Just wanted to clarify that when civilians refer to a MBR they also mean that he weapon in question was either actually used by a military or is a civilian-legal variant thereof. Thus, a Mauser 98k is an MBR but a Remington 700 in the same caliber is not. Likewise, a Springfield Armory M1-A is a MBR though a Remington 7600 in the same caliber is not.
I realize we’re getting into “how many riflemen can dance on the head of a pin” territory here but I’d argue that the SA M1-A is not a MBR any more an AR-15 is because it’s just a civilian clone of of an M14. Some but not all M14s were selective fire. The “Springfield Armory™” that makes the M1-A just purchased the name. They are not the same as the US armory that made muskets, trapdoors, '03s, M1s and M14s.
I would agree with you, which is my point exactly. MBR is a civilian, or hobbyist, term; not one that has any military etymology. In that sense, MBR and Assault Weapon are devoid of meaning when it comes to actual military items.
I’ll withdraw the complaints about the MBR thing. It’s not an actual military term, just something I came across on gun boards a lot. The definition there was more along the lines of what I said, though. It was basically a term created to describe post-WW2 select fire rifles that weren’t assault rifles, I guess.
If the military don’t call it that, then we can’t either?
Dang!
I think there some pretty valid parallels between what’s discussed here and the evolution of the wonderful H2. Arnold’s car.
I don’t think that’s the issue in question. The term “assault weapons” was created to mislead - no one ever claimed that they couldn’t call them that, just that it was dishonest.
No, it wasn’t. It may have been used that way in the 1980’s, but it was not “created to mislead.” It was “created” by journalists well before then, and deception had nothing to do with the origin of the term.
Well, alright. I don’t have any irrefutable proof as to the intentions of the first usages, so I won’t argue that in GQ. It clearly has been used by gun control advocates in scare tactics. Even if they didn’t create the term, perhaps we could agree that they popularized it, (arbitrarily) defined it, and used it deceptively to their advantage.
You have given me a good-natured chuckle, SenorBeef. 
I’m sure your biases have nothing to do with that.
Nah.
It’s that “Berkeley” thing again, isn’t it.
Game, set, match!
The OP has been answered.
Take all the petty bickering somewhere else.
Closed.
samclem GQ moderator