend on rifles. For one reference, check http://www.westernfirearms.com. $20,000 for the M16 full auto version or $1,000 for the Bushmaster semi-auto version.

[Commander]

Thanks for the quick reply....I wasn't clear on my question....I knew that it was possible (with enough funds) to buy and own fully automatic guns. What I thought the guy was talking about was some switch on your everyday AR-15 type rifle. (ie. "Assault Weapon")

[flintknapper]

Well, in todays DMN, there is a letter that refers back to my letter of last week:

Assault label is arbitrary

Re: "Use those guns in the military" by Sandy Elkins and "An Assault Weapon, defined" by Phillip Herbst

I was glad to see the comments from Mr. Herbst in the same column as those from Ms. Elkins. Most people don't understand that an assault rifle, by the government's definition, is anything that doesn't have to be manually cocked each time you fire a shot. What needs to be governed is the selector switch that changes a rifle or gun from semi-automatic to fully automatic. Military weapons and ammunition are some of the most accurate that can be bought.

Art Haynes, Gun Barrel City


At the risk of sounding dumb - Help me understand his comment about the selector switch. I was unaware that rifles with such switches were available for purchase. Does this guy know what he is talking about? Or is he referring to some after market modification of the gun?

The short answer is NO, the guy doesn't know what he is talking about. The definition of "Assault Rifle" is not based on whether or not the firearm is "manually cocked". If it were...then every semi-automatic rifle (think Ruger 10/22 etc) would be considered an Assault Rifle.

Also, the "selector switch" he suggests be "governed" is NOT a stand alone item that allows a semi-automatic weapon to become "full auto". Most rifles would require fairly extensive modifications to be converted to full-auto (Safe, Full) and even more to be "select fire" (Safe, Semi, Full).

[Skiprr]

Thanks for the quick reply....I wasn't clear on my question....I knew that it was possible (with enough funds) to buy and own fully automatic guns. What I thought the guy was talking about was some switch on your everyday AR-15 type rifle. (ie. "Assault Weapon")

Your every-day AR has two safety-switch positions: on and off. And it isn't an "Assault Weapon," BTW.

There is no select-fire option. Otherwise, it would be a Class III weapon.

Most people don't understand that an assault rifle, by the government's definition, is anything that doesn't have to be manually cocked each time you fire a shot.

We need to, somehow, correct Mr. Art Haynes, of Gun Barrel City. Again

[fire128]

What concerns me is that a majority of AR owners perpetrate the assualt weapon name and misnomer. Just look at all the questions and post referring to EBR's, (evil black rifle) sniper rifle's, and what not. Its the mall ninja mentality that will cost us our rights in the future. To those in the know it's semantics, but to those who don't know its a military weapon which should not be in the general publics possesion..

just my opinion

[bdickens]

Let's get it straight: AR-15s and the like are to be called "sport-utility rifles," "self-defense rifles" or, best of all, simply "sporting rifles."

Do not allow the enemy to frame the debate and do not adopt the enemy's propoganda terminology.

[jpierce30]

It is amazing how many of our own help drag us down by feeding the liberals. I had to re-educate on of my managers about the "assault weapon" misnomer.
We sure need to educate ourselves as well as the sheep.

[Commander]

The intent of my letter was to inform as the DMN article went on and on about "Assault Weapons" but made no effort to explain what that term meant (in the eyes of the media, the AWB and general public). I agree that sometimes we fall into our own trap about sport rifles and reading back to the text of my original letter, I could have and should have made a better effort to use better terminology. My point was that the AWB was singling out rifles based on their appearance rather than their function.

Here is the text of my letter as published in the DMN on 11/23/2008:

An Assault weapon, defined

Most readers would be surprised to learn that an "assault weapon" is determined merely by cosmetic features, such as a folding stock or pistol grip, and not how it actually functions or its caliber.

The misconception is that an assault weapon is an automatic weapon - meaning that one press of the trigger results in the gun firing until the trigger is released. This is not true. The guns covered by the old Clinton ban were semi-automatic - one press of the trigger fires one round and one round only. Between trigger presses, the gun loads a new round.

Many of the most popular target and hunting rifles could be interpreted simply by looks to be an assault weapon and subject to being banned.

[GrillKing]

Let's get it straight: AR-15s and the like are to be called "sport-utility rifles," "self-defense rifles" or, best of all, simply "sporting rifles."

Do not allow the enemy to frame the debate and do not adopt the enemy's propoganda terminology.

This is a great concept. The image we want starts with us. Look how effective the anti's have been with "resonable restrictions", "common sense restrictions" etc. It is all about perception and EBR, Assualt Weapon, etc., are effective at giving a negative perception just as "Sport Utility Firearm" could be effective at countering that image.

Good post Bdickens.

[jimlongley]

About a week ago, the Dallas Morning News had an article about the run on "assault weapons". No where in the article was it defined what exactly an assault weapon was. So I wrote a letter to the editor and was surprised that it was published last Sunday as I received no notice from DMN that it would be. I basically stated that most people assume that an assault weapon is fully automatic and defined what fully automatic was versus semi-automatic. I also mentioned that in a lot of cases what determines what is an "assault weapon" was cosmetic features such as a folding stock or a pistol grip and not how it functions (ie automatic) or its caliber.

Well, in todays DMN, there is a letter that refers back to my letter of last week:

Assault label is arbitrary

Re: "Use those guns in the military" by Sandy Elkins and "An Assault Weapon, defined" by Phillip Herbst

I was glad to see the comments from Mr. Herbst in the same column as those from Ms. Elkins. Most people don't understand that an assault rifle, by the government's definition, is anything that doesn't have to be manually cocked each time you fire a shot. What needs to be governed is the selector switch that changes a rifle or gun from semi-automatic to fully automatic. Military weapons and ammunition are some of the most accurate that can be bought.

Art Haynes, Gun Barrel City




At the risk of sounding dumb - Help me understand his comment about the selector switch. I was unaware that rifles with such switches were available for purchase. Does this guy know what he is talking about? Or is he referring to some after market modification of the gun?

The writer was right in saying that people don't understand, but then he revealed the depth of his own ignorance.

I have had two letters published in the DMN recently on the obama and "assault weapons" issue, and sent a few more.

The one I wish they had published was this one, but maybe I used too many big words.

It is interesting to observe the prejudice and bigotry displayed by those who would practice "gun control."

They use meaningless terminology as justification for their unknowing attitudes. They gleefully mix metaphors while lecturing us on the evils of something they obviously know nothing about. And they steadfastly refuse to recognize that they are practicing prejudice and bigotry.

The only difference between this, and racial prejudice and bigotry, is that the perpetrators are targeting an inanimate object, which they can "prove" is a bad thing by using enough pejorative terms in describing it, and attempting to cast themselves as taking a moral stand against crime while castigating the owners of such inanimate objects as potential if not real criminals.

Oops, did I fail to mention that I was talking about people who are so "up in arms" about assault weapons, even if they don't know what they are?

Jim Longley

[shootthesheet]

Commande, thank you for taking the time to write the DMN. That is the kind of action we all need to do when those type articles appear. There should have been one written by every gun owner that read or heard about that piece in my opinion. That is what makes the difference in us retaining and regaining our full 2A rights.

I agree that we should not use the word "assault" to describe anything but a crime. The auto-loaders we have are jokes compared to true military weapons. The only advantage we have in having them is numbers. They would be effective if used in that way. I use "auto-loader" but I like "sport-utility rifle" since that is all our overlords at the federal government will "allow" us to exercise our 2A rights with.

I think the problem is those of types that want to seem in the "elite" because they have one. They are the mall ninjas and gun shop want-to-be guys that brag about their car or their cloths or their gun because they are trying to seem much more important than they are. They are usually younger guys but I have known them in their sixties as well. Same ones that think they are special because they got a CHL or can carry at work. I can only hope they get over it, grow up, and start doing something to learn the why and how of fighting to insure the next generation can enjoy this right.

Just because it looks like a duck doesn't mean it is anything more than a decoy

[ghostrider]

While the 2nd Amendment isn't about 'sporting' use, I do like the term "sport utility rifle" :-)

While "EBR" is a fun term to use amongst ourselves, in the presence of non-believers or those who just don't know any better, I just use "AR-15".

[jpierce30]

After all is said and done, a rifle is just a rifle. Just like people, they don't all look alike.

[Cuda]

I know when I was in the Army not so far in the past, most of the carry options were not fully auto. In fact the AR (Automatic Rifle, I think this is where the news assumes AR stands for assault rifle gets confused) was not fully auto but the selector was 1 round or 3 round burst. 3 rounds is far from full auto to me. Now when touching of an M60 and in your head saying 5 to 9 is just fine was more of a full auto to me.

But then again Hollywood hasn't done much realistic research on weapons since Vietnam i.e semi-auto pistols that still click with every trigger pull. I think Hollywood is part of our assault weapon problem too.