1. I saw that number quoted in an article in this weekend’s Wall St Journal, by two writers who are apparently working on a book about the AR-15.

   Nowhere did they point out the obvious, which is that this proves the AR-15 isn’t a source of crime, because if it were, whatever contribution it makes would now be 50 times what it was then, and that would be extremely obvious.

   By the way, it made a claim that I wonder about: that the term “assault weapon” was originally created as a marketing term by the people selling AR-15s, and only later adopted by the victim disarmers. Could that be true? It’s the first time I’ve ever seen that claim.

   3

   1. Marketing by gun grabbers.

      2

Comments are closed.