Liberal Forum

Blackvegetable » 17 Aug 2026, 7:03 am » wrote: ↑

17 Aug 2026, 7:03 am

This is nonsense.

The "civilian" AR-15 is a variant of the original AR-15 design, modified so as not to be a machine gun subject to the 1934 regs.

It doesn't "look" like an assault rifle...it is one.

This terminology debate is irrelevant. The AR-15's design and development predates the etymological discussion. The antecedent is German.




 

 

Please provide the definition of an assault WEAPON.

The U.S. Army defines assault rifles as "short, compact, selective-fire weapons that fire a cartridge intermediate in power between submachine gun and rifle cartridges."[17] In this strict definition, a firearm must have at least the following characteristics to be considered an assault rifle:[2][3][4]

• It must be capable of selective fire.
• It must have an intermediate-power cartridge: more power than a pistol but less than a standard rifle or battle rifle; examples of intermediate cartridges are the 7.92×33mm Kurz, the 7.62×39mm and 5.56×45mm NATO.
• Its ammunition must be supplied from a detachable box magazine.[5]
• It must have an effective range of at least 300 metres (330 yards).

Rifles that meet most of these criteria, but not all, are not assault rifles according to the U.S. Army's definition. For example:

• Select-fire rifles such as the FN FAL, M14, and H&K G3 main battle rifles are not assault rifles; they fire full-powered rifle cartridges.
• Semi-automatic-only rifles like the Colt AR-15 are not assault rifles; they do not have select-fire capabilities.
• Semi-automatic-only rifles with fixed magazines like the SKS are not assault rifles; they do not have detachable box magazines and are not capable of automatic fire.