4 ms·

Don't get confused by the terms. They are both 100% deadly. Both come in semi-automatic configuration as well. The only difference is that hunting rifles typica

Don't get confused by the terms. They are both 100% deadly. Both come in semi-automatic configuration as well. The only difference is that hunting rifles typically have low capacity magazines whereas assault rifles have high capacity magazines. EDIT: In case you are talking about types of ammunition, it's true that anti-human ammunition is more deadly. But I am not sure it makes that much of a difference because hunting ammunition is already deadly enough.

boringg 6y ago
High capacity vs low capacity magazines is a real difference if you are in a fire fight.
- dogma1138 6y ago
  Not really the biggest difference would be a detachable magazine vs a non detachable magazine.
  - bitwize 6y ago
    And selective fire. If it comes only in semi-auto configuration, as all legal AR-15 type rifles do, it's not an assault rifle. U.S. legislators are fond of using the deliberately similar sounding and confusing term "assault weapon" to refer to any rifle with military-style features.
    - dogma1138 6y ago
      Automatic fire other than for suppression isn’t effective if you want to kill people semi vs auto won’t make a big difference neither is 10 vs 30 rounds. This is the problem with the gun control debate you either control all of them or none of them. The assault weapons ban did absolutely squat to prevent gun violence in the US. Being able to attach a bayonet or having to pin and weld a flash suppressor I mean sorry compensator or w/e they’ll call it to pass the requirements isn’t going to make a gun less deadly. Honestly I don’t know what can be done in the US at this point there’s more guns than people, and despite the so called ammo shortages there are probably enough rounds out there to kill every person on the planet 10 times over. There little that any gun control legislation other than a complete ban and confiscation campaign could do. This is because if you look at gun violence you see essentially two groups neither of which could be prevented by stricter gun legislation. One is people committing crimes/homicide with legally purchased firearms and passing all checks including any additional checks that any “sensible” gun legislation would introduce. The other are people who obtain guns illegally by stealing them or buying them on the black or grey markets. More background checks won’t stop them, especially not in the near term until guns become prohibitively expensive for most criminals to obtain but without confiscation that isn’t likely to happen. There’s still gun violence in the UK as far as criminals go but that’s mostly limited to organized crime vs organized crime incidents other than that and the Irish border conflict related violence you can rally only get the odd crank that finds grandpa’s old shotgun with a few 50 year old hunting rounds. Common criminals can’t afford to buy guns in the UK and many of them don’t want anything to do with firearms because of the response it would trigger.

boringg 6y ago

High capacity vs low capacity magazines is a real difference if you are in a fire fight.

dogma1138 6y ago
Not really the biggest difference would be a detachable magazine vs a non detachable magazine.
- bitwize 6y ago
  And selective fire. If it comes only in semi-auto configuration, as all legal AR-15 type rifles do, it's not an assault rifle. U.S. legislators are fond of using the deliberately similar sounding and confusing term "assault weapon" to refer to any rifle with military-style features.
  - dogma1138 6y ago
    Automatic fire other than for suppression isn’t effective if you want to kill people semi vs auto won’t make a big difference neither is 10 vs 30 rounds. This is the problem with the gun control debate you either control all of them or none of them. The assault weapons ban did absolutely squat to prevent gun violence in the US. Being able to attach a bayonet or having to pin and weld a flash suppressor I mean sorry compensator or w/e they’ll call it to pass the requirements isn’t going to make a gun less deadly. Honestly I don’t know what can be done in the US at this point there’s more guns than people, and despite the so called ammo shortages there are probably enough rounds out there to kill every person on the planet 10 times over. There little that any gun control legislation other than a complete ban and confiscation campaign could do. This is because if you look at gun violence you see essentially two groups neither of which could be prevented by stricter gun legislation. One is people committing crimes/homicide with legally purchased firearms and passing all checks including any additional checks that any “sensible” gun legislation would introduce. The other are people who obtain guns illegally by stealing them or buying them on the black or grey markets. More background checks won’t stop them, especially not in the near term until guns become prohibitively expensive for most criminals to obtain but without confiscation that isn’t likely to happen. There’s still gun violence in the UK as far as criminals go but that’s mostly limited to organized crime vs organized crime incidents other than that and the Irish border conflict related violence you can rally only get the odd crank that finds grandpa’s old shotgun with a few 50 year old hunting rounds. Common criminals can’t afford to buy guns in the UK and many of them don’t want anything to do with firearms because of the response it would trigger.