Cracking Popular AR-15 Myths after Vegas

*I have updated this article in a more recent post* "Debunking ALL AR-15 Myths" Click Here!

Some will say that this post came too late. But I wanted to make sure that I have all the facts before writing about the events of last week. As you probably know, there was a shooting last Sunday in Las Vegas at a country music concert. A deranged individual shot at a crowd of thousands from the window of a hotel. As of right now, 58 people were killed in the attack, with over 400 injured. The man was able to shoot hundreds of rounds very quickly because he used a device called a "bump stock" that was fitted on several of his rifles. This sparked yet another gun control debate, but more specifically, a debate whether or not these kinds of accessories, that significantly increase a firearm's rate of fire, be legal to own. I have my own opinion about bump stocks, which can be found at the bottom of this article.

That being said, since the shooting, I'm seeing A LOT of false information on social media and the news. Some of this is intentional to push an agenda, but I'm also seeing a lot of people sharing fake information about AR-15's due to their lack of knowledge on the subject. So that's why I'm writing this. In a world where people get their political information from memes on Facebook, I will do my best to bring you the truth about AR-15's. 

Here are some of the most popular myths about the AR-15 rifle:

• AR-15's are automatic weapons: False
• Despite what the media "talking heads" are saying, an AR-15 is a semi-automatic firearm. One trigger pull = one bullet. This is the same action used on most handguns, but you don't hear about "fully-automatic pistols" after a gang shooting. AR-15 are perceived to be fully-automatic because of their military twin, the M4 carbine.

• Fully-automatic weapons are easy to obtain: False
• Fully-automatic firearms are very highly-regulated. It requires a long and tedious background check, expensive fees, a long wait time, and you must present a good reason for owning these guns. Plus, if you manage to survive this process and obtain your Class 3 weapons license, you still have to purchase the fully-automatic guns, which can cost anywhere from $10,000 to $200,000 each.

• A "bump stock" converts a semi-automatic gun into "fully-automatic": False
• A bump stock provides a way to fire a semi-automatic rifle very quickly. It still doesn't match the rate-of-fire of a fully-automatic weapon, nor does it change the internal components of an AR-15. The gun is still technically a semi-auto firearm that's firing very fast. My full opinion on bump stocks can be found at the end of this article.

• Bump-stock regulation would've prevented deaths in Las Vegas: Unknown
• This one is tricky. First off, most people didn't know the bump stock was even a thing until the shooting, so it's not likely regulation would have existed in the first place. The people that did know about bump stocks were firearm enthusiasts that saw these stocks as range toys with no real purpose other than wasting expensive ammo quickly. I stand by what I've always said about these kinds of things: Just because you regulate something, doesn't mean criminals won't obtain it.

• A suppressor would've made the shooter invisible to police/bystanders: False
• Ugh...the evil suppressor debate. Say it with me: "SUPPRESSORS DO NOT MAKE THE GUN SILENT"- despite what you hear in the media or see in Hollywood movies. Unless a shooter uses a .22 Long Rifle with sub-sonic ammunition, the weapons still makes a very loud noise even with the suppressor attached ESPECIALLY using a .223 caliber AR-15. This is a terrible argument that Democrats in Congress are making in a desperate attempt to prevent the Hearing Protection Act from passing.

• A large magazine ban would've reduced the injury count in Las Vegas: Unproven
• Probably not. Again, banning large magazines would not prevent the shooter from illegally purchasing larger ones. I've always seen the "large magazine" ban as being nothing more than a "feel good" law that never really reduces crime. Just ask Chicago.

• The Trump Admin. made it easier for mentally-ill people to get guns: False
• This is nonsense. The Trump administration rolled-back an Obama-era decision to strip gun rights from people who let someone else handle their finances. Yes, you read that correctly. If you let someone handle your finances (due to inability such as age), you lose your 2nd Amendment rights. This was a sad, last-ditch effort by Obama to remove guns from households. And it's a little offensive to consider someone who may need financial assistance due to age as "mentally-ill."
• "But he wants people on the TERROR WATCH LIST to own guns!" - again, you are mistaken. The legislation that would've prevented people who are on the terror watch list from purchasing firearms was blocked by the Republicans because there was no due process clause in the bill to remove your name if you were accidentally put on this list. Americans have the right to due process. No bill should ever pass without it. 

• Nobody uses an AR-15 for hunting: Very False
• As stated in a previous post, AR-15s are one of the most common hunting rifles in the nation. Used by millions of hunters every year for many different animals including:
• Deer 
• Wild boar
• Coyote
• Jackrabbit/Hare
• Coypu/Nutria
• Feral goats (yes these are real)
• Fox
• Raccoon
• Tyrannical governments
• and more! 
• Read more about the AR-15s hunting uses HERE.

• Gun Shows allow criminals to avoid background checks: False
• Why do people still believe this? I've already covered this in length here. In short, the "Gun Show loophole" is a myth. Most of the sellers at gun shows are certified dealers who have to run a background check on every firearm purchase. If you are selling a gun as an individual to an individual, no background check is needed, but that kind of selling is not what's happening at gun shows and it's not how gangs are acquiring their weaponry, despite what Obama said in his Town Hall speech. 

• The Founding Fathers didn't foresee guns like the AR-15: VERY, VERY False
• The Founding Father's weren't that stupid to think that technology, especially wartime technology, wouldn't change throughout the years. This is why the Freedom of Speech carries over to modern technology like your smartphone.
• Believe it or not, weapons with a high round capacity and rate of fire existed at the time the 2nd Amendment was ratified. Here are some names to Google: Giradoni rifle, Belton flintlock rifle, pepperbox revolver, the Puckle gun. ALL of these weapons had high ammo capacity and could fire in quick succession, similar a modern-day semi-auto rifle. To top it off, our Founding Fathers were fans of these guns, wanting to arm troops with them. Unfortunately, they were just too expensive.

• Nobody uses an AR-15 for home defense: False
• If you just listen to the news you know that this is false. While it may not be reported often, the AR-15 is actually a very popular home defense weapon - especially with women. The recoil is lighter than a shotgun and the gun can be maneuvered easier than other long guns. It also has better sight options that a normal handgun. Picture this: You wake up to a crashing sound downstairs. Do you know how many intruders there are? Will you be holding a flashlight with your pistol? These questions are important and an AR-15 is a perfect answer for this. Regardless, I would always recommend training before using a gun like this for home defense. Safe storage of an AR, just like any gun, is most important of all.

• The media knows what they're talking about: VERY False
• I'm very upset by what I'm seeing in the news about guns and gun control. Almost every story or article that I read about guns is filled to the brim with inaccuracies and false information. Here are just a couple examples of where the media gets it VERY wrong.
• CNN recently made an animation titled "How Does A Bump Stock Work?". First off, a bump stock wasn't even included on the gun in the animation. Also, the 3D-modeled gun in the video had a grenade launcher attached to it - which is VERY illegal. Watch the video here.
  
  
  
• NBC made a video in which a person shoots a watermelon and it explodes. As the watermelon is being shot, you can here the reporter saying, "Now lets take a look at this video where we shoot a watermelon with an AR-15." The only problem was the gun used in the video was a 12-gauge shotgun, not an AR-15.
  
  Watch the video here.
  
  
  
  
  
• It's difficult for me to tell if the media is intentionally reporting false information, but the more I listen to them, the more I think they're legitimately misinformed.

How do I feel about bump stocks?

I don't really care about bump stocks. Most people didn't even know what a bump stock was until the events in Las Vegas. I've never used one myself, and the closest I've ever come to one was the guy next to me at the range.

- He was obnoxious -

When I go to the range, I focus on accuracy, as do most shooters. So while bump stocks might be entertaining, they aren't good for accuracy, they're annoying to people around you, and many times the person that owns the bump stock brings people to the range who lack gun safety training. So if these are taken off the market, it wouldn't really bother me.

The problem is that politicians won't just move to ONLY ban bump stocks. They'll also try to remove large magazines, modified triggers, and other popular accessories for AR-15's. It's a "If you give an inch, they take a mile" kind of scenario. Nancy Pelosi even said that she "hopes" that bump stock regulation will cause a "slippery slope" and lead to more gun control bills. That's NOT how you get support for a bill.

So my opinion in a nutshell is this: It wouldn't bother me if a law is passed to end the production of bump stocks, but it would have to include ONLY bump stocks - not a ban on all rate of fire accessories (because that includes custom triggers). A ban on any other gun accessory would be too much.