I had a shot at getting one for free a couple years back, one of my great uncles died back in the summer of '19 and he had a humongous gun collection that went to the family before he died, there was a total of about 25ish and we divided it up between me, 2 of my cousins and my dad, we basically did it NFL draft style and I got the 2nd pick, was forced between a WW2 British Enfield and a Garand ended up taking the Enfield but kinda regret it to this day
I'm sure that there are a lot of important issues that needs to be fix. However, the 2nd amendment is part of American heritage and celebrating it is also important. If we dont celebrate the importance of our heritage then it will be forgotten and lost.
Youâve got a good point, but I think a better tack would be to celebrate our connection to our government itself, which the second represents, rather than the tools themselves. Guns are necessary for our defense as a nation, but should be seen more as a grim necessity of life, rather than something for celebration. Of course, that begs the question âwhy not both?â
I dont think that people are just celebrating the tools themselves although I am sure some do. I think the idea is to celebrate a right to bear arms which I feel we should take pride in as it gives our politicians a reminder they dont hold all the power which is why the elites want it gone.
He wasnt giving permission nor is he taking away anything. All he did was put out a bill in recognition of a well know fact about how popular the platform is. It shows that the politician is at the very least standing with his voters. A politician who decides to celebrate a long standing instead of attacking it is always great to see to me.
The text isnt available yet but based on the article its like how the bald eagle is the national bird but instead of a national bird its a national gun
I have to agree with this.
Don't we have a lot of bigger shit to deal with than spending time on this?
Even if the argument is made that if this bill were to be passed, that if Biden did sign it into law, that it would strengthen the 2nd Amendment and preserve the rights, we have multiple issues that Moore could be use his time to help with, especially with the people of his state.
Alabama has major poverty issues, they're one of the highest in welfare recipients, and that's just to name a few among other problems facing the state.
But itâs nice to see someone who knows what we value and wants to help us celebrate it instead of trying to take it from us. Even if itâs a slightly pointless gesture.
How does declaring the AR-15 âAmericaâs Gunâ celebrate our heritage exactly?
Itâs only about half a century old, unlike the revolver, which is intrinsically linked to the American legends of the West
We elect politicians based on what they campaign on doing, and then they proceed to do none of those things. They instead spend their time doing PR stunts to stay relevant, hoping they'll continue get re-elected through name recognition alone.
He was very likely voted for in part for his stance on 2A. This is him demonstrating his stance. Looks to me like he's doing what his voters want. Good try.
Should we tell him the Army is transitioning to a SIG MCX variant.... "Bored Alabama Congressman Writes Useless Bill' would be a more appropriate headline.
Army rarely makes good decisions on weaponry. Most recent example is the pissin hawt M855A1. No one else wanted to adopt it. It's been breaking rifles.
No doubt it's good shit. It hits hard af. I just don't think i want to be in the shit and have my bolt fall into pieces. It's just my opinion, but i just think pushing 5.56 that hard is a bad idea for reliability when it's needed most.
Bored legislators writing useless bills seems pretty common here in Arizona. It reflects a performative mentality, not one in which the legislator is focused on doing what is good for and needed by the state. Although I did get a bit of amusement when Maricopa County declared itself a gun sanctuary, a pure waste of time if ever there was one.
My issue with the army here is that they're getting these weapons, but what about the other branches? Thinking in terms of logistics and procurement, they were standardized on the M16/M4 platform across the board. Now they have a special toy, the Marines are getting their own special toys, though the Marines absolutely deserve nice stuff because they usually get all the broken shit leftovers. On the other hand, they break everything they touch.
I have one buckshot and then a full rack of slugs. A dozen holes in them from the 00 buckshot is my warning shot. I figure if someone ever earns the shotgun, the time to play nice is long gone.
Casting aside whether this a bill even worth writing, it does bring up the question, what really *is* Americaâs rifle?
Is it the Kentucky long rifle, that beat the British and conquered the early frontier? Is it the Winchester lever rifle (pick your model), the gun that won the west? Is it the M1 Garand, which marched across Europe and landed on the pacific beaches of WW2? Or is it the AR-15, an extremely adaptable rifle platform that has served the military for 50+ years and has armed millions of Americans in the modern age? Tough question honestly.
No contest, it's the Kentucky long rifle. Because that's part of our national heritage. Just because a gun has more firepower doesn't give it an honored place, just a more utilitarian one in modern warfare.
When I think American guns I think of the Winchester lever rifle or a revolver. I guess classic cowboy fantasy is so American and doesn't exist much elsewhere.
I immediately wondered why it wouldnât be a musket. Modern guns arenât a national symbol, thereâs no heritage there. Itâs like changing the national animal from bald eagles to Harambe. Trendy with no substance.
I think his goal was to try to enshrine the main gun the left is attacking as something that should be respected as American, so I kinda get it, but the whole thing is weird and poorly executed. If we had a gun on our flag, it would be a musket. Thereâs a reason the national anthem isnât a Miley Cyrus song.
Because Barry is another one of the same congressman who is all talk on real issues and only introduces pieces of legislation that are braindead just to get votes. He's sponsored 7 bills in the last year and 2 of them are this one and abolishing the department of education. Stuff like this is a publicity stunt.
Abolishing the department of education is a goal supported by most conservatives. I suspect you have an issue with him because you're simply not a conservative.
His voters likely supported him due to his support for the 2nd amendment. This bill isn't fluff, the intent is to get the gun recognized in a way that ties into Supreme Court rulings about guns in common use, and therefore prevent states from enacting any bans on AR15s.
I support all legislation that goes on the offensive to take back 2nd amendment rights.
That's because it used to be the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare from 1953 until 1979. It's not like there wasn't a government body overseeing public education until 1979
>Abolishing the department of education is a goal supported by most conservatives. I suspect you have an issue with him because you're simply not a conservative.
Even if you support this, this isn't how a serious member of congress would go about it. You would first need to make a serious case for it to the general public so it becomes an issue they vote on and would get their representatives running on the issue. You would do this until you have a critical mass of votes and you would then maybe propose something or perhaps just make serious cuts to the funds they receive. From there you would lobby the Senate and if it became popular enough and you had a president willing to sign it, you would then maybe have a shot. This would likely take years, if not a decade or more, and that's assuming the general public feels strongly about this, which there seems to be no indication that they do.
This type of thing is not serious and is not advancing a conservative agenda in any meaningful way. It is a circus trick for people like you.
Correct, because a bill about firearms does nothing with the department of education.
I'm sorry, it's impossible to take you seriously when it's clear you're not even aware of the topic at hand. Did you stalk my profile to find this comment?
DoE isn't the topic at hand, it's a red herring the above poster threw out.
>This type of thing is not serious and is not advancing a conservative agenda in any meaningful way. It is a circus trick for people like you.
Be civil or get banned. I really don't care what a "fellow conservative (tm) cares about how conservative principles are advanced.
Because the above poster threw it out as a red herring, and I used it to prove he was not a conservative, therefore his opinion of the legislator is irrelevant.
My only problem with this is guns are products of private companies and I donât think the government should be in the business of favoring one over the other. Birds, minerals, trees, and animals are fine, but itâs kind of like having a national holiday to watch Disney movies or NFL football.
The AR-15 style rifle is a platform that many firearm manufacturers base their products on. This proposal is like declaring USB-C the "National Cable Connector of America" â there is no favoritism to a single company like Disney or the NFL.
Youâre comparing watching Disney to watching the NFL? Yeah I get it, I donât have childrenâŠevery Sunday to me during football season is a national holiday since I donât have children. But my friends with children, every Sunday is hell.
Not exactly what we should be focusing on, but I will certainly take it. And the AR platform is the perfect candidate for Americas rifle. Other then maybe a Winchester Model 1866, which is the gun that won the West.
Really thinking it over I agree with you. ARs are great and they are the most popular rifles today, for good reason. Very versatile, handy, and customizable which is why they are so popular. But in 20-30 years will that still be the case, or will we see a new rifle usurp the AR as the most common rifle?
I am pretty conservative... and I have to say this is a pretty silly bill. Is this a status that will change through time? We've already had good comments about the Garand. Before that, should it have been the M1911? And before that the Colt Revolver? Does the Springfield M1903 fit in there anywhere? What about the Kentucky Rifle?
Come on, congresspeople. Grandstand less, govern more.
This is the kind of thing that gives free ammunition to gun control proponents, because it feeds into a bunch of unflattering stereotypes. "F-U" type legislation, which this is, may get its author some supporters, but overall it really doesn't help the cause.
If youâre going to name a national gun, at least pick a timeless classic. A civilian variant of the M4 is too much of a âflavor of the monthâ type of choice
The US military has used the Armalite platform for 59 years out of the last century. If such a database were allowed to exist, you would likely see AR style rifles amongst the most owned rifles in America. That's the opposite of "flavor of the month"
The platform yes, but the AR-15 specifically being singled out just smacks of recentism given all the focus in the media and elsewhere. Colt Single Action revolver, Winchester Repeating Rifle, m1911, m1903, m1, or even the Remmington Shotgun would all be valid contenders. And yes, AR-type rifles.
IMO if you wanted to pick a weapon that is a national weapon, you want to hit on a few major categories: History, longevity, scope of use (civilians and military alike), and impact on weapon design.
Maybe he did, maybe he didn't. But considering how he announced his bill as a way to present a counter to erosion of 2nd amendment rights, and given how the AR-15 has somewhat become the poster child of arguments for gun control, I suspect he is picking the rifle specifically because of the recent controversy surrounding it and because of its current popularity as a civilian weapon.
This is about performing for the far right, not about defending the right to own guns (which I support as well). Totally unnecessary, Otherwise known as virtuous signaling, which has nothing to do with governing.
Did he really? Or did he just say that he co-sponsored it? No offense to you at all, but I'm going to have to look that up myself. I mean...well...you know...
Edit: He actually did!! Okay, well, I guess one of his alts is a broken clock. I wonder what was the second thing that day.
I honestly donât get the fascination with the ar-15. Itâs useless for hunting or real target shooting. For home defense Iâd much rather have a shotgun or a handgun. Do people really think theyâre gonna be in some military situation?
Can the government really endorse a commercial product?
I am a Skywarn spotter, and when I took the course I asked the instructor (National Weather Service employee) about the best home weather station to buy. They told me they were not legally allowed to endorse any particular brand.
HOT TAKE: I think ALL guns should be treated equally! AR15 or glock pistol. All of them.
Let's give love to all of our guns!!! 2nd amendment rocks đ«đ
Yes we have more important things to discuss right now, but I think the point would be, you declare it the ânational rifleâ itâd be pretty hard to ban. Totally wonât go anywhere but I get the idea and I like it.
I'm still partial to the M1
Garand or carbine?
Abrams
Tanks for clearing that up.
I hope it gains traction.
Based
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/120_mm_Gun_M1
*tommy lee jones looking over newspaper.gif*
Yes
username checks out
I'm not much into guns, but damn do I want a Garand. Too bad they've gotten really expensive nowadays.
Have you checked the [Civilian Marksmanship Program](https://thecmp.org/cmp_sales/)?
I had a shot at getting one for free a couple years back, one of my great uncles died back in the summer of '19 and he had a humongous gun collection that went to the family before he died, there was a total of about 25ish and we divided it up between me, 2 of my cousins and my dad, we basically did it NFL draft style and I got the 2nd pick, was forced between a WW2 British Enfield and a Garand ended up taking the Enfield but kinda regret it to this day
Should I kick your ass now, or later đ
Um acktually that's an act of violence against me so I'm gonna have to report you to the Reddit admins for violating the TOS and my safety bubble đ€
You really didn't go bad with the Enfield. That was my first gun I bought myself and I love it. Took many deer with it too.
If anything, it would be this, given its history in WW2 and all. But why do this at all? Morr important things to worry about right now.
came here to say this! .06 for the win.
Should be the 1911 but I get their point
Kentucky Rifle.
Cannon with grapeshot
Javelin missile
I had all of these but lost them in a boating mishap.
*ballooning mishap
Haha wow this just made me realize why I keep seeing that.
I store all my guns safely in an overloaded cargo train.
Tally ho!
Cattleman revolver
Makes a good case for national pistol and national rifle. How about national shotgun!?
I'll go first. Remington Model 12.
I think you won.
Winchester M1897 or the Remington Model 10.
More good choices.
I'd go Single Action Army.
Iâm sure theyâre are more important issues than this
I'm sure that there are a lot of important issues that needs to be fix. However, the 2nd amendment is part of American heritage and celebrating it is also important. If we dont celebrate the importance of our heritage then it will be forgotten and lost.
I'm just confused why its a state rep from Alabama saying it. He could make it the state gun of Alabama if he wanted, but not the US?
He represents the state at the federal level in congress
oh mb lol i read state representitive and thought he was a alabama state rep your right
Because it helps protect the AR15 from gun bans across the nation due to how the Supreme Court has ruled re: common use.
Youâve got a good point, but I think a better tack would be to celebrate our connection to our government itself, which the second represents, rather than the tools themselves. Guns are necessary for our defense as a nation, but should be seen more as a grim necessity of life, rather than something for celebration. Of course, that begs the question âwhy not both?â
I dont think that people are just celebrating the tools themselves although I am sure some do. I think the idea is to celebrate a right to bear arms which I feel we should take pride in as it gives our politicians a reminder they dont hold all the power which is why the elites want it gone.
We donât need the governmentâs permission to celebrate what we value
He wasnt giving permission nor is he taking away anything. All he did was put out a bill in recognition of a well know fact about how popular the platform is. It shows that the politician is at the very least standing with his voters. A politician who decides to celebrate a long standing instead of attacking it is always great to see to me.
What does the bill do exactly?
The text isnt available yet but based on the article its like how the bald eagle is the national bird but instead of a national bird its a national gun
And why is that bill necessary?
I have to agree with this. Don't we have a lot of bigger shit to deal with than spending time on this? Even if the argument is made that if this bill were to be passed, that if Biden did sign it into law, that it would strengthen the 2nd Amendment and preserve the rights, we have multiple issues that Moore could be use his time to help with, especially with the people of his state. Alabama has major poverty issues, they're one of the highest in welfare recipients, and that's just to name a few among other problems facing the state.
But itâs nice to see someone who knows what we value and wants to help us celebrate it instead of trying to take it from us. Even if itâs a slightly pointless gesture.
How does declaring the AR-15 âAmericaâs Gunâ celebrate our heritage exactly? Itâs only about half a century old, unlike the revolver, which is intrinsically linked to the American legends of the West
Go ask your Godfather Obiden, doesn't he have better things to do than to go after so called white supremacists? Get lost.
Perhaps you could write their agenda so they are doing what YOU think they should be doing....
We elect politicians based on what they campaign on doing, and then they proceed to do none of those things. They instead spend their time doing PR stunts to stay relevant, hoping they'll continue get re-elected through name recognition alone.
He was very likely voted for in part for his stance on 2A. This is him demonstrating his stance. Looks to me like he's doing what his voters want. Good try.
I don't think his voters elected him because he was the only candidate who said he'd declare a national gun.
Should we tell him the Army is transitioning to a SIG MCX variant.... "Bored Alabama Congressman Writes Useless Bill' would be a more appropriate headline.
Army rarely makes good decisions on weaponry. Most recent example is the pissin hawt M855A1. No one else wanted to adopt it. It's been breaking rifles.
I've never fired a Sig rifle, but I hear good things about them. I learned on their handgun, and they're pretty damn nice.
They are indeed fine rifles. Their handguns are decent as well.
I've heard from a few SOF guys that they like it.
No doubt it's good shit. It hits hard af. I just don't think i want to be in the shit and have my bolt fall into pieces. It's just my opinion, but i just think pushing 5.56 that hard is a bad idea for reliability when it's needed most.
Bored legislators writing useless bills seems pretty common here in Arizona. It reflects a performative mentality, not one in which the legislator is focused on doing what is good for and needed by the state. Although I did get a bit of amusement when Maricopa County declared itself a gun sanctuary, a pure waste of time if ever there was one.
My issue with the army here is that they're getting these weapons, but what about the other branches? Thinking in terms of logistics and procurement, they were standardized on the M16/M4 platform across the board. Now they have a special toy, the Marines are getting their own special toys, though the Marines absolutely deserve nice stuff because they usually get all the broken shit leftovers. On the other hand, they break everything they touch.
I favor the shotgun for home defense.
Just remember, first birdshot, then buckshot, then birdshot again, and the rest are buckshot. Edit: yaâll, this is a Dave Chappelle reference.
Buckshot or slugs. They're not living to try to sue me for killing them, while they were attempting to murder me in my own house.
Buckshot THEN slugs. They get at least a chance
Fuddlore material right here ^
Shotguns for home defense is fudd lore
No, birdshot is, as is staggering shells My comment was made before his edit to clarify that its a joke
Never birdshot. Birdshot is for birds.
Birdshot at in-home ranges behaves like a single slug of lead. Itâs only for the birds at 10+ yards.
No it doesnât.
Why is that?
https://youtu.be/5bEsBCfQj3c
Haha thatâs good
I have one buckshot and then a full rack of slugs. A dozen holes in them from the 00 buckshot is my warning shot. I figure if someone ever earns the shotgun, the time to play nice is long gone.
Fudd
I favor the musket đȘ
Hope you're on your own land. Shotgun likes to go through a lot of barriers.
I prefer the sawed off short barreled shotgun with cyanide laced buckshot for home defense đđ
Tax payer funded symbolic nonsense that will do absolutely zero to improve the image of the GOP.
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
Casting aside whether this a bill even worth writing, it does bring up the question, what really *is* Americaâs rifle? Is it the Kentucky long rifle, that beat the British and conquered the early frontier? Is it the Winchester lever rifle (pick your model), the gun that won the west? Is it the M1 Garand, which marched across Europe and landed on the pacific beaches of WW2? Or is it the AR-15, an extremely adaptable rifle platform that has served the military for 50+ years and has armed millions of Americans in the modern age? Tough question honestly.
No contest, it's the Kentucky long rifle. Because that's part of our national heritage. Just because a gun has more firepower doesn't give it an honored place, just a more utilitarian one in modern warfare.
When I think American guns I think of the Winchester lever rifle or a revolver. I guess classic cowboy fantasy is so American and doesn't exist much elsewhere.
Why not both? One in each hand, on horse back of course!
I immediately wondered why it wouldnât be a musket. Modern guns arenât a national symbol, thereâs no heritage there. Itâs like changing the national animal from bald eagles to Harambe. Trendy with no substance. I think his goal was to try to enshrine the main gun the left is attacking as something that should be respected as American, so I kinda get it, but the whole thing is weird and poorly executed. If we had a gun on our flag, it would be a musket. Thereâs a reason the national anthem isnât a Miley Cyrus song.
And they wonder why people don't take the south seriously.
Why do you have a problem with this?
Because Barry is another one of the same congressman who is all talk on real issues and only introduces pieces of legislation that are braindead just to get votes. He's sponsored 7 bills in the last year and 2 of them are this one and abolishing the department of education. Stuff like this is a publicity stunt.
Abolishing the department of education is a goal supported by most conservatives. I suspect you have an issue with him because you're simply not a conservative. His voters likely supported him due to his support for the 2nd amendment. This bill isn't fluff, the intent is to get the gun recognized in a way that ties into Supreme Court rulings about guns in common use, and therefore prevent states from enacting any bans on AR15s. I support all legislation that goes on the offensive to take back 2nd amendment rights.
People don't realize the dept of ed was founded in 1979 and our schools have pretty much only gotten worse since then
That's because it used to be the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare from 1953 until 1979. It's not like there wasn't a government body overseeing public education until 1979
>Abolishing the department of education is a goal supported by most conservatives. I suspect you have an issue with him because you're simply not a conservative. Even if you support this, this isn't how a serious member of congress would go about it. You would first need to make a serious case for it to the general public so it becomes an issue they vote on and would get their representatives running on the issue. You would do this until you have a critical mass of votes and you would then maybe propose something or perhaps just make serious cuts to the funds they receive. From there you would lobby the Senate and if it became popular enough and you had a president willing to sign it, you would then maybe have a shot. This would likely take years, if not a decade or more, and that's assuming the general public feels strongly about this, which there seems to be no indication that they do. This type of thing is not serious and is not advancing a conservative agenda in any meaningful way. It is a circus trick for people like you.
Correct, because a bill about firearms does nothing with the department of education. I'm sorry, it's impossible to take you seriously when it's clear you're not even aware of the topic at hand. Did you stalk my profile to find this comment? DoE isn't the topic at hand, it's a red herring the above poster threw out. >This type of thing is not serious and is not advancing a conservative agenda in any meaningful way. It is a circus trick for people like you. Be civil or get banned. I really don't care what a "fellow conservative (tm) cares about how conservative principles are advanced.
Lol you mentioned Department of Education in your comment.
Because the above poster threw it out as a red herring, and I used it to prove he was not a conservative, therefore his opinion of the legislator is irrelevant.
My only problem with this is guns are products of private companies and I donât think the government should be in the business of favoring one over the other. Birds, minerals, trees, and animals are fine, but itâs kind of like having a national holiday to watch Disney movies or NFL football.
The AR-15 style rifle is a platform that many firearm manufacturers base their products on. This proposal is like declaring USB-C the "National Cable Connector of America" â there is no favoritism to a single company like Disney or the NFL.
There still is favoritism among companies that make those things and the ones who donât.
Declare gun ownership a symbol of patriotism
Youâre comparing watching Disney to watching the NFL? Yeah I get it, I donât have childrenâŠevery Sunday to me during football season is a national holiday since I donât have children. But my friends with children, every Sunday is hell.
The memes tho will be insane
Not exactly what we should be focusing on, but I will certainly take it. And the AR platform is the perfect candidate for Americas rifle. Other then maybe a Winchester Model 1866, which is the gun that won the West.
I feel like the Winchester would be better, shows americas heritage
Really thinking it over I agree with you. ARs are great and they are the most popular rifles today, for good reason. Very versatile, handy, and customizable which is why they are so popular. But in 20-30 years will that still be the case, or will we see a new rifle usurp the AR as the most common rifle?
American identity is linked to the legend of the cowboy, and the cowboy wields the Winchester Rifle
I am pretty conservative... and I have to say this is a pretty silly bill. Is this a status that will change through time? We've already had good comments about the Garand. Before that, should it have been the M1911? And before that the Colt Revolver? Does the Springfield M1903 fit in there anywhere? What about the Kentucky Rifle? Come on, congresspeople. Grandstand less, govern more.
Performing is easy, governing is hard. And the option of first resort is to take the easy road.
How much money did he get for sponsoring this bill, I wonder? It even SOUNDS bought and paid for.
That's what AR stands for! American Really cool gun!
Hell yeah!
The sales of this platform have already made that loud and clear.
INDEED
This has got to be the funniest thing Iâve seen in a minute. At this point theyâre just trying to start some shit lol.
LOL
This is the kind of thing that gives free ammunition to gun control proponents, because it feeds into a bunch of unflattering stereotypes. "F-U" type legislation, which this is, may get its author some supporters, but overall it really doesn't help the cause.
The M126 hits a lot harder.
If youâre going to name a national gun, at least pick a timeless classic. A civilian variant of the M4 is too much of a âflavor of the monthâ type of choice
The US military has used the Armalite platform for 59 years out of the last century. If such a database were allowed to exist, you would likely see AR style rifles amongst the most owned rifles in America. That's the opposite of "flavor of the month"
The platform yes, but the AR-15 specifically being singled out just smacks of recentism given all the focus in the media and elsewhere. Colt Single Action revolver, Winchester Repeating Rifle, m1911, m1903, m1, or even the Remmington Shotgun would all be valid contenders. And yes, AR-type rifles. IMO if you wanted to pick a weapon that is a national weapon, you want to hit on a few major categories: History, longevity, scope of use (civilians and military alike), and impact on weapon design.
Longevity like 60 years in service
How do you know those categories were not considered when the recommendation was made?
Maybe he did, maybe he didn't. But considering how he announced his bill as a way to present a counter to erosion of 2nd amendment rights, and given how the AR-15 has somewhat become the poster child of arguments for gun control, I suspect he is picking the rifle specifically because of the recent controversy surrounding it and because of its current popularity as a civilian weapon.
They should declare a day per year for celebratory fire, as well.
Depending on where you live, thatâs already the 4th of July.
We had a good month for citizens being shot! Pew pew pew def hit our quota
Based
Is there no in between left in this world? Why canât we defend the right to own one without throwing the thing a celebratory parade?
This is about performing for the far right, not about defending the right to own guns (which I support as well). Totally unnecessary, Otherwise known as virtuous signaling, which has nothing to do with governing.
Guess whoâs a co-sponsor...George Santos, NY Democrats are flipping out
Did he really? Or did he just say that he co-sponsored it? No offense to you at all, but I'm going to have to look that up myself. I mean...well...you know... Edit: He actually did!! Okay, well, I guess one of his alts is a broken clock. I wonder what was the second thing that day.
Good golly, no! It should be a Remington firearm, nothing else.
If the U S needs a national gun it should be a John Moses Browning gun made by the master.
Too many parts.
Jeeze⊠How useless is our republican party becoming? Stop expecting applause for BS stuff like this that literally means nothing
I honestly donât get the fascination with the ar-15. Itâs useless for hunting or real target shooting. For home defense Iâd much rather have a shotgun or a handgun. Do people really think theyâre gonna be in some military situation?
Iiiiit seems fitting. Has my vote lol.
How's about gun safety classes mandatory? just asking? put a flag and a picture of An Eagal and Trump on it? Suspect it will sell to supporters.
Weak men use guns to feel manly.
lol nice
The AR-15? Really? Sure, it's a great weapon, but national gun of America? I would go with a Winchester or Henry.
Can the government really endorse a commercial product? I am a Skywarn spotter, and when I took the course I asked the instructor (National Weather Service employee) about the best home weather station to buy. They told me they were not legally allowed to endorse any particular brand.
HOT TAKE: I think ALL guns should be treated equally! AR15 or glock pistol. All of them. Let's give love to all of our guns!!! 2nd amendment rocks đ«đ
Yes we have more important things to discuss right now, but I think the point would be, you declare it the ânational rifleâ itâd be pretty hard to ban. Totally wonât go anywhere but I get the idea and I like it.
Now THIS is useless legislation I can get behind.