Post-Ban Lower Receivers

[Aloha_Shooter]

Yeah, my 10-22 would be an "assault weapon". In Oregon is an M1 an "assault weapon" since it has an internal magazine greater than five rounds?

It seems we lost the battle of political language around the nonsensical term. My firearms are "defense weapons". They've never assaulted anyone. I now see further degradation of terminology with the use of "assault weapon" and "assault rifle" interchangeably by the MSM.

But an M-1 WAS an assault weapon .... 75-80 years ago. The soldiers assaulting Omaha and Juno Beaches utterly depended on it (well, it and the naval fire from 16-inch guns and aerial bombardments and ...).

[Gman]

But an M-1 WAS an assault weapon .... 75-80 years ago. The soldiers assaulting Omaha and Juno Beaches utterly depended on it (well, it and the naval fire from 16-inch guns and aerial bombardments and ...).

It was a weapon of war built for the battlefield, but doesn't fit the criteria of either an "assault weapon" or "assault rifle".

...but I think you knew that.