Stop Arguing Over The Features Of The AR-15
BY Herschel Smith
Our stolid friend James Fallows at The Atlantic has yet another dense post up mainly consisting of letters to him and a few lines in reply. There’s not much to see, except that he does make an admission that brings a much-needed breath of fresh air.
I understand that the AR-15 is not functionally unique. Thus anyone who argues that the AR-15 should not be in civilian hands should be willing to extend the argument to similar weapons. That’s what I think about the AR-15, and and I say the same thing about functionally similar weapons.
Good. It’s a healthy and helpful thing to speak honestly about such matters. This whole thing began some years ago with arguments over select-fire and the definition of assault rifle, the smaller caliber cartridge and whether it is any good for deer hunting, the value of a pistol grip, the “scary looking” features of the AR-15, the standard capacity magazine, its semi-automatic design, and on and on it went.
These were merely the first steps in the dance. We’re way past that now. Honesty has demanded that the progressives admit their demands, and honesty has demanded that we reply. The definition of “military” is nonsensical anyway, and we all know it.
There was an article recently about Glock making their “military-grade” pistol available to civilians. This means that it’s a Glock with a flat dark earth finish and pretentions of being modular. Nothing more. And truthfully, all weapons are “military grade.”
Let’s talk 30-06 bolt action deer rifles. Yep. Ask those whom Carlos Hathcock killed in Vietnam to speak from the grave and tell you all about that 30-06 round that hit them from a Winchester bolt action gun. Marines were still using Winchester bolt action rifles for DM guns at the beginning of OIF, and most sniper rifles in military use today are bolt action. How about 30-06 semi-automatic? Yep. The M1 Garand. WWII. And how about semi-automatic or automatic carbine? Yep. The M1 Carbine. WWII.
How about shotguns? Yep. The Marine Corps was using Benelli M4s for room clearing in Now Zad, Afghanistan, during OEF. How about revolvers? Yep. They were the sidearm for many years, and today .357 Magnum and .44 Magnum wheel guns are still in use defending homes and against big predators in America.
No one who knows anything should have to ask about Browning’s best design of his life, the 1911, which is still the most expensive handgun that can be purchased. The point is that there is no such thing as a weapon that hasn’t been used on the field of battle between countries or various actors, and it makes no sense to argue over whether something is called “military grade.” We’ve got virtually everything the military has ever had, and vice versa (except that the professional precision rifle shooters probably have better guns than the military).
The freshness about what Fallows said is that he admits that there is no stopping point, and that’s good, because logically he’s right. And the freshness for us is actually not all that fresh, I just don’t think Fallows is hearing it, or perhaps he’s hearing it, but he just doesn’t believe it.
No. We won’t give them up. Period. Your move.