I love that here in Canada, when a civilian has an AR15 the media calls it an "assault weapon." But when a police officer has an AR15 in their cruiser it's a "patrol carbine." LOL.
Sorta the same deal with the media here in the US. A civilian with an AR-15 has an "assault weapon", "assault style rifle" or "military weapon" while cops with ARs carry "patrol rifles."
I love how they say you can’t have an ar15 bc there scary, but let me get a type 81…. Just a replica ak47 that the Chinese military actually uses the same blueprints of that now only difference is they have a full auto switch, goes to show you who the real scary guys are tho, they say it’s the guys with the ar15’s 🤷🏼♂️ guess the terrorist organization they created to have a public enemy are the good guys bc I don’t see them waving around no ar15’s 😂🤭
Yes, I mean, they are rifles and were designed to be used in infantry assaults. The big problem is how the word sounds, and the government takes advantage of that to demonize this kind of weapon. If the average population were less prone to be politically manipulated, nobody would accept what they're trying to do, even those who dislike guns. It's all caused by misinformation, which is something that almost every politician loves.
shift the overton window or you're gonna lose no matter what. At the end of the day, they're weapons, and they're weapons of war. If you can't convince the average person that's ok, you are simply going to lose.
Well, with a population being capable of and excercizing basic self-reflection with an at least halfway functioning long-term memory and understanding of really just ridiculously obvious and simple historical truths, most if not even all of todays political debates would just quickly fade into irrelevance, becoming only a tragically laughable relic of the past. But naah, instead it seems to be all the hype to be a misinformed heavily manipulated and pathologically ignorant collective with the more-than-strong tendency to continue swallowing every future bit of upcoming fear-mongering and demonization-campaigns.
I mean lets call a spade a spade. Demonized words or not, guns are meant to kill people...especially these guns, they're meant to kill people efficiently. It's silly to argue that a word is responsible for how guns are portrayed by the general public when they were made for harm. This is coming from a gun owner, I'm just not trying to hide what they were originally created for.
"Assault Weapon" or the incorrect use of assualt rifle as political labels is bred out of ignorance and a lack of nuance. As a consequence, it spawned more ignorance and lack of nuance on the opposing side. Good video, as always
I don’t believe it is always out of ignorance. Sometimes it is, but not always. It is otherwise out of malicious misguidance of the public. Those people may also be ignorant, but they don’t need to be knowledgeable to find a term that’ll cause fear for the sake of an agenda.
Your pupper chose AK as his favorite. So adorable he had his paw on it. He knows the difference between assault rifles and boring old semi-auto rifles.
Well well, words with their origins and definitions can sometimes be tricky, especially in this topic and especially nowadays. Inspired by another comment now i'll put my two cents here, maybe some will find it interesting: Generally speaking, i'd say on one side the term "assault rifle" is a valid word to use. As we know, nowadays its mostly used for describing a vast spectrum of rifle-types, making it a handy word for easy but nonetheless superficial communication. Its totally valid in terms of simplifying communication. But judging by its origins and etymological attributes, it honestly is pretty much the same as if people would start to call 0,5L beer bottles "belly-enlargers" and everyone just goes with it. Valid for everyday communication as long as everyone knows what is meant, but on the other side it technically just isn't a correct term. Originally it was a PR-effective term first used by the nazis for propaganda-purposes, renaming the original weapons-category of Maschinenkarabiner/MKb (translating to "machine carbine", an actual technically describing term) to "Sturmgewehr/StG", which later in WW2 gave birth to the today well-known Sturmgewehr 44. In developement it first was designated as a large MP (Maschinenpistole/machine pistol), while simultanously falling into the category of Maschinenkarabiner (machine carbine) because of its larger-than-pistol-caliber cartridge. Both terms were simultanously used at some points in developement. Technically it was kiiinda falling into both categories while also not being a fully true MP or fully true MKb. Well, then the term "Sturmgewehr" got coined and it simply kept going. After the war the terms "Sturmgewehr" and its English derivate "assault rifle" continued being used and evolved to be an overall category-name, while still having their roots and origins in being propaganda-born terms and not being born from technically correct terminology for describing a certain category of firearms. As an interesting sidenote for semantics here would be for example how most of the slavic speaking parts of the world generally went with the term "автомат", simply translating to "automat". In this case, firearms of this category can but dont necessarily have to feature select-fire-capabilities or detachable mags. For example, semi-automatic rifles with fixed internal mags often get called "автомат" as well. There is also the term "штурмова винтовка" which has the same origin like "assault rifle" in being a derivate of the German word "Sturmgewehr", but with the difference of being DIRECTLY taken from it, litterally taking the German word "Sturm-" and turning it into the phonetically identical sounding cyrillic "штурм-" (a word not to be found anywhere else in Russian language) and coupling it with the Russian word "винтовка" (rifle), creating "штурмова винтовка". It doesnt really get much used tho, and far less than the German or English words Sturmgewehr/assault rifle. The word "автомат" is by far a lot more common. Overall i'm sure this whole assault-rifle-wording-debate wouldnt be anywhere near as much of a topic now if the word wouldnt get misused and exploited so much by biased media, restriction-pushing officials, and misinformed individuals. The term "assault rifle" has its controversy, no doubt. But calling every black rifle with a pistol grip and a detachable mag an "assault weapon" now really is on a whole different level of controversy, THAT really is just pure nonsense 😂 Sorry for the rant, but maybe some people will find some of it interesting 😆
Great insight! My understanding of the STG44 history is that it was originally referred to as a MP to get it pushed into continued development despite hitler being against it replacing the k98. But staff saw it's potential and wanted to sneak it through under the guise of a MP40 replacement.
@@armandgun from the top of my head that correlates with my info too. I also can definitely imagine a room full of officials back then being highly aversive against the StG44 replacing the K98 because of 7,92x33 being a "weaker" cartridge compared to the K98's 7,92x57, but being curious about it replacing the MP40 because of 7,92x33 being a "stronger" cartridge compared to the MP40's 9x19. Overall its highly interesting to look at how the entire concept evolved over the past century, especially when looking into how different its terminology evolved in all parts of the world with different languages and concept-doctrines, and as a German native speaker understanding English and a good portion of Russian and Bulgarian there are litterally TONS of fascinating cross-connections to observe in this fields terminology. Another interesting sidenote here for example would be how SMG's are differently called in English, German, and Russian: As we know, in English it is "sub-machinegun/SMG", in German it is "Maschinenpistole/MP", litterally translating as "machine-pistol", and in Russian it is "пистолет-пулемёт/ПП", which translates to "pistol-machinegun", tho "пулемёт" is a word on its own by being a construct of "пуля" (bullet) and "метать" (throwing), litterally meaning "bullet-throw", which resulted in the creation of the term "пулемётчик", which gets translated as "machinegunner" but with its litteral translation simply being "bullet-thrower" 😆
For example, the bolt action Lee Enfield was the principal small arm for the Commonwealth for nearly 60 years. It helped win 2 world wars and the Korean War. Definitely a 'weapon of war' but no one calls it that now because it is considered obsolete. No nation uses a semi-auto rifle to equip its army. Ergo, nothing on the banned list is a 'war weapon'.
I mean here in Germany we call mag fed rifles in a intermediate cartridge "Sturmgewehre" which a rifle like that has been always called that here in Germany.
Which means basically the same, but is outdated german, which makes it sound less "offensive" - pun intended. "Sturm" not meaning the type of weather but "Ansturm" for storming or assaulting a position, someone or something.
@@LegendOfTheOld although I did hear some Germans call them "Maschinengewehre" (Machine gun) but this term is used for belt fed, fully automatic firearms.
5:20 I'm German and the term "Sturm" means "storm", "strong wind", "dry thunderstorm" - the english "Assault" would become the German "Angriff", "Überfall", "Belagerung", "Belästigung" it's not 100% literally. But the combined term "Assaultrifle" is "Sturmgewehr" but the German definition includes following extra point: -small arm -select fire -interchangeable magazine -closed bolt -case length 33 - 51 mm -bottle neck cartridge -rimless cartridge -rpm 400 - 900 -fixed barrel -pistol grip -no thumb holes (excluding bull-pups) -no straight blow back -not assigned into another category
@@TheSundayShooter You could if your really want, because the German word "Sturm" can refer to comming thunderstorms. You can often hear expressions in German like: "Heinrich, wir sollten schnell nach Hause, ein -Strum- zieht auf." which can be translated as: "Heinrich, we should go home, a --thunderstorm. is comming". But the exact term for thunderstorm is still the German "Gewitter".
Does that mean you call the H&K G3 an assault rifle? Because I’m pretty sure most Americans would consider it a battle rifle as 7.62x51mm is today considered a full rifle caliber even though it was conceived of as a short .30-06.
Back in the 18th century over the pond, there was a fashion debate which looks better, a red coat or a blue coat. That escalete a bit. It is ironic that civilians (militia) had better rifles than army had. Not everybody had, but some did. They also had lots of French who hate the red color. Civilians also adopt repeating rifles long before the US army did. Through out the history US army wasn't equipped as well, but now they have Javelins and Abrams. A nation that was build by the civilian firearms doesn't seem to know much about firearms or directly tell lies about them and want to ban them, like they ban French.
The assault rifle argument is only used because it's east pickings. Most people are afraid of guns in general (tbh anything that shoots a projectile). Once they ban scary looking rifles they'll want to ban shot guns and hand guns, they won't stop. Many people just want to live in the futuristic dystopia from Demolition Man, where anything not considered wholesome by their standards is outlawed.
Oh, I know the pain of saying that "X is an assault rifle" and then having bombarded with comments about it not being one because it's battle rifle or it not being one because battle rifle is a term that appeared only in 90's or because the cartridge is not intermediate or it's not intermediate enough or in the classification of it's country it was SMG or because it's carbine and somehow doesn't count and so on, and so forth and it never stops. And I'm too european to understand what you were talking about with "politics" and "assault weapons". And too eastern european to be allowed to have guns without Kremlin putting explosive collar on me "just in case evil West would encroach on my freedom" -_-
Assault rifles are protected arms under US constituition. But they were illegally banned in 1986 under the hughes amendment for general public ownership. Only SOTs and LE/MIL can own them. And, Transferables (grandfathered) because MGS were legal to own, were Registered MGs before 1986.Thus, only armalite/ sporting rifles restricted to semi auto are available to general population.
STG labeled Storm rifle and nicknamed at the time"assault rifle." As a fully automatic rifle caliber to take the place of a pistol caliber subs. The B.A.R. was full auto chamberd rifle caliber. " assault rifle" was just a nickname like you said, over storm rifle.
STG its fabric name, its called Machine pistol(MP-42/3/4) in service (as AK in east Germany mpi-AK). As there was no term of battle rifle, there wasn't term Assault rifle for intermediate full auto guns until around 70-80s. So if you have gun with full auto using intermediate cartridge ye , its assault rifle. If you have civilian copy or deactivated one for example in Russia and Poland its called civilian carabine or just carabine. For example - AK-74 is assault rifle, Saiga-545 is civilian carabine and there 2 difference - on Saiga receiver there 'name' of gun "SAIGA" and it have 3 position with safe, semi and semi.
@Sectero I thought STG44 was named Stern gavere rifle? You have a saiga 12 select fire? That's pretty cool. The terminology "Assault-'verb" Rifle-'noun" is addictive phrase. It's a subjective term, not an actual terminology defining an object. Regardless of modern-day small arms, they are not as lethal to many easily acquired objects of misused. It can be much more harmful and dangerous. I consider firearms as objects for self-defense. Honestly, many things can be misused as a weapon.
From my understanding, an assault rifle meets these standards. Intermediate sized cartridge. Select fire capabilities, (Semi, burst, and or full auto) Detachable magazine.
@@mateoromeo7032 Of course a gun can't assault someone lol you said it yourself, that's what the military plans to do with it so that's where the name comes from. I didn't pick the name 🤷 call it something else if it makes you feel better
0:52 If you go back to the origin of the first so called assault rifle the "Lewis Assault Phase Rifle" you can also find the original meaning of the "Assault Phase". Back in WWI is was the phase were you cross no-man's land so storm an enemy trench, this action required light weapons, for example a heavy machine gun was not suitable for this phase, therefore a HMG is not an assault weapon.
I start at today's "assault rifles" and work back through their history. Their line starts with the Sturmgewehr. Other isolated examples are merely outliers that did not develop into what we now consider as this class.
@@armandgun You are right . I was only trying to explain, that not every weapon is an assault weapon, because some are to heavy or unwieldy to perform an assault.
So when the media advocates towards banning assault rifles, I can think in the back of my head "go ahead, by all means ban full auto weapons, oh wait they already are banned"(I am well aware you can still get them with proper licenses and taxes)
That's the definition I've always used. Select fire is the key. Interesting, however, in my 35 years in the infantry, we never referred to 'assault' or 'battle' rifles... they were just rifles of the moment. The FN C1 A1 in 7.62 was the standard 'rifle' or 'personal weapon'. Although, these days, it is referred to as a 'battle rifle'. When we got the C7s, we didn't jump up and down, clap our hands and say, 'oooh goody goody... look at the assault rifles we are getting..." It was more of a "meh. we're getting new rifles..." I maintain that the term is used for one of 2 reasons: 1. to jazz something up and make it sound cooler or 2. to purposefully use inflammatory language to sow fear among ignorant people. The former is like the constant misuse of the word "decimate' by journalists struggling to sound cool when they just mean destroy. The proper definition of 'decimate' meaning to reduce something by 10%. Unfortunately, it's been misused for so long now that even the OED has added the extra, incorrect definition. Thus further dumbing down our language.
I’ll tell ya tho man ur one lucky man with all those sexy beasts around ya 🫠one last thing tho just hilarious some people get offended why the word assault rifle like that’s what they are death machines 😂 we don’t make 50.cals to put people in the hospital 😂
I do believe some consider the Federov to be the first assault rifle with the STG-44 being the first to see any kind of official military deployment. Similar to how the M1 wasn’t the first semi-automatic battle rifle but was the first fielded by an entire army.
🇺🇸etc Assault Rifle Full auto. Others semi auto etc. Battle rifle ??? Like Brown Bess❤ it has bayonet capability 😂. No honest lever action man need’s a bayonet
"Sturm" or "Stürmen" just has two different meanings. You even have this in english. For example: "Masked youths clashed with police in front of the parliament and some tried to storm the building."
When I check my gun @ the airport I specifically call it a "firearm " & not a weapon to be more discreet A weapon is something planned to hurt and damage A firearm just shoots
Should a separate category of rifles be made for select fire magazine fed rifles chambered for 6.5 arisaka and carcano, and the new 277 fury cartridge like the Fedorov be made?
The storm rifle was called that because it was conceived of as a weapon you’d use when storming enemy positions. To storm and to assault being synonymous in that sense.
I have to say that i disagree. The term assault rifle is useless. It implies a usage that isnt there. An "assault rifle" in military context is the standard issue rifle. It is an automatic rifle, because it doesnt need to be manually operated between shots. That´s the end of it. A rifle is not used to "assault" just because it has both semi and full auto. Anyone who uses the term "assault rifle" is either ignorant, blatantly spreading propaganda or both. It is an automatic rifle, a carbine, or something similar. Nothing else.
assault rifles are real, but the guns that the media and politicans call 'assault weapons' do not qualify as assault rifles- which is why they say assault _weapon,_ because that is a term that doesn't have an actual definition- meaning it can refer to anything that the person demonizing it wants. A DVD case can be an 'assault weapon' if they want it to be.
Nice to see someone on the younger side (I'm guessing a fellow millennial) with so much knowledge. I'm 28, and live in California, and really, really want to buy a gun, but it's such a charged issue here. I feel like I'm judged for wanting one. (My girlfriend hates the idea). I'm a dude, I like dangerous things, sue me. Anyways, content like yours gets me fired up to start a collection! Can't wait man.
You don’t sound like a dude if u were u would give a fuck what people think and get ur damn toys man 😂 ur gonna let that little voice in ur head saying ohh no people gonna think things about me stop u, sorry if that’s harsh but come on man having a gun doesn’t make you evil, the guy breaking in ur house and putting one in ur face and possibly taking a life because you didn’t have one he’s the one people gonna judge, one of those things that’s very good to have and not need. But tbh most people are not responsible enough to own something like that it feels like a toy but it’s a life taker and nothing more that’s allot of responsibility to have mentally and in ur hands.
correct. Yeah, the word gets used incorrectly a lot, but that is roughly the definition. The definition I always knew was a rifle chambered in an intermediate caliber, capable of select fire (full auto or burst and semi-auto) and most effective between 400 to 600 yards.
Omg THANK YOU I have been fighting this fight since the whole assault rifle isn't correct shit started and it's good to hear the opinion backed up by someone with an actual platform to get it out
Which is dumb, you can pull the trigger as fast as you can and mimic a slow automatic fire, that amount of lead slinging in the air doesn’t seem to notice the difference.
Assault rifle = rifles that fires intermediate cartrige with full auto/burst setting, thus even if civilian legal SCARs are called assault rifles, they aren't. also, assault rifles, WITH full auto, is covered by 2A. Assault weapon = political jargons
"The" AR15 was designed as a select fire rifle and wasn't commercially available as a semi-automatic rifle until after the US military had already bought tens of thousands. *Your* AR15 might not be a select fire rifle, but a fairly significant number of them are. And *everyone* should have access to them.
Bro I hate gun simps trying to make weapons sound politically better. It is another example of how the consumer mind twists reality to fit a nobler perception. Speak your truth bru, these are weapons of war, thats why civilians should have them 🤙. Boldness is more noble than molding things vainley to appear friendly.
Do you trust the government? Do you believe that they support you? Because they don't. I'm sure that's not some news flash for you. You're out here thinking that civilians have guns to deal with civilians, and sure that can be something that a firearm can help with. But you see we have a little thing called second amendment. It's part of the Constitution and it allows us to have firearms, It allows you (assuming you live in the United States of America) to have a firearm, even if it is your choice not to. You are afraid of something that you do not understand, That's plain and simple. You live in a fairy tale world where if there was a law that banned firearms people would stop dying, I suggest you look up the "Luty" or any poaching firearm. You will see that there is nothing you can do to get rid of firearms, All you'd be doing is getting guns out of the hands of good people. The same good people who will protect you and your freedoms against foreign or domestic governments. You can give up your rights all you want, but stop trying to give up mine
There's a lot of translations that people like to argue over, just like a shotgun being called a "Flinte" or "Shrotflinte" translated literally is just "Flint" or "Scrap Flint". Not every language is normalized to be translated into English, not sure why people are so hung up on that.
5:03 This is not fully correct the term "Assault Rifle" originates form the 1918 "Lewis Assault Phase Rifle", technically it was more like the BAR some sort of a "Walking Rifle" but it brought the term to the table, that later labeled the "Sturmgewehr" for the English speaking world.
We'll start with your automobile, phone, tv, hell all electronics, any braces you may have had or will have, All of the knives in your house, all the spoons and forks, All the pots and pans and anything else you might have that's metal, we should start with those because they are protected by an amendment, then once you realize that you got rid of all of these items for no reason and understand that that didn't do anything besides make you worse off to live in modern society then get back to me
I study politics. My specialty area is specifically politics and religion in America since WWII, but these discussions are common. So, while it might be semantic, I usually say "assault style rifle" or "assault style weapon," because there are certain things that are considered "other" by the ATF now, to try to limit the conflation between the two different things.
That standard is not absolute. A sledgehammer is specifically designed to destroy objects yet wouldn't call it a weapon, its only a tool. More accurately a weapon is something designed to destroy or hurt living things.
Yep, pretty dumb. It happens other places as well. People are just ignorant and misinformed regarding firearms, and msm twists things for attention, which just keeps the spiral going.
People need to chill with the assaults rifle arguments. Sure, use the term when appropriate but engaging with antigunners and your argument boils down to they said assault rifle when not appropriate does nothing to bring that antigunner to our side. They don't care if they are called fluffy pillow launchers they still want them banned. You know what exaxtly they mean when they say assault rifle and replying with umm that's not an assault rifle, LiBTarD as some sort of dunk doesn't help at all. I mean say you get the point across they aren't assault rifles? Then what? They respond with ok I want assault rifles and modern sporting rifles banned. Congrats back to square 1. Instead of trying to dunk on people who don't know all the terminology lile that'll somehow win them over to your side maybe offer to take them to the range instead and go over what the differences are when going over proper handling etc etc. I think there's just a better way to do it without coming off as super condescending and smug which helps nothing. Even if you're correct the goal is to win them over because you can be correct all you want but that won't stop modern sportsman rifles from being banned . Building report and mutual respect will go way further than any terminology dunk ever will.
I appreciate your comment. I'm not here to dunk on anyone. I'm partially here to correct the ignorance that is finding its way into my comments from other gun enthusiasts anytime I correctly use the term when discussing a firearm. I'm also taking the opportunity to correctly inform a lot of you to this. I know that anti's don't care and want things banned anyways, but they also don't understand guns. Education - and yes 100% as you said it "take people to the range" - is sooo important. I try to make time to introduce someone new to the hobby in person at least once a year. There are millions of us, if we all just made the effort once a year this would not be an issue. Give those who are willing a great first experience, and for those who aren't at least try to educate them and those around them.
@Arm&Gun sorry for the confusion, I wasn't referring to you in particular saying you were dunking on people. I was speaking about the people who you were referring to. people who's knee jerk reaction to anybody talking about guns is to be hyper-vigilant about terminology that doesn't really add anything to the discourse and in most cases, particularly when talking to people on the other side, does more harm than good because they come off as just trying to dunk on and dismiss people over terminology that ultimately isn't important to the broader conversation.
I’ve got a question about carbines versus assault rifles. What are the main differences? I’m trying to become a bit of a fire arm nerd like my stepdad, but I barely have time to research stuff about firearms because of school and things like that.
A "carbine" is generally just a rifle with a shorter barrel length or in a shorter configuration. It's a generalization and used to have more meaning a century ago when typical rifles were 'musket' length. M16A4 has a 20" barrel and is considered a rifle, M4 is 14.5" and is considered a carbine. I don't know if the distinction has a ton of value anymore though, most people talk in terms of chambering and barrel length.
@@armandgun XM5/XM7 is, officially, a carbine, despite being designed to penetrate body armor at 600 meters and getting almost 3000fps from a 135gr projectile. That's basically 20" .308 performance, with 13" of barrel. Completely putting aside how dumb replacing the M4 with this is, carbine is dead indeed. Performance wise, XM7 is a rifle. It is the heaviest service rifle ever fielded in its complete configuration, beating out even the Sig 510. Carbine is meaningless now. Basically all firearms terminology is vague and terrible, though. Part of what makes it so hard for governments to regulate any specific kind of firearm
Yes, let's stop beating around the bush a ND pretending. They CAN be used for sport, self defense, whatever. But they're assault rifles in reality, but it's our right to own them.
They're well suited for "assault" in modern warefare, but 80years ago armies were 'assaulting' one another with bolt action rifles and bayonets. As times change, so does armament. The name is not important, it is what it is and the ignorance and false stigma around it is what I am trying to fight. In reality, nearly all the firearms civilians have (or should be able to have) at home are never used offensively; they're tools for hobby, sport, sustenance and defense, and that shouldn't bother anyone.
No, don’t listen to any of the comments. As soon as u acknowledge them u lost. Fantastic break down to bad we are goin to be glassed and not fight the Russkies in close combat state side
Even if assault rifles were a term that has historically been used, we don't need to continue using it. Just call it an automatic rifle. That is more precise. Police and military used to call suppressors silencers. They stopped doing that because the term suppressor is a more precise description of what it does. The same should be true for assault rifles. The distinction between an intermediate and full power cartridge is actually not that important, since a full power rifle is not controllable in automatic fire. So obviously, if you're using a rifle in automatic fire, it'd need to be in an intermediate cartridge. So the term "automatic rifle" implies intermediate cartridge just fine. And keeping rifle in the name is sufficient to distinguish it from smgs and machine guns. They key characteristic if an assault rifle is that it is an automatic rifle. Not that it is used for "assaults". And since there are all these negative connotations associated with the word "assault" its better to stop using it.
"Automatic rifle" refers to too broad a class, same as saying "machine gun". Everything from a stocked m712 schnellfeuer to a m2 browning are covered by those terms, which is why we label things with more specific definitions. The word "assault" is just a word. People who understand it incorrectly need to be educated. Silencer is also the original patented name Maxim used and there are companies out there that still push it. Yes, outside of Hollywood there are only select configurations that produce such silent results, so suppressor or muffler is technically more accurate, but regardless it's ignorance that's the issue - we shouldn't be afraid of names. Military largely dictates these terms, which industry then follows and they're not listening to the likes of me, so for now the terms we have need to be dealt with. I'm here to try to help educate and equip others with info like this so that they can in turn can also educate those in their circles.
@@armandgun No it doesn't. Having rifle in the name distinguishes it from all machine gun classes, including light, heavy, general purpose, etc. When you hear the term rifleman, that evokes a very distinct meaning than the word machine gunner. An since all machine guns need to be fired from a mount or bi-pod to be controlable in fully automatic fire, that directly implies that an automatic rifle is meant to primarily not be used in such a way. Which narrows its possible calibers to intermediate cartridges, because full power cartridges are not controllable when not fired from a mount or bipod. So no. Automatic rifle does not refer to too broad a class. Automatic rifle has a highly specific meaning impliedly built into the name.
Yes, however that doesn't change the term. It's a definition for a class of firearm. You don't call semi auto mp5's "submachine guns", you call them "pcc's" or something to that effect. Similarly you don't call semi auto AR15's "assault rifles". You only use the term if they fit the definition of mag fed rifle in an intermediate cartridge that is ALSO capable of full auto fire.
We use Stürmen in germany like when u wanna say u rush or the google word: make a run on“ its like u say rushweapon or run on weapon its meant like u kick the door open and rush in the hause u stürming u know
