NPR on AR Pistol

[illinoisburt]

Generally when we see a news story about guns written by the non-outdoor press we end up parsing it for technical flaws in describing guns, then declaring the writer uninformed and hence not credible. Although the tone of this particular piece is anti-AR, I would say it's probably the best written article on the subject from any of the "left wing media" and surprisingly non-combative. This is exactly the type of sensible reasoning people need to use when arguing for their point of view instead of the usual hysterics and vitriol. This represents a change in how the subject is being presented to the public which is probably going to be a lot more coercive than past news or opinion pieces.

https://www.npr.org/2019/08/08/748665339/the-pistol-that-looks-like-a-rifle-the-dayton-shooters-gun

 

[Texas10mm]

Wow, now we know how the Crown feels about the subjects being armed.

 

[Cump]

This is often the approach of NPR. Present a guise of objectivity, but imply conclusions that have been predetermined. In this case, it argues gun laws are inadequate and implicitly suggests regulation of nonserialized parts, among other things.

I think npr may be as problematic as cnn because it gives fodder for reasonable people to come to emotional conclusions with the illusion of having been objective.

 

[01KLR650]

I'm sorry, but "capable of pouring a stream of high-velocity bullets, thanks to its huge ammunition magazine" is hardly objective reporting.

 

[syntaxerrorsix]

This is often the approach of NPR. Present a guise of objectivity, but imply conclusions that have been predetermined. In this case, it argues gun laws are inadequate and implicitly suggests regulation of nonserialized parts, among other things.

I think npr may be as problematic as cnn because it gives fodder for reasonable people to come to emotional conclusions with the illusion of having been objective.

Exactly that. NPR is my SO's primary news source and she's apparently nose blind to it no matter how much I point it out. They do a fair job of reporting but it's always clear they have their minds made up.

 

[SSN Vet]

I don't know about you, but the conclusion I reached from reading that article is that I now want an AR pistol (where as I never did before)

Is the recoil super snappy on them?

 

[badkarmamib]

I don't know about you, but the conclusion I reached from reading that article is that I now want an AR pistol (where as I never did before)

Is the recoil super snappy on them?

Not too bad, but very loud, flashy, and obnoxious.

 

[syntaxerrorsix]

I don't know about you, but the conclusion I reached from reading that article is that I now want an AR pistol (where as I never did before)

Is the recoil super snappy on them?

They're really loud. You lose significant velocity. In fact, if NPR had a better working knowledge they could have surmised that the pistol was the poor choice over a rifle. The only benefit being a little easier to conceal (5.5" smaller?) which he wasn't trying to do anyways...

 

[I6turbo]

This is often the approach of NPR. Present a guise of objectivity, but imply conclusions that have been predetermined. In this case, it argues gun laws are inadequate and implicitly suggests regulation of nonserialized parts, among other things.

I think npr may be as problematic as cnn because it gives fodder for reasonable people to come to emotional conclusions with the illusion of having been objective.

National Pinko Radio
It infuriates me that my tax dollars are used to subsidize that America-hating propaganda mill.

 

[jar]

I like NPR and trust it over almost any other US based news source.

 

[GEM]

I'm sorry, but "capable of pouring a stream of high-velocity bullets, thanks to its huge ammunition magazine" is hardly objective reporting.

Hate to go against the flow of the evil NPR, but if you shoot carbine matches with AR platforms, you will be amazed at the rapidity of some shooters. One friend of mine is awesome in his speed of semi auto trigger pulls. You would almost think it is a burst.

A good shooter with a hundred round magazine can do that. Whether that is a point for banning them is another discussion. NPR is usually a reasonable news outlet, IMHO.

 

[syntaxerrorsix]

Hate to go against the flow of the evil NPR, but if you shoot carbine matches with AR platforms, you will be amazed at the rapidity of some shooters. One friend of mine is awesome in his speed of semi auto trigger pulls. You would almost think it is a burst.

A good shooter with a hundred round magazine can do that. Whether that is a point for banning them is another discussion. NPR is usually a reasonable news outlet, IMHO.

I believe the point was the sensationalism of the reporting not the fact that it's possible to rapidly fire an AR....

 

[theotherwaldo]

Novo Pravda Radio says, "This is a perfect example of how our federal gun laws now have been so convoluted and weakened that we can't determine basic components and what's what in firearms anymore," said Vince (an ex-BATFE employee), who is also a criminal justice professor at Mount St. Mary's University in Maryland.
Yeah, let's give more power to BATFE... on the say-so of a college professor.

 

[GEM]

I guess my point was that trying to down play or correct the technical gun issues won't aid in stopping bans. A rifle being a better choice isn't a suggestion we really need, is it? Anyway, anymore to offer besides just funny insult names for NPR?

About sensationalism, a little off topic - this was a line for Barnes ammo from a Bass Pro catalog: Purpose Built Ammo For Deadly Tasks

 

[illinoisburt]

This is often the approach of NPR. Present a guise of objectivity, but imply conclusions that have been predetermined. In this case, it argues gun laws are inadequate and implicitly suggests regulation of nonserialized parts, among other things.

I think npr may be as problematic as cnn because it gives fodder for reasonable people to come to emotional conclusions with the illusion of having been objective.

This is the point I wanted to get across. Usually "news" stories pushing gun bans are flat out fictional, trying to confuse people with machine gun and explosives annologies, if not just plain made up or misinformed descriptions of items. Here we have someone who clearly does understand what an AR pistol is and does a good job explaining why they are currently legal and how/why folks are buying them. Obviously the reporter is encouraging a change in the law, though notice they quote a 'government expert' to say NOT to ban them but instead regulate them heavily. I don't agree with them, however we have to be aware these types of persuasive arguments are being made to the largely affluent and non-gun audience of NPR (think suburban moms and yuppy-millenials).

Saying things like the author is wrong about the gun, how it works, or things like the old clip/magazine foil are not going to be helpful in this situation. You will have to argue the use and regulation rather than the old standby "you don't know what you're talking about" (which by the way most anti and on-the-fence types don't really care about).

 

[AlexanderA]

AR "pistols" would not exist if they were not workarounds for the SBR restrictions. And as such, their popularity is also tied to "arm braces," which are non-shoulder-stock shoulder stocks.

The whole thing is a joke, but is a logical extension of the NFA, which itself is a joke.

It's just a matter of time before "arm braces" and AR "pistols" are regulated out of existence, just like bump stocks.

 

[Trey Veston]

AR "pistols" would not exist if they were not workarounds for the SBR restrictions. And as such, their popularity is also tied to "arm braces," which are non-shoulder-stock shoulder stocks.

The whole thing is a joke, but is a logical extension of the NFA, which itself is a joke.

It's just a matter of time before "arm braces" and AR "pistols" are regulated out of existence, just like bump stocks.

I think you're right. I've been seeing ads for them the last couple of days from different suppliers like CDNN. I bought the Extar EP-9 this Spring, which comes with a brace. Now I'm thinking maybe I need to get another brace or two for it just in case.

And NPR is extremely biased. During the last election cycle, I happened to have them on in my house while I was getting ready for work and it was the day after the elections. For "contributors" they had nothing but Democrats. At least they acknowledged that all their guests and commentators were Democrats, but still...

 

[GEM]

Sigh, big news that various news channels feature candidates of a certain ilk. We are wandering away from the issue of the gun story? Anymore to say on that story as compared to general NPR comments?

 

[Texas10mm]

What I gathered is that we should have to fill out a 4473 for EVERY part of a DIY build.

 

[AlexanderA]

What I gathered is that we should have to fill out a 4473 for EVERY part of a DIY build.

This isn't going to happen even in the antis' wildest dreams.
Too much information is as useless as no information. The system just cannot digest a surfeit of data.

 

[01KLR650]

If I remember correctly, aren't stripped lower receivers essentially treated the same as pistols by the BATFE? Meaning the buyer must be 21, no purchases outside your home state, etc. The story didn't mention this.

BTW, I listen to NPR almost daily. I like a lot of their reporting, but it's increasingly hard to ignore their bias against private gun ownership.

 

[AlexanderA]

If I remember correctly, aren't stripped lower receivers essentially treated the same as pistols by the BATFE? Meaning the buyer must be 21, no purchases outside your home state, etc. The story didn't mention this.

Stripped lowers are listed as "other" on the Form 4473. That means that they are neither rifles nor shotguns. Purchases outside your home state (from an FFL dealer) must be either a rifle or a shotgun. So, yes, a stripped lower would not be eligible.

But, increasingly, this whole thing is being bypassed by using an "80%" or unfinished lower, which is a "non-gun" and is totally unregulated. A creditable job of finishing such an unfinished receiver can be done using the jigs and tools that are on the market.

 

[jar]

Wow. I assume Rachel Madow on MSNBC is your second most trusted source???

Nope. Seldom listen to MSNBC.

AbE: Next most likely BBC, then NY Times.

 

[GEM]

This is closed because of off topic and childish language. Penalties to those who don’t take a request to avoid such.