I tried to find their definition of “assault weapon” in some of the articles about this agenda, but couldn’t find one.
I’m sure it will be the usual laundry list of features that make firearms more user friendly and ergonomic, like pistol grips (gasp), forward vertical grips (gasp again), adjustable stocks for different size shooters (I feel faint), and 30 round magazines to fend off violent gangs without reloading (someone get the smelling salts).
It’s also laughable that 5.56/.223 is referred to as a “high-powered” round just because the AR-15 uses it.
All this argle-bargle from the commies has been used since the late 80s without any change. C’mon guys, give us a new, compelling argument against MSRs (modern sporting rifles)!
“C’mon guys, give us a new, compelling argument against MSRs (modern sporting rifles)!”
That’s a weasel word. They are a 99% equivalent to the assault rifles our military uses, only missing the superfluous and generally less effective detail of full auto. In many cases, we actually have much better rifles than the military.
And they are precisely for use in a militia and defense zone. It’s silly for us to pretend they are mere sporting rifles. Our founders would not have made such a silly argument.