In 1962, the Pentagon had a pickle on its hands: America wanted to give South Vietnam guns with which to kill its Communist brothers and sisters in North Vietnam, but we couldn’t figure out which guns. The answer became as clear 50 years ago as it is today: The AR-15 is an incredibly good tool for killing lots of other humans. The AR-15 rifle…has become one of the most widely owned weapons in the United States (the NRA boasts that it’s “America’s most popular rifle”). Not coincidentally whatsoever, the AR-15 has also become the weapon of choice for Americans who want to murder other Americans in large numbers, as was the case in the massacres at Sandy Hook Elementary School, a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, an office party in San Bernardino, and now a gay nightclub in Orlando.
There’s no credible argument to be made to refute the idea that the AR-15’s sole raison d’etre is to destroy human life. It was true during the Vietnam War, and it remains true today- the AR-15 is incredibly useful for killing large numbers of people, but it has no other purpose. It’s a weapon designed to be used to kill in close quarters, but in the right hands it can also be deadly at long range.
Though the AR-15 has limited effectiveness as a hunting rifle, it was designed for one thing and one thing only- killing human beings in large numbers. The fact that, 50+ years later, a variation of the AR-15 is still the U.S. military combat weapons of choice speaks to its efficiency and effectiveness. Despite the NRA’s attempt to deflect the truth, the AR-15 isn’t, and never was, designed for the civilian marketplace.
That’s not to say that there is or ever was any conceivable reason why a military rifle needs to be sold to or in the possession of civilians. There’s no credible reason or explanation for why a civilian should be able to stroll through Atlanta’s Hartsfield Airport (the world’s busiest) with an AR-15 slung over their shoulder. Yes, that sort of ridiculousness and irresponsibility is legal under Georgia law (another discussion best left for another time), but legal doesn’t always mean “right” or “responsible.”
If there was a disease that killed large numbers, people would be demanding a cure. AR-15s also kill large numbers of people…just without the accompanying demand for a remedy. Evidently, not all public health crises are created equally. The 2nd Amendment, cure-all that it may seem to some Proudly Closed-minded Gun Control Foes ©, doesn’t provide inoculation against being killed by an instrument of war.
