I have no idea what that is.

The ammosexuals will go with whatever definition fits their selected narrative.

Does this definition fit “your narrative”? Or

https://www.britannica.com/technology/assault-rifle

So what is the real definition?

a lightweight rifle developed from the sub-machine gun, which may be set to fire automatically or semi-automatically.

Nice; a misinterpretation of what an “Assault Rifle” is - per usual.

Here is the definition per Britannica:

“Assault rifle, military firearm that is chambered for ammunition of reduced size or propellant charge and that has the capacity to switch between semiautomatic and fully automatic fire.”

Keywords here - “the capacity to switch between semiautomatic AND fully automatic fire.”

Therefore, a rifle with only semiautomatic fire is not an “Assault Rifle” per the definition.

https://www.britannica.com/technology/assault-rifle

And per the English dictionary, a lightweight rifle developed from the sub-machine gun, which may be set to fire automatically or semi-automatically

Which; sources please?

Has to be more reputable than the Britannica, the oldest English-language general encyclopedia.

Again, unless the dictionary definition is also leftist biased, I think a dictionary should work fine for your requirements

You didn’t answer my question - which source are you using?

Just told ya. The English Dictionary. A book

... lol okay. And this is why you know nothing about guns and should have no say on the matter. Bullshit arguments based off opinions with zero sources.

Your right. Anyone with a shred of common sense uses the internet. A place famed for nonsense and conspiracy theories. And, of course, any internet source I use is liberal biased (Even the BBC and Wikipedia, for some reason). So tell me. Why is a book written to define every word in the English language an 'invalid source'?

Right, so you use the internet. Great. You said “source” twice and never provided one. Give me a URL / website contradicting Britannica.

Also, just for future reference- Wikipedia is not a legitimate source of valid information.

I don't know what's so hard to understand about the fact that I can't give a URL for a book

Wikipedia isn’t a scholarly source so whatever you find there can’t be used in a real argument. Just saying.

I told you. I didn't use wikipedia. That's an encyclopedia. I just mean the official English dictionary

So it’s related to function and not cosmetics. Anything that has the ability to fire more than one round with a single trigger pull is an NFA item and subject to a tax stamp, correct? This means semi-auto rifles aren’t assault weapons.

No. It's a rifle that can shoot automatically or semi-automatically. It literally says that in the definition

Right, which excludes civilian versions of the Stoner action that aren’t select-fire.

In common parlance? Any gun engineered expressly for taking out concrete bunkers in Fallujah by putting as many bullets as possible through the air. As opposed to other situational weaponry like shotguns which are just about short-range punch and rifles that are about one-time precision, the understanding is that assault rifles are for sustained combat where fire rate and clip size is what's important.

Some people will complain that the nomenclature is technically more narrow than that but if your intention is to bring the conversation to regulation of civilian weaponry then anything other than a civilian understanding of the vernacular is completely irrelevant.