You are not entirely correct. The term "assault rifle" seems to change meaning on a regular basis. One common definition of an assault rifle is a rifle which will hold more than 7 or 8 rounds in the clip, another definition is a rifle that uses a clip. One definition is guns that are "scary looking". You seem to be using the Wikipedia definition.

The requirement for the gun to be fully automatic is not absolute either as many claim the MI Garand to be the first real assault weapon and was only semi automatic.

I took my AR15 to Alaska for target practice and bear defense (it is highly recommended that you have a gun in the wilds of Alaska) but the Canadian customs would not let me enter the country with an assault weapon.

No one is going to openly carry a weapon up to range and shoot the president. It would be a simple act of sucicide.

out number by who

do you assume every one with a gun is a fanatic out to kill everyone

it is that kind of thing that is killing this country and leading to
the loss of freedoms

why is it if one person does something that no one else should be able
to have anything that that person used for their evil

maybe fertilizer and fuel should be banned after all it is used to
make explosions

so much for farming industry (enough of both on most farms to blow up
city hall a couple times) [is it a regular occurrence] no it is not

I highly reccomend you bring something with a little more junk-in-the-trunk than a .223/5.56 AR15 for bear defense.. A .44 Magnum perhaps, maybe a .454 Casull or S&W .500. A shot (or even multiple shots) from a 223 AR15 will do little more than piss off an already angry bear. I imagine you'd have to hit him several times over to do real damage,(ie to stop the threat)

Couple things though. A, it's not a clip, it's called a magazine. B, the Nazi Sturmgewehr of 1943/44 (MP43/MP44) is considered to be the first true assault rifle.(and had they been able to field them in any significant number at all or a couple years sooner, Europe would look nothing like it does today. That is to say, the Germans may well have been able to stem the Allied invasion and extend Hilter's occupation of continental Europe.) The M1 Garand was a battle rifle.

That aside, you miss my point. The AR15 is NOT an assault rifle, "scary looking" as it may be, (though it's not, it's actually quite an attractive piece of engineering). The definition/criteria I use is one that's widely accepted and generally applied thoughout the firearms community. To be an assault rifle, it has to have a selector switch, and be designed to be fired in full-auto mode. The AR, lacking both of those design features, is not an "assault rifle". The soviet designed AK47 seen carried by mujahedeen and viet cong soldiers, is the archetypal assault rifle. The WASR and other AK knock-offs that can only be fired in semi-auto mode are also NOT assault rifles.

This is crazy. They are allowing people to have assault weapons and guns and be near a President.

Man carrying assault weapon attends Obama protest.

By AMANDA LEE MYERS and TERRY TANG, Associated Press Writers Amanda Lee Myers And Terry Tang, Associated Press Writers – Mon Aug 17, 6:22 pm ET

PHOENIX – About a dozen people carrying guns, including one with a military-style rifle, milled among protesters outside the convention center where President Barack Obama was giving a speech Monday — the latest incident in which protesters have openly displayed firearms near the president.

Gun-rights advocates say they're exercising their constitutional right to bear arms and protest, while those who argue for more gun control say it could be a disaster waiting to happen.

Phoenix police said the gun-toters at Monday's event, including the man carrying an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle slung over his shoulder, didn't need permits. No crimes were committed, and no one was arrested.

The man with the rifle declined to be identified but told The Arizona Republic that he was carrying the assault weapon because he could. "In Arizona, I still have some freedoms," he said.

Phoenix police Detective J. Oliver, who monitored the man at the downtown protest, said police also wanted to make sure no one decided to harm him.

"Just by his presence and people seeing the rifle and people knowing the president was in town, it sparked a lot of emotions," Oliver said. "We were keeping peace on both ends."

Last week, during Obama's health care town hall in Portsmouth, N.H., a man carrying a sign reading "It is time to water the tree of liberty" stood outside with a pistol strapped to his leg.

"It's a political statement," he told The Boston Globe. "If you don't use your rights, then you lose your rights."

Police asked the man to move away from school property, but he was not arrested.

Fred Solop, a Northern Arizona University political scientist, said the incidents in New Hampshire and Arizona could signal the beginning of a disturbing trend.

"When you start to bring guns to political rallies, it does layer on another level of concern and significance," Solop said. "It actually becomes quite scary for many people. It creates a chilling effect in the ability of our society to carry on honest communication."

He said he's never heard of someone bringing an assault weapon near a presidential event. "The larger the gun, the more menacing the situation," he said.

Phoenix was Obama's last stop on a four-day tour of western states, including Montana and Colorado.

Authorities in Montana said they received no reports of anyone carrying firearms during Obama's health care town hall near Bozeman on Friday. About 1,000 people both for and against Obama converged at a protest area near the Gallatin Field Airport hangar where the event took place. One person accused of disorderly conduct was detained and released, according to the Gallatin Airport Authority.

Heather Benjamin of Denver's Mesa County sheriff's department, the lead agency during Obama's visit there, said no one was arrested.

Arizona is an "open-carry" state, which means anyone legally allowed to have a firearm can carry it in public as long as it's visible. Only someone carrying a concealed weapon is required to have a permit.

Paul Helmke, president of the Washington, D.C.-based Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said people should not be allowed to bring guns to events where Obama is.

"To me, this is craziness," he said. "When you bring a loaded gun, particularly a loaded assault rifle, to any political event, but particularly to one where the president is appearing, you're just making the situation dangerous for everyone."

He said people who bring guns to presidential events are distracting the Secret Service and law enforcement from protecting the president. "The more guns we see at more events like this, there's more potential for something tragic happening," he said.

Secret Service spokesman Ed Donovan said armed demonstrators in open-carry states such as Arizona and New Hampshire have little impact on security plans for the president.

"In both cases, the subject was not entering our site or otherwise attempting to," Donovan said. "They were in a designated public viewing area. The main thing to know is that they would not have been allowed inside with a weapon."

Representatives of the National Rifle Association did not return calls for comment.

A mentally disturbed person would, and one that preferred you to kill them, but meanwhile they will take some folks with him. It might be rare, but I prefer to keep my family away from groups small or large that want to prove a point in a crowd.

We can't say that no one is going to shoot the President. Four of them have already been shot and killed.

???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

We can't say that the secret service agent standing next to him won't shoot him...... no one knows


I can't say that I won't get killed/or kill another in a car accident , today...
.....
Doesn't mean I should not be allowed to drive a car ....

Well, you are wrong if you think the AR15 in not considered an assault rifle by many (but not by me). It certainly is by the Canadian government and mingle2 is not a US only website. It is all a matter of perception, which is really what this thread is all about ... the percecption that the president was placed in more danger by someone being in the crowd with an AR15, which he was not.

The Canadians had no problem with my lever action 45/70 and I knew they would never let me enter with an Israeli Arms .50 Desert Eagle so I didn't bother to bring it.

I've spent a lot of time in Alaska.

""""A mentally disturbed person would""""

a mentally disturbed person is not permitted to lawfully buy nor own a gun

But let's not let the facts of the case prevent liberal Obaaaaama fanatics from taking the opportunity of seeing a gun in the hands of a "regular person" to rail against American Liberties..

well certainly it is considered an assault weapon by some, indeed many but it is only through ignorance and liberal anti-gun activism that the AR has been branded as such. I never disagreed that some people consider it an assault rifle. I know this misconception exists and is prevalent here in the US and elsewhere. my contention is that they are wrong (at best) in branding it so as it does not meet the design and operating criteria to be an assault rifle. that's all I'm saying.

talk about fear-mongering and the spreading of mis-information. The OP tagline would suggest to someone that didn't know anything about the situation that some nutjob with an automatic rifle was allowed in the handshake line awaiting an opportunity to cap the president.

Nothing could be further from the truth. The actual facts of the case are that a free American was out excercising his God-given rights and liberties. He was a threat to no one. There are no laws prohibiting him from what he did. He threatened no one. None were shot or shot at. Everyone went home happy.

But let's not let the facts of the case prevent liberal Obaaaaama fanatics from taking the opportunity of seeing a gun in the hands of a "regular person" to rail against American Liberties..

hiya Winx

I see nothing wrong, they were making a statement and also were not breaking the law. Their presence didn't wreck havoc for the secret service. The people who were worried were those who still believe that because one carries a gun one is up to no good.

It's just like those who carry pencils, not really sure why they do that, especially since most people no longer use pencils... hmmm lol, surely they are up to no good