I have no issue with that. I understand and approve. it's the statement about "military style" which got me and seems unnecessary.That's what going on Ferguson right now. Stories of shop owners standing guard with rifles because the police were too timid to do their jobs and stop the looting. So they looked on from a few blocks away as people were getting robbed.
I own that shirt, except it has a FAL on it.I saw the best T-shirt:
"Why do I need to own one of these"
**Picture of an AR**
"Because F*** you thats why."
Bet they have a bumper sticker.
Some guys may dislike the vulgar language.. However I don't like tip toeing around with antis anymore.. Bluntness usually sums everything up.
Any AR/AK/FAL or what have you I can purchase is NOT "Military style". That denotes the ability to fire on full automatic/burst. They don't. The cops have military style weapons in abundance.
So I will fact check myself here. I did a little more looking into the history of the AR-15, and while it did come before the M16, it was designed with the intent of meeting the military requirements for their new weapons platform, and the original AR-15s were select-fire. It was immediately marketed to the civilian market however.That's the funny thing about definitions, everyone seems to have their own. And I am pretty sure that the M16 is a military version of a civilian rifle that was adopted into military service (just like most "military" weapons).
So really, when they are talking about military style weapons, that term does not even apply to AR-15s. Bet they would be surprised to find that out.