WTF is Wrong with the AP?

(courtesy ruger.com)

“Congress’ latest crack at a new assault weapons ban would exempt more than 2,200 specific firearms, including a semi-automatic rifle nearly identical to one of the guns used in the bloodiest shootout in FBI history,” the AP reports. “President Obama has called for restoring a ban on military-style assault weapons and limiting the size of ammunition magazines. Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein has introduced a bill that would ban 157 specific firearms designed for military and law enforcement use and exempt those made for hunting. One model of the Ruger Mini-14 — used in the deadly 1986 FBI shootout — is on the list of banned guns. A different model is on the list of exempted firearms. Gun experts say the two firearms are equally deadly.” Just what are they trying to say here? Whatever it is, exactly, I don’t like it. And the fact that foxnews.com republished this ditty doesn’t make me happy either. You?

avatar

About Robert Farago

Robert Farago is the Publisher of The Truth About Guns (TTAG). He started the site to explore the ethics, morality, business, politics, culture, technology, practice, strategy, dangers and fun of guns.

42 Responses to WTF is Wrong with the AP?

  1. avatarWilliam says:

    You know what they’re saying: “ban ‘em all; let God (Obama? DiFi? Sarah Brady?) sort ‘em out.”

  2. avatarLucas D. says:

    What I get out of it is what the AP is hoping your average low-information dickweed gets out of it: they are saying all guns are equally dangerous, so they should all be banned. They finally get around to consulting people who actually know what they’re talking about, but these “experts” are still vehemently anti-gun and therefore don’t know what the hell they’re talking about.

  3. avatarOddux says:

    The Mini14 is still a good example of how useless and stupid the law would be in its stated purpose. Biden’s admission helps too.

    Once people admit that, it’s much easier to show them what the actual purpose is. Incremental disarmament.

    • avatarEagleScout87 says:

      yes, but many people on that side of the argument would be perfectly fine with full ban/confiscation.

      • avatarDonny77 says:

        But for a full ban they have to deal with the 2nd Amendment and they know it. Partial bans they can “argue” leave the 2nd Amendment intact.

        Of course, they also need to deal with Heller/McDonald. How is the Mini-14 Tactical “unusual and exceptionally dangerous” while the Mini-14 Ranch Rifle is not?

  4. avatarGyufygy says:

    Herp derp SCARY!!!1!1!11!!!111one!!1

  5. avatarNine says:

    Not my Mini…

  6. avatarChuck J says:

    My first thought is that the antis and the media are dealing a little bit of payback to Ruger for taking a stand and making it so easy to contact ones representatives.

  7. avatarMatt in FL says:

    This doesn’t take a rocket surgeon to figure out.

    The Ruger Mini-14 is one of the go-to examples that we use to say “this would be an assault weapon under their legislation, and it’s functionally identical (or only different cosmetically) from this one, which their law specifically exempts.” We use it to show the ludicrousness of the AWB.

    By reversing the example “this average-looking rifle is almost the same as this scary-looking black one” while throwing in the “deadly 1986 FBI shootout,” it’s clear that their aim is to increase support for gun regulation. They would call it “just giving all the facts.” I would call it fearmongering.

    • avatarrossi says:

      That is an accurate and succinct explanation of the underlying goals. I couldn’t have said it any better myself.

    • avatarJesse says:

      Exactly. Would you prefer that there be an assault weapon ban as long as you can hang on to the Mini 14? It clearly shows the divide and conquer intent of the bill by garnering favor with hunters against anyone else that bears arms. If you don’t think they are out there, then you haven’t talked to enough hunters who are happy to keep there’s to throw everyone else under the bus. This includes magazines with a capacity above 10 rounds.

      TTAG published the fact that Breivik utilized a Mini 14 during the massacre in Norway. It happened to be the exact firearm that would be legal if the latest ban went through in its current state. However, it would ban the more “tactical” version. This just proves the uselessness of their reasoning.

    • avatarEagleScout87 says:

      Exactly, the Mini-14 has always been a double edged sword in that regard. I’m actually shocked it took them this long to swing the damn thing the other direction.

  8. avatarDrVino says:

    “Just what are they trying to say here? ”

    They are coming to an inevitable realization.
    Remember how we all argued that banning firearms on the basis of cosmetics makes no sense and then used the Mini14 as an example?

    What was that about chickens coming home?…..

    This is kind of like the scenario where an assailant takes a victim’s weapons and uses it against them….

  9. avatarThompson says:

    I agree that people should have kept that quiet… and yet here we are re-republishing it…?

  10. avatarJohnny says:

    They’ve been jumping up and down about the Mini 14 in Canada ever since Marc Lepine shot all those girls. “We won’t go after hunting rifles!” but the Mini 14 is a hunting rifle…

    • avatarJavier says:

      All rifles are hunting rifles, if that is what WE use them for. So the point would be that they(you know who they are now don’t you?) are actually going after all rifles and your rights.

  11. avatarRB says:

    the “gun experts” should not be telling them the difference anyway, I feel a mini 14 is legal in all respects,its not a “military arm”or “assualt weapon”if they tell the grabbers the difference they will take them ALL away!

  12. avataranon says:

    what you thought that conservative were on our side? please they only support gun rights under pressure. Look at Romney in mass he supposed to be a conservative yet supported the AWB for Massachusetts. The ruling elites would sell us out in a instant if they could still hold on to the levers of power doing it.

    • avatarAnon in CT says:

      Most conservatives are on he side of 2A. Fox News is owned by Rupert Murdoch, an explicit and admitted Aussie gun-o-phobe. Bill O’Reilly is also proudly anti-gun. He’s also not particularly conservative on a bunch of othe issues – he’s more of a faux angry Irish cab driver.

  13. avatarB says:

    Wait, they can’t use that argument against us! That argument shows how stupid it is to ban the gun, not how stupid it is not to ban it! Thats using it to say they need to ban all of them. God, this whole trying to set some safe cutoff on things that are designed to kill is just stupid. Are they going to require guns beep when they have a round chambered? Special mandated soft bullets made from stuff like depleted uranium to reduce deadliness (I know…)? It hurts my sensibilities so much.

  14. avatarTRUTHY says:

    The CONservative Faux News (..cough…NOT news..propaganda..cough) is anti-gun, because of their beloved Murdoch being anti-gun. It’s not a news channel, it’s the Murdoch agenda channel.

    • avatarLucas D. says:

      Yeah, but thank God we can count on MSNBC, CNN and the mainstream press to defend our Second Amendment right to… *snort*… BWAHAHAHAAAA!! Oh man, I couldn’t even TYPE that crap with a straight face!

      But seriously, none of the news networks are on our side; never have been, never will be. It’s all just varying degrees of antagonism against us gun owners.

  15. avatarDaniel Silverman says:

    They are reaching deep to try and do something logic be damned.

  16. avatarDave S says:

    The Mini 14 was marketed to military and Law Enforcement from day 1.
    That, along with the “A” indiscriminately spraying rounds thru em for decades,
    has ensured that the Mini 14 in all of its furniture is going to be on the to be banned list right after the AR.

    This is an unreasoning assault on anyone who enjoys weapons, that is not LEO or Military.

    Make no mistake, there can be no compromise on our part

    • avatarDave S says:

      “A” Team (hate this computer)

      • avatar1911A1 says:

        Most of us above a certain age knew precisely what you were talking about. 4,627,532 rounds of .223 expended over 5 seasons. Zero dead bad guys, and less than a handful wounded.

        I’d hate to see the stats for the “B” team.

  17. avatarokto says:

    If it’s the AC-556 vs the Ranch Rifle, that’s a pretty big difference.

  18. avatarRalph says:

    What’s wrong with the AP? That’s like asking what went wrong with Fast & Furious. The answer is nothing. The purpose of F&F was to arm the Sinaloas. The purpose of the AP is diseminate propaganda, which it does just as well as the rest of the MSM.

    You say it’s a news agency? Hahahahahahahaha. Oh, wait. You were serious about that?

  19. avatarNew Chris says:

    “Just what are they trying to say here?”

    Firstly, and we really shouldn’t be surprised by this, they don’t actually care about public safety or crime prevention.

    Secondly, and much more insidious is this. They don’t care about basing laws on rational premises. They are eager about making irrational rules, and then using force to impose their irrationality on everyone except themselves.

    They wish to, perhaps unconsciously perhaps not, create a system where reason and logic are not sufficient counter arguments to their whims and dictates.

    This is about much more than gun rights.

    Theses people must be stopped.

  20. avatarGov. William J. Le Petomane says:

    Sure the standard model fires the same cartridge as the one with the pistol grip, but if you’re shot with the one with the pistol grip you’ll be even deader!

  21. avatarThe Stig says:

    You know, there aren’t really all that many centerfire rifles that aren’t deadly. I think it’s kind of the point to make a firearm deadly. You only shoot things you intend to kill. Otherwise you probably shouldn’t be shooting it.

  22. avatarg says:

    A factory folder Ruger Mini-14 is still on my wishlist of rifles to own someday, if for no other reason than it gives me happy, nostalgic memories of watching A-Team episodes with my Dad.

  23. avatarLance says:

    Its shows DiFI’s AWB is DOA has no votes from us we want our rights the antis in this piece doesn’t like it it doesnt ban all of them. Shows hoe dumb AWBs are.

  24. avatarHighvoltage says:

    The article states that the pistol grip allows for easier shooting….to me it would seem that the standard rifle stock would be more ergonomic for “indiscriminate” hip shooting.

    The agent that survived the shoot out states that they are basically identical, and equally “dangerous”. Those on our side would use this to further our argument that the proposed ban and it’s “generous” exemptions is ridiculous. The antis will see it as not restricting enough.

    We that are informed on the function of these firearms all know that all the Mini series function the same as an evil AR (semi-auto, .223 chambering), and repeatedly pointing that out to each other will do nothing to inform and sway opinions of those that are naive, or otherwise on the fence about gun issues. I’ve been talking to coworkers over the past two months(most of them are hunters). Now I get calls during the day from guys wanting to tell me about the letter they sent, or voicemail they left for their reps. We need to bring the folks that would otherwise remain silent into our cause, as eventually it will affect all gun owners. It’s pretty cool that after explaining the facts, and how easy it is to contact their reps, they are willing to have their voices heard. I have to think at some level, everyone’s voice can help, but not until people speak up..

  25. avatarMike says:

    AP has it’s fingers in a lot of leftist cookie jars…AP supports the Virginia Press Association, a lobby group which stood against Virginia’s concealed carry permit privacy bill last week.

    http://www.vpa.net/index.php/news/article/stanley_op-ed_in_daily_press_gun_permits_iare_i_the_publics_business1/

  26. avatarRandy Drescher says:

    Whos going to come out with a hunting AR. On the side it will say, stay with me now,wait for it, Hunters Special. It can’t be black because of bigotry. It will have a 30 round standard mag so those with arthritic fingers(disabled waiting for a gov mint check) can load the mag all at once. Sure it might look like a standard AR, this will have the mentioned “sign” on it though, Randy

  27. avatarJAS says:

    It’s simple, what they are saying is that regular citizens SHALL NOT POSSESS ANY WEAPON THAT IS ON AN EQUAL FOOTING WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT OR THE MILITARY. That is, for law abiding citizens. I will let you draw your own conclusions. Mine, it is all about absolute control of the citizenry.

  28. avatarensitu says:

    The ultimate goal of all “Gun Control” (vs Crim Control) is total disarmament.
    America is the only, almost free nation, left on the planet.
    Let that sink in for a moment.
    Once Americans become disarmed serfs the planet falls into a Dark Age and there is no New World left to escape the evil of the Old World to.

  29. avatarEd says:

    The MR1 (to be banned) vs. the R1 (exempt) is another good example.

  30. avatarTim says:

    Glad I kept the wood stock for my mini. I put an ATI tactical, which required a “bullet button” in CA. I’ve sent the same question to Leland Yee the CA state gun grabbing senator.

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.