American Gun: The True Story of the AR-15... A Book Review Turned Anti-Gun Screed

[TrappedinCalifornia]

In certain respects, I think this was intended as a book review of American Gun: The True Story of the AR-15. But, I think the 'anti-gun' zeal caught hold of the author.

The Curse of the AR-15

...American Gun attempts to unravel the strange history of this weapon, from an unlikely engineering success, to a marketing and branding coup, to an object singularly associated with the current catastrophic state of American culture. The rise of the AR-15 represents the end result of Eisenhower's feared "military-industrial complex": private corporations making weapons of war to sell both to the military and ordinary citizens. But the story of American Gun is also the story of the changing face of America's fascination with guns, from the image of the skilled hunter to the macho dude whose ferocious weapon is also stunningly simple to use. The gun that unmade America was built to address a secret, long-suppressed problem: The American fighting man just wasn?t that good at fighting. And if the AR-15 is so feared these days, it's because it's brought that sub-competence to the civilian world, where now literally any idiot can use it to unleash mayhem and death...

A lucid, straightforward, and well-researched and -reported work, American Gun promises, via its back cover, "fairness and compassion." By the book's end, I found myself wondering why fairness is a worthy goal here. I don't know what fairness we owe these manufacturers or the individuals who buy their products. There is no argument here - compassionate or otherwise - that can explain why an everyday person needs a weapon designed solely to kill as many people as possible in seconds. And that's because no defensible argument exists...

The piece itself is an interesting example of how to turn legitimate information into a screed. It's also an example of the mindset we're up against. No matter how decently and rigorously documented, our 'facts' will simply be used as exemplars of 'the problem,' even if the problem being cited is largely unrelated to the facts at hand. For that reason alone, I thought it to be an interesting read.

[sfvshooter]

I heard a story about this book on LAist. Had no clue Stoner was an engineer in L.A. and the AR-15 was created in Westchester.

[walmart_ar15]

Sadly, the author had no true understanding of what Bill of Rights represents. 2A like the 1A is the foundation that ensure the Rights are not taken away. In plain wording, the People should be as well armed as the Government.

[Grendel Guy]

If memory serves, Stoner was an engineer with Fairchild Aircraft, not sure if he had been tasked by them to come up with a rifle (originally in .308). Having the aeronautical background, he cut weight where he could and kept the steel where it was needed.

[CornStrategy]

I'm about two-thirds through the book and I've yet to glimpse any "fairness and compassion" as promised on the back cover, at least as far as AR-15 owners are concerned.

Act I of "The Story of the AR-15" should be called "How the U.S. Military Tried and Failed to Derail the Adoption of a Small Start-Up's Super Rifle." Eugene Stoner, an engineering genius with no formal education, invents a military rifle for the Atomic Age and beyond, the A[rmaLite]R[esearch]-15. Unmatched in accuracy, lethality, and ease-of-use, it challenges traditional thinking by embracing light, Space Age materials and a lightweight, high velocity round that it fires to devastating effect, shredding any body part it impacts. Despite attempts by the military industrial complex to block its adoption, reason prevails.

Act II, what I'd call "How Greedy Corporations Unleashed a Mass Killing Machine on the American Public," tells a tale of the havoc wreaked by the AR-15, the failed efforts to ban it, and greedy companies who dupe consumers into buying millions of rifles they don't need.

Were this my sole source of information on the AR-15, I'd see absolutely no reason for me or anyone to own one. I keep waiting for a chapter which profiles an AR-15 owner who isn't a mass murderer or fool. Maybe that chapter is in Act III ...

[iMigraine]

While back Tom Gresham's Gun Talk podcast interviewed one of the co-authors of the book. It was pretty clear that this book was propaganda for the gun ban industry masking as journalism. Tom ripped into the guy for it's heavy bias and the coauthor was surprised. Coauthor offered no explanations for his one sided view and just reiterated that "this is the data" and lots of "uh'mms" and awkward pauses for answers.

Yeah, one could tell pretty quickly that book is trash form the interview. The coauthor was a young guy straight out of college who was working for New York Times with a agenda.

[TurboChrisB]

I heard a story about this book on LAist. Had no clue Stoner was an engineer in L.A. and the AR-15 was created in Westchester.

I believe it was originally developed in Costa Mesa.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

[jayhuh]

I believe it was originally developed in Costa Mesa.

Yes that is what I have always been told.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

According to a site called Calguns... The AR-15 was developed in Costa Mesa.... But WHERE?...

We all know that the AR15 was designed and developed by Eugene Stoner back at Armalite/Fairchild in the beautiful city of Costa Mesa, CA....

Ask M24armorer

His Dad worked with Eugene Stoner back at Armalite/Fairchild.
The Early development....didn't even take place at the factory
as I recall.

Somewhere I read that Stoner did a lot of the design out of his home in Newport. Can't confirm that though.

Actually the AR15 was designed in Hollywood, when Armalite was still part of Fairchild. Then they moved to Costa Mesa later. IIRC the early AR10's and AR15's had Hollywood CA on the recievers? They didi not make AR15's in Costa Mesa, Colt had bought the rights by then. It was the AR18 / AR180 that was being made there. The AR18 is the grandfather to many of our current assault rifles of the world today...

The design was sold to Colt in 1959... The Complete History of the AR-15 Rifle; so we know the design was around prior to that. But, that's where things get a little hazy. It's known that...

...Ten AR-15 rifles together with 100 magazines were delivered to Ft. Benning for test and evaluation against some brand new T44E4 rifles from Springfield Armory on 31 March 1958. In a simulation of combat environments, the AR-15 proved to be three times as reliable as the M14.

But Gen. Maxwell Taylor, the Army Chief of Staff, vetoed any further CONARC development of the AR-15 in favor of continued procurement of the M14. Fairchild, disenchanted with the AR-15 program, sold the entire AR-15 package to Colt's in December 1959. However, after the March, 1958 tests at Fort Benning, during which some minor "bugs" were identified, Stoner made a number of changes to several of the original 17 rifles. The modifications included the following: the trigger pull weight was reduced to approximately 7 pounds; the trigger?s return action was improved; the single, conical fiberglass handguard was replaced with a two-piece, removable type; the rear sight mask was increased in size; the selector lever positions were changed; the charging handle was re-located from under the carrying handle in the manner of the AR-10 to the rear of the receiver and changed in shape to a serrated triangle, which eventually became a distinctive characteristic of the entire M16/AR-15 series; the magazine well was increased in size; a molded rubber buttplate was added to the stock; the hole for the buffer was opened up; the receiver's contact surfaces on the bolt carrier were reduced; the feed ramp was altered; the magazine capacity was reduced from 25 to 20 rounds; the weight of the barrel was increased by 2 ounces and a flash suppressor was added to the muzzle.

Of all these changes, re-location of the charging handle altered the rifle's appearance more than any other modification. In its original location under the carrying handle, which placed it directly over the bolt carrier key, it became too hot to touch during sustained fire bursts. In addition, it could not be manipulated while wearing Arctic gloves...

So, a prototype version or developmental model of it existed in March of 1958. But, that appears to be the reason for the haziness; i.e., it depends on how you define "developed" or "created" or "designed" or similar as there were numerous design tweaks prior to formal adoption by the military and what we now know as the AR-15/M-16. The safest claim is that the base design was around by 1957 which, according to Armalite, was the result of a request made by the Army in 1956. This timing is confirmed in (the source cited is) Pikula, Sam (Major), The ArmaLite AR-10, pp. 23?26; taken from Armalite AR-10 Battle Rifle...

...In 1957, in an effort to increase profits from the ArmaLite venture, Fairchild decided to compete in the U.S. Army'sCONARC requirement for a new six-pound, high-velocity, .22-caliber selective-fire rifle accurate to 500 yards. In response, ArmaLite engineers Gene Stoner, Jim Sullivan, and Bob Fremont used the basic AR-10 design to produce the AR-15 in .223 Remington, which was completed as a firing prototype in 1958...

Thus, it is safe to say that the prototype existed prior to the company's move to Costa Mesa and the same source is cited as stipulating that happened in 1959.

Does that help narrow it down in terms of where it was developed/created?