Time to let you in behind the scenes: we're honestly torn on David Hogg and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. For the same reasons. Both are young, dumb, and should be irrelevant were it not for all the free press we in conservative media constantly give them. We know that. And we're sorry. But their young dumbness makes them such easy fodder. They also perfectly exemplify the real motives of the left, and are eager to spew those motives for attention. So here, once again, is the David Hoggermeyerwiener. He has his hat on backwards, so you know he's living that thug life. We suspect he Googled "scariest black rifle stats on the scary black rifle" to sound like a class-A smarty pants.

"The AR-15 has an effective range of over 1500 meters. And if you have a weapon with an effective range of over 1500 meters, you're not defending yourself. You're hunting a human being."

Two can play the Google game.

The absolute FIRST result is a Mic.com article. David didn't even have to click the link to read more. It's all right there for him, easy speasy.

Had he bothered to read more, he'd have learned most AR-15s are chambered for .223, with very few rifles chambered for .338 Lapua. Doing the math that's... 900 meter difference. Seems like kind of a lot. Related: David Hogg Suggests Gun Owners Regularly Hit Targets Over One Mile .

So answer me this: did the shooter at any high school have an AR-15 chambered for a .338 Lapua? Or were those AR-15s like most AR-15s, chambered for .223/5.56? Because to have longer range accuracy and to accommodate a larger round, one needs a longer barrel. I pinged my local ballistic expert and usual Hoggy Correspondent, Corey Stallings, who texted this:

I’m not sure anyone has the statistics, but I’m willing to bet no human has ever been killed by one at that range outside of war.

I personally have never met anyone who owns one [.338 Lapua]. Truthfully, if you’re going with a .338, you’re usually gonna go with a Barrett rifle or some type of bolt-action. They’re gonna be a much better bet than a modded out AR.

As for the "hunting humans" thing, not quite right there either, David. Legal gun owners aren't interested in hunting humans, just protecting themselves from humans who hunt humans. Just think how much different the Stoneman shooting may have been had, say, Scot Peterson been armed with an AR-15. Or if he wasn't, in fact, a f*cking pussy.

There will always be evil people in this world who do whatever it takes to get their hands on weapons. It's the nature of criminality. I personally want to defend myself from those people. I'd wager David would also like to be protected by firepower to match or exceed that of some gun-toting loser who's father didn't hug him enough. Should he ever be in another situation which went mammaries skyward. Somehow I just don't think a backwards hat is going to ward off baddies. But an AR-15 might. Which is rather the point.

NOT SUBSCRIBED TO THE PODCAST? FIX THAT ! IT’S COMPLETELY FREE ON BOTH ITUNES HERE AND SOUNDCLOUD HERE .