If President Joe Biden had his way, every American would surrender their AR-15 to the government ad buy a shotgun instead. As vice president, he often touted the shotgun, saying it was way easier to aim than an AR-15, and he told Field & Stream, “Well, you know, my shotgun will do better for you than your AR-15, because you want to keep someone away from your house, just fire the shotgun through the door.” This is the same guy who says police officers should be trained to shoot a suspect in the leg.
The shotgun is not “America’s national gun,” sadly. The BBC says that honor belongs to the AR-15, which “used to be banished to the back of gun shows.” Ryan Busse, senior advisor to Giffords Courage, says this is a great and important article.
Great and important article here by @writefreedom09
How the AR-15 became 'America's national gun' and loved by the NRA – BBC News https://t.co/ZDldHAklHq
— Ryan Busse (@ryandbusse) April 15, 2023
(He's saying that because half the article is quotes from him) https://t.co/Fm5mz6BjSD
— Rob Romano (@2Aupdates) April 15, 2023
Government-funded media outlet BBC News reports:
It wasn’t long ago that the idea of millions of civilians owning a military-style rifle was unthinkable even to industry insiders.
Ryan Busse was a top executive at a firearms company in the early 2000s. Back then, he said, AR-15s and other “tactical” military-style weapons were banished to the back halls of industry shows and only accessible to law enforcement and former military members.
“The rest of the industry wouldn’t let those things be displayed in the main, tasteful and respectable part of the show,” he said.
…
Rather than any one law, Mr Busse said that the industry’s decision to eschew tactical weapons was because there was a “social stigma” around them and leaders agreed that firearms should belong in the hands of the military and trained police officers.
“I’ve never owned one. To me, the guns have a very clear purpose. They are tactical weapons of war, and I wasn’t planning on embarking on a planned military offensive action,” he said.
Recommended
He was a top executive at a firearms company but never owned an AR-15 because of the social stigma, apparently.
You are such a a hack
— ComeAtMeBro (@RifleAz) April 15, 2023
When you worked at Kimber, you sold actual weapons of war to civilians. You should be arrested.
— DissidentRexy🦖 (@DissidentRexy) April 15, 2023
The AR-15 has acquired its totemic status because most people who support more gun control laws irrationally fear them. That has made the gun more popular with gun enthusiasts if only to spite their political opponents.
— Bill (@Cavaturaccioli) April 15, 2023
The article even calls out the reason that civilians find it handy beyond a martial context. It's light, easy to build into a configuration of your choosing, it can be quite affordable, you can adapt it to various cartridges, you can even pop on compliance parts in ban states.
— Ghost Cougar (@ghostcougar01) April 15, 2023
The AR-15 was never relegated to “back halls”. My college roommate had one in 1978. I bought my first one in 1989. They were readily accessible and visible in almost every gun shop in America.
— Leo B. Wood (@wood_leo) April 15, 2023
“It wasn't long ago that the idea of millions of civilians owning a military-style rifle was unthinkable even to industry insiders.” Which is why the AR15 has been on sale to civilians since the early 1960s. You even admit they never left the trade show floors.
— Kuug (@gringosuavex) April 15, 2023
Click bait. Other than Colion Noir saying he liked to shoot it, there was nothing in the article about the NRA and a relationship with the AR-15. People understand it's not the NRA pushing a certain type of firearm. It's consumer demand. More pull than push.
— Tim Stoner (@timothystoner) April 15, 2023
You’re right. I’ve read a number of articles dealing with this subject, and this one is far and away the best. It brings exceptional clarity.
None of the others have every come close. Thanks for pointing this out.
— The Nick Report®️ (@muscadyne) April 15, 2023
That’s sarcasm, by the way.
“The law provides legal immunity for gun sellers, gun dealers, gun manufacturers and those who transport weapons, to protect them from lawsuits based on the harm that their guns do.”
This is a misunderstanding of the law, unfortunately usual in the case with gun control writers.
— The Nick Report®️ (@muscadyne) April 15, 2023
"Meanwhile, advances in technology have accelerated the rifle's capabilities beyond those of the military's M-16, Mr Busse said, making it more deadly."
?
— Kostas Moros (@MorosKostas) April 15, 2023
I guess there's no additional danger in legalizing full-autos, then
— Rob Romano (@2Aupdates) April 15, 2023
"America's National Gun"?
Sounds pretty in common use to me. Based AF.
— Brian Wilson (@brianwilson22) April 15, 2023
Good people should own superior arms. Your life is your most invaluable possession. As such, you shouldn’t allow any of these clowns to dictate what tools you are worthy of using to defend it.
— Triggerology (@Triggerology_FT) April 15, 2023
The UK doing a article on AMERICAN firearms? There's a good reason their opinion has no value here? 🤣 And now an American is promoting said article, that's sad.
— bajackson (@bigaljackson) April 15, 2023
“Great and important article”… mostly composed of quotes from you. Your narcissism is nauseating.
— Andrew (@UtahGunGuy) April 15, 2023
A senior advisor to a gun control organization thinks the BBC’s take on the AR-15 is “great and important.” So we’ll take that as an admission that it’s completely biased.
***
Related:
Expert testifies that a single round from an AR-15 can sever the upper body from the lower body https://t.co/7CMwyUDGOi
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) February 11, 2023
Join the conversation as a VIP Member