Another day, another prop from the gun control industry, in the form of grieving parents who are uneducated about the topic they are taking a stand on [or being pushed into]. Queue the bloody shirt.
This case is about a particular weapon, Remington’s Bushmaster AR-15, and its sale to a particular market: civilians.
I’m sure you meant to say citizens. Or perhaps, tellingly….not.
This case is about the AR-15 because the AR-15 is not an ordinary weapon; it was designed and manufactured for the military to increase casualties in combat. The AR-15 is to guns what a tank is to cars: uniquely deadly and suitable for specialized use only.
The AR platform is the very definition of an ordinary weapon. Just because you desire a utopian vision where firearms technology never surpassed the black powder era, doesn’t negate the fact that the AR platform is a firearm in common use, and a wildly popular one at that. Never mind the fact that whether piston or gas-impingement, the AR rifle is functionally no different than any other semi-automatic rifle…..a genre of technology that has been in existence, inarguably, in mass production since 1862. Never mind the fact that every advancement in firearms technology, from the wheelock to the percussion cap to the bolt action to the revolver to detachable and tube magazines……have been designed foremost for a military purpose….the military often being in the vanguard of technological advancements. Thus, every firearm…including those you would deign to allow the citizen to keep and bear…..are military firearms.
In fact, we believe that Remington and other manufacturers’ production of the AR-15 is essential for our armed forces and law enforcement.
Wait….you want our law enforcement agencies to be armed with weapons that “increase casualties in combat”???? What exactly would be your reasoning for that? This is where the predictable crickets appear, when after the blather of “weapons designed for the battlefield, shouldn’t be on our streets” meme falls flat. That you would arm only agents of the State with such “ferocious” [your words] with “mass casualty producing” firearms, tells us a bit about your subservience and surrender of your duty as a citizen.
The last thing Daniel’s tender little body would have felt were bullets expelled from that AR-15 traveling at greater than 3,000 feet per second – a speed designed to pierce body armor in the war zones of Fallujah.
Again, queue the battlefield imagery for the predictably stale appeal to emotion. One wonders how versed in firearms these useful idiots are, when they take to the airwaves or the print media, and employ technical terms that they clearly cannot define. “Assault weapon” myth aside……I’d like to know what the Bardens think of how the standard muzzle velocity and muzzle energy of the seemingly protected “hunting rifle” [irrespective of the fact that one can, and many do, hunt with an AR style rifle], stacks up to the standard AR. The Bardens represent the class of activists who, perhaps well meaning, are fundamentally ignorant of the very topic they rail on about; using terminology fed to them by the gun control industry, but without the necessary context with which to come through as educated and serious. These are the folks that get the vapors over ergonomic, cosmetic and safety features of the very AR style rifle they demonize, yet can’t define. Ironically, the self-appointed “gun safety” industry, argues against firearm components that promote safe use. Not to mention that not a single gun control group actually pursues, teaches nor funds actual gun safety. The single largest group that fills that role? The NRA. Also ironically, this OpEd might be the first scripted narrative from the gun control industry that fails to mention the boogeyman of the NRA.
Much like the parents of Jessica Ghawi, Mark and Jackie Barden are the next useful idiots being led by the nose to wave the bloody shirt for citizen disarmament. And just like the Ghawi’s, the Bardens argument fails to meet even the rational basis test. This is why they lose.