What Is An Assault Weapon?

Simple answer: it is a totalitarian term of art.  But the skewing of the language by the Left to serve their purposes of aggression and control should neither surprise nor trouble us; it's who they are and what they do.  What is troubling is that conservatives uncritically accede to the terminology and thus to the premises of our enemies.   We should immediately and instinctively correct the usage to "defense weapons" (better still, "defensive firearms"), and when there is a mass killing simply point out that a defensive firearm fell into the wrong hands -- most often the hands of persons who are mentally ill.



The purchase, ownership, possession and carrying of firearms is overwhelmingly in the service of defensive and/or recreational purposes.  It is bizarre to define and thus characterize firearms by the small minority that are misused.

And what distinguishes a so-called assault weapon from a defensive firearm is nothing more than the intent and purpose of its user. 

Gratuitous Thoughts About Gun Control
Newtown.  How much worse might things have been if Lanza had carried out his massacre with a pair of machetes (ala China, Rwanda, Zimbabwe)?  Or a chainsaw?  Or explosives?  Or chem/bio agents?   Crazies, particularly bright ones, will not be much deterred by the want of firearms.

Projection by the Left.  While Marxists like to portray the Tea Party, and conservatives in general, as violent, and angry skinhead types, the plain fact is that the Left in the best Jacobin tradition has always been -- and remains -- the locus of violence.  I believe that the true reason they hate guns lies in their fear of how they and their ilk would behave if armed.  But they also see guns as a check on their aggressive tactics.