Posted on 04/01/2018 7:57:44 AM PDT by Simon Green
Soon after the school shooting in Parkland, Florida, Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary changed its definition of “assault rifle.”
The entry for “assault rifle,” which was updated March 31, 2018, reads as follows:
noun: any of various intermediate-range, magazine-fed military rifles (such as the AK-47) that can be set for automatic or semiautomatic fire; also : a rifle that resembles a military assault rifle but is designed to allow only semiautomatic fire
After 17 people were shot and killed at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in February, activists have been using the tragic events to make the sale of so-called “assault weapons” illegal.
An Internet archive search shows the Merriam-Webster entry for “assault rifle” appears to be different now than it was before the shooting. A cached version of the same entry from June 13, 2016 has this definition:
noun: any of various automatic or semiautomatic rifles with large capacity magazines designed for military use
“Assault weapon” and “assault rifles” are malleable terms often used in public discourse to scare people. After all, all guns are designed to “assault” something. The usual proper use of this term is to describe fully automatic machine-gun-style weapons, which in the United States have been banned from civilian use for years. Notice that the Merriam-Webster change stretches this definition to include anything that looks like such a gun regardless of whether it shoots like one.
Yet media and politicians often use this term inaccurately, as doing so furthers their desire of getting Americans to support gun-control policies. As Sean Davis pointed out on our pages last year, when the United States had a federal “assault weapons” ban, lawmakers defined the term cosmetically instead of by function and, contra Merriam-Webster, had nothing to do with a military-esque design (whatever that means):
(Excerpt) Read more at thefederalist.com ...
When will it include toy guns?
The legacy dictionaries are pretty much obsolete anyway.
He who controls the language...
Soon. Didn’t wally world remove look alike toy guns already? When the definition doesn’t fit, change the definition. It’s what the alt-left radical extremists do. Change the ‘narrative’(I’ve grown to HATE that word) to fit the issue.
By this definition, a one round per pull AR type Airsoft is now an assault rifle.
Lunacy.
Thanks for posting.
Now I know that Merriam-Webster is no longer a reliable resource for the meaning of words.
The first definition remains and this can only be the last addition to all the other definitions
But, the AR15 wasn’t designed for military use. So the definition is wrong.
Then Merriam-Webster is no longer scholarly, and is no better an authority than, say, Snopes.
Their revision is a mixed bag. Everything before the “also” is correct. If they had stopped there they would have improved on their earlier definition. But then they go nuts with the definition based on appearance.
Not lunacy, this is intentional. The agenda is to get an assault rifle ban and have the definition include as many weapons as possible. If the Rats get the Congress we will see an assault weapons ban if they don’t it is still likely. Incremental repeal of the 2nd is the plan.
Merriam-Webster can redefine ‘AR’ all they’d like. The ONE word we all should be leary of the ‘em touching is: INFRINGEMENT.
....not as if that’d change the Historical record, or speeches of the time, debate(s), etc. Govt will continue to do what it has always done: Ignore that which impedes its own growth and power.
Webster’s New World Dictionary 1957: There is no entry for assault rifle or assault weapon.
it should read
noun: any of various intermediate-range, magazine-fed military rifles (such as the AK-47) that can be set for automatic or semiautomatic fire; also : a rifle that resembles a military assault rifle but is designed to allow only semiautomatic fire; also : a rifle that is made of NaCl.
The word “Romantical” is also found in the dictionary now.
So yeah, these dictionaries need oversight. May I suggest a congressional panel assigned to approve our language ?
Fully automatic weapons have not been “banned for civilian use for years”, you can still licence their possesion in most states via the federal government.
Toy guns were first removed from stores in the anti-gun hysteria of 1968.
Sure...if you can afford to spend $20,000 on a rifle that should cost $1,000. It's a ban in all but name.
And the definition of Merriam-Webster is Newspeak; see 1984.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.