‘Semiautomatic Rifles’ vs ‘Modern Sporting Rifles’ Which Is Constitutionally Protected ~ VIDEO

When discussing the debate over AR-15s and similar firearms, there’s a key point Second Amendment supporters need to understand: language matters.

In his video, Mark W. Smith from The Four Boxes Diner explains why we should stop calling AR-15s and similar rifles “modern sporting rifles” and instead refer to them as semiautomatic rifles. That distinction is so important for the pro-Second Amendment community.

A Brief History of the Terms

The term “modern sporting rifle” was coined by pro-gun groups [primarily the National Shooting Sports Foundation] in response to anti-gun advocates labeling AR-15s and other semiautomatic rifles as “assault weapons.” It was a way to push back against a term that was deliberately meant to vilify these firearms and make them sound dangerous or “military-grade.”

However, while “modern sporting rifle” is not technically wrong, it isn’t the strongest or most strategic term in today’s political and legal climate.

Mark Smith takes us back to the late 1980s when the debate over banning AR-style firearms first gained traction, particularly after the Stockton, California shooting. At that time, the conversation was centered around whether these rifles had a “sporting purpose,” a concept that arose from America’s gun import and export laws. Back then, it was understood that firearms like rifles and shotguns had inherent sporting purposes, such as hunting or target practice. This classification allowed them to be legally imported into the U.S. unless they fell under the National Firearms Act (NFA), which covers fully automatic weapons and short-barreled rifles.

Why ‘Semiautomatic Rifles’ Is the Stronger Term

Here’s where Smith’s analysis gets critical for the Second Amendment community: calling these firearms “semiautomatic rifles” is more accurate and, more importantly, aligns with the language used by the U.S. Supreme Court. Smith emphasizes that we must frame our language in a way that mirrors how the courts, particularly the Supreme Court, view these firearms.

Smith highlights a crucial legal perspective: Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s dissent in a 2011 case where he referred to AR-15s as “semiautomatic rifles.” Kavanaugh argued that semiautomatic rifles, like semiautomatic handguns, are in common use and, therefore, constitutionally protected under the Second Amendment. Kavanaugh’s focus on the term “semiautomatic rifles” is not just a legal technicality – it’s a deliberate choice that connects directly to the constitutional protection of firearms.

The court’s consistent use of “semiautomatic rifles” strengthens the Second Amendment community’s argument that these firearms should not be banned.

By adopting the same language, we ensure that the courts, legislators, and the public understand that AR-15s and similar firearms are no different from other semiautomatic firearms that are already in widespread lawful use.

The Importance of Speaking the Right Language

Using the term “semiautomatic rifles” frames the debate in a way that disarms anti-gun rhetoric. “Assault weapon” is a term filled with negative connotations, while “modern sporting rifle,” though neutral, doesn’t connect as directly with legal protections. “Semiautomatic rifles,” on the other hand, is a clear, factual term that describes the function of these firearms and puts them in the same category as other legally protected firearms.

Smith makes it clear: the language we use in the Second Amendment fight matters. When discussing AR-15s, AK-47s, or any other semiautomatic rifles, using precise terms is not just about being accurate—it’s about winning the battle for gun rights. By aligning our language with that of the courts, we strengthen our position and make it harder for opponents to misrepresent these firearms.

Live Inventory Price Checker

PSA PA15 Complete Classic EPT A2 Lower Receiver - 7781023 Palmetto State Armory $ 389.99 $ 179.99
PSA PA15 Complete Classic EPT A2 Lower Receiver - 7781023 Palmetto State Armory $ 389.99 $ 179.99
PSA PA15 Complete Classic EPT A2 Lower Receiver - 7781023 Palmetto State Armory $ 389.99 $ 179.99
PSA PA15 Complete Classic EPT A2 Lower, ODG Palmetto State Armory $ 249.99 $ 179.99

Opperators: Stay Smart, Stay Strategic

As the Second Amendment fight continues, we must be strategic in our communication. Calling AR-15s “semiautomatic rifles” instead of “modern sporting rifles” aligns us with the legal language already in play and ensures that we’re presenting our arguments in the strongest way possible.

Mark W. Smith’s message is clear: stay informed, stay precise, and always use the best language to defend your Second Amendment rights. In today’s world, where every word in the gun control debate can be used for or against us, it’s crucial to be the smartest person in the room—and now you are.

52 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Nanashi

I’ve always hated the term “Modern Sporting Rifle” because
1: “Modern” is fleeting. What are we calling the next thing?
2: It’s part of the NRA assisting in slow boiling the American people. The 2A is not for sport, it’s to throw off such government and provide new guards for [our] future security. Period. People who try to obfuscate this fact are not your friend.

BobS

I prefer just “rifle”
There’s no need to be specific about the cycling mechanism (bolt or lever or pump or piston or gas) nor about the utility (single shot or repeating or semiauto or automatic)
They’re all bearable arms, within the scope of the Constitution’s protection for individual possession
Using the descriptor “semiautomatic” is too narrow, just like “sporting”, and gives up the “automatic” ground unnecessarily

USCitizen

Smith makes and excellent point, 2A supporters should use the same language used by SCOTUS.

Ledesma

Semi-automatics are here to stay! Roughly 91% of the active American arsenal.

Last edited 1 year ago by Ledesma
StLPro2A

How about….IM-15…IM-10……Insurrectionist Musket. Yeah, think I’m going with that.

Penning the 2A, our Founders expected citizens to keep’n’bear, to show up with current state of the art technology, military capable arms….not rubber band guns’n’SuperSoakers…..to “…defend the security of a free state…” All NFA items for all Americans.

“I am an American. I have the right to keep and bear arms. Your permission is not required.” Lilicloth.com tee.

Last edited 1 year ago by StLPro2A
Mac

Both are protected so…..

Montana454Casull

My Reminton model 1100 shotgun is a semi automatic rifle and also must qualify as a modern sporting rifle under both criteria mentioned . The only thing it lacks is the changeable mag but that’s just a cosmetic detail .

Arizona

Nope. We are entitled to modern weapons of war, and modern develops and expands with new tech every year. Every terrible implement of the soldier is our BIRTHRIGHT.

We are not limited to semiautos. The NFA is unconstitutional garbage, as is the Hughes amendment.

DDS

Actually, the current “sporting purposes” test included in GCA68 was borrowed by Sen. Thomas Dodd from a 1938 Nazi weapons law.

https://jpfo.org/filegen-a-m/GCA_68.htm

https://gunfreezone.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/The-Sporting-Purposes-Test.pdf

Jerry C.

Can it be used in defense of home & hearth? It’s Constitutionally protected, period.