Thank you to the brave men and women who fielded this “hunting rifle” and saved the free world.

Full disclosure: this is a meme, not a real Everytown / Moms Demand Action ad. It was created to make fun of how ignorant they are on the topic for which they exist.

 

37 COMMENTS

    • I honestly doubt many of that bunch even have a clue what a Garand is. It’ll look like a “regular rifle” to them, and I bet this fake meme photo could actually get suggested to them as a real ad if it were floated in front of them with no other context or information to go with it.

  1. Got two.

    One I bought from the CMP, the second one I built in the CMP Advanced Maintenance Class in Anniston, AL and test fired it at the CMP range in Talladega. First 8 shots in a 4-in. group at 100 yards (probably would be better if I was a better shot).

    Great rifle and the range at Talladega is spectacular.

  2. Got mine back in ’88 through the CMP program. My old man very rarely spoke of his time in WWII, but seeing that Garand brought a look in his eyes I had never seen before. You could see the memories alive in his eyes. He held it as if a old friend had returned from a long lost place. After a few minutes of silence he handed it back to me saying nothing more than nice rifle son take care of it and it will take care of you. He passed 2years later never again speaking of his time over there. Yes they were the Greatest Generation…

    • I had the same experience with my Dad. He loved my M1, told me stories about it. But his eyes really lit up when I showed him my M1 Carbine. He carried one all through the Pacific. Gave me tips on cleaning and care. He passed in 2019 at the age of 96. Gone but never forgotten

  3. The only hunting rifles protected by the Second Amendment are those used for hunting humans. The word “Arms” denotes military weaponry. Fowling pieces and deer rifles are not military weapons, and are NOT protected by the Second Amendment, except for a few odds and ends that were adopted by the military over the years.

    • Wrong. They’re all protected. Anything you can arm yourself with falls into the category of “arms.” No matter how antiquated it is or whatever its designed use may have been, if you can pick it up and shoot at an enemy with it, it’s covered.

      • Adding to that it does not specify “fire” arms.
        Therefore rocks, clubs, hammers, knives, bombs, paperclips, airplaines, tanks, missles, bowling balls, etc…. are protected. YOU are protected anytime you “ARM” yourself.
        Read it the way it was intended.

        YOU have a GOD given right to defend your life against those trying to take it by any means you need.

        • True but the left would take your argument to mean as long as bowling balls are available they can take guns.

        • The article for letters of marque still is present in the constitution. A letter of marque means the government has authorized you to prey on ships of piracy and enemy vessels wherever found. In order to exercise your letter of marque you would need modern armament starting with quad 50s and going on up to 5-inch deck guns, possibly 40 mm automatic twin Bofers guns, and certainly in the case of armed vessels of foreign countries at least ship to ship missiles.

          As for personal weapons, the ruling in the case that forbad short barrel shotguns said they were not weapons of warfare. Well, times change. They certainly are used as breaching weapons by the military almost every time they breach a door without using C-4. Which, by the way, being a weapon of war, according to the Supremes, is perfectly legal for possession by the militia. That sort of leave me out as I am way over the age limit for the militia but I suppose with my former Marine Corps history I could qualify for a rear guard position as long as I didn’t have to run. My knees are strictly non-functioning in the fast mode. They are okay in the slow and steady mode as long as it is up hill or on level ground. Downhill they are in the slide on your butt mode.

      • Though I agree with you and SCOTUS has engendered tasers into the arms category, US v. Miller (1939) SCOTUS did not agree. In that 8-0 unanimous ruling, the court cited the introductory statement of the 2nd Amendment as specifically protecting arms of efficacy to the military as protected for the People. They upheld Miller’s conviction because there was no evidence presented by the absent opposing counsel that short barreled shotguns were of efficacy to the military. But one could easily argue that all firearms are of efficacy to the military or were at one point.

        But to your point, based upon existing case law, not all arms have been determined to be protected. Which means they are until they are not.

  4. The Garand is that rifle that I do not get why someone doesn’t bring it back. Inland makes M1 Carbines and Trench Guns while there’s a zillion 1911’s out there.

    Someone could make a mint bringing back the M1 Garand in .30-06 and another line in .308. Hell, they could probably charge a “historical premium” on the ’06 versions.

    • “Someone could make a mint bringing back the M1 Garand in .30-06 and another line in .308.”

      But could they really?

      What were the man-hours needed to make them back then, and how much hand-fitting did they require? I suspect there were a fvck-ton of individual machining operations needed to build them back then, and that’s gonna make them very expensive today.

      I hope someone like DG can weigh in on this…

      • I’d think they could make perfectly fine money at it considering one that’s beat to shit goes for $1800-$2500 on a pretty regular basis.

      • I agree with Mark N., below, but I don’t see why the few minor differences (gas system, internal magazine) would make it significantly more expensive to replicate than an M1A.

        I hadn’t priced one lately, but the prices Strych9 quoted amaze me. While the rate of supply has slowed, the supply has at least kept pace with the population while the population’s tastes have largely shifted in a different direction. The way the price has so far outpaced inflation would make a fascinating economic case study.

      • 3 major factors.

        First is that AR style rifles are selling a hundred thousand to one so the market isn’t huge for new Garands.

        Second, The M14 patterns exist which eats a huge market.

        Third, as found in the M14 reproduction.
        The forged receivers are extremely hard to duplicate, CNC’s have difficulty cutting the complex geometry that required hours of hand machining. This is why the M14 styles are either expensive or use cheap cast receivers that are known to fail easily.
        So with a tiny market, it is hard to justify making a $4000 rifle while at the same time so many originals still exist and sell for $800 ish.

        This is the same reason nobody does remakes of a lot of things like grease guns, M60’s, M1 carbines, etc… yes there are some aftermarket ones but generally they’re not known to be very good copies.
        Uncle Sam invested a LOT of money into tooling for these weapons and had a blank check to do it with at the time. Private industry would have to lay out a very large deposit they may never see a return on.

    • The preference these days is for a magazine fed weapon, such as the Springfield M1A, a rifle that is half way between a Garand and an M-14. They are not cheap.

      Funny thing, the ATF nominee testified that his definition of an “assault weapon” is any mag fed semiauto rifle, which would include the Springfield and the M1 Carbine but leave out the Garand.

      • I have an M1A the day I bought it I got it because it was $500 cheaper than the Garand sitting next to it.

        Garand rifles fetch a lot of money, often over $2K at gun shows around here.

    • Look up Stephen Crowders early days where he asked tons of people what was acceptable and what wasn’t. These brainwashed morons are only interested in what the media tells them they need to know.

  5. Funny meme-

    The user decides what a “hunting rifle” is, not the manufacturer or some non-user. 30 years back one of my little brothers took a couple deer on our WY deer hunt with one of my Garands, a complete IHC contract rifle. He didn’t have a Mod 94 or Marlin and quick follow-ups to use for long drives so dragged it with him and loved it. Fed the 150 gr soft points just fine. I cna’t even remember why I took it along…

    I’ve also shot perhaps a dozen deer hunting with my injun pals in MN with my M1-A, made a great drive gun with 10 round mag. Ghost ring sights are fast to acquire.

    Strangest “deer gun” I have is a 1941 Johnson, got it for a song at Cabela’s in Owatonna 20 years ago or so. It was in their “Gun Library”, someone had taken it apart and lost the 2 pins that mate the “action/barrel sections” to the magazine section. Someone (not Winfield) had also ground/buffed off the rear sight lugs and put a tiny Williams sight on the receiver just aft the barrel. The guys there couldn’t figure how to make it work so I made a ridiculous offer and walked out with it. Used 2, 1/4″ machine screws in place of pins and it was cycling fine after 20 minutes of cleaning. Need to shoot a deer or something with it sometime…

    In any event, we decide the purpose of our tools, not some jackbooted, jackassed regulating bureaucrat or ignorant, bedwetting legislator. That’s why there are so many ARs out there on the prairie dog shoots…

  6. I’m glad you clarified, because I absolutely would believe those idiots made a real advertisement like that.

  7. attention to moms demand action “RAISE YOUR KIDS RIGHT!”..demand that they are well versed in the state laws and respect for those laws and firearm handling and safety before they can graduate or quit school…then ignorance won”t be an excuse..

  8. Nowhere within the 2nd Amendment is “hunting” even mentioned or refered to. It’s not referenced in the Federalist Papers either. So I smack anyone that refers to “Hunting and the 2nd” upside the head. The people of the State, are the State’s Militia, and the people, themselves, the Militia against the State, should it act in Tyranny against its citizens.
    A State’s Tyranny against its citizens, is just as egregious as Federal Tyranny, thus the 2nd’s protection as an individual Right Shall Not Be Infringed.

  9. “saved the free world”? You do recognize that the reason the Japanese attacked us was because we cut off their oil supply, which would bring them to their knees in short order. Go read the book, Bankrupting the Enemy, and see how we provoked the war by humiliating the Japanese. A U.S. Admiral said it would cause a war, but the Army Generals and other military officials saw no harm. FDR was okay with it. Never heard of this? That’s because the victors write the history books and absolve themselves.

    • Ummm….not quite. There was a LOT more to the Japanese deciding to go to war. The primary reason was a lust for expansionism, for natural resources and to extend their empire. They had a superiority complex as wide as the world. They “KNEW” that they were superior to ALL other races, who should only exist to serve the emperor. Might want to do some additional research.

      • And don’t forget the d*ck swinging contest between the Imperial Japanese Army and Navy. The two fought each other as much as anyone else.

      • They also had beaten Russia, one of the largest WHITE foreign countries. The Russian defeat at the battle of Tsushima (if I remembered to spell it correctly) put the Russian asiatic fleet at the bottom of the straits. While Russia had handled the Japanese Army handily on the ground, the sinking of almost the entire fleet proved Russia’s undoing and they sued for peace. Good Ole’ Teddy Roosevelt who won the Nobel Prize for Peace with his “settlement” of the Russo-Japan war set the stage for the insults that Japan felt were thrown at them because of race. It was the first of a thousand blows to Japanese pride. Remember, according to their legend they had never been defeated by a foreign invader. Although the Khan brothers had tried to invade Japan (that’s the Mongol Khans, not the Jewish Cohns, a couple of times, each time the invasion failed. Once it failed because the Khan fleet got wiped out by the Divine Wind, the infamous Kamikaze, a full blown category 5 typhoon that sunk the Mongol fleet much like the Spanish fleet off the coast of Ireland.

        Michael Crognale is correct that the Japanese decision to go to war with the United States is a long and complicated scenario made more difficult by stereotypical thinking on both sides. To the Japanese utter chagrin, they learned that Yamato Damashii does not overcome smooth firing 20th century machine guns and a bayonet charge against said machine guns does not result in disciplined troops breaking and running. It results in windrows of dead and dying troops.

  10. My dad used the Springfield 1903 most of the time he was in service. And sometimes a 12ga pump shotgun.. he was an MP guarding mostly Italian and German POWs. He was so impressed that after the war he had to have one of each, which eventually came to me. I guess the M1’s were needed more importantly elsewhere.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here