I oft said that Liberals can only win when they redefine the language. Merriam-Webster just did exactly that. For the Left. - Granite Grok

I oft said that Liberals can only win when they redefine the language. Merriam-Webster just did exactly that. For the Left.

My AR-15 identifies as a single shot bolt actionSo now we know where one of the premier English language dictionaries, Merriam-Webster, lies on the political spectrum – full Progressive. As the post notes, here is the “definition” for “assault rifle”

noun: any of various automatic or semiautomatic rifles with large capacity magazines designed for military use.

I have big problems with this – it’s still wrong, of course. The quick “gunsplainin'” is that 30 round mags are Standard capacity, not 10, not 7, nor 5. The proper term is “selective fire” which doesn’t even appear in their definition: full automatic (pull trigger once, rounds keep firing), burst mode (standard US is one trigger pull, three rounds fired), or semiautomatic (1 trigger pull, 1 round fired). “Or” is a red-herring in the above. Let me add that an AR-15 is NOT designed for military use.

Now, “after Parkland” (in fact, redefined March 31, 2018), we see that Merriam-Webster has decided to choose political sides:

noun: any of various intermediate-range, magazine-fed military rifles (such as the AK-47) that can be set for automatic or semiautomatic fire; also : a rifle that resembles a military assault rifle but is designed to allow only semiautomatic fire

Notice the creep of “various intermediate-range” and “magazine-fed”. Worse is anything that “resembles a military assault rifle” is now classified as an assault rifle. So that which merely looks like something it isn’t, is. So an AR-15 is now the exact same thing as an M4.

It’s guns gone transgender, if I might break a really bad metaphor. Yeah…no. Once again, we’re back to the definition of what “is” is (so do I get to call Merriam-Webster “Bill Clinton”??). This is sheer support of the civilian disarmament mob – a redefinition to support what the Democrats / Progressive desire. But it gets worse – look at the Kids version of the definition:

any of various especially automatic rifles designed for military use — called also assault weapon

So, according to the people whose job it is to actually live up to the phrase “words have meanings” and for dictionaries, “have exact and precise meanings”, we see the blurring and obfuscation of such definitions by those we rely on to “hold the line”. So officially, an “assault weapon” is an” assault rifle” – and an “assault rifle” is an “assault weapon”.

Presto! See, Merriam-Webster just made one thing into something it isn’t, and made the other thing back again as well. Certainly done not for a precise definition – the only reason why they would have done is political partisanship and done outside of knowing what the heck their talking about in the actual problem domain.

Thanks Merriam-Webster, for dropping your mask – I’ll remember this and no longer rely on you for actual definitions like I have in the past.

(H/T: The Truth About Guns)

>