Online: | |
Visits: | |
Stories: |
Story Views | |
Now: | |
Last Hour: | |
Last 24 Hours: | |
Total: |
Pictured is one of the guns at the heart of the U.S. assault weapon debate: the Bushmaster AR-15 semi-automatic rifle
Start the Countdown
When Adam Lanza arrived at Sandy Hook Elementary School on the morning of Dec. 14, 2012, he had four guns in his possession: a Bushmaster AR-15 semi-automatic rifle, two pistols made by Glock and Sig Sauer, and a 12-gauge shotgun made by Izhmash. He left the shotgun in his car but carried the other three weapons into the school. Ten minutes later, after firing hundreds of rounds, 20 kids and 7 adults, including Lanza himself, lay dead or dying.
Lanza’s attack did more than rip the soul from a small town. It triggered vehement arguments about gun control and emboldened President Obama to propose a renewal of the 1994 assault weapons ban, which had expired in 2004. Some of these arguments are filled with misconceptions. Here’s one: Assault weapons and assault rifles are the same. They’re not. The latter is a firearm developed for military use. The former is a general term meant to bring connotations of ferocity and firepower to certain civilian guns used in nonmilitary situations. Those guns could be rifles, pistols or shotguns, but only if they meet certain legislative criteria.
That brings us back to Lanza. Would the guns he wielded be classified as assault weapons? According to the 1994 ban and the 2013 one proposed by Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, at least two — the AR-15 rifle and the shotgun — would qualify. The two handguns may or may not, depending on the capacity of their magazines.
So, what are the hallmarks, or exclusive features, that earn an ordinary firearm the “assault” label? That’s where we’re headed in this article.
Military Heritage
Guns carried by soldiers into battle have much different requirements than firearms used by civilians for hunting or target practice. An infantry soldier needs a lightweight, accurate, rapid-fire weapon with stopping power, or the ability to render a target immediately harmless. Ideally, a soldier’s gun would also exhibit extreme ruggedness and reliability in battle.
Over the years, weapons manufacturers have refined their products to better meet the unique demands of infantry combat. The assault rifle stands as the perfect example. During World War II, military leaders clamored for a weapon that could give their soldiers superior firepower in assault situations. Germany cracked the nut first when it introduced the Sturmgewehr 44 (StG 44) rifle in 1943. The StG 44 came with a 30-round detachable box magazine and could operate in full automatic mode, meaning it fired bullets as long as its trigger was squeezed. It was the first true assault rifle — and it spawned a number of similar designs, most notably the M16 in the United States and the AK-47 in Russia.
All of these weapons were made for soldiers battling other soldiers. But a funny thing happened on the way to the armistice: Hunters and gun enthusiasts saw the appeal of having a weapon with certain warlike features. As a result, gun manufacturers started making civilian versions of their military firearms. The modern AR-15 rifle, for example, evolved directly from the M16 assault rifle. It doesn’t offer full automatic fire, but it otherwise looks and acts like its combat cousin. Read the full article on All Self Sustained