MSNBC has never been known as a bastion of logic-based argument and debate when it comes to gun control. In fact, they’re usually the ones who spout the most inaccuracies and false analogies when it comes to firearms in order to get their pro-gun control agenda out there. I found one such video over on Reddit, and figured it would be entertaining to tear down Ari Melber’s anti-gun rant point by point. Join me, won’t you? . . .
Ari opens his rant by pointing out that the remaining Boston bomber is charged with using explosives, and that it’s therefore logical that those devices should be regulated. According to Ari . . .
“That’s because there’s basically no legitimate private way to use a bomb. You can’t protect your home with an explosive unless you’re willing to blow up the whole house.”
I’m going to have to stop you right there, Ari. Obviously you’ve never tried to remove a hundred year old tree stump from your field to allow you to plow it, or heard of this cool thing called “explosion welding” that’s really useful in manufacturing. There are, indeed, legitimate uses for explosives in private hands. Ari’s just ignoring them to make his point, and depending on what that point is, I’m willing to give him a little latitude. What, exactly, is that point again?
“That’s why Congress has criminalized explosives. In 1994 it even bulked up the penalties for violent crimes committed with explosives. […] The justice system weighs the danger and motive associated with a given weapon. Explosives are illegal because they’re weapons for attack, not defense. They are designed and operated to assault, not defend. In plain English, they’re ‘assault weapons’. So I’m going to take a leap here and discuss how we should regulate similar weapons.”
Wait, did he just equate bombs with firearms? Trying to hijack the raw emotions that are flowing after the Boston bombings and directing them towards gun control instead, are we? OK, let’s take a walk down that road. What’s your main argument, Ari?
“Each of the characteristics I just discussed apply to the military style weapons that most democracies ban, like machine guns, m320 grenade launchers, and yes, AR-15s.”
See, now I really need to stop you. Let me debunk that claim right now. You say that an AR-15 is a weapon for “attack, not defense.” And yet just about every day, we see headlines like these:
- (4/22/2013) Philly Man with AR- 15 Defends Home from Invader
- (6/29/2010) 15 Year Old Defends Self, Sister with AR-15
- (1/23/2013) RIT Students Defend Apartment with AR-15
I could keep going. I really could, but there goes Ari’s statement that AR-15s are only ever used to attack, and I haven’t even left the first page of Google results. The truth is that an AR-15 works wonderfully as a self defense firearm, and there are literally hundreds of examples of their being used to save lives every year. Just ask the thousands of police officers who carry an AR-15 in the trunks of their patrol cars. And the millions of Americans who have them by their night tables in case something goes bump in the night.
Just because you haven’t taken the time to actually research your opinions doesn’t make them right, Ari.
As for machine guns and M320 grenade launchers, I’d like to remind you that those items are already regulated by the BATFE. Heavily. And since 1994, there has not been one single use of a legally owned machine gun or grenade launcher in the commission of a crime. So in reality, all Ari is trying to do is scare his listeners into believing that these “dangerous and scary” weapons are out there on the streets and in criminals’ hands. Not to mention associating them with the common, legal and widely-used AR-15, despite the facts. Pretty underhanded there, Ari.
“These weapons, like bombs, don’t belong on the streets because there are no legitimate uses for them.”
…unless they’re in the hands of the police, eh Ari?
“And just like with explosives, they sacrifice precision for maximum impact.”
So you believe that the AR-15 platform is inaccurate? Is that why the U.S. military uses them (in the form of the M110 SASS) for their scout sniper teams…because they sacrifice precision for maximum impact? Or why police officers carry them, because police don’t care about firing stray rounds into crowds?
What we have here is another example of a typical gun control advocate not taking a couple of seconds to think about their position before they open their yaps. Police officers carry AR-15 rifles because they are accurate and reliable. In fact, the AR-15 platform is the cheapest and most accurate semi-automatic firearm you can buy.
What makes his statement even more nonsensical is that he claims the AR-15 sacrifices “precision for maximum impact,” when anyone who has studied the ballistics and history of the rifle knows that the exact opposite is true. The smaller projectile of the AR-15 was specifically designed to give better accuracy at long distances. That was a fundamental design requirement of the military who was still in love with the idea of the “American Rifleman” being able to shoot long distance targets on battlefields. That smaller projectile has actually been criticized lately by our troops for actually being too underpowered for today’s battlefield.
In short, our own troops think that the AR-15 is underpowered, not a “high powered killing machine.” Those would be the people with the most experience in this particular area, Ari. Just thought I’d point that out.
But Ari’s unencumbered by the facts. Ari cares about emotion. He’s trying to confuse his audience into thinking that the AR-15 is an evil firearm by its very nature, and that if we ban them all, the ills of the world will go away. But I’m not buying it.
He finishes off with that favorite old chestnut:
“You don’t need an AR-15 to hunt, and no responsible gun owner wants an AR-15 to repel intruders from their apartment.”
I have some bad news for you there. I hunt with an AR-15. And I know thousands of other Americans that use their ARs for hunting. Remington even sells an entire line of AR-15 rifles (they call them the R-15) that are specifically intended for hunting. The truth, Ari, is that the AR-15 is quite possibly the greatest hunting rifle since the Remington Model 700 came on the scene. And especially in Texas, where we have something of a hog problem, an AR-15 is pretty much required if you actually want to keep the little porkers under control.
As for stating what a “responsible gun owner” would or wouldn’t want, I don’t think you’re really in a position to make that judgement. Especially since the AR-15 has become the most popular rifle on the market in the United States. I’d say that those millions of responsible gun owners disagree with your analysis there, bub.
“But as we all know, AR-15s provide a fast killing machine for murderers. They were used to mow down the kids in Newtown. And to murder people at that movie theater in Aurora, Colorado. Now, we’re going to hear a lot about security after Boston. And when we talk about public safety, to me, bombs and assault weapons are pretty much the same.”
They might be pretty much the same in your mind, but reality says otherwise. You can be as scared as you want of the creepy-looking evil black rifle, but those nagging little things called “facts” don’t agree with you.
Ari sees the AR-15 only in terms of mass murders. I’m sure if he only saw cars in terms of traffic accidents, he’d want to treat them the same way. But by willfully ignoring the benefits of the AR, and not doing any research into how the gun actually works, he shows exactly how
much little he really know about this subject.
“So don’t let the NRA or their friends in DC tell you any differently.”
In other words, believe only the propaganda and lies we feed you. Don’t try to check any facts for yourself. Because we’re on the TV, therefore we’re telling you the truth.
Ari Melber lied on MSNBC. He used the standard civilian disarmer talking points without bothering to do any fact checking, and spouted off the standard lies about the AR-15 that are designed to elicit an emotional response. Trying to actually present a logical argument for banning these firearms was just too burdensome. Yeah, that doesn’t fly with me.