[castlebrew]

...up until the point he described a “.30 caliber machinegun” as a heavy weapon.

AK-47 rounds (7.62x39mm) ARE .30 caliber rounds. My M1 Garand(in 7.62x51mm (.308 NATO)) is a “.30 caliber” weapon...albeit sporterized a bit.

So is it the caliber, or the automatic-fire feature that makes it a “heavy weapon”?

The SAW is a 5.56x45mm (.223) caliber weapon with automatic- fire capability - it that also a “heavy weapon”?

C’mon, Lou, get the facts...

[Tallguy]

So is it the caliber, or the automatic-fire feature that makes it a “heavy weapon”?

Mixing & (mis)matching definitions are why we never seem to get anywhere in debates with gun-controllers like BoR.

We can infer that BoR thinks of a "heavy weapon" as an automatic weapon that puts out a high-volume of fire. The military definition of a "heavy weapon" is basically any weapon that isn't easily man-portable by a single soldier. Therefore, a Squad Automatic Weapon (.556) is a light-weapon as it is handled by a single-soldier while a M2 (Ma Deuce) machine gun requires a crew (or is vehicle mounted).

Seems we keep running into these problems because few if any liberals have military experience. When you 'school them' they just change the subject or start arguing another fine-point about which they know nothing.

[MarkL]

So is it the caliber, or the automatic-fire feature that makes it a “heavy weapon”?

I'm willing to give Lou a break here, just for cowing BoR, as well as educating him and his audience.

Personally, I agree with Pat Buchanan and his quote on what firearms the government can regulate for the American public:

"I don't think the goverment should have anything to say about a gun that you don't need a trailer hitch to move."

Mark