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]

[andy @ Jan 17th 2008 5:56PM]

Actually, that's just a name you and your lib friends gave it.


In proper nomenclature, its type is main battle rifle and its model is AR-15 which stands for Armalite model 15.

You just call it an "assault" rifle because it's what you perceive to be "an evil black rifle". However, I guess this doesn't qualify as an "assault rifle" even under your definition because while it may be "evil" and a "rifle", it's not "black" anymore.

[Roofus @ Jan 17th 2008 6:17PM]

Not a gun hater, or a gun owner hater. I just prefer bow hunting... and ruffling some feathers. :P

[imec @ Jan 17th 2008 6:49PM]

There's an old saying: "You're either a victim, or a gun owner." Gun laws hurt law-abiding citizens, of course criminals don't care if they are breaking the law when they purchase an armor-piercing AK-47 with a drum clip. I wonder if the guy with the semi-automatic MP-5 will be able to defend himself when the armored criminal kicks the door in? Not only does it give criminals the upper hand, it allows the government to enforce unfair practices or laws without resistance (if the government ever gets that bad; chipping, for instance, wouldn't be tolerated by the mass majority).

[caleb @ Jan 19th 2008 2:10PM]

Careful Andy...not all gun supporters are right-wing assholes :P

Gun control laws actually have their beginnings in racism and the attempt to keep guns out of the hands of minorities. :)

*just another gun toting lib-tard*

[Damon @ Jan 17th 2008 6:15PM]

What a bunch of kids who's only contact with firearms is on video games or TV. That weapon will only be used at the range as a hobby, what kind of idiot thinks every gun on the planet is used to kill people?

White supremesists? When you find anything 'white supremesist' in that pic you are obviously incredibly racist and think everyone else is, too.

[gadgetzen @ Jan 17th 2008 6:40PM]

semi-automatic != assault rifle

[caleb @ Jan 19th 2008 2:12PM]

Well that depends on who is defining the term. For example, Washington DC has actually defined any gun that is either fully automatic or semi-automatic that holds more than 10 rounds as a "Machine Gun"

[imec @ Jan 17th 2008 6:41PM]

That's pretty cool, of course, the police will hesitate to shoot you when you go on that killing spree at the nearest hello kitty.

[imec @ Jan 17th 2008 6:54PM]

(And yes, this was a joke. I completely hate anyone who thinks that guns should only be in the hands of soldiers and police officers.)

[Jeff @ Jan 17th 2008 7:37PM]

If that dude is in California, he's busted. That weapon has a 30 round magazine and a bayonet lug!

Perhaps the pink color will suit him well in prison!

[Alex @ Jan 17th 2008 8:47PM]

If you click go to the original site and read through the comments, he explains how he made this legal, such as permanently modifying the 30 round clip to only hold 10.
As far as the gun nuts vs. Gun haters debate, if I may chime in, owning a pistol for protection or a rifle to hunt makes sense to me, but why does any normal person need a freakin battle rifle? This ain't halo, I don't think king George is gonna barge in and start pushing us around any time soon, and if we look at Europe no guns does equal less murders. I live in Berlin now, a city of 4 million, and there were like 60 murders last year. No guns, no death penalty, which are supposedly 2 of Americas biggest deterrents. But shit, who am I to say what people can and can't have? But if attack my family I'll kill you with my bare hands if I have to.

[Wwhat @ Jan 17th 2008 9:36PM]

Once we got cloning perfected we can clone people for americans to KILL KILL KILL
In fancy resorts perhaps.

[Brian @ Jan 18th 2008 12:39AM]

@alex

You won't be defending your family with your bare hands if "they" have one of these... or any other firearm.

What's wrong with assault rifles? People don't knock over gas stations with $2k rifles, they knock them over with $100 pistols. These rifles are purely for sport, in the hands of a US civilian. It's the ones we ship overseas you have to worry about :p

These things will kill just as easily as the $100 pistol. Eliminating the rifle will not eliminate the problems this country (never) faces. It won't even help.

I'm a very "liberal" / left person, myself... and I don't understand why lefties are so obsessed with taking the guns away from law abiding citizens.

[ZeroCorpse @ Jan 19th 2008 1:34AM]

I guess he altered it to be legal.

However, I seem to recall a law that makes it illegal to make a real gun look like a toy gun. This came after they started putting the colorful parts on toy guns to make it obvious that they were toys. Apparently, some thugs thought it was a good idea, and so they started painting their real guns with safety orange barrels and bright colors to make their weapons look "safe." Once the fact that this was being exploited was discovered, laws were quickly passed to make it a crime to misrepresent a real gun as a harmless toy. This was also meant to make it so the non-toy guns weren't appealing to young children.

I cannot cite any references for this. It's just from memory. I do believe it's true, though. If it's an active, deadly firearm, then it has to LOOK like an active, deadly firearm.

So-- Cool mod. Nice job.

But watch for the cops, dude.

[T @ Feb 11th 2008 7:44AM]

Actually California has no rules against having a bayonet lug. Look it up...that was part of the now-expired Federal Assault Weapons Ban (or the "Clinton ban"). It is legal in California to use a magazine that has the same dimensions as a 30-rd magazine if it has a fixed 10-rd capacity. Before you go spouting information you know nothing about, check your facts.

[daveuy88 @ Jan 18th 2008 12:22AM]

Hopefully it will encourage more ladies to learn about firearm safety? lol

[DTWD @ Jan 18th 2008 5:20AM]

Probably photoshopped, but I had this in my Photobucket account:

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y257/DamnThoseWiffyDogs/UnGodly/People/PinkMilitaryBDUs.jpg

[Mo @ Jan 18th 2008 8:03AM]

it's for his wife, i saw the pics months ago on ar15.com

[jkjudgex @ Jan 18th 2008 10:52AM]

@siddharth:
Your points are invalidated by history...

Without guns, problems like the thugees of India and other hoodlums arise and can get out of control.

Without guns, more people build homemade explosives.

Without guns, you are helpless when two other people decide to beat you to death for your money, and sometimes it only takes one. Martial Arts? Whatever.

Illegal guns = Criminals shoot you, you run for cover.
Legal guns = Criminals have to think twice. You might shoot back.

[airtonix @ Jan 18th 2008 12:40PM]

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

they also use :

spoons, tv magazines, plastic straws, the tiny bits of fluf you find in your navel after a good orgy, your grandma, edges of cliffs, ideas annnnnnd really boring lists like this.

[john_v_phipps @ Jan 18th 2008 5:01PM]

If I painted my car in a Hello Kitty motif.... would you consider it a lethal weapon?

[ZeroCorpse @ Jan 19th 2008 1:26AM]

For the record:

I'm a far-left liberal.

I think we should have the right to own guns. Not to prevent crime, or defend our land from our fellow Americans, but to defend ourselves from our own government.

If the government starts taking away your right to bear arms, that's a BAD SIGN. Even our nation's founders understood the importance of having the option and ability to take up arms against an oppressive government. That's why they made that one of our rights.

My only problem is with gun enthusiasts who treat them like children or collect them obsessively, and don't secure them properly. There's nothing wrong with owning a shotgun, rifle, and handgun. There's a problem when you own a dozen shotguns, a dozen rifles, and a dozen handguns. If you give names to all your guns and touch them/brandish them all the time, you might have a mental problem.

I also think that basic background checks and short waiting periods are perfectly reasonable. There is no reason you need a gun RIGHT NOW when you walk into a gun shop. If you think you need it immediately, then you're probably not in the right state of mind to have one. Waiting a day, having time to think about what you need the gun for, and having to submit to a check to see if you've ever committed a crime with a gun shouldn't be a problem for most people. Figuring out if you are an escaped mental patient before giving you a glock is a GOOD thing.

Besides, you can still legally purchase black powder weapons without a background check or waiting period in most states. Sure, you need to be able to properly load a flintlock, musket, or wheel-lock firearm, and that takes time and knowledge, but the allowance is there.

So please, do not judge the gun issue as a liberal vs conservative one. It is not. While a lot of my fellow liberals seem to take the opposite side of this issue and believe guns are naughty-bad and wrong, I think it's irresponsible to refuse the right to bear arms if you want your republic to be a just and free one.

I do not own a gun, and I do not want one at the moment. However, I would be most displeased if my government were to decide that I no longer have the option of owning a gun. When they issue that sort of mandate, it's usually the second step on the road to fascism or an outright dictatorship.

On the issue of a pink Hello Kitty gun, I do not think the founding fathers had a stance. I would have to believe that they would find it a bit disturbing, though, and consider it something more appropriate to a French dandy than an American.

My question: Does he paint the bullets pink for her, too?

[caleb @ Jan 19th 2008 2:36PM]

I agree with most of what you've said except for a waiting period. Currently in the US, to buy a gun from a licensed dealer (and even a private seller in some states) you have to have an *instant* background check. i feel like this should be enough for anyone to buy a gun if they want or feel they need one. While one day isn't so bad most organizations like the Brady Campaign are pushing for 30 day waiting periods. 30 days is more than enough time, for example for a woman to start being stalked and realize she might be in physical danger from this person and decide to buy a gun to protect herself and then actually be attacked.

[caleb @ Jan 19th 2008 2:36PM]

I agree with most of what you've said except for a waiting period. Currently in the US, to buy a gun from a licensed dealer (and even a private seller in some states) you have to have an *instant* background check. i feel like this should be enough for anyone to buy a gun if they want or feel they need one. While one day isn't so bad most organizations like the Brady Campaign are pushing for 30 day waiting periods. 30 days is more than enough time, for example for a woman to start being stalked and realize she might be in physical danger from this person and decide to buy a gun to protect herself and then actually be attacked.

[Michael Z. Williamson @ Jan 19th 2008 10:20AM]

http://olegvolk.net/gallery/d/2779-4/pinkrifles0511.jpg

My daughter thinks you're a bunch of pansies.

BTW, when you get to that crap about "only the police and military" and "Consult with an expert," etc., I'm right here.;-)

[Mauritz @ Jan 28th 2008 8:21AM]

This Rifle was actually made by my boss (I can't tell you how many lunches we've spent discussing gun control. Guess what his position is :) ). I feel almost famous!

[dodgerblues00 @ Jan 29th 2008 7:55PM]

i think it's cute.

[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!

[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".

[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.