Thread by @StephenGutowski

This tweet goes to the idea many gun-control advocates are more concerned about regulating aesthetics than any else. This is a semi-automatic 22lr rifle. It is designed to look like an AR-15, but it's functionally the same as a Ruger 10/22 or any number of other 22lr rifles.

https://twitter.com/GavinNewsom/status/1494136708807356420

Whatever you think of the tounge-in-cheek marketing approach here, this certainly isn't a "weapon of war" by any standard. 22lr is a small round commonly used fwhen training kids. The objection here is to how the rifle looks rather than any connection it has to actual gun crime.

Here is the JR-15 next to the Ruger 10/22. They look different, but they are both magazine-fed semi-auto 22lr rifles. The main difference in function is the JR-15 has an integrated safety lock to prevent unauthorized use.

This a long-running complaint gun-rights advocates have had about "assault weapons" bans. They are primarily focused on banning guns based on how they look.

You can use the same comparison here too. These rifles function the same way and fire the same rounds. One is banned in California, the other is not.

Is the "JR-15" marketing intended to troll people like Gavin Newsom? Almost certainly, yes. Outside of the integrated lock and shrunken size there isn't much new about this gun. Smith & Wesson has been making a 22lr AR lookalike for years.

The incentives to market this way are very clear. People like Newsom get upset about it, we talk about it, and his opponents are more inclined to buy it. The strategy worked. This gun and the company selling it are getting far more attention than they otherwise would have.