# Is a semi automatic rifle an assault rifle? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 14, 2016, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-semi-automatic-rifle-an-assault-rifle/757375 "2016-06-14T21:08:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2016, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-semi-automatic-rifle-an-assault-rifle/757375/61 "2016-06-15T16:45:44Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > [snip] … This is silly. 22LR are little baby bullets, used for cheap plinking and teaching your 10 year old how to shoot. If anything with more energy than that is “high powered” then the vast majority of guns are “high powered” and the term is meaningless. Plenty of common calibers have 5 times the kinetic energy of .223 rounds. Are they super-duper-ultra-high-powered? … [snip] I was making a simple comparison between a .22 Long, a 30/30, an old Colt .45 and the NATO 5.56. Larger bullet, same energy, less muzzle velocity … ---
**Author:** ![thelurkinghorror](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7c8e57/32.png) [@thelurkinghorror](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/thelurkinghorror)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2016, 5:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-semi-automatic-rifle-an-assault-rifle/757375/62 "2016-06-15T17:32:07Z")
> [@watchwolf49](#): > > A .22 long cartridge holds 29 grains of power … the .223 NATO cartridge holds 55 grains powder … of roughly equal bullet size, we pack almost double the powder in … thus “high power”. True. Although comparing the weights of two different types of powder is not a good comparison. Even if you load two rounds of the same caliber with different powder at the same velocity, the grains may vary by quite a bit. AR-15s are also used because they’re popular. Like how if you see a random pickup truck, it may not always be a F150 but it often is. ---
**Author:** ![engineer\_comp\_geek](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/engineer_comp_geek/32/504_2.png) [@engineer\_comp\_geek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/engineer_comp_geek)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2016, 5:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-semi-automatic-rifle-an-assault-rifle/757375/63 "2016-06-15T17:41:14Z")
> [@Lumpy](#): > > Somewhere, somehow, the M-16, and by extension the AR-15 got branded “high power” rifles. I’d like to know where the heck that came from. Probably came from the media. What’s really ironic is that the M-16 was designed to reduce the overall carry weight for soldiers and to ease the logistics for the ammo carriers. It fires a smaller and less powerful round than its main competitor, the AK-47, which was fairly controversial at the time (and still is). The idea being that if you can carry a lot more ammo, even if the individual rounds aren’t quite as powerful, you’ll be more effective, and the army as a whole will be more effective as its expends less effort to move ammunition around. They’ve beefed up the round a bit from the original M-16 days, but it’s still a less powerful round than what the AK-47 fired and it’s a less powerful round than the M-14 fired (the M-16 replaced the M-14). The M-16’s 5.56x45mm round isn’t a high powered round, it’s a “good enough for the job” round. The M-14 with it’s .308 round (7.62x51mm NATO) was the last U.S. military standard infantry rifle that used what I would call a “high powered” round. ---
**Author:** ![Dallas\_Jones](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dallas_jones/32/3277_2.png) [@Dallas\_Jones](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dallas_Jones)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2016, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-semi-automatic-rifle-an-assault-rifle/757375/64 "2016-06-15T17:54:00Z")
> [@Lumpy](#): > > Somewhere, somehow, the M-16, and by extension the AR-15 got branded “high power” rifles. I’d like to know where the heck that came from. “High Powered” is another one of those descriptions that are meaningless without the proper context. Does it mean feet per second? Knock down power? What? If it means fastest FPS, one of the most high powered rounds is the .17 Remington cartridge. This bullet is the same diameter as the BB in the Daisy Red Rider BB gun from the popular movie “A Christmas Story” where Ralphie is told that he will put his eye out. The .17 Remington is a great round, shoots flat and fast. It is shown on this ballistics table as the fastest, at least on this chart. The AK-47 bad guy gun shoots 7.62 X 39mm and it is way down the list. [http://www.chuckhawks.com/rifle\_ballistics\_table.htm](http://www.chuckhawks.com/rifle_ballistics_table.htm) ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2016, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-semi-automatic-rifle-an-assault-rifle/757375/65 "2016-06-15T18:00:26Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > It’s very silly. Even with a very generous definition of “assault weapon”, they’re used in less than 5% of crimes in the US. Even if you got rid of them all, you’d barely put the tiniest dent in anything. > > Really, handguns are where it’s at when it comes to crimes with guns. You can tell who’s focused on reacting with their emotions (or exploiting people reacting with their emotions) by how much they care about scary looking rifles which are used in a negligible amount of crime vs handguns which are very commonly used in crime. Well we can certainly agree that it’s very silly. AR-15 style rifles have been used in most of the recent mass killings. But you’re right: no point banning them while more people die of, I dunno, heart disease. ---
**Author:** ![engineer\_comp\_geek](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/engineer_comp_geek/32/504_2.png) [@engineer\_comp\_geek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/engineer_comp_geek)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2016, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-semi-automatic-rifle-an-assault-rifle/757375/66 "2016-06-15T19:13:41Z")
> [@Mijin](#): > > AR-15 style rifles have been used in most of the recent mass killings. But you’re right: no point banning them while more people die of, I dunno, heart disease. So, if you take away all of the AR-15s, all of the whack jobs out there that want to kill people will just sit on their couches and think happy thoughts? Or will they just find some other non-banned weapon to use? ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2016, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-semi-automatic-rifle-an-assault-rifle/757375/67 "2016-06-15T20:23:36Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > You may have missed it - but I was responding to the training aspect. I did miss it, sorry. I would still favor training as a licensing requirement, but not as a renewal requirement for most guns. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2016, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-semi-automatic-rifle-an-assault-rifle/757375/68 "2016-06-15T20:27:39Z")
> [@engineer\_comp\_geek](#): > > So, if you take away all of the AR-15s, all of the whack jobs out there that want to kill people will just sit on their couches and think happy thoughts? Or will they just find some other non-banned weapon to use? They will probably use the same weapons that all the other mass shooters in countries that have gun bans use. ---
**Author:** ![engineer\_comp\_geek](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/engineer_comp_geek/32/504_2.png) [@engineer\_comp\_geek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/engineer_comp_geek)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2016, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-semi-automatic-rifle-an-assault-rifle/757375/69 "2016-06-15T20:42:41Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > They will probably use the same weapons that all the other mass shooters in countries that have gun bans use. You better ban knives too while you’re at it. > [@](#): > > On April 29 in Taixing,[8] Jiangsu, unemployed 47-year-old Xu Yuyuan went to Zhongxin Kindergarten[15] and stabbed 28 students and two teachers after stabbing the security guard;[9] most of the Taixing students were 4 years old.[16] The attack was the second in China in just two days. Just one of many examples out there. Banning guns doesn’t stop mass killings. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2016, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-semi-automatic-rifle-an-assault-rifle/757375/70 "2016-06-15T20:45:29Z")
> [@engineer\_comp\_geek](#): > > You better ban knives too while you’re at it. > > Just one of many examples out there. > > Banning guns doesn’t stop mass killings. It’s awesome just making up stuff that you think people say, and then arguing against it. It happens so often, there should be a term for it. ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2016, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-semi-automatic-rifle-an-assault-rifle/757375/71 "2016-06-15T20:46:55Z")
Ruger 22-250 semi with a Bushnell banner scope is pretty much under everybody’s radar. ---
**Author:** ![Laggard](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/9de053/32.png) [@Laggard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Laggard)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2016, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-semi-automatic-rifle-an-assault-rifle/757375/72 "2016-06-15T20:49:14Z")
> [@engineer\_comp\_geek](#): > > You better ban knives too while you’re at it. > > Just one of many examples out there. > > Banning guns doesn’t stop mass killings. It would reduce them though. ---
**Author:** ![Chihuahua](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/dec6dc/32.png) [@Chihuahua](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chihuahua)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2016, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-semi-automatic-rifle-an-assault-rifle/757375/73 "2016-06-15T20:53:38Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > They will probably use the same weapons that all the other mass shooters in countries that have gun bans use. You appear to be missing the point. The media specifically talks about the AR-15 to the exclusion of all others. If the AR-15 were categorically banned, there are many dozens of other firearm designs that offer identical functionality. The _point_ is the stupidity of focusing on a single model of firearm as a “bad” gun when many other firearms could fulfill the same purpose. ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2016, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-semi-automatic-rifle-an-assault-rifle/757375/74 "2016-06-15T21:06:59Z")
Glock 19 auto 9mm will fit in your pocket, though the 33 round clip would stick out some. ---
**Author:** ![msmith537](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2016, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-semi-automatic-rifle-an-assault-rifle/757375/75 "2016-06-15T21:15:11Z")
> [@engineer\_comp\_geek](#): > > Probably came from the media. > > What’s really ironic is that the M-16 was designed to reduce the overall carry weight for soldiers and to ease the logistics for the ammo carriers. It fires a smaller and less powerful round than its main competitor, the AK-47, which was fairly controversial at the time (and still is). The idea being that if you can carry a lot more ammo, even if the individual rounds aren’t quite as powerful, you’ll be more effective, and the army as a whole will be more effective as its expends less effort to move ammunition around. They’ve beefed up the round a bit from the original M-16 days, but it’s still a less powerful round than what the AK-47 fired and it’s a less powerful round than the M-14 fired (the M-16 replaced the M-14). The M-16’s 5.56x45mm round isn’t a high powered round, it’s a “good enough for the job” round. > > The M-14 with it’s .308 round (7.62x51mm NATO) was the last U.S. military standard infantry rifle that used what I would call a “high powered” round. Yes, God forbid the media describe weapons in terms that make them sound dangerous. I can’t be bothered to look up the specifications, but I don’t know that the M-16’s M-16’s 5.56x45mm NATO round is significantly “less powerful” than the M-14’s 7.62×51mm NATO round or the AK-47 7.62×39mm. It’s obviously a smaller round, but it also has a much high muzzle velocity. And as everyone knows, energy increases linearly with mass, but squares with velocity. All these round are “high powered” in the way the .22 rimfire rounds you used in your rifle in summer camp isn’t. Since I’m sure it will come up, a couple of definitions: The M-16 and AK-47 are “assault rifles”. Lightweight selectable-fire rifles (usually made from stamped parts) designed to be the infantryman’s primary weapon. It’s a specific “thing” compared to the more generic media term “assault weapons” (although I suppose one could apply it accurately to assault rifles, submachinguns, carbines like the M4 and machine pistols like the Uzi or MAC-10). The M-14 is a “battle rifle” (now also used as a “sniper rifle”). While historically serving the same combat role as the assault rifle, it is heavier, more unwieldy in close quarters and holds less ammo (although the ammo is typically heavier). While there are purpose-built sniper rifles like the M-95 Barrett, AS50, PSG-1 and Dragunov, there is functionally little difference between a sniper rifle and a scoped hunting rifle. In fact, the M40 is basically a Remington 700 bolt action rifle. > [@engineer\_comp\_geek](#): > > So, if you take away all of the AR-15s, all of the whack jobs out there that want to kill people will just sit on their couches and think happy thoughts? Or will they just find some other non-banned weapon to use? Yes, that’s the idea. They would have to find some other weapon that doesn’t allow you to kill a room full of people in seconds. ---
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2016, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-semi-automatic-rifle-an-assault-rifle/757375/76 "2016-06-15T21:30:16Z")
> [@Mijin](#): > > This is the kind of logic often touted by the gun lobby, but the simple fact is, gun bans in general and assault weapon / assault rifle / SMG bans in particular, _actually work_. We see examples of that all around the world, both in countries that have effectively always banned guns, and in countries that have recently tightened their laws, such as Australia and the UK. > One only needs to compare homicide, gun deaths and mass killing deaths to other countries to get a very clear idea of this (and yes, as a proportion of population, obviously) > > Now, you may object to bans on civil liberties grounds. Fine. > But I think it’s totally erroneous to claim that attempts to restrict the sale of guns or assault weapons are counterproductive and just political showboating. Oh really? Well, [FactCheck.org](http://FactCheck.org), a website supported by the Annenberg Foundation (a social justice and educational focused foundation which can scarcely be considered any kind of mouthpiece for the gun industry or NRA), found that the results on crime of the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act were at best inconclusive, and that both pro- and anti-gun control sides cherry picked the data to support their conclusions. It is, of course, trivial to municipalities or states with significant legal constraints on gun ownership which nonetheless have high crime rates, and the converse. This suggests that the focus on firearms, rather than the underlying issues which perpetuate crime such as socioeconomic inequality, lack of effective education, poor community bonding, et cetera, is more substantial than the relative access to firearms. This doesn’t mean that rational proposals to certify potential firearm users as being responsible and well-trained should not be advanced and seriously entertained, but “getting rid of guns on our streets” is really more about rhetoric and posturing for the cameras than taking an effective and comprehensive approach to addressing these problems. The language that is often employed is particularly irksome because I’ve never personally seen a gun just laying on the street, but I have seen schools underfunded and poorly managed, police enforcing laws inequally or arbitrarily, bright children lacking opportunities and encouragement to excel, and so forth. The almost monomaniacal focus on gun control initiatives isn’t just misguided; it actually misdirects attention to some of the real problems that no one wants to seriously address because they aren’t going to be fixed in an election cycle. > [@Lumpy](#): > > I doubt however there would be much support for this, because there’s a fundamental divide between the pro and anti gun sides. Broadly, the pro side believes that people should be able to privately own instruments of deadly force, and the anti side thinks the government should have a monopoly on armed force. A number of people would in practice accept some intermediate compromise, but both extremes would consider that a betrayal of their fundamental positions. And this, as with many highly politicized issues, is the problem; the radicals on both sides of the issue have taken over the debate, and the media (mainstream and otherwise) in it’s desire to capitalize on the conflict, ignores the middle. Regardless of how you feel about gun ownership on a personal level, the reality is that the United States has such a large population of gun owners and available firearms that any effort to substantially restrict legitimate gun owners isn’t practically going to eliminate firearms ownership. And no matter how dogmatic you may feel about the Second Amendment (which legitimate legal scholars acknowledge does, in fact, protect the rights of individual citizens to possess and use firearms for legal purposes), any reasonable person has to admit that firearms are inherently hazardous devices which pose a public threat in the hands of malicious or incompetent users, and therefore the government has a vested interest in regulating for the public interest. As for mass shootings of the kind that occurred recently in Orlando, it is worthwhile to bear a few things in mind; one is that even without a firearm (“assault weapon” or otherwise), the individual in question could go significant harm to large numbers of people using any number of other devices or substances, such as the infamous Happy Land or UpStairs Lounge fires. This doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t make better efforts to prevent emotionally disturbed, mentally ill, or just plain malicious people from acquiring firearms or other means of mass destruction, but it needs to go beyond just trying to restrict access to hazardous tools and substances. Every time a mass shooting happens the gun control advocates again wail out the need for measures that often would not have prevented or often even delayed the individual in question from acquiring weapons, while Wayne LaPierre gets in front of a camera and says a bunch of intellectually offensive and insensitive nonsense, and the media laps is all up as recreational outrage. But the worst is that no one takes it as a sign that we should have better counseling for bullied students or returning veterans, that we should institute effective checks of competence and responsibility for people who wish to purchase firearms, or that in general, we need to deal with the various problems that cause a small subset of people to go mentally haywire and everyone else to ignore it until they bust a fuse and start shooting or burning. Making arbitrary distinctions on how a firearm looks, whether it has a bayonet lug, or if the stock folds, aren’t just harmless nuances of feel-good legislation; they divert attention to actual causes of violence, and convince the public that “something” is being done even if it is no more effective than posting mannequins around a bank to scare away would-be robbers. Stranger ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2016, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-semi-automatic-rifle-an-assault-rifle/757375/77 "2016-06-15T21:35:52Z")
In your local Walmart Garden section: Bonide 272 1 Lb Granules Stump-Out Encap LLC 10615-6 Fast Acting Sulfur-2.5LB GARDEN SULFUR Frontier 198-330-128 6.2 lbs Instant Light Charcoal Briquets Grind equal amounts and mix well … ---
**Author:** ![Count\_Blucher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c5a1d2/32.png) [@Count\_Blucher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Count_Blucher)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2016, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-semi-automatic-rifle-an-assault-rifle/757375/78 "2016-06-15T21:35:59Z")
Q: Aren’t “kits” easily and inexpensively available to purchase ‘legally’ for the AR-15? Kits that, if used, will make the weapon full-auto fire or “bump” fire? [link to kits](https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=AR-15+kits) [DIY Convert AR15 into a Machine Gun Video (One of Many)](https://youtu.be/Q1bKh3dYDqc?t=229) [TL,DW](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTuOfgOITUo&feature=youtu.be&t=402) ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2016, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-semi-automatic-rifle-an-assault-rifle/757375/79 "2016-06-15T21:45:26Z")
If the AR-15 was manufactured before 1986, yes, and the rifle should already be registered. If the AR-15 was manufactured after 1986, not so much, and the kit will make your AR-15 need to be registered. Registered as a fully automatic weapon that is … easy if you’ve a perfectly clean record and don’t mind waiting 6 months. ---
**Author:** ![Chihuahua](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/dec6dc/32.png) [@Chihuahua](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chihuahua)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2016, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-semi-automatic-rifle-an-assault-rifle/757375/80 "2016-06-15T21:46:33Z")
> [@Count\_Blucher](#): > > Q: Aren’t “kits” easily and inexpensively available to purchase ‘legally’ for the AR-15? Kits that, if used, will make the weapon full-auto fire or “bump” fire? > > [link to kits](https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=AR-15+kits) > > [DIY Convert AR15 into a Machine Gun Video (One of Many)](https://youtu.be/Q1bKh3dYDqc?t=229) > > [TL,DW](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTuOfgOITUo&feature=youtu.be&t=402) These kits do not have a good reputation. They don’t exactly work as advertised, in the sense that they sometimes work awkwardly or you have to hold the gun in a weird way. Not that this would make much difference to a mass shooter in close confines. There was a rather funny episode a few years back, in which the ATF declared that any device that converted a weapon to fully automatic fire was considered to be a “machine gun” and subject to (extremely restrictive) NFA rules. Someone demonstrated how wrapping a shoelace around an AK-47 could allow it to fire as if it were fully automatic. By the terms of the ATF’s policy, this meant that shoelaces were now “machine guns.” Things like this get held up as examples of how difficult it is to legislate every invention, variation, or aftermarket accessory that people could conceivably employ. It is very hard to write laws that are broad enough to accomplish their intended purpose, but also specific enough to avoid reduction to absurdity. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-semi-automatic-rifle-an-assault-rifle/757375.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-semi-automatic-rifle-an-assault-rifle/757375.md?page=5)