Reread this thread, dumbass. I gave very detailed descriptions for why the current nomenclature is the way it is. If there's anything you're not clear on, I'll fucking reiterate again. The thing is, your mind is set and you will not change it.
OK, show me the nomenclature stamped into the weapons.
This again? How is your reading comprehension that fucking bad?
Read again:
You won't see one. Same way you don't see "submachine gun" stamped on an MP9, "heavy machine gun" on an M2, "battle rifle" on an M14, "S.A.W." on an M249 or M60, "anti-material rifle" on an M82, or "sniper rifle" stamped on an M40. Should I move on to grenade and missile designations and their types or have I made my point? Doesn't change the facts that that is what each of them are.
Yes, by all means, tell me about that M16 "assault rifle" and the M14 "battle rifle". Let's take a look at my inch pattern L1A1 "battle rifle". Nope, nothing but "Rifle 7.62mm L1A1". Where do I find the "battle rifle" marking, Murica?
YOU FUCKING WON'T. Reread again! Keep rereading until it gets through your skull. The FAL and your Canadian copy are classified as battle rifles. Arms manufacturers and militaries don't stamp that detail.
Get it through your head that military nomenclature refers to M14, M16, Garands, 03s, whatever, simply as "Service Rifles". Official nomenclatures DON'T refer to them as "assault rifles" or "battle rifles". Just because cheesy politicians and other fools use the term doesn't mean that it's correct. However, you're welcome to keep your head tucked firmly in your ass.
(post is archived)