So one wonders if it is motivated by malice. Easy enough to find out the facts if you really want to know them.
Congressman Adam Smith, Democrat, Washington on the radio today stated that he was by no means a gun expert. Then he came out with this gem.
"Assault weapons fire faster, are more powerful, and are more deadly than other rifles. That is not open to question."
There is not one single true thing in that statement. Leaving aside the idiotic definition of cosmetic features making a rifle an "assault weapon", assault weapons fire at the exact same rate as any other semi-automatic firearm (once each time you pull the trigger).
They have the same power as any other rifle chambered in the same cartridge (for example the AR-15 is chambered in 5.56mm (.223 which is one of the most popular cartridges in the United States).
They are no more deadly than any other rifle chambered in the same caliber since it is caliber and rate of fire that make a rifle deadly.
So why are they anti-gunners misrepresenting this kind of rifle? Well one, they want to ban all firearms, much like they did in England and they are working on in Australia. Two, they think of this as a bargaining chip. Smith stated that, later in the interview. He would be willing to drop pushing the assault weapon ban if only we would be willing to support a raft of other "common sense" legislation, which includes, of course, a ban on magazines with more than some to-be-determined capacity. Since that proposal is about as pointless as an assault weapons ban, why would we bargain away anything?