Wow, the venom in this thread saddens me.
Instead of using pejorative language to demonize entire groups of people, why don't you try to educate folks as to why it is your ability to buy AR15's is so important. Frankly, I think that most people who have a knee-jerk negative reaction to so-called black rifles just don't understand what is at stake, or can't see the long view.
As for the guy who said he pulled his membership from orgs like Ducks Unlimited and other such groups: our American countryside would look vastly different now if it weren't for groups such as these, and our shooting sports would most likely be in decline in a much more radical way than they are now. To write off and discount the good an organization does because it doesn't line up exactly with your expectations smacks of fanaticism to me.
This is precisely why gun owners are in such trouble these days: each side insists they're right and demonizes the other. I guess if someone were to label me, I'm a "Fudd": a gun to me is a tool and nothing more. Like any tool, I take good care of it and enjoy its use. I also recognize the importance of the AR15 community with respect to the 2A, and support our right to bear these arms even though I personally do not own one.
I meet a lot of hunters like me. I don't personally know many hunters who think AR15s should be banned. In fact, for most hunters I know it's really not on the radar at all. They are more concerned with the future of their sport, the subdivision that just paved a century-old orchard with manicured lawns, and with the health of their quarry and its habitat, than with the finer points of the black rifle debate. This is a good thing. If hunters aren't there to advocate for nature conservancy then shooting sports in general are going to suffer big time.
The thought that my brethren gun owners are running around out there using terms like "Fudd" is disappointing to me, and is indicative of a serious pathology within American culture in general: the need to reduce and objectify, and ultimately dehumanize those that represent a differing viewpoint.
I see this again and again on this site (and others) whether it's about a specific person in office, an entire political party, or a group of gun owners with a different interpretation of what it means to bear arms. All the good is forgotten.
I'm not foolish enough to think that this post will change anything. Otherwise reasonable people tend to put up straw men in internet arguments. I'm just expressing a distaste for the divisive commentary and snide remarks. Most importantly, I'm trying to suggest that both groups, the Fudds and the AR15 crowd, are essential to the future of shooting sports. We need the hunter who cares more for nature than he does his half-rusted 870, just as much as we need the ardent AR15 owner who punches holes in paper all day.
This entire debate falls right into the anti's hands: divide and conquer. You might as well just write a check to the Brady campaign right now and save time and energy.
Tom