I last posted this article about a year ago, but this one never gets old, if for no reason other than that D/S/Cs never get smarter, and never quit, as The Western Journal reports:
Democratic Texas Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee incorrectly claimed this week that an AR-15 rifle typically fires .50 caliber ammunition, while also vastly exaggerating how much the firearm weighs.
‘I held an AR-15 in my hand, I wish I hadn’t,’ the congresswoman said. ‘It is as heavy as 10 boxes that you might be moving, and the bullet that is utilized, a .50 caliber, these kinds of bullets, need to be licensed and do not need to be on the street.’
ARs weigh in the 6.5 to 7 pound range—light for any rifle–and its standard cartridge is the .223 Remington, about .22 caliber in size. So close, Rep Jackson-Lee, but that only counts with horseshoes and hand grenades.
The political hoax response to the Coronavirus is on its last legs, but one thing that never changes is Democrat/Socialist/Communist mania for disarming the honest and law abiding. That imperative may be on the back burner from time to time, but it never, ever goes away. I originally wrote a version of this article in 2016 for Bearing Arms. Though humorous, that article, and the updates that followed, exposed the mindset of far too many American journalists and D/S/Cs—I know: same thing. As Kurt Schlicter has written, they really do hate us, and have little idea of the daily reality of normal Americans, and for male–-sort of–-reporters, far less masculinity. These people take themselves very seriously indeed, so making fun of them is an effective means of supporting liberty. Besides, we can use some laughs these days. Enjoy this updated article and share it with your friends:
I was going to write “it is a matter of faith,” among experienced gun owners D/S/Cs know nothing about guns, nor do they care to know anything, but that’s not quite true. It’s also a matter of experience. Occasionally, a D/S/C ventures boldly forth into the soul-destroying and terrifying realm of “gun culture”—you know: normal, sane America–-and barely escapes with his or her life and sanity, not that many of them could, upon demand, demonstrate sanity in the first place. Such a person is one Gersh Kuntzman, writing for The New York Daily News.
Mr. Kuntzman, a very brave reporter in the manner of Brave, Brave Sir Robin, sought out a gun dealer that would allow him to fire the gun most terrifying, brutalizing to the shooter and most deadly in all the world. A .50 BMG caliber Barrett? A .500 S&W? A .50 BMG chambered for a revolver with a 2-inch barrel? A six-pound rifle firing a 30mm cannon round from a 4” barrel?
No. Much, much worse: an AR-15 in .223 Remington. What follows is not a parody.
It feels like a bazooka — and sounds like a cannon.
One day after 49 people were killed in the Orlando shooting, I traveled to Philadelphia to better understand the firepower of military-style assault weapons and, hopefully, explain their appeal to gun lovers.
But mostly, I was just terrified.
Many gun shops turned down our request to fire and discuss the AR-15, a style of semi-automatic rifle popular with mass killers such as San Bernardino terrorist Syed Farook and Orlando terrorist Omar Mateen.
Mr. Kuntzman ignores the reality few mass shootings in America have involved AR-15s. Two of the attacks with the highest body counts used commonly available handguns. The Fort Hood jihadist used a single handgun. The Virginia Tech killer–the highest body count to date–used two common handguns, including one in .22LR caliber. The deadliest American school attack by far took place in 1927 in Bath, Michigan, and was accomplished exclusively through the use of explosives.
I’m sure many gun dealers would be/should be wary of any reporter, particularly one for The New York Daily News, asking to do a story on the AR-15. Gun owners and dealers have all had more than their share of reporters misquoting them, even lying about them and firearms, a notorious example being Katy Couric’s malicious editing in an anti-liberty/gun documentary.
Kuntzman reports that one Frank Stelmach, a gun dealer in Philadelphia agreed to host him. Kuntzman depicted Stelmach as just short of a gun control cracktivist, and ala Couric, suggested Stelmach was unable to answer some of his morally superior questions. By all means, take the link to see for yourself. I do pity Mr. Stelmach who will doubtless have some ‘splainin’ to do.
NOTE: Stelmach did ‘splain, and in doing so was far more credible than Kuntzman:
Kuntzman is also, unsurprisingly, horrified at how easy it is to obtain a firearm:
Very easy. In fact, as Philadelphia Daily News columnist Helen Ubinas showed today, you can get a military weapon in seven minutes in this country.
And how long do Kuntzman and Ubinas think one should be required to wait to exercise an express, fundamental, unalienable right? Waiting periods, by the way, have been demonstrated to have no effect whatever on crime, which is why so few states require them. Perhaps just to be safe, reporters, the pen being mightier than the sword, should be required to undergo a month long background check before publishing any story?
Actually, it took Urbinas about as long as it normally takes anyone to purchase a semiautomatic AR-15, not a “military weapon,” or any other firearm. Ubinas’ story claims it took seven minutes from handing the clerk her driver’s license until the federal background check was complete. The fact that it took considerably longer than that to finish and check the required federal paperwork–form 4473–complete the sale and leave with the rifle is buried much more deeply in the story, which is a standard anti-liberty/gun diatribe. That’s Ms. Ubinas in the photo holding her new AR-15. She appears, somehow, to be holding on to her sanity, though doubtless, she is on the ragged edge. She immediately gave the gun to the local police, which may have spared her Mr. Kuntzman’s lingering, eternal trauma, or perhaps she’s just more manly than Kuntzman.
Kuntzman tells readers Stelmach thinks the AR-15 good for “cops, soldiers, hunters and target shooters,” and also thinks the rifle fun to shoot. But not so for poor Mr. Kuntzman, who suffers so you won’t have to:
Not in my hands. I’ve shot pistols before, but never something like an AR-15. Squeeze lightly on the trigger and the resulting explosion of firepower is humbling and deafening (even with ear protection).
The recoil bruised my shoulder. The brass shell casings disoriented me as they flew past my face. The smell of sulfur and destruction made me sick. The explosions — loud like a bomb — gave me a temporary case of PTSD. For at least an hour after firing the gun just a few times, I was anxious and irritable.
Even in semi-automatic mode, it is very simple to squeeze off two dozen rounds before you even know what has happened. In fully automatic mode, it doesn’t take any imagination to see dozens of bodies falling in front of your barrel.
“The recoil bruised my shoulder,” and poor Mr. Kuntzman, even with ear protection was humbled and deafened.
Return with me, gentle readers, to those thrilling days of yesteryear, circa the mid 1970s, my first time on the range in the USAF with the M-16, an actual fully automatic rifle, a mythical and world shattering “assault weapon.” Though I was only a lad of 6’ and 155 pounds, I was able to fire the fearsome weapon, actually on full auto, and semiauto, without the slightest discomfort. One of my most vibrant memories of that experience was a Sgt. demonstrating the fearsome recoil of the weapon by placing the buttplate in direct contact with his nose and firing several rounds.
That valiant NCO must have had stainless steel ears and a titanium nose, perhaps due to war injuries, because not only were no injuries visible on his nose–-it wasn’t even a little red–-but he showed no sign of hearing damage, nor did he appear to be humbled, carrying on as a fully functional and genuinely terrifying drill instructor without skipping a beat. Despite being substantially less a man than I currently am, I too escaped physical and psychic injury, incurring not the slightest bruise. The same was true of my fellow recruits, many of whom were substantially less substantial than I. It was obvious the .223 cartridge was more powerful than the .22LR with which I was then intimately acquainted–-it was a louder and produced a bit more recoil–-but the horrors experienced by Kuntzman were nowhere to be seen on the range that day. Oddly, many of the targets had more holes than the number of rounds fired in their direction, but I don’t think that’s that gun’s fault.
As a fellow member of the evil, white supremacist, systemically racist patriarchy, I worry about Mr. Kuntzman’s masculinity and self-image. I have, on numerous occasions, introduced females, including little girls no older than 10 and no more than 70 pounds, to the horrors of the AR-15. Granted, they had to fire from a supported position, lacking the strength to support the 7-pound rifle for long otherwise, but after firing many rounds, their universal reaction was one of delight–-they found the little rifle’s accuracy and ease of use pleasing–-and not a bruise among them. The same is true of adult women, many in the 100 pound range.
Mr. Kuntzman seems a bit delusional in other ways. Unless he is left handed and fired the rifle from his left shoulder, there would have been no brass flying past his face to disorient him–the rifle ejects to the right–and the odors he reports might be experienced when firing a black powder rifle, but not a rifle using modern ammunition. And what, I wonder, does “destruction” smell like? And explosions? “Loud like a bomb?” I can only hope a sensitive fellow like Mr. Kuntzman is never within aural range of an actual explosion. Judging by his reaction to the report of an AR-15, which is mild indeed among rifle cartridges–-and even some handgun cartridges–-he’d probably resemble Wile E. Coyote after he blows himself up.
PTSD? From firing a few rounds through an AR-15? Really? Perhaps Mr. Kuntzman would be well served by doing a bit of research on what actually constitutes PTSD.
Mr. Kuntzman’s prose gives the reader the impression he fired a fully automatic rifle, as he differentiates between full and semiautomatic fire, without specifically saying that. Yet in one paragraph he claims to have fired the rifle “just a few times,” and in the next, he fires “two dozen rounds” so rapidly he has no idea what happened.
Mr. Kuntzman also imagines “dozens of bodies falling in front of [his] your barrel.” No wonder gun dealers were reluctant to allow him to shoot anywhere near them. I certainly wouldn’t want him to be anywhere near me on a range. Actually, I wouldn’t want to be anywhere near such a range. Maybe not in the same county…
But that’s Mr. Kuntzman’s world, a world inhabited by a great many reporters, and many D/S/Cs (I know: same thing). It is a world of obsession and irrational fear, of unjustified moral certainty and superiority, of loathing of inanimate objects and their owners. However, it is interesting to note during the Age of Obama, and more recently, during the Covid-19 panic with its race-based rioting, followed by the installation of the Biden/Harris/Whoever Administration–Gropin’ Joe Biden, Temporary President/meat puppet–many Americans, including D/S/Cs, have, for the first time in their lives, purchased guns, and failed to experience the horror that so terrified Mr. Kuntzman. They actually discovered shooting is great fun, confidence-building and empowering, and yes, some of these guns were AR-15s. Among these new gun owners are a great many Black Americans and women. It would seem confidence is something of which Mr. Kuntzman is very much in need. Perhaps he could emulate those new gun owners?
In reality, the AR-15 is the most popular sporting rifle in America and has been for years, a trend that shows no sign of slowing. Its .223/5.56mm cartridge is of intermediate power-–it is not a “high-powered rifle”–-and one reason for its popularity is its very mild recoil and report. One of my other memories of firing an M-16 for the first time–-triangular hand guard!–-was hearing the main recoil spring, through my hearing protection and the report of the rifle, cycling the bolt group as I fired. It’s amazing I could hear that despite the explosions that so disoriented and deafened Mr. Kuntzman, no? Reality also reveals that rifles of any kind are very rarely used in any kind of crime in America, and the AR-15 family represents a tiny portion of an already tiny statistical category.
I wish Mr. Kuntzman well, and a speedy recovery from his self-inflicted trauma. I do, however, worry about his ability to cope with the modern world. I sincerely hope should he ever use power tools or drive a car he first engages adult supervision. He definitely should be kept away from chainsaws. Perhaps there ought to be a law…?
Kuntzman, obviously smarting from a torrent of incredulous responses to his article–some even linked to my little satire–quickly wrote a follow up article:
The gun debate is also a gender war.
In all my years in journalism — coming up on 30 (thanks) — I have never received so much angry mail as I did after yesterday’s story, “What is it like to fire an AR-15? It’s horrifying, menacing and very very loud.”
I don’t mind spirited debate, but many correspondents told me that even expressing an opinion about today’s high-powered weaponry is off-limits to those of us who don’t own such guns.
To reiterate, the goal of the story was simply to share with readers my experience of firing an AR-15, which very few of them have done. I found the sheer power of the weapon horrifying. I found the noise deafening and anxiety provoking. I was frightened by its potential for rapid, catastrophic, Orlando-like carnage with similiar weaponry. Using an AR-15 made me irritable and jittery for hours afterwards. To me, it felt like a bazooka.
Oh dear; he’s fired a bazooka? Where do you go for that? I thought an AR-15 horrified him?! Apparently, Mr. Kuntzman learned nothing from his shooting experience, and from those that reasonably took him to task:
Yes, this weapon scared the crap out of me. And it should scare the crap out of all of you, too. An AR-15 is a weapon of mass destruction, a tool that should only be in the hands of our soldiers and cops, as Rep. Seth Moulton wrote in the Daily News on Tuesday. I don’t think there’s anything unmanly about pointing out this fact.
He also addressed his masculinity, somehow equating it with the First Amendment (do all reporters do this?)
Besides, if masculinity is defined by the power to commit violence on a wide scale, I proudly choose femininity. At one time, ‘being a man’ meant standing up for what you believe in — and against injustice. By that definition, we need more real men in power taking on bullies like the NRA, which seeks to bolster the Second Amendment by shutting down opponents’ right to the First. We can’t even debate guns in this country, thanks to the gun lobby.
Anyone so discombobulated by firing an AR-15 is unlikely to be able to define “injustice,” let alone stand up against it.
This is a classic case of being in a hole but refusing to stop digging. Unlike Mr. Kuntzman, I’ve seen no lack of “debate” about guns, including AR-15s. Oh course, the D/S/C idea of “debate” is to make their opponents shut up.
Masculinity is defined in part by harnessing violence, by keeping it under control until it is needed for good, even then using it judiciously. Kuntzman’s critics were merely pointing out that a man terrorized by one of the lightest recoiling rifles in existence is not exactly displaying manly fortitude. The NRA does not, in any way, advocate against the First Amendment, nor does it try to suppress anyone’s freedom of expression. It merely advocates for the Second Amendment by pointing out the misstatements and absurdities of people like Mr. Kuntzman. In time-honored D/S/C fashion, Kuntzman drew a completely absurd comparison:
But what if a weapons manufacturer could fashion a handgun that would fire a nuclear blast — an atomic version of an AR-15, if you will. It would look like a gun, but it could kill thousands instead of dozens. Like a rifle, it’s one of many arms that we are allowed to keep and bear. But would we really stand idly by as people buy a nuclear gun in the name of the Second Amendment?
No, we wouldn’t, and under long-standing law, we do not. Besides, such an invention would be the virtual definition of planned obsolescence. One shot and you need a new one, and a new home, town, county, etc. I’d challenge Mr. Kuntzman to find a single instance of any rational, serious person lobbying for individual ownership of nuclear weapons, but it would be a waste of time. It’s obvious Mr. Kuntzman thinks his opponents resort to such ludicrous thinking, therefore, it’s fair game for him to do the same.
Yes, I’m a wimp.
Well, if you insist…
I simpered because my experience with the AR-15 bruised me, body and spirit. But there’s nothing unmanly about reminding my readers that mass murder is much easier to commit with a semi-automatic killing machine than it is with a hammer.
If that makes me a girl, well, maybe we should have a girl running the country.
What does a “bruised spirit” look like?
I suspect we might have that opportunity in the not too distant future, and she has an enemies list of reporters that don’t value her “lived experience.”
I leave you, gentle readers, with the true story of one of my all-time favorite students, a brilliant and funny girl, an ROTC cadet. She was all of five foot nothing and 100 pounds, but in a wrestling match with a much taller and heavier male cadet, pinned him, and exclaimed: “all right; it’s official: you’re a pussy!”
The boy, properly chastened, toughened up, and she graduated with honors, quickly aced a bachelor’s degree and went to medical school. Sadly, Mr. Kuntzman, who embarrassed himself by engaging in public definition of character, appears incapable of learning as much as an embarrassed teenaged boy and manning up, while seven-year old girls everywhere continue to shoot AR-15s without psychic or physical damage, enormously enjoying the experience.
That’s your media, gentle readers: the self-imagined intellectual, moral and pseudo-manly elite.