Hello Kitty AR-15 assault rifle makes you wish it was Photoshopped

If the Disintegrator had you quivering in your combat boots, we'd recommend grabbing a bullet proof vest and having a seat for this one. Apparently, a fellow in California has dressed up a (legal) AR-15 assault rifle in Hello Kitty fashion for his better half, and while it'd be way too easy to pass this off as a fantastic Photoshop job, the pictures awaiting you in the read link definitely prove otherwise. Cute never looked so evil.

[Via CNET]

[ppcsurfr @ Mar 6th 2008 10:32AM]

Well I see a lot of comments from people who definitely know nothing about firearms and apparently about the law. Or maybe, people who were just lazy enough to go and click on the link to see the real story behind the painted AR-15 and why it is legal.

Anyway, it's a wonderful piece of work.

The color has nothing to do with it really. Is black evil and pink cute? Is black deadly and pink safe? color is nothing more than color. If guns came in all the colors of the rainbow, does it try to hide its lethality under the wrong hands? Does a firearm in the hands of a law abiding citizen become a tool of death? The law is for law abiding citizens... criminals do not care much about the law.

[Morgan @ Feb 3rd 2008 8:23PM]

PPC makes a valid point. Color has nothing to do with the legality of a painted firearm. Hunters paint their shotguns all sorts of colors. It would be apparent that this pink weapon has found it's designated purpose and that is plinking on the range. What I find funny about all of these posts is that everyone making comments against the legal ownership of such weapons (it is by defunct definition an assault weapon). This AR 15 shoots a .223 caliber bullet. Not even lethal enough to be used in hunting in some states. HOWEVER, no one seems to have a problem with the sniper rifle with scope to the right of her. This rifle most likely does not fall into most state's definition of assault weapon but is capable of shooting a .50 cal bullet which can disable aircraft. NOW THAT IS FUNNY because the rifle to the right is not depicted in some legislator's picture book of "assault weapons for dummies".

[MadJack @ Feb 3rd 2008 10:41AM]

Just look at the percentage of incoherent people on the computer today!!!
The PINK gun is NOT to make it look like a toy STUPID.
The PINK gun is NOT to entice kids, STUPID. I'll bet that gun is locked up!

When our government was/is trying to pass more laws, it's the "BLACK GUNS" otherwise called "ASSAULT" rifles that are targeted. The most logical reason for the PINK AR was to show people (government related or not) that it is not the color of the gun any more than the style of gun!

Guns don't kill people....husbands who come home early do!

[Assrot @ Feb 8th 2008 10:34AM]

This rifle makes me want to buy one for both my daughters and my grandaughter. Where can I get 3 of these magnificent examples of American firearms?

Molon Labe,

Joe

[Trickseedog @ Mar 2nd 2008 12:18PM]

I've shot up a lot of paper and wood with my (legal) AR-15, but I've never shot anything breathing, including people. I agree that there should be some regulation of this type of firearm, although the media refering to it as an "automatic" weapon is not accurate. It is a semi-automatic rifle.
I don't know what the answer is to keep any firearm out of the hands of psychotic lunitics, but, as long as they can get them, I want to be able to protect my family! And they WILL ALWAYS be able to get them!

[Arthur @ Mar 12th 2008 9:18AM]

I'm a gun-owner and sport shooter. My belief that people should own firearms has nothing to do with the Second Amendment, or anything else that the NRA and pro-gun people frequently spew. Guns are dangerous, deadly weapons whose only purpose is to harm and kill living things. That being said, firearms ownership creates "force parity"- everyone with a gun is roughly equal in terms of the force they can use. Without guns, bigger, stronger people (usually men) can easily dominate smaller, weaker people. This is not a condition that should exist in modern society. Guns help to "level" the playing field and are, in fact, conducive to equality and democracy. Moreover, I stand by the saying that "if you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns". Criminals don't care about the law, that's why they're criminals. If guns are illegal, then good people won't have them, but bad guys will. That's not a good idea.

[Veronica is average @ Jan 17th 2008 2:25PM]

What a great idea, make a real assault rifle look like a toy weapon instead of the toy looking real. Great for impromptu bank robberies and concealment.

[jroc @ Jan 17th 2008 3:17PM]

I'll be waiting for the powerfuff girls version to come out.

[jroc @ Jan 17th 2008 3:18PM]

I'll be waiting for the powerpuff girls version to come out.

[Andir3.0 @ Jan 17th 2008 3:19PM]

It takes a person to rob a bank, steal something or kill someone. A gun will never do this alone. I hope. I just wanted to put that out front.

[aoeu00 @ Jan 17th 2008 3:29PM]

Guns don't kill people! People kill people! But people use guns to kill people! /confused :P

[ldrn @ Jan 17th 2008 3:34PM]

Ok, maybe it does usually take a person.

But that gun's so cute that if it DID come to life and rob a bank and so on, we'd just have to forgive it and give it hugs.

[MEAT! @ Jan 17th 2008 3:36PM]

I thought the point of bringing a gun to a bank robbery was to let everyone know that you have a gun.

[Manuel @ Jan 17th 2008 4:44PM]

Guns don't kill people! Hello Kitty kills people

[travis @ Jan 17th 2008 4:56PM]

how in the world could someone do that to a gun....that is like the biggest sin in the gun world

[siddharth s @ Jan 17th 2008 7:18PM]

"Guns don't kill people, people kill people" is absolute rubbish. I've seen arguments comparing to car fatalities or other problems to gun related incidents - that's bulls**t.

The primary design goal of a gun is its lethality, to kill. A Car (or other object) generally aren't designed with the goal of taking lives away. The intention of a particular object has much to do with how widespread it should be.

The problem with guns is that it make it SO easy for people to take lives. The Vtech shooting is clear. One guy took out so many folks so quickly and easily. Hell, if you permit such guns, why stop at guns? Why not allow rocket launchers, grenades, bombs, nerve gas or even sub-kiloton atomic bombs?? Lets start a civilian arms race!

You could try to argue at the other end and say "Whatever, then we should also ban knives and that is dumb". Well, knives (like guns) are banned in several places, but more importantly, knives aren't as devastating or deadly as guns. And you can't cut food with a gun, whereas a knife is essential for cooking (the primary design goal, remember?)

Guns, like other lethal military equipment, should be only with the military, police and other government controlled institutes. The only justification I can see is during a civil war, against a despotic government.

[HahnWG @ Jan 17th 2008 8:08PM]

siddharth s @ Jan 17th 2008 7:18PM

"Guns, like other lethal military equipment, should be only with the military, police and other government controlled institutes. The only justification I can see is during a civil war, against a despotic government."

Soo.... if the despotic government's military and police have all the lethal military equipment... wouldn't that be a pretty short civil war?

[Jason Kennemer @ Jan 17th 2008 10:47PM]

Sid,

Go find another country to live in.

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

[TK @ Jan 17th 2008 10:46PM]

Sid,

Go live in another country, you've just lost your right to live in this one.

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

[siddharth s @ Jan 18th 2008 4:33PM]

Jason, TK, that's a very smart argument. You guys should quit inbreeding ya know.

HahnHG, that's a short sighted conclusion on your part. If you're competing with the army, navy, air forces and marines, you REALLY think your firearms will give you the edge over their ammunition, guns, vehicles, aircrafts, helicopters? Not even a CHANCE! What you are alluding to, is that the civilians need to have an arms race against their own government (not a foreign threat!), JUST in case the government goes bad. Hell, we better start taking bids for our own anti aircraft guns during the next neighborhood watch meeting ...

Please study most successful civil wars against established empires/governments. NONE have been successful without foreign influence or foreign support (i.e. allies). I'm surprised you didn't notice this since in recent history, there have been several examples of just that.

There is no point in arguing on hypothetical when examples from the real world are very clear. Look for gun violence in the US and the impact of civilian gun control laws during modern (i.e. not 18th century) civil wars.

In the end, we all want laws that safeguard civilians, without personal agendas of "pro-gun" or "anti-gun". Its just that by reason, "pro-gun" poses more risk than the rewards it promises.

Also, the handful of "pro-gun" folks are rating down every "anti-gun" post in this thread, so I'm not surprised about the rating trend for this post.

Anyway, this is engadget, so I'll let this rest and move on with the gadget news ...

[caleb @ Jan 19th 2008 1:47PM]

First of I wish people like TK and Jason Kennemer would keep their ignorant mouths shut. They do nothing to help their (our) cause.

Second:
@siddharth s

"The Vtech shooting is clear. One guy took out so many folks so quickly and easily."

If you could make the technology just go away you might have a point, but it's too late at this point. If only one of the Virginia Tech victims had a gun to protect themselves the tragedy could have been eliminated or at least mitigated. Virginia Tech has a policy against students carrying handguns (even if they have gone through the training and permitting process to legally concealed carry in Virginia). Notice how this did not stop Cho from carrying a gun on campus, but did prevent any law abiding citizen and student from protecting herself. It's surprising how may of these mass shootings occur in "Gun free zones" like the mall shooting in Omaha. All that a "gun free zone" does is let a criminal know that he will be uncontested and unequaled in fire power at least until the authorities arrive.

"HahnHG, that's a short sighted conclusion on your part. If you're competing with the army, navy, air forces and marines, you REALLY think your firearms will give you the edge over their ammunition, guns, vehicles, aircrafts, helicopters? "

Good point. One only has to look at our overwhelming success of The United states over the under manned, under armed and under trained insurgency in Iraq as well as Russia's success in Afghanistan in the 80's to see the truth in that point.

"Please study most successful civil wars against established empires/governments. NONE have been successful without foreign influence or foreign support (i.e. allies). "

I could be wrong, but I'm fairly certain that the Cuban Revolution and Castro's overthrow of the Batista regime started with a very small group of rebel forces. Well under 100 men from the outset if my memory serves me.

"Guns, like other lethal military equipment, should be only with the military, police and other government controlled institutes. The only justification I can see is during a civil war, against a despotic government."

Is that really the *only* reason? Wow! you *are* and extremist. Even the Brady Campaign wouldn't take hunters rifles away from them. There may not be many where you or I come from, but there are plenty of less fortunate people out there who rely on their guns to put food on their tables and to feed their families.

[stantla @ Feb 15th 2008 2:14AM]

guns dont kill people........but the sure do help

[aeo @ Jan 17th 2008 2:26PM]

Death never looked so cute. It will certainly make your victims WANT to die when they see it.

[Adoniteking @ Jan 17th 2008 2:31PM]

can you imagine if the new RAMBO film showcased this gun in a scene.
At first the rebels("bad guys") will probably laugh and speak in their dialect "this guy is a joker..it aint real..tsk! stupid american" then Stanlone replies back in their dialect "wanna bet..simle for the kitty" PRAKAKAKAKBRAAKAKAKAAAA!!!

[Henrik @ Jan 18th 2008 7:01AM]

WOW, Best. Movie Script. Ever.

[TJ Johnson @ Jan 17th 2008 4:47PM]

That would first require:

a) Stallone to not have a speech impediment and
b) for the movie to be the spoof of Rambo

The only thing that would make this gun cuter is if I could use it to shoot Hello Kitty in the face. Oh yeah, IMHO.

[Michael Doeling @ Jan 17th 2008 2:33PM]

Isn't it illegal to make a weapon look fake or toy like?
My other thought was , so nice to see gay white supremists at the shooting range

[Ray-- @ Jan 17th 2008 3:12PM]

he made it for his wife/GF as the post states.

"dressed up a (legal) AR-15 assault rifle in Hello Kitty fashion for his better half"

[Andir3.0 @ Jan 17th 2008 3:21PM]

"white supremists"

What makes you think that? Racist much?

[aoeu00 @ Jan 17th 2008 3:25PM]

According to the CNN article, that picture "is of the wife"! No further comment..

[aoeu00 @ Jan 17th 2008 3:26PM]

Err.. CNET/riflegear link (why can't we edit our comments? /sigh

[Brian @ Jan 17th 2008 3:50PM]

No kidding. Racist much?

What makes you think this person is a white supremist? Maybe it's because there wasn't a minority in the photo-op?

[lefty @ Mar 26th 2008 8:46PM]

Guns don't kill people, dangerous minorities kill people.

[Roofus @ Jan 18th 2008 2:00PM]

Not that I'm defending the ignorant comment you're arguing against, but where does it say his "better half" is a woman? Just saying.

[Miles @ Jan 18th 2008 3:09AM]

I guess only minorities have the right to bear arms since the "white man is trying to keep them down"

Please, in a few years whites will be a minority too.
There was some estimation about it, I think the study showed that Hispanics would be the majority, they even went so far as to say that Spanish would be the main language spoken in the US too.

[Makalu @ Feb 29th 2008 11:56PM]

The read link says he made it for his wife.

[xB Owner @ Jan 17th 2008 2:34PM]

So how do I go about getting a in Call of Duty 4? Could you imagine the shame that would reign down upon your opponents when they find out they just got wasted by Hello Kitty?

[Fruition @ Jan 17th 2008 2:31PM]

I'd be more afraid of the guy carrying a Hello Kitty assault rifle than a regular one. Because the guy who has the painted pink gun is clearly capable of anything.

[grjohnston @ Jan 17th 2008 6:16PM]

"A man walks down the street in that hat, people know he's not afraid of anything."

[Bb @ Jan 17th 2008 2:33PM]

Say Hello to my 'lil Kitty

[m @ Jan 17th 2008 5:13PM]

Goodbye Kitty.

[Simon P @ Jan 17th 2008 5:20PM]

my wife said that to me.....once.....

[John @ Jan 17th 2008 2:31PM]

I think there'd be less of a gun issue if people didn't think of guns as "cute" or as toys...

[Andir3.0 @ Jan 17th 2008 3:41PM]

There would also be less of a gun issue if the weapon of choice wasn't highlighted as the cause of the crime with guns making the headlines. People do truly buy guns as a hobby (target shooting, collections...even hunting) and not all guns are used for crime. Every crime you read about concerning weapons is written as though the person wouldn't have done it if they didn't have a gun and somehow the gun infected their brain with thoughts of killing. It's merely a tool. Just as any tool, when used the wrong way it can kill. Hell, even my R/C Helicopter can be used to kill people from a distance. The edge of the blade travels in excess of 200MPH and can slice an artery wide open. Would you think of a flying R/C vehicle as a toy? Are we going to ban anything with range or ranged control because it might be harmful if abused? How about a rubber band powered paper clip?

I mean, it's pretty obvious from the photo that they are training to rob a bank, right? Because according to popular media, there is no other purpose in owning a gun besides crime.

[omf @ Jan 17th 2008 2:32PM]

Definite proof that there's no limit to the power of the human imagination.

The next logical step is a complete Hello Kitty Armed Corps. Watch those recruitment numbers skyrocket!

[macona @ Jan 17th 2008 2:34PM]

Now you can kill without even firing a shot. Your victims will kill themselves when they see the rifle!

[Eldiablo @ Jan 17th 2008 2:39PM]

When you absolutely, positively need to kill every futhermukin cutesy ass product in the room - accept no substitute.

[Teetdogs @ Jan 17th 2008 4:18PM]

Nice Jackie Brown Reference there, I lmao

[Philippe @ Jan 17th 2008 2:42PM]

Sooooooo... Where are the Hello Kitty target practices?

[riggs @ Jan 17th 2008 2:44PM]

great, now all we need is a calvin and hobbes grenade.