They cannot identify most of the dead from last night's slaughter

[cab67]

94. Let's be careful with our terminology.

I'm with all of you - firearms like the AR-15 do not fill a civilian need nd should be banned. No one needs such a weapon.

But for what it's worth, the AR-15 and similar weapons are not assault rifles. They're assault-style rifles.

The difference? An actual assault rifle like the M-16 or AK-47 can be fired in automatic mode. The AR-15 is semiautomatic only - unless it's been altered, it cannot fire in fully automatic mode.

I bring this up only because some gun nuts I know like to point out errors in the claims made by rational-minded individuals, whose claims are then dismissed as reflecting ignorance. MIstakes in terminology are, of course, marginal to the issue at hand - there are way too many guns out there, some of them have no legitimate civilian purpose, and it's far too easy for one person to kill large numbers of people before anyone can do anything about it. But no matter how trivial an error might be, it can be weaponized.

Like I said - I'm only making a semantic point about terminology, not disagreeing with your overall conclusion. Semiautomatic assault-style rifles, even if not capable of automatic fire, still enable mass shootings - they can be fired at a rapid rate, they can take a high-capacity magazine, and the caliber and muzzle velocity of the bullet causes far more grievous injuries than would be caused by the average hunting rifle. If we can't abolish these weapons (and I would like to see that happen), we should at least do what we can to limit access to high-capacity magazines and bump stocks. (Unfortunately, the USSC stupidly overturned a California ban on high-capacity clips a few years back.)

We can actually use this distinction to our advantage when dealing with gun fetishists. They keep saying the right to bear arms cannot be infringed, but in fact, that right has always been "infringed," and nearly everyone is cool with it. Depending on your jurisdiction, ownership of certain types of firearms is already banned or tightly regulated - sawed-off shotguns, machine guns, and assault rifles (as opposed to assault-style rifles) are examples. The question isn't "should we ban guns?"; it's "which guns should we ban?"