Watch: Anti-Gun Liberals Devolve Into A Cacophony Of Nonsense As They Can't Explain What An Assault Rifle Is

|
|
Posted: Mar 25, 2018 3:00 PM
Watch: Anti-Gun Liberals Devolve Into A Cacophony Of Nonsense As They Can't Explain What An Assault Rifle Is

Oh, this is just too good—and it shows why we can’t sit down and talk with these people. Turning Points USA’s Charlie Kirk suited up and went into the belly of the beast to ask those participating in the March to Take Away Our Rights, I mean, the March To Save Our Lives, by asking anti-gunners what an assault rifle is, which devolved into a shouting match since they couldn’t define it. One woman asked if Kirk was stupid or failed to read the papers, which is hilarious since the news media, at least in Florida, has written about how the government abjectly failed to enforce the laws that could have prevented the Marjory Stoneman Douglas shooting on February 14. It’s not a question about lax gun laws, but back to this amazing video. 

She replies it’s a military grade weapon, which is not an answer. Kirk aptly noted that the military also uses handguns, like the Beretta 92 FS 9mm, so does that deserved to be classified as military grade? The woman flies into a rage, asking Kirk if his ears are working since she’s not talking about pistols, but AK-47s. 

Some guy shouts they’re taking about “f**king muskets,” which actually is true. Muskets were considered “military-grade” at the time, though it still doesn’t offer a valid argument for left-wingers who want to shred the Second Amendment:

Anti-gunners often claim that “modern/rapid-fire” arms are not protected. This argument assumes that muskets were the only type of arms in existence when the Second Amendment was written, and therefore our founding fathers never intended our protections to extend to modern firearms.

First, repeating rifles were in existence for more than 100 years before our Bill of Rights were included in our Constitution. Second, muskets were military-grade firearms. Our founding fathers wanted to protect our ability to overthrow a tyrannical government, which would include the capability to match whatever arms an opposing military possessed.

Third, if this argument were valid, then smartphones and social-media would not be protected as forms of speech under the First Amendment, because these “modern/rapid-fire” forms of communication were not around back then.

Kirk asks the question again, and no one can answer. The woman leaves, while another man replies it’s an AR-15, though he doesn’t know what “AR” stands for; it does not, as some progressives think, stand for “assault rifle.” 


When Kirk asks what does “AR” stand for (it’s ArmaLite, by the way), the man shouts, “I don’t give a s**t what it stands for…it’s a deadly weapon.” Kirk then is able to get the man to say that pistols and knives should be banned.

“We should get rid of you, and Trump, and every one of you clowns,” he added. Someone then holds up a sign that says, “Trump is an unstable penis.”

Nice work, Mr. Kirk. It just shows you that if you give them enough rope, some the Left will hang themselves. That cannot be always our lifeline. 

My only criticism is that assault rifle is an actual term. The first one was arguably the Sturmgewehr 44 (“storm rifle”) used by the Germany in World War II. The main function that differentiates these firearms with their civilian counterparts is that the former has a select-fire function. Civilian models are solely semi-automatic or self-reloading (i.e. one round per trigger pull). Most handguns have the same function. 

The M14 and a M1A Springfield rifles are a prime example to show the difference. Both look similar and fire .308 Winchester, but the M14 has a select fire function. In all, if it’s an automatic rifle, you could call it an assault rifle. The term “assault weapon” is the one used the anti-gun Left that holds no meaning, but both terms are being used interchangeably by gun control advocates to make the case for more stricter gun laws. As you can see, they would certainly agree the the two phrases are one in the same.

Yet, Kirk capture the essence which is that the term assault weapon is a made up phrase used by gun control advocates to ban firearms, that anti-gunners don’t know anything about guns, and that their aim is to ban all guns in America. Also, I’m pretty sure he could define what an assault rifle is if these folks piped down for a bit.