David Kenik (a.k.a., the rabbi) created this video for the edification of Rhode Island legislators looking to ban “assault rifles” in the Ocean State. While I’m not optimistic that the politicians in question will grasp any of the concepts therein, it must be said—and demonstrated—that RI’s AWB makes no sense whatsoever. And now it has been. What happens next? Senate testimony on Thursday with dispatches from same. Watch this space.

Recommended For You

49 Responses to “Assault Rifles” Debunked

  1. Obviously Mr Kenik knows that the legislators don’t care about safety or function of the guns. They just don’t want us having guns. Still, a good video/olive branch petition. Hopefully you’ll get to Texas before the effective date of the ban(s).

  2. Great effort Rabbi. But the pols already know this and don’t care. They’ve got their agenda in the works and the public hearings are just so they can claim they listened to public imput. It’s a dog and pony show.

    • Politicians don’t care about definitions. They are the same types who call a rinky-dinky IED a “Weapon of Mass Destruction.

  3. Great video unfortunately I doubt they will listen to it. They have an agenda and they will not let anything get in the way of it, especially facts.

  4. It may not sway the dedicated gun-grabber, but such an excellent presentation would help with any open-minded fence sitters. Is there a way to get on RI airwaves?

    • Local cable access? It often has a larger audience than you think, and getting something on the air usually only requires being a member. And you don’t have to worry about the MSM spin.

  5. The right has made up its mind and the left has made up its mind. There are aways a few that are undecided or can be swayed. Those are my target (pun intended.)

    • Nicely done, at that. Short, sweet, and very clear. I’d have to agree, I think you would see much better results if you could get this on a local news segment or something. There are a lot of people who just plain don’t understand, sadly most politicians don’t want to understand.

  6. So, for the three responders so far, are we just to accept what they legislate or do we stand and fight? Bravo Rabbi, you have done us all an honor in this video, and shows the stupidity and misinformation in their (the politicians) actions!

    • Fight and make their ears bleed and let them know you will be there on election day as well to show them the door.

  7. About as succinct an explanation as I have seen. Well done Rabbi. Thank you.
    The only thing I would like to have seen is a comparison of a “legal” Garand Rifle and its .30-06 cartridge, and an “illegal” AR and its .223 round.

    You are always welcome in TN if you tire of living behind enemy lines. 🙂

    • Thanks.. I AM looking to move in a few years after my son is out of school, but I don’t know where yet. Can’t stand this moronic state. Always open to invitations 🙂

      • Come to Washington. Lots of variety in terms of where and how you can live and the gun laws are actually very good. We could use as many new gun friendly voters as possible to help keep it that way.

        Which is something I’ve been meaning to bring up. When people raise the question of where to move if one can’t stand living in one of the “lost cause” states, I propose we direct them to the “swing” states. These are the states where gun laws are good, contrary to what one might expect, because they’re generally Democratically controlled or influenced. Washington is one, Oregon is another, Maine is one as well. If we continually increase the number of pro-Second Amendment voters in these states, they will become safe from attack and we can focus more of our efforts on the truly hard cases, those previously thought of as “lost causes”.

        • In New Mexico, we have about 333 days of sunshine every year. Even our libs, or most of them, like guns.

          So how come Janet Napolitano can buy 7,000 full autos, and she gets to call them “personal defense weapons” but if I buy one semi auto, it’s an “assault weapon.”

    • We don’t want to give the morons any ideas. If we explain that a non-banned rifle is much more powerful than what they proposed to ban, they will simply add the more powerful rifle to the ban.

      • I see the logic, but a counter argument could be made. 1) If they keep adding firearms to the list, it will become obvious to fence-sitters that this is an all-out ban, and 2) it will get the fence-sitters (i.e., hunters) off the fence when they realize that even they are not immune.

  8. The purpose here is to get people used again to a ban on something. That’s the goal of those who actually know what they’re talking about on the gun control freak side. The rest of those people just want a law that will make them feel good.

    Can we just have an open bar in the legislature instead?

  9. Way to go rabbi, good info-quick and clear. You have demonstrated that there is absolutely NO difference in the operation regardless of mounting. The people who will be seeing this who have the power to do something about it could care less though. These officials must appease the masses who clamor for relief of the fears imposed on them by cinema and the talking heads. At the end of the day it is not about facts, but about perception.

    • I do hope however, that you can persuade them to change their own perception, and carry through to the masses……Good Luck Rabbi. .ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

  10. I am afraid of what the take-away may be. “Holy shit?! They are ALL that dangerous?! In that case, we don’t need an assault weapons ban. We MUST repeal the 2nd amendment, NOW!!!”

    In a sick sort of way, I would kind of like to see them try. Then they would KNOW they have just kicked a hornets nest that was A LOT more than what they saw on the surface. They certainly won’t know what to think when the police and military turn on them(well, the people in the service most likely will…never know about the piggies).

    • Kicking a hornets’ nest? You’re certainly waxing charitable.

      I’m thinking that an attempt to repeal 2A would go about as well as skinny dipping with piraña.

      • I don’t want to use things that may scare the liberals. They are already scared enough. The more fear we put into them, the harder they will push.

        Yeah. I will just say that was why I said it that way. That’s a decent BS excuse, right?

      • I think you’re right. If the Dems had refrained from their antigun jihad over the years, gun ownership would probably be half of what it is today.

  11. It’s a relatively small point but at about 2:25 David says, “every AR-15 made today has a threaded barrel”. That’s simply not true. There are many so-called state compliant AR’s sold without flash suppressors, threaded barrels or bayonet mounts. Other than that, David made a fine short film.

    • True. I have a MA-compliant AR with no threads, compensator or hider. The damn barrel looks disturbingly nekkid without a muzzle device of some kind.

  12. Great presentation by Kenik – clear and concise. I think the libs are aware of all the facts presented in the video, but are not concerned with actual function of the gun. It is the appearance and style of the rifle that they want to ban, as they believe the ownership of such a rifle, inspires, promotes and causes military-like behavior in a civilian setting, a predisposition to act on feelings of being “like the military” in a war setting and probably dangerous behavior in general. They (the leftys) probably liken this to a person buying a sports car, and then the person drives recklessly, at great speed, and as a result, endangers the public.

    • It is the appearance and style of the rifle that they want to ban, as they believe the ownership of such a rifle, inspires, promotes and causes military-like behavior in a civilian setting, a predisposition to act on feelings of being “like the military” in a war setting and probably dangerous behavior in general.

      If you look at the mass shootings and attempted mass shootings in 2012 where an AR-15 was used, something jumps out: they all acquired it less than three months prior to the shooting. These were not instance of a gun owner snapping and going on a rampage with weapons he already owned – these were cases of non-gun owners snapping and acquiring guns as part of their plans for mass murder. So it’s hard to claim the ownership of the “military-style” rifle influenced them to kill.

      On the contrary, I would propose that media hype surrounding the AR-15 and its role in mass shootings (even before it had much of one) has made this platform the go-to weapon for non gun-owners planning a rampage.

      • No, it’s the evil vibes emanating from the things. They do their Devil’s Work very quickly, turning innocents into terrorists in less than one moon.

        Don’t you read…?

  13. As another suggestion, I think you could add a demonstration of how a pistol grip actually makes it more difficult, ergonomically speaking, to “shoot from the hip” since that seems to be the only (completely unfounded) complaint about them.

    Great job all around, though!

  14. Great video Rabbi!

    I think you should send this to the NRA. It would be a very effective commercial.

    I think it’s a great educational video for the uninformed masses that believe everything the government and media says. My bet is that many legislators voting on these gun control bills don’t even know the facts that were presented in this video.

  15. This is a great video unfortunately Liberal Democrats do not use logic and that’s what this video is about.

    • wow original post was deleted… ralph, if you search on face book for “Minnesota Gun Owners Civil Rights Alliance” Change the post from Highlights to Posts by page. On April 3rd there is a post with a video that starts with the sentence “Hausman delegated the job of introducing her bill to a paid anti-rights lobbyist, then left for the the rest of the hearing.” At the 4 minute mark there is a comparison of two Ruger 10-22s. One tricked out like an assault rifle and one standard with the wood stock. Sorry that was long and drawn out, but I didnt want to link a vid in the comments. It fell on deaf ears, because all of the democrats left when the opposition testimony started. Imagine the out rage if the republicans introduced a bill and then all left when opposition testimony started. Oh well, what a weird world we live in.

  16. So clear, so concise and so accurate. I sure hope the elected officials in RI will listen and give it some thoughtful consideration.

  17. Great job Rabbi. I just showed the video to one of my friends who doesn’t understand why we need these evil military style assault rifles. You did an awesome job breaking down the different aspects of the rifle, and my buddy is finally starting to see the light. I also think you should send this to the NRA and hopefully they could use it around the country. Keep up the great work.

  18. If you can explain to the General Assembly that banning ARs would violate an obscure union rule, the bill will die a rapid death.

  19. The problem with the argument that “Assault Weapons” are no different than other firearms is that a) it’s true; b) they ultimately already know it’s true; and c) we’re making their argument that they should just go ahead and ban the rest, too…because that’s how their minds don’t work.

  20. Well done, Rabbi. As has been said, it will have no effect on the dedicated gun-haters, but can reach the gun-ignorant who are being bamboozled for political manipulation.
    If the practice of repeating a lie often enough leads to it being accepted as the truth, then repeating the truth often enough will lead to lies being recognized as lies.

  21. The title should be “Assault Weapons” Debunked. The term “Assault Rifle” is an meaningful term that has a specific definition, while the term “Assault Weapon” is a political term and is only defined in legislation. That’s why the laws all use the term “Assault Weapon”.

    These anti’s know all of this. Even Feinshit knows this. They are doing their best to appeal to the masses using emotion. They know what tactic to use. They play ignorant to these facts in order to help their cause of taking guns away from peaceful people.

  22. Excellent video, short, sweet, and educational for those that don’t understand firearms. Unfortunately, the disarmament crowd doesn’t care. There is no logic that can sway them. They just want our guns – period.

  23. Assault Weopons are only used in a very small percentage ( about one fifth of one percent ) of homicides ,….on the other hand handguns were used for 72.5 of all homicides committed using a firearm……..congress has to be aware of these statistics ( I made sure of it by sending them to congress more than once ) I believe what they fear is the whole reason the second ammendment exists ……..

    “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

    This was written because of britain , and to keep the people from being ruled over by the government again ,..the whole reason why this country was formed ,….to escape a invasive government that thinks that they rule the people,…..it is supposed to be the people ruling the government in america,….
    What has gone wrong? ….I can’t actually believe that its the people who want these ridiculous useless waste of money senseless laws ,……( maybe some people who are too stupid to think for thereselves and believe every lie that a politician tells them ) but it only takes a small amount of common sense to see just how idiotic this all is,……there is a whole other hidden agenda ,…..there has to be ,…those are some sneaky little bastards ( politicians )

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *