[Shanghai Dan]

I may or may not have a Remington 700 bolt action rifle that fires the exactly same ammunition, but only holds five rounds and must manually eject an expended cartridge and load a new round by manipulation of the bolt. The effect on the human body when hit is identical. Those clueless politicians and similarly low information media types would call what I may or may not have a “deer rifle” while the other would be called an “assault rifle”. I would not recommend the Remington 700 in .223 caliber for deer hunting and I would never recommend civilian AR-15 type rifles for use in military combat assaults. The differences are essentially cosmetic.

My favorite comparison:

Both are 5.56mm caliber items. Both use the same magazines (PMAGs, steel, etc). Both have the same operation mode (semi-automatic). Both have 16" barrels and the same lethality.

One is evil; the other is perfectly acceptable (looks like a deer rifle).

[Texas resident]

I prefer the Springfield 1903. 30-06 round. Good for long distance shots and it delivers a hell of a punch. WW1 assault weapon. The USMC was able to deliver shots out to 1,000 yards with this weapon in France on the Germans. They never knew what hit them. And it isn’t a scary looking black rifle that makes libtards make Obama’s in their pants.

[centurion316]

Great comparison. What are those rifles called?