The antis have had a lot of fun with attempting to control the language to their favor. Stuff like “Assault Weapons”, “High Capacity Bullet Clips” and “Armor Piercing Ammunition” really only exist from them attempting to vilify common guns as something they aren’t. Well recently there has been a push-back. The Article seems to take a shine to the AR-platform, tho I’d say any modern semi-auto rifle will count.
The Antis don’t seem to like this at all.
NSSF begs gun rights activists to call assault rifles “modern sporting rifles.” Ridiculous? You bet.
NSSF to gun writers, please, please, please use the term “modern sporting rifle.”
Of course we’ll first take note that most of these Sporting Rifles are based on military designs, what’s neat is the older bolt, lever, and pump-action sporting rifles that are falling out of favor were also based on military patterns. Heck even black powder rifles were once the main battle rifle of the military. So heritage doesn’t really count.
I guess “Modern” could be a little suspect as the AR platform was invented in the 50s, the Guns like the FAL, M14, the CETME, the SKS, M1 Carbine and the AK all from the 40s. Still we have guns like the Bushmaster ACR, and the FNH SCAR pattern guns that are brand-spanking new. Certainly compared to Pump action, the Mauser-style bolt action, and the lever action, which are all 19th century technology, they are “modern” by comparison.
Sporting? Well I can think of two very popular sports where they’re only-way-to-go.
The other sport that is often thought of for “Sporting Rifle” is hunting. The AR-15 is the Swiss-Army gun as far as that goes, you can mount uppers that will take any game animal in North America, and the better part of the world, anything from rabbits and such with a .22 Conversion, Prairie Dogs and varmints with .223, to Moose and Bear with .450 Bushmaster or .50 Beowulf. All from a standard AR-platform. Of course AR-10 style rifles, and the H&K G3 CETME, or the M14/M1A, or FN FAL pattern rifles are in 7.62x51mm/.308 Winchester which is one of the most popular sporting cartridges out there for medium to large game. Also an AK pattern in the ubiquitous 7.62x39mm round is close enough to the .30-30 Winchester to be interchangeable with it.
And as an added bonus these sporting guns are excellent for self defense!
So what part was “Ridiculous”?
So if you insist we use the term, I don’t see a reason why not!
“Light semiauto carbine”.
The presence or absence of a pistol grip on a light semiauto carbine is not so great that we need a specific term for them. “Light semiauto carbine with a pistol grip” will do for those few times when the ergonomic preference is important enough to be worth mentioning.
And of course note that pistol grips appear on guns because they have a stock that is inline with the bore of the rifle, rather than below the bore axis. When you raise the line of the stock up, your hand still needs something to grip on so the pistol grip was added.
Of course there are more traditional stocked guns that have pistol grips added for ergonomic control of the gun. On those guns I actually prefer a standard stock, but who am I to judge?
Josh took a big hit when he hired Jar Jar Binks to rename larger caliber handguns as ‘big boomers’.
http://daysofourtrailers.blogspot.com/2008/12/running-out-of-scary-names.html
I do like calling my small pocket guns “Pocket Rockets” 😉
Personally, I’ve objected to the new push to call them modern sporting rifles. I don’t support calling them assault weapons, either, because they are not, by definition. My objection to MSR’s is that it seems to call for a need of “legitimate sporting purpose.” We all know the second amendment is not about sports, so why continue to say these weapons are for sporting purposes? They may be, in fact, used for sporting purposes, but I don’t like how it’s being sold to the public as if this were the litmus test for acceptability in the “civilian” world.
How about just “semi-automatics” ??
You’ll notice from reading this blog, I simply use the term “Rifle” or “Carbine”. That’s about all I need. I’m not a sporter of any sort, and even if I take a deer, or compete in a 3-gun match, My rifles are still just “Rifles”. But I guess if I WAS a sporter, and I built up a gun specifically for competition or hunting, I have no objections to “Sporting Rifle”
Really the big use for this is when an anti says “Assault Rifle”, and you respond: “Do you mean Modern Sporting Rifles?”. Then the discussion turns to why or why not “Assault Weapon” is a valid term, or sporting rifle is a valid term…and we KNOW who wins that debate.
Again I’m a fan of “Rifle” or “Carbine” but if you want to use another term that is equally as valid, so be it. And “Modern Sporting Rifle” is a lot of thing, but one thing it isn’t is a lie.
“Then the discussion turns to why or why not “Assault Weapon” is a valid term, or sporting rifle is a valid term…and we KNOW who wins that debate.”
I disagree. It may win the immediate argument on whether the weapon in question is in fact an assault rifle, but I think in the long run it proves the antis point that weapons are for sporting purposes only. It seems to me that by using the MSR term we are playing by their rules, when we should be disregarding their rules altogether and playing by our own.
In the scenario you mention, you envision an argument over whether a specific firearm fits the definition of an assault rifle. But by doing so, it seems to me as if one is saying “Of course this isn’t an assault rifle! This one is for sporting purposes!” Again, as if this were the litmus test for firearm acceptability.
Personally I feel that a better option would be to point out that the particular weapon doesn’t fit the definition, but actual assault rifles, while difficult, are legal to obtain in many states, and are still covered by the second amendment.
So far, my only problem with the AR platform is that it doesn’t come in 45-70.
Yet.
😀
LOL, well frame length is gonna be a HUGE issue with that.
That being said, .450 Bushmaster is VERY close to many of the trapdoor Springfield loads of .45-70. I’m just sayin’
Well, given that the “modern” architecture and art movement lasted from roughly 1900 to 1960, calling all of those various firearms “modern” would be more-or-less accurate, at least in terms of aesthetics ;).
*shrug* I just call them “rifles”. “Self-loading rifle”, “modern sporting rifle”, “modular recreation rifle” (yeah, I made that one up)… it is all the same. They are not, however, “assault rifles”, given then overwhelming majority of them in civilian circulation do not have “happy switches”… but you knew that ;).
I understand .458 has ballistics that very closely mirror .45-70 Govt, and can be loaded in a standard AR magazine to boot.
I’ve been calling them carbines…
Sport Utility Rifle if pressed.
At one time I labeled such guns Volkskarabiners, or people’s carbines. VKb being a play on the origin of assault rifle term, Sturmgeweher (StG).
Buy an AR, it’s PC! People’s Carbine!
This article from Chuck Hawks’ Web site also uses the “Sport Utility Rifle” term.
To be fair, the AR15 wasn’t built for the military. It started as a civilian firearm.
Not calling a semi-auto an assault rifle isn’t playing by their rules. Regardless of appearance, no semi-auto is an assault rifle. You need selective fire, literally by definition.