Month: May 2025
Opinion
U.S. Air Force Basic Military Training trainees carry weapons at Joint Base San Antonio-Lackland on August 2, 2024. (U.S. Air Force photo by Ava Leone)Well, here we go again. The United States Air Force had a brief moment of clarity—just a moment—when it looked like they might start treating their own recruits like real warfighters by letting them carry actual M4 rifles during basic training.
But predictably, that moment passed faster than a Beltway politician dodging accountability.
According to the Air Force’s top brass, arming trainees with real, live-fire-capable rifles throughout boot camp is just too hard. Too many “logistical challenges,” they say. Too much responsibility. Heaven forbid young Americans who sign up to wear the uniform actually handle the tools of war early on—tools they’ll be expected to be intimately familiar with when the real fight starts.
Instead, they’re sticking with glorified toys: inert M4s that look real, feel real, but don’t go bang. Maj. Gen. Wolfe Davidson, who oversees the whole training pipeline, confirmed they’re not moving forward with real rifles “in the near term.” You know what that means—it’s code for never, unless they get forced into it by reality.
Let’s be clear: The Marines do it. The Army does it. Hell, even most ROTC programs give their kids more trigger time. But the Air Force? Nope. They’re convinced a red-plastic-tipped dummy gun is enough to create a “warfighter mindset.”
And that’s the problem.
We’ve got high-ranking Air Force officials saying we’re on the brink of a near-peer war with China or Russia.
We’ve got high-ranking Air Force officials saying we’re on the brink of a near-peer war with China or Russia. They’re right. The next war won’t be fought from cushy air-conditioned offices—it’ll be brutal, ugly, and real. But if you believe that, and you still won’t arm the next generation of Airmen with anything more than a cosplay rifle, you’re not preparing for war. You’re playing pretend.
Security concerns? Too many weapons to store? Not enough instructors? Guess what—none of that stopped our grandfathers from winning WWII. They figured it out with clipboards, paper maps, and grit. But now, in the era of biometric locks and digital armories, the world’s most advanced Air Force can’t figure out how to responsibly issue a basic firearm to a grown adult?
Meanwhile, here’s what Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth had to say just three months ago in his Message to the Force:
“We will remain the strongest and most lethal force in the world… All of this will be done with a focus on lethality, meritocracy, accountability, standards, and readiness.”
So let’s ask the obvious: how exactly does marching around with a red-tipped plastic toy gun meet the Secretary’s call for lethality? How does locking a non-functioning rifle in a dorm room locker restore the warrior ethos?
It doesn’t.
This is what happens when political correctness meets the profession of arms. Instead of sharpening the spear, the Air Force dulled it—again.
Sure, they still make the recruits look like they’re carrying rifles. They march them around with fake M4s, let them break them down—oh wait, you can’t—and then practice holding them. It’s like handing someone a rubber knife and calling them a chef.
You can’t fake warfighting. And you sure as hell can’t fake the Second Amendment. That right—the one to keep and bear arms—isn’t just a civilian right. It’s a warrior’s foundation. If the Air Force can’t trust its own people with real rifles in basic training, maybe it shouldn’t be trusted to send them into combat either.
We’re raising a generation of soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines to fight enemies who are armed to the teeth and trained from childhood. And instead of meeting that threat with strength, we’re stuffing red and blue plastic into warrior’s M4 barrels and calling it a day.
Lock and load, America. Because the people in charge of defending this country still think the scariest thing in a barracks is a loaded rifle.
About Tred Law
Tred Law is your everyday patriot with a deep love for this country and a no-compromise approach to the Second Amendment. He does not write articles for Ammoland every week, but when he does write, it is usually about liberals Fing with his right to keep and bear arms.
A brief filed by the federal government in the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in a case involving the constitutionality of banning machine guns has one pro-gun rights group seeing red.The case United States v. Justin Bryce Brown revolves around the federal government charging Justice Bryce Brown with knowingly possessing a machine gun in violation of federal law. Brown’s attorney argued that under the landmark 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, the statute was unconstitutional as applied to him.
A district court dismissed the charge against Brown in January, holding that the ban violated the Second Amendment as it applied to him. The government then appealed to the Fifth Circuit.
A brief filed April 24 by Patrick Lemon, acting U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Mississippi, argued that “machine guns are not the kind of arms protected by the Second Amendment,” and that America’s “history of regulating dangerous and unusual weapons confirms [the federal machine gun ban’s] constitutionality.” The brief drew quick condemnation from the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC), which called the brief both “horribly flawed” and “insanely offensive.”
One portion of the brief that really set the gun-rights group off was when Lemon cited The Trace, a rabidly anti-gun instrument of Michael Bloomberg’s so-called Everytown for Gun Safety, as his source of information.
“Acting U.S. Attorney Lemon’s horrifically flawed brief is unprincipled and an incredible affront to the People and our constitutionally protected rights,” Brandon Combs, FPC president, said in a press release about the brief. “Not only does this lemon of a brief expressly advance anti-liberty arguments, it went so far as to cite the radically anti-Second Amendment Everytown propaganda publication, The Trace, in support of its position. This brief could not be less consistent with President Trump’s ‘Protecting Second Amendment Rights’ executive order.”
Since President Trump’s executive order on protecting the Second Amendment does matter—or at least it should to Lemon—Combs said the brief should prompt the president and Attorney General Pam Bondi to look into Lemon’s ability to respect the executive order. After all, the U.S. Attorney filed the poorly thought-out brief on behalf of the federal government, which Trump heads.
“This insanely offensive brief should never have been filed in any court, let alone at the Fifth Circuit,” Combs continued. “It should be immediately withdrawn and thrown into the trash, along with Mr. Lemon’s ability to make these filings in the future.”
Combs added that the Lemon filing is a prime example of why the organization has been asking President Trump to appoint a competent Second Amendment czar to coordinate the administration’s agenda across the government and with stakeholders in Second Amendment litigation.
“Our rights must be protected at all costs and the American people are counting on President Trump and Attorney General Bondi to fulfill their promise to do just that,” he concluded.
Categories
Big Horn Armory .500 S&W Magnum
