“No one needs an AR-15 to hunt,” someone pops off.

It’s a variation on a theme, often based around the idea that the Second Amendment is somehow about hunting. It’s not, but some people refuse to accept that. In their minds, the only acceptable reason to have a gun is to hunt and anything that doesn’t conform to that is unnecessary.

The fact that most of these people have never been hunting in the first place is irrelevant in their minds. They’ve seen hunting portrayed in television and the movies so, of course, they’re experts on what is and isn’t involved.

Especially when modern sporting rifles such as the AR-15 and AR-10 are a big part of hunting, as noted over at America’s 1st Freedom.

Author Brian McCombie starts off by recounting a hog hunt where things we’re told we don’t need played a key role, starting with AR-10s but also including thermal scopes and suppressors. He then goes on to say:

Incredibly, as anti-Second Amendment groups and politicians try to remove this particular civil right, they insist they are not out to stop hunting or hunters; the thing is, as gun-control proponents try for even more restrictions and try to ban ever more guns, they are also attacking our ability to hunt.

Gun-control advocates, including the current resident of the White House, keep insisting that AR-15 and AR-10 rifles have no hunting purposes and that banning these so-called “weapons of war” will greatly reduce violent crime. Both contentions are very easy to prove false. America’s 1st Freedom has provided substantial proof that banning these commonly owned, semi-automatic rifles will do next to nothing to reduce violent crime rates, as these rifles are rarely used in crimes; FBI data, for example, consistently shows that, year after year, rifles of all types are used is less than 3% of murders in the U.S.

Meanwhile, when it comes to today’s hunters, AR-platform rifles are used everywhere hunters can legally use them to hunt. Americans use these popular semi-automatic rifles to hunt small game, coyotes, hogs, deer, bear and all sorts of big-game animals. If, however, citizens can’t legally acquire or own these rifles, then they can’t use this very effective rifle platform for hunting.

McCombie most definitely notes that the Second Amendment isn’t about hunting, but he argues that hunting is a celebration of the right to keep and bear arms, and I find myself in total agreement. It’s not the only way to celebrate it, but it is a celebration just the same.

The AR platform and other modern sporting rifles are, in my opinion, far more comfortable to shoot than most other “traditional” hunting rifles, which is just one benefit of these weapons. The ability to adjust the stock to fit different shooters is yet another advantage.

Yet gun control activists will repeatedly claim these are useless for hunting. They say they want to ban them because they’re so useless for this particular activity and are only good for killing people.

And yet, I see a lot of people taking issue with the .308 round in the wake of Lewiston, all without any understanding that this is one of the most popular hunting rounds in the nation.

The people who say there’s no real sporting use for such weapons are people who generally don’t partake in the sport in question. It’s like a non-tennis player telling Serena Williams what kind of racket she doesn’t need.

Hunting is part of this nation’s gun history and the very guns under attack are part of that history.