Talk:Assault weapon
Latest comment: 4 months ago by North8000 in topic The page is linked to from pages about Canada
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Assault weapon article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8Auto-archiving period: 2 months  |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to governmental regulation of firearm ownership; the social, historical and political context of such regulation; and the people and organizations associated with these issues, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Assault weapon article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8Auto-archiving period: 2 months |
The page is linked to from pages about Canada
editSo clearly just describing how ONE political party in ONE country used the word is inadequate. 2604:3D09:D78:1000:377E:61DF:3EAC:2898 (talk) 15:08, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- Good point. But as a starting point, this is an article about a fluid American political term, not a type of firearm. North8000 (talk) 15:12, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- Is there any reason the scope of the article can't include analogous legislation in other countries? VQuakr (talk) 16:12, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keeping in mind that "this is an article about a fluid American political term, not a type of firearm." The issue is "analogous in what way?" North8000 (talk) 18:32, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- In the way that the term and concept is also used in Canadian firearms legislation/politics. [1]. VQuakr (talk) 18:51, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- @VQuakr: Sorry, I missed your post at the time. Not sure what to say; they threw around all kinds of terms in what was covered in that article including 2 different ones with "assault" in them (including conflating with the "assault rifle", the full auto firearms which only the military gets to have) but didn't use the term "assault weapon" and this article is really about a term. But it might be good to include what you linked beacuse it shows use os similar sounding terms in political context. North8000 (talk) 17:05, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for the ping. I do not really agree this article is about a term. It is about the vaguely defined grouping of firearms that the various definitions of the term classify. It is therefore about a political concept. But the specific phrase "assault weapon" was indeed used in connection with the Canadian program, [2]. VQuakr (talk) 17:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- There are many terms which seek to redefine something or create a certain view of something through a particular lens. The fact that the objects that could fall within the variable-meaning term are real does not mean that it isn't primarily just a term. For example, is Gay agenda (about) a term, or is it (about) a set of gay rights initiatives? Same for Anchor baby Is it about a term, or about those children? North8000 (talk) 21:28, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for the ping. I do not really agree this article is about a term. It is about the vaguely defined grouping of firearms that the various definitions of the term classify. It is therefore about a political concept. But the specific phrase "assault weapon" was indeed used in connection with the Canadian program, [2]. VQuakr (talk) 17:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- @VQuakr: Sorry, I missed your post at the time. Not sure what to say; they threw around all kinds of terms in what was covered in that article including 2 different ones with "assault" in them (including conflating with the "assault rifle", the full auto firearms which only the military gets to have) but didn't use the term "assault weapon" and this article is really about a term. But it might be good to include what you linked beacuse it shows use os similar sounding terms in political context. North8000 (talk) 17:05, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- In the way that the term and concept is also used in Canadian firearms legislation/politics. [1]. VQuakr (talk) 18:51, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keeping in mind that "this is an article about a fluid American political term, not a type of firearm." The issue is "analogous in what way?" North8000 (talk) 18:32, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- Is there any reason the scope of the article can't include analogous legislation in other countries? VQuakr (talk) 16:12, 19 March 2024 (UTC)