It covers how there’s a generational shift happening in the firearms industry.
Related posts (automatically generated):
Surprisingly well-balanced and -played. The article consistently referred to them as Modern Sporting Rifles, which was a nice touch.
Really want to irk the Lefies and Gun-Fearing Wussies, we should just call them Sport/Utility Rifles! :)
As far as the article goes, I think every generation goes through this with the hunting crowd. When cased ammunition and bolt actions started getting used by civilians, the “traditionalists” insisted the only ‘pure’ method of hunting was the muzzle loader. After semi-autos like the Garand got adopted by some hunters, those that grew up on bolt actions pooh-poohed the notion.
And now that crowd is turning up their noses on the AR-style platforms. As I’ve said, I’m not really an AR guy myself, but don’t see a problem with it, as long as the right ammuntion is being used for the right type of game. Not much in the hunting world worse than a wounding shot that doesn’t immediately kill and letting the animal suffer and be wasted.
That’s a calm and balanced article — almost pro-AR in tone. Good job, Business Week.
The key passage is the one that suggests, “Hey, you know those nice respectable traditional bolt-action sporters (that people sometimes want to contrast with the eeevil semi-autos)? Those were originally adapted from front-line military rifles too.”
Ah good … they are pushing the sporting purpose of those rifles.
I suspect they are taking baby steps toward mainstream popularization … but the language of Heller pretty much precludes the need for a “sporting purposes” test for protected arms.
I don’t know why we play along and have to give “those rifles” special names like the banners so love to do. Hell, they’re just guns. Specifically, single-shot self-reloading rifles.
They’re right. ARs have no business out there hunting game. Only rifles with wood stocks like this one should be allowed: