delete if dupe...

http://www.sanmarcosrecord.com/sports/local_story_316115726.html

Production of the AR-15 sporting rifles a big mistake
By Jim Darnell
Daily Record Columnist

Choose your battles carefully.

That’s good advice to parents with teenagers. It’s good advice for politicians. Some issues are too emotionally charged and not worth the fight. I would give the same advice to the American gun manufacturers and the National Rifle Association.

I’m a strong Second Amendment rights person. I stand against fire arms registration and government control and confiscation of our guns. But I strongly feel that the firearm manufacturers of our country are making a big mistake in producing the AR-15 sporting rifles.

Ever since Colt introduced the first AR-15 into the hunting world more than 30 years ago they have been very popular. It’s now being produced in several heavier calibers by all major gun manufacturers and is the all-time No. 1 selling rifle.

The AR-15 looks very similar to the M16 service rifle first used in combat in Vietnam. It’s similar in looks to the military rifle used by our vets in the first Gulf War. It also has similar features to an AK-47.

Therein lies the problem. These modern sporting rifles are inflammatory in looks — they don’t look like modern hunting rifles. They are military in looks. They look like they were produced to kill men, not deer.

The AK-47 is the most widely distributed assault rifle in the world and almost always associated with wild terrorists. And most Americans can’t tell the difference in the looks of an AK-47 and a modern AR-15 hunting rifle.

Granted, the AR-15 is not an assault weapon.

Unlike the AK-47 it is not fully automatic (pull the trigger and fire the whole clip). It shoots one bullet at a time like my semi-automatic 30-06 that I hunt deer with.

Granted, the new AR-15’s are compact, light, rugged and accurate. They make excellent hunting rifles. The problem is their inflammatory looks.

The press immediately jumped on the letters AR to mean “assault rifle.” That’s not what AR means. AR abbreviates Armalite. But the anti-gun press conveniently overlooks the facts.

The firearms manufacturers defend their production of the AR-15 modern hunting rifles with an argument from history. World War I soldiers used the 1903 Springfield bolt-action rifle in combat. When they returned to America they wanted a hunting rifle in the same 30-06 cartridge with the smooth bolt action cycling that they experienced with the Springfield. Thus, the production of millions of great bolt action sporting rifles like the Model 70 Winchester, the Ruger 77, and the 700 Remington. The bolt action rifle is still the most accurate and popular rifle among the world’s big game hunters.

Then came WW II and the introduction of the first semi-automatic service rifle, the M-1 30-06, popularly known as the Garand (named after the inventor).

When these brave service men returned home a wide range of semi-automatic hunting rifles and shotguns gained widespread popularity among both hunters and target-shooting enthusiasts.

The manufacturers ask, “Shouldn’t Vietnam and Gulf War vets have a hunting rifle like their service rifles?”

I don’t think the argument is valid. After WW II, crazy terrorists weren’t running through the streets firing 1903 bolt action Springfields into the air.

No Arab terrorists were on the daily newscasts blasting people with the semi-automatic Garand after WW II.

It’s the AK-47 and its long history with revolution, riots and terrorism that’s the problem.

The average person in America says why do you need a terrorist’s assault rifle to hunt? Again, the AR-15 is not a terrorist’s weapon. It is not fully automatic. It is not an assault rifle. It just looks like one.

So why endanger our Second Amendment rights by manufacturing and defending a modern hunting rifle that has such an inflammatory design? It plays right into the hands of the anti-gun movement. They love the looks of the AR-15. It’s easy to enrage the average American against such an “assault rifle.”

Let’s get wise. We have a difficult enough task defending our right to own firearms without this foolish battle.


Jim Darnell is an ordained minister and host/producer of the syndicated television show “God’s Great Outdoors.” His column appears every Thursday in the Daily Record.

**********************************************************************************************************

Comrade Castro with a....ut oh.... sniper...er...  bolt action hunting rifle designed only to kill innocent deer from long cowardly distances



Comrade Fidel once again with a.....bolt action United States Rifle Model of 1917... the obvious choice of terrorists.



Somebody better not tell the intelligent and informed Reverend-Columnist that these are
1903 Springfields and M1 Garands in Cuba in 1959 (is that post-WW2?)



American government terrorists armed with M1 Garands and they ain't firing them into the air, are they Reverend?
Kent State 1970 killing unarmed innocent Americans.



She's probably saying: "If we all had AR15 rifles this wouldn't have happened".

39 years and I never noticed what was on her teeshirt.......... :(



American terrorist with scary and inflammatory looking Winchester assault rifle




Dutch - who shot his first Ar15 in 1968

What a douche.

Uh I think the guy is on our side.

You dont actually expect these shitheads to read ALL THAT before commenting?

Do ya?

His mom was  inflammatory looking......so I put a bag on her head.

De ja Zumbo

I think the guy is full of shit, anyone that first tries to qualify themselves (big 2nd amendment guy) is full of shit. Plus he equates gun ownership with hunting which is an angle liberals love to take.

I could never figure out the pistol grip= bad gun. It's ergonomics folks. Look at computer keyboards and Your mouse. I bet some of You don't have the old flat rectangular key boards with a plain old mouse. Even hammer handles, axe handles, scissors etc, have got more comfortable grips over the years. But guns can't  improve ergonomicly?

Impala =car, Corvette=assault car

Yup; let's give up production of what even the writer of that asinine article admits is the most popular, useful, rifle ever made and as such, qualifies as a "common usage" firearm under the SCOTUS Heller Decision.

Only because it's looks are "inflammatory".

That'll help preserve our rights.

What a dick.

Let me help you out.




The guy is a douche bag traitor. Fuck him.

So why endanger our Second Amendment rights by manufacturing and
defending a modern hunting rifle that has such an inflammatory design?
It plays right into the hands of the anti-gun movement. They love the
looks of the AR-15. It’s easy to enrage the average American against
such an “assault rifle.”





Let’s get wise. We have a difficult enough task defending our right to own firearms without this foolish battle.






All I needed to read.

He and Jim Zumbo are cut from the same cloth.

There is no cure for a weak-kneed, ignorant apologist like this.  Just marginalize him, out him for what he is, spread the word on his misguided agenda and do not support any product or organization he is aligned with.

He is taking zumbo stance and defending itpurposely with faulty arguements.

Here is his website, I will leave it cold: http://www.ggoutdoors.org/
Looks like he is sponsored by Trijicon, might want to send them an email.

SO.... who is going to set him straight?.....Telling him that the 2nd amendment isn't about hunting.
What a dumbass.

You might want to edit that comment after reading the article one more time................Oh wait.

Sorry, I choose not to be a pussy when it comes to fundamental rights.

WHEN WILL YOU GUYS REALIZE THAT THE 2nd AMENDMENT IS ABOUT PRESERVING OUR RIGHTS TO HUNT AND TARGET SHOOT??!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WAKE UP AMERICA!!!!!!!!!  WE MUST PROTECT WHITETAIL SEASON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

what a tool

If he is on your side then you are not on my side.  

This guy is no friend to gun owners.  He is another Fudd who has not realized that the 2nd ammendment has nothing to do with hunting

His article does more good for Ar15 than harm. When you get done, the only thing he has done is say that it doesnt look like a normal hunting rifle, even though it functions the same and is light, rugged, accurate. Throughout the article he refers to it as a modern sporting rifle.

From this page: http://www.ggoutdoors.org/board.html



Jim Darnell (Beth),
 God’s Great Outdoors TV Program
 


425 Bella Vista Lane, Martindale, TX  78655
 


 E-mail: [email protected]

You shouldn't judge a book by its cover.

My ARs are sad now

I think you may need to read it again.  Take this line for example:

"So why endanger our Second Amendment rights by manufacturing and defending a modern hunting rifle that has such an inflammatory design?"

Once again the second ammendment has nothing to do with hunting.  We have the right to own firearms of any configuration for any task.  Self Defense, Target shooting, competition or hunting.  The AR platform is extremely suited for all those tasks, regardless of what some fudd pussy writes in his article.

This should be good





5,4,3,2.1.......  before the Brady picks this up

I sent him and Trijicon an email. Hopefully Trijicon will drop him like a bad habit.

At least he didnt blatantly call them "terrorist rifles", even if he did imply it quite heavily.

Yeah, because appeasment is such a winning strategy. Eat a bowl of dicks, fucktard.

Wow... attacking your sponsor's biggest non-government market...

At least they only banned certain features, not the whole gun.

Here's a list of Darnell's sponsors. http://www.ggoutdoors.org/sponsors.html

Kinda thin on the firearms side but it might pay to write to Trijicon and Hodgon  as well as the archery company.

This guy needs a Zumboing if anyone ever did.

If he's so inclined; perhaps the OP can change the title of this thread into a firemission.

Damn fudd's.

So he says.  But he fails to realize that incrementalism will go after his semi hunting, 30-06 shortly after they take away our "inflammatory" guns.  Short sighted appeaser.

In the words of my people: "What a schmuck...."

The idiot is not on our side. He is the brady's best asset.

And those same Americans probably can't tell the difference in the looks of a desk chair and a giant sex toy?

I don't know what fucked-up church Jim Darnell is a minister in, but I do know that the FSM loves the AR-15.

Jesus....what a fucking jackass.

if anyone knows how i can make my ar "more inflammatory" please let me know. the more intimidating it look the less likely i will have to shoot someone with it

He is writing to the people who say "what do you need that for" when you bring an AR to the range.

What does it have going for it
1 its a suitable hunting rifle. Rugged accurate, etc.
2 its been growing in popularity the last 30 years and now comes in many calibers. Larger so no more reason to call it a mouse gun
3 its not an assault rifle
4 it is semi automatic like your traditional hunting rifle


Oh but we shouldnt defend it because it looks scary.

Darnell needs to be kicked in the nuts so hard that he pukes his nuts on to the ground.

Jim Darnell somehow managed to type: "I’m a strong Second Amendment rights person."    Well most of the time when it suits me & my pretty wooden guns but not when they have a shoulder thing that goes up.

"But I strongly feel that the firearm manufacturers of our country are making a big mistake in producing the AR-15 sporting rifles."

Feeling strongly while thinking weakly.  Clearly we are in presence of a rocket surgeon.

I bet he voted for the one, and he was paid to say that in his column.

i wonder if Mr. Darnell has his next career picked out...

Be very suspicious of anybody that uses the word 'but' after they describe themselves. Because it's usually followed by a statement that totally contradicts the previous statement and then a bullshit attempt at justifying it.

"I'm a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment....but"
"I want big government out of my life......but"
"I love freedom......but"




Fuck this guy.

What a phag.

So how is he on our side again?  He is spineless.  How many times do I have to repeat that the Second Ammendment is not about hunting?

Why is it so hard for these dumbfucks to understand that the second amendment is meant to protect military weapons and not only hunting rifles?

 

List of sponsors with links here

+1