Justin Sullivan / Getty Images
Speaking at a campaign rally for Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden, former Secretary of State John Kerry flubbed his way through some anti-gun sentiment.
“I’m a hunter,” Kerry said Saturday in North Liberty, Iowa. “I’m a gun owner. Been that all my life.
“But I got news for you: There’s not a veteran here who would take an AR-16 with a long clip to go out and shoot a deer or shoot anything. There has no business — Joe led the fight to get those things off the street.”
The 2004 Democratic presidential nominee was most probably referring to the commonly owned AR-15 modern sporting rifle, which is loaded by magazines, not clips.
Kerry’s statement that no veteran would utilize an AR semi-automatic rifle for deer hunting is questionable.
According to Field & Stream magazine, semi-automatic rifles were part of a “whitetail revolution” in deer hunting when Larry Benoit, one of the most celebrated trophy buck hunters, appeared with one on the cover of Sports Afield in 1970.
Since then, the AR platform has grown in popularity among hunters — many of whom are military veterans — and today is regularly considered one of the top rifle picks for buck hunting by leading sportsman magazines.
Kerry’s remarks were yet another reminder that many who hold anti-gun views often speak ignorantly on the topic of firearms and their ownership.
The myriad examples of gun-control politicians and activists conflating firearm terms, misrepresenting ownership policies and even lying about laws on the books have become an unfortunate and long-running joke.
Are the flubs often made by gun-control advocates a sign of true ignorance?
0% (0 Votes)
0% (0 Votes)
There is no other hot-button issue in America in which one side routinely misrepresents, fabricates and flummoxes its way through arguments.
As Becket Adams pointed out in an Op-Ed in the Washington Examiner:
“No one would cheer if a pundit said it’s easier to get a late-term abortion than Sudafed. His audience would ask to see his homework. No one would shrug it off if a legislator incorrectly referred to a ‘trimester’ as a ‘semester.’ No one would ignore it if a pro-life senatorial candidate explained his position on abortions in cases of rape and incest with a response that included something about the human body rejecting ‘legitimate rape.’”
Are these ongoing mistakes by gun-control advocates a sign of true ignorance or something more — a philosophy by design intended to marginalize the subject?
Speaking articulately upon the matter of guns and gun ownership provides a semblance of respect toward these issues and the people who care about them.
But the continual mistakes made by gun-control advocates indicate that the subject is pointless and not worth getting right, which also, unfortunately, marginalizes anyone who might care.
Ultimately, by obfuscating these issues, confusion ensues, and voters can wind up supporting policies they may not fully understand.
This could lead to Second Amendment rights being curtailed or perhaps one day revoked.
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.