"More powerful," "less powerful," assault, non-assault - can all of you PLEASE take a breath?
Some of you already know this, but I've kept fairly quiet about it because I'm actually rather low-key 90% of the time, so here goes:
I own a high-powered military rifle. A member of the Kalashnikov family, to be a bit more specific. It has a pistol grip, a telescoping stock, and a muzzle brake. It accepts 30-round magazines and is capable of spitting out a bullet with a muzzle velocity of around 880 meters per second. By comparison, sound travels through air at an average speed of 343 meters per second.
It's not full-auto, partially because even in those rare instances where I could afford it, I had more pressing matters at hand than obtaining an NFA tax stamp - besides, semi-auto is sufficient for my needs. But my rifle, although it can be used for harmless plinking or for mid-duty ranch work or hunting small to mid-size game, is specifically designed for combat.
And I am perfectly comfortable with all of the statements I have just made. The Republic endures.
To my fellow DUers who support gun control: We will probably never agree, and we'll likely butt heads a few times. Just keep in mind that my wife was in your camp; why she never joined the Brady Campaign is beyond me. But the two of us were able to have civilized and rational discussions about gun ownership and gun laws. She was adamant that she didn't want any working firearms at home. I did everything I could to honor her wishes. And I miss her every single day.
To my fellow DUers who own military-grade firearms: If you're going to discuss them in public, there's no need to be coy about their abilities. Don't be overbearing, either; just be matter-of-fact and relaxed about it. We know that some gun-control activists try to define the terms of the debate to put us on the defensive, but that doesn't mean we should be defensive or evasive about the firearms we keep.
That's all I've got. No long screeds or chest-thumping or righteous indignation. I've said my peace.
= new reply since forum marked as read
...your AK has a thing that goes up. 
Have a good evening. 
...to a gun show and buy a kit... you know one that adds the thing that goes up and converts it .50 cal full auto so you can shoot down airplanes, choppers and alien spacecraft.
...You know, them aliens that's tryin' to kidnap wholesome young girls for sex...
...that goes out...
I own a high-powered military rifle.
...really it's merely intermediate-powered...
Dont shoot it much anymore since dad sold the farm, I'm looking for another good wide open space to shoot it. Nothing like printing nice groups at 500 yd 
Trapdoor Springfield , 1873. Haven't shot it in quite a while but it's a real blast to send that big ol slug a long way at a target
The use of proper terminology in a discussion of a technical nature is necessary if the discussion is to be meaningful. Slang is slang, and while it might be acceptable for casual discussion, it has no place in formal discussion. You can line up as many ignorant folks as you like and get them to agree that your improper use of a particular technical term (like "assault rifle" is OK in their opinion, but all you'll have is a group of people who are simply wrong. I can say stupid things like, "Their over they're", "Your a jerk", "Where's you're car?", etc., and I bet I can find 100 fools who can't find anything wrong with those statements, but in the end I'd be just as wrong as you are about the definition of the word "assault rifle".
Now, if you address me as "brother" when doing so, or refer to me as your "dog", I understand that both are slang terms, and that you don't really believe we are siblings nor that I am a canine. I probably won't respond well to either, as I don't hang out with people who speak like that, but I will understand it's just slang.
I was making that argument just the other day...doesn't really matter what you call it, because we all know what we're talking about here anyway. I was told by you:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/117230098#post98
Are you conceding that your argument there was absurd?
How many hands will it pass through?
It's really not quite as simple as you would like to portray, a sort of rugged-individualist you leave me alone and I leave you alone. Nope. The problem is much more complex and doesn't exist in the sort of libertarian "I live in a bubble" dream as you would like to conceive. Your wife was right about the issue.
That said, I do my best to be civil when I am treated civilly. When I am not, I will defend myself with words, and not bullets.
About the fight being lost. I've tried to explain some things to people for years and have finally thrown up my hands , I give up.
Take this weapon for instance. Not what I'd call particularly high powered. Nice rifle for ranch work , medium range plinking, small to medium game etc etc. nice walnut stock... A real "regular" looking rifle to the uninitiated .
Now, you take that nice "regular" looking walnut stock off and dress it up in its Barbie doll clothes and you get this horrendous "high powered death dealer"
Now what I've found is, that when dealing with most people that want to rid the country of "assault weapons", is that there is no rational, civilized conversation to be had regarding the second rifle pictured.
While it is in reality the EXACT same weapon except for its appearance, there is often no way to convey that to someone who is screaming, running in circles and pissing down both legs with their hair on fire. They want it and everything that looks like it gone and no amount of logical discussion is going to convince them that it's no more powerful, no more accurate and no more deadly than what they see in the first picture.
So I just finally gave up. It's useless. Waste of time and breath ....
