Merriam-Webster - "assault rifle" definition change

[bblhd672]

Millions of people across the country lift their gaze from their devices and ask, "What's a dictionary?"

Commented:

Assault rifle is NOT a semiautomatic weapon that looks like a fully automatic weapon.

I understand that you are all progressive socialists with an agenda to fulfill, so commenting gets me nothing but sneers in return.

[Soccerdad1995]

Millions of people across the country lift their gaze from their devices and ask, "What's a dictionary?"

Commented:

Assault rifle is NOT a semiautomatic weapon that looks like a fully automatic weapon.

I understand that you are all progressive socialists with an agenda to fulfill, so commenting gets me nothing but sneers in return.

So you mean if I draw a picture of a cow, it's not a cow? I mean, what if it is a really good picture and it looks just like a cow? Surely then it becomes a cow and is no longer just a picture.

Words have meaning. And the left feels free to redefine their meaning whenever they choose to do so. Net result = words no longer have meaning. "Racist" used to mean someone who harbored evil thoughts toward other races. Now it means someone who disagrees with the left on border security, or affirmative action. There are plenty of other examples.

[mojo84]

1984

[KLB]

Assault rifle is NOT a semiautomatic weapon that looks like a fully automatic weapon.

Well, or it may be, in which case we're back to the point that the term has no useful meaning. We'll be regulating weapons based on their appearance instead of the danger they present. But this will be selective. None of these people would agree that, because a pineapple grenade vaguely resembles a pineapple, it should be regulated the same way.

[troglodyte]

So by the new definition this is almost an “assault rifle”.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mFIky57N0_Y

[puma guy]

I haven't checked Webster on this one. I didn't know whether to look up "bust a gut" or "assault hammer".

https://www.facebook.com/lil.j0ker.laff ... 516746324/

[Grundy1133]

so just becasue something LOOKS like something else according to webster its the same? what if we took a dog thug and stuck it between 2 pieces of bread and called it a sandwich. Think they'd eat it? NO. because it's NOT food. its a dog thug! this is asinine... a bunch of leftist idiots who run the world... idc what dictionaries say an AR-15 or ANY OTHER semi-automatic rifle is NOT a military fully automatic rifle... this is getting ridiculous.

[Liberty]

so just becasue something LOOKS like something else according to webster its the same? what if we took a dog thug and stuck it between 2 pieces of bread and called it a sandwich. Think they'd eat it? NO. because it's NOT food. its a dog thug! this is asinine... a bunch of leftist idiots who run the world... idc what dictionaries say an AR-15 or ANY OTHER semi-automatic rifle is NOT a military fully automatic rifle... this is getting ridiculous.

I don't believe any dictionary claimed it is.

The thing is, common usage is what ultimately defines words in the English language. If enough people call a magazine a clip often enough then a clip becomes a synonym for magazine. If we want to get technical, every M16/M4 fully automatic rifle is an AR15. Its a military styled scary looking semiautomatic weapon. There is nothing to apologize for.

[The Annoyed Man]

I sent them the following feedback message:

Your definition of “assault rifle” is inaccurate. There is a very specific military definition for what constitutes an “assault rifle”, and civilian market semiautomatic rifles do NOT meet that standard.

An assault rifle is generally defined as:
A) firing an intermediate power caliber (specifically NOT a high-powered caliber, which would make it more difficult to shoot)
B) having a select fire mechanism allowing the user to choose between “safe” and “automatic”, or “safe”, “semiautomatic”, and “automatic”; the common denominator is the ability to fire in fully automatic mode.

The official US Army definition of “assault rifle” is (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_rifle):

"short, compact, selective-fire weapons that fire a cartridge intermediate in power between submachine gun and rifle cartridges."

The link further explains:

“In a strict definition, a firearm must have at least the following characteristics to be considered an assault rifle:

• It must be capable of selective fire.
• It must have an intermediate-power cartridge: more power than a pistol but less than a standard rifle or battle rifle, such as the 7.92×33mm Kurz, the 7.62x39mm and the 5.56x45mm NATO.
• Its ammunition must be supplied from a detachable box magazine.[5]
• It must have an effective range of at least 300 metres (330 yards).

“Rifles that meet most of these criteria, but not all, are technically not assault rifles, despite frequently being called such.

“For example:

• Select-fire M2 Carbines are not assault rifles; their effective range is only 200 yards.
• Select-fire rifles such as the FN FAL battle rifle are not assault rifles; they fire full-powered rifle cartridges.
• Semi-automatic-only rifles like the Colt AR-15 are not assault rifles; they do not have select-fire capabilities.
• Semi-automatic-only rifles with fixed magazines like the SKS are not assault rifles; they do not have detachable box magazines and are not capable of automatic fire.”

Civilian semiautomatic rifles are NOT assault weapons by any actual definition. In fact, the US Army did not adopt the M16 (actual) assault rifle until several years AFTER it had been for sale in civilian semiautomatic form. By converting it to a fully automatic weapon, the military did not automatically cause the civilian version to become assault rifles.

By changing the definition in your dictionary, you have inserted yourselves into the nation debate on firearms rights, but semiautomatic hunting and target rifles have been in use for well over 100 years. Your change of definition reclassifies millions of purely hunting rifles as “assault weapons”. It not only injects your organization into the debate, it calls into question the reliability of ANY word or phrase you define.

You can do better than that, and we, your readers/users deserve better than that. You have no place injecting yourselves into the national discourse.

I respectfully request that you either include the above information in your definition to clarify it, or that you revert the definition to it’s previous state.

The Annoyed Man
North Richland Hills, Texas

[lfinsr]

They did the same thing with the meaning of fascist.

[flechero]

Not as eloquent as some but I sent this:

Your NEW definition of “assault rifle” is factually INCORRECT, both in it's description of technical attributes as well as it's appearance. I'm saddened by the change of a number of "definitions" that have been changed in recent history, to follow the political climate, not the actual change in an object. Gone are the days that we could trust a REFERENCE BOOK to be unbiased and accurate.

A perfect example of how ridiculous your assault rifle definition is , would be defining a Ford Fiesta as a Formula One race car because someone added "racing stripes" or mag wheels.... neither enhance it's performance or change it from being a tiny, slow economy car.

I never thought I would have to check multiple sources to get an accurate definition.