Man Surprised To Receive Illegal Assault Rifle Instead Of The TV He Ordered From Amazon

A man living in Washington, D.C. was expecting a new high-definition TV he ordered from Amazon through a third-party seller, but somewhere along the way, his order got turned into something he (or anyone) wouldn’t have ever expected: A high-caliber, semi-automatic assault rifle that is very large and very illegal in D.C.

Apparently the guy was first tipped off that something was amiss because instead of the rectangular packaging and somewhat flat shape one might expect for a TV, his delivery came in a long, narrow box, reports FOX 5, and was simply left outside his apartment door. Once he and his wife discovered the rifle, they called the cops right away to get the gun out of their house as fast as possible.

Assault rifles are totally illegal in D.C., as is transporting them. Which is why it’s a good thing the guy called the cops instead of even bringing it to UPS to return it to the sender. Police officers confiscated the gun and are in the midst of trying to figure out how it landed at the man’s apartment instead of the gun shop in Pennsylvania where it was heading originally.

“[Police] were a little confused at first, they’ve never seen anything quite like it,” said the man. “They just took my information and then said we’ll handle this weapon because it’s illegal to keep here. It’s illegal to transport in a car, so it can’t be returned.”

Now, about that missing TV…

DC Breaking Local News Weather Sports FOX 5 WTTG

*Thanks for the tips, Patricia, Elizabeth and Grant!

DC man orders television online, receives rifle in mail instead [FOX 5]

Comments

Edit Your Comment

  1. Lyn Torden says:

    I guess the DC police don’t have much experience dealing with UPS.

  2. AcctbyDay says:

    Now that is interesting. I wonder which would be more expensive.

    • StarKillerX says:

      It depends, how would you expense the time in jail?

      Seriously though, most Sig Sauer rifles are more expensive then most TVs which would be delivered by UPS.

      • Blueskylaw says:

        Right now, some Pennsylvania gun shop owner is calling
        police to remove a very illegal big screen television from his shop.

    • Ogroat says:

      The Sig 716, which is the model that the guy received, has an MSRP of about $2100. I believe that most televisions that consumers would buy are likely to fall under that price.

      • dangermike says:

        FWIW, he did say “TVs which would be delivered by UPS.” This is not quite the same as “televisions that consumers would buy.” Generally for TV’s over about 35″, the delivery would be handled by a cargo service rather than a parcel service. Also, anyone that pays more than $1700-1800 for a 716 is getting soaked. Might as well look toward FN or HK at those prices. Or if an AR platform is desirable, Colt, DPMS, Armalite, and Bushmaster are generally known for higher build quality and better customer service. But to each his own, I suppose.

  3. Ashman says:

    I was waiting for a different punchline to the story. something along the lines of ” The man who reported the gun mistakenly delivered to his apartment to the police was arrested for being in possesion of an illegal firearm…”

    Now that would have been news.

    Waiting on part 2. man never receives tv becuase ups shows they delivered…

    • Velifer says:

      Part two is where the original shipper’s ass has to be unclenched by a surgical team after he hears how badly he screwed up the FFL process.

      • MarkFL says:

        Part III is where Dish Network gets into a squabble with the gun manufacturer over carriage fees for assault rifles and ends up dropping Sportsman Channel.

        Part IV is where some moron blows the head off a family member with what he thought was a really cool remote.

  4. nybiker says:

    Does that third-party reseller also sell guns as well as the tv? If so, maybe it was just a simple mistake of swapping the mailing labels?

  5. Velvet Jones says:

    Wow, this is one gun the lazy and incompetent DC police can actually get off the street. I’m sure if an actual criminal had the gun they wouldn’t have even shown up.

  6. dicobalt says:

    Hmmm, smells like a gun smuggling operation inside UPS.

    • axhandler1 says:

      Hey, why not? They’re already in the illegal drug transport game, albiet somewhat unknowingly.

  7. Banished to the Corner says:

    Anyone else think that the gun shop in Pennsylvania has a new TV???

    Damn that dyslexia and mixing up labels – as a person with mild dyslexia, I’ve done this with Christmas presents :-(

  8. TheMansfieldMauler says:

    “Assault rifle” LOL.

    Sounds like the guy saw it, screamed like a little girl, started dancing around and peed his pants.

    Not that there’s anything wrong with that…

    • lovemypets00 - You'll need to forgive me, my social filter has cracked. says:

      You made me laugh! Now I don’t live in DC with their weird gun laws, but as a country girl in central PA, I probably would have been all like “cool – look at this” and “what, I can’t keep it?” Dang!!

    • Starfury says:

      My first thought would’ve been “WTF? This isn’t a TV.” followed by “Cool…a new toy”

    • aerodawg says:

      IF it was even an assault rifle, which Iit was not. Assault rifles are capable of full auto or burst fire and are not cheap or readily available to civilians ever since FOPA ’86. This was a standard semi-auto AR-15…

      • Difdi says:

        Assault rifle is a nonsense term. It means whatever the user wants it to.

        Military rifle and hunting rifle are a bit more specific, and aside from magazine capacity, most hunting rifles outperform most military rifles in most ways. It takes a lot more performance to take down a moose, after all, than an infantryman.

      • dangermike says:

        It’s a Sig 716… It looks like an AR-15 but would be 308 instead of 223 and the Sig action uses a piston rather than direct gas impingement. So, actually, it’s probably a bit better than a standard AR-15 for anything other than squad suppresive firing maneuvers.

    • law-n-disorder says:

      LMAO!

  9. mergatroy6 says:

    There is a lot of cross over between Consumerist and Gothamist articles lately. Just today there is this story, the starbucks/square story and the price is right video.

    Is this site slowly becoming part of the “ist-averse”?

  10. Quirk Sugarplum says:

    If the recipient had simply taken the time to read the details on what he obviously hastily ordered, he’d see that what he actually bought was a “High-Definition TV *kit*”. Step 1 of the process is getting the gun. Step 2 is finding someone who owns a TV. And so on.

  11. frodolives35 says:

    How were either packages not signature required?

  12. Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

    “Assault rifles are totally illegal in D.C.”

    Yeah, how bout the rest of the nation?

    • DemosCat says:

      I would assume it’s not illegal in PA.

    • lovemypets00 - You'll need to forgive me, my social filter has cracked. says:

      Yeah, and whether they’re legal or not does not prevent someone (read criminals) from using them. Philly has some pretty strict gun laws, but yesterday 3 people were killed in a shooting, and they found a Tech-9 nearby. Yep, those laws really work – for law abiding people, that is.

      • benminer says:

        Philly does not have any substantive gun laws over and above what applies in the rest of PA. In fact, localities in PA are prohibited from passing their own gun laws. Perhaps you meant NJ?

        • lovemypets00 - You'll need to forgive me, my social filter has cracked. says:

          You’re right, I mispoke. Philly tries to restrict gun rights, but they haven’t been successful. The police there have been educated that people with carry permits shouldn’t be harassed, etc. From time to time, our local paper treats us to the rantings of their state representatives about gun control. My theory is registering my hunting rifle will not prevent a gang killing with an illegal gun in Philadelphia.

          • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

            Regardless, a strict gun law in NJ doesn’t stop someone getting it from another state and then bringing it in. I was more referring to a nation-wide ban.

            And yes, criminals will have them. It’s going to be difficult to eliminate them completely, if not impossible. That’s not a very good excuse to not try.

          • Difdi says:

            Philadelphia is noteworthy on carry rights, because the same statute that allows permit-holders to carry firearms in Philadelphia is also the statute that makes it legal for police to do so.

            If the law isn’t valid (as the Philly police have tried to claim repeatedly), then police can’t lawfully carry either.

      • Captain Spock says:

        Indeed, making guns illegal, does not stop criminals from getting them illegally. You would need to ban the sale and manufacture, criminals would find a way…

        • Difdi says:

          I read an article a while back, where the author had witnessed a craftsman in Afghanistan make an AK-47 per day using only hand tools; Considering an AK-47 uses stamped metal components and the gunsmith didn’t own metal stamping presses, that’s very impressive.

          Then there are the people who produced a 3D-printed gun recently.

          I’m not spectacular as a machinist, but I could make my own gun if I felt like it, given access to a modern metalshop.

          You can’t restrict manufacture, since criminals don’t respect laws.

      • scottboone says:

        Wow criminals are dumb. TEC-9s have not been sold for a long time; in “gun circles”, they are pretty valuable. The gun had been reported stolen. Easy come, easy go I suppose.

        And before the nuts jump in, the TEC-9 is not a “machine gun”. It is, in fact, classified as a “pistol”. Outside of the plastic body work, not much different than an ordinary Glock or S&W 9mm. Though I believe it initially shipped with a 20-round magazine. Fun little gun to shoot too.

      • Jawaka says:

        If they were illegal in all states then there would be less manufacturers making them available. Any assault weapon found should be destroyed rather than checking to see which state it’s going to.

        • Difdi says:

          Just one problem: One state’s deer hunting rifle is another state’s banned assault rifle.

          Sometimes the same gun becomes illegal simply by changing the color of the grips. With blue grips it’s a sporting rifle, with black ones it’s an assault rifle.

          Assault rifle is a nonsense term, it’s meaningless. It’s a scare term, used to stampede people into passing laws that don’t make much sense.

    • benminer says:

      The Second Amendment is still on the books in most other States.

    • nishioka says:

      > Yeah, how bout the rest of the nation?

      Good luck convincing batshit crazy people in this country that they don’t need an AR-15 for “home defense”. People should be leaning hard on what Justice Scalia said about the issue of gun control… the second amendment does not apply to rocket launchers, therefore a case could be made that assault rifles should also not be covered.

      All giving assault rifles to the public has done has increased the carnage in public shootings. That’s why they’re called ASSAULT rifles.

      • benminer says:

        Rocket launchers are more properly classified “ordinance” not “arms” but thanks for the red herring. As far as “assault rifle” goes, that term means fully automatic. The rifle in question here is semi-automatic. Perhaps you are confusing your fear-mongering labels and meant “assault weapon” which is a media invented term for guns that look scary.

        • Chuft-Captain says:

          The difference between semi-auto and full-auto is a rather small change, easily made by pretty much anyone with some basic gun knowledge and the will to do it. It doesn’t magically stop being an assault rifle just because you tweaked it.

          • aerodawg says:

            ROFLMAO. That “easily made” conversion you’re talking about, requires a skilled gunsmith and a full machine shop and even then there’s no guarantee it will actually work safely and reliably.

            I would bet money you’re one of those ignorant rubes who think “filing down the firing pin” will magically make a weapon full auto when the weapon in question has no full-auto sear or any of the other necessary components for full-auto operation.

          • Difdi says:

            By the same standard, a Honda Civic can be converted into a vehicle that can win Formula-1 races AND survive being shot by a main battle tank with a few rather small changes, easily made by anyone with some basic automotive knowledge and the will to do it.

            Assault rifles are not usually designed to kill people anyway. They operate on the theory that killing a soldier removes one soldier, while wounding one removes three. Most hunting rifles are many times deadlier than any assault rifle.

      • JEDIDIAH says:

        “Assault rifles” are exactly what the members of the militia carried to Concord to whup the British. In terms of the original context of the 2nd Amendment, they are exactly what you should allow civilians to own. Probably should be some encouragement regarding marksmanship too.

        That was the original intent of the NRA BTW.

        The term “assault rifle” is just a term cooked up to scare the ignorant.

        • benminer says:

          “Assault rifle” is a valid categorization and refers to fully automatic rifles that are a step below light machine guns (designed for sustained automatic fire) and a step above submachine guns (which fire pistol cartridges). “Assault weapon” is the media invented term you are thinking of.

      • Mark702 says:

        I say people don’t need super huge trucks like the RAM 3500s and the F-450, so lets make those illegal too right? Oh wait no, we don’t get to dictate how other people live their lives or what personal choices they make. Screw the Feds and their garbage laws that destroy our rights, including the 2nd amendment.

        • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

          That argument is fallacious and invalid.

          Point of fact, we actually do dictate how other people live their lives, and we do control what personal choices people can make. We do this all the time. The Constitution itself limits the scope of freedom. Federal state laws continue with the trend.

          • Libertas1 says:

            Actually, the Constitution limits the scope of the government. It says nothing about personal freedom.

      • polishhillbilly says:

        What a pansy. Man up nancy.

        Call the gun shop, and ask them if they are missing a rifle.
        work things out instead of relying on revenue collectors.

        • Difdi says:

          Then go directly to jail. Do not pass go. Do not collect $200.

          What part of felony to possess in D.C. did you miss?

        • Shinzakura says:

          If he was across the river here in VA, that wouldn’t be much of a problem. But DC has laws requiring the cops to confiscate the rifle and do that part for you.

      • aerodawg says:

        1. It’s not your business to determine what other people “need” to defend their lives and home.

        2. “Need” has absolutely nothing to do with my free excercise of my rights.

        3. There is no functional difference between an AR-15 and any other semi-automatic rifle including many that are widely accepted as hunting rifles.

        4. It’s mighty funny that you claim the availability of AR-15s and the like has increased the carnage in public shootings, because the vast majority of these mass shootings don’t even include a rifle at all. The vast majority are perpetrated with handguns and shotguns and quite a few of the most deadly have been perpetrated with bolt action rifles.

        • Difdi says:

          3. Actually, the main difference about an AR-15 is how wimpy they are.

          They’re a civilian version of a military rifle that was designed solely to be cheap to make and allow a soldier to carry a LOT of ammunition, with the understanding that the ammunition would be underpowered and weak. An AR-15 is more powerful than your average .22 rifle, but it’s a joke as a hunting weapon. It’s designed to wound and incapacitate humans, not bring down deer.

        • Greg Ohio says:

          It is my business to determine what I need to be able to go to school, to meet my congresswoman, the movies, or temple without being murdered by some nut or criminal.

          The Supremes got it exactly backwards.

      • Happy Tinfoil Cat says:

        An AR-15 would likely make a much better weapon for home defense due to the shorter barrel and the mild kick. That and a nice bump stock and you’re golden. ;^)

      • heypal says:

        Citizens are not only granted the right to bear arms in the second amendment in order to protect themselves from each other. It’s a pretty well known fact that at least part of the reason Japan never landed in the US to invade is that they were afraid of the number of guns held by the citizenry. In addition, it keeps our government honest. Kinda.

        • heypal says:

          * I should say they never landed to invade during World War II.

          • Happy Tinfoil Cat says:

            Technically wrong. Didn’t Japan actually invade part of Alaska? Mother Nature is a bitch though and didn’t take kindly to them.

            • heypal says:

              You’ve probably got me on a technicality, but I’m not going to look it up because the substance of what I’m saying won’t change if Japan landed on one small part of Alaska’s archipelago. They didn’t come at us because they knew what was good for them. ; )

            • Libertas1 says:

              Technically, Alaska was not a state .

            • euph_22 says:

              She also didn’t take too kindly to our troops either.

        • euph_22 says:

          No, they didn’t invade the US because they COULDN’T. The closest major battle was at Midway which is 3200 miles from the mainland and 1300 miles from Honolulu. And they lost that battle. Japan simply didn’t have the resources to launch a major amphibious assault (ie d-day like attack) across that much open ocean.

      • Nasty Dan was a Nasty Man says:

        “All giving assault rifles to the public has done has increased the carnage in public shootings. That’s why they’re called ASSAULT rifles.”

        who gave assault rifles to the public? assault rifles have been legal since they were invented and heavily regulated but legal since the national firearms act of 1934. assault rifles meaning, of course, heavy automatic weapons, which an ar-15, sig 716, etc. are NOT. outside of that distinction what you call assault rifles (rifles of the same caliber as “traditional” hunting rifles with nasty cosmetic differences) makes up a very small percentage of firearms deaths.

    • Bsamm09 says:

      How about that this wasn’t an assault rifle to begin with. Assault rifles are FULLY automatic.or selective fire (usually three round burst). This is just a semi-auto version.

      Also, real assault rifles aren’t illegal either. They are just extremely regulated under the NFA. It isn’t too hard to get one if you want to jump through the hoops and also let the ATF inspect where the gun resides any time they want. And spend tons of money for a fully auto version.

      They have them for sale on gunbroker all the time. A small uzi type machine gun will set you back $10k+ very easily.

    • luxosaucer13 says:

      They are, unless one registers it with the BATF and pays the appropriate $200 fee. The term, “Assault Rifle,” is used erroneously to describe semi-automatic rifles that bear resemblance to full-auto military rifles:

      “An assault rifle is a fully automatic rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine, not to be confused with so called assault weapons.[1] Assault rifles are the standard infantry weapons in most modern armies. Assault rifles are categorized in between light machine guns, which are intended more for sustained automatic fire in a light support role, and submachine guns, which fire a pistol cartridge rather than a rifle cartridge.”

      Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_rifle

      Moreover, “Assault Rifles”, by definition, feature selective-fire capabilities which allow the user to switch the firing mode from full-auto (fires continuously as long as the trigger is depressed) to semi-auto (fires one shot per trigger pull). None of the so-called “Assault Rifles” legally for sale at any US gun shop w/o registration requirements have such capability as originally manufactured.

      One common mis-categorization as an “Assault Rifle” is a standard, run-of-the-mill SKS rifle with a fixed magazine. Yes, it fires the same cartridge as the Soviet AK-47 military rifle, but that is where the similarity ends. The rifle is not capable of full-auto or selective fire (and cannot be converted to such because of the rifle’s design) and it has a fixed magazine, not detachable from the rifle itself . According to the BATF, it is actually a semi-automatic carbine, and not an “Assault Rifle.”

      Being in the firearms trade as a Federal Firearms License holder, I doubt very seriously the OP received a bona-fide “Assault Rifle,” as there are special licensing requirements for dealers to be able to sell or ship them, above and beyond a standard Federal Firearms License, as well as citizens to be able to purchase them. Moreover, FFL holders aren’t legally allowed to ship any firearm, excepting firearms classified as “antique” by the BATF and blackpowder firearms, directly to the general public. This would have to be one hell of a FUBAR, if it were a bona-fide “Assault Rifle.”

      On a side-note, if you’re going to advocate for the restriction of the sale of a particular class of firearm, at least do your homework on what constitutes such a firearm.

  13. nodaybuttoday says:

    It’s kind of odd that the same seller of tvs would sell firearms… also doesn’t UPS scan packages?

    • George4478 says:

      Here in Georgia I’ve been in a couple of gun stores that are also pawn shops. So, you could buy a .357 revolver and a saxophone, for example.

    • GitEmSteveDaveHatesChange says:

      They scan all their packages. That’s what the bar codes are for.

    • GitEmSteveDaveHatesChange says:

      Also, Walmart sells tvs and guns.

      • wombats lives in [redacted] says:

        Don’t forget to get the antidepressants before you pick up your guns at walmart.

  14. There's room to move as a fry cook says:

    Of course now he won’t get his TV until he returns the gun.

  15. benminer says:

    Folks, it’s not an assault rifle. Assault rifes are fully auto and the article clearly says this rifle is semi-auto. A “semi-automatic assault rifle” is an oxymoron. Once again somebody who knows very little about guns has added to the confusion.

    • TheMansfieldMauler says:

    • deesee says:

      Agree, it’s like calling an apple a tomato. They’re both red colored fruits, but very different.

    • George4478 says:

      It’s an assault rifle under the Congressional Brady Bill definition of ‘guns that look scary and therefore should be banned’.

    • Dave B. says:

      “Once again somebody who knows very little about guns has added to the confusion”

      You’ve pretty much described the entire media entity in a single sentence. Reporting without knowing or even researching facts. And you are correct, there is no such thing as a semi automatic assault rifle.

    • Difdi says:

      In California, if you attach a pistol grip, 20 round magazine and a bipod to a squirt gun, it’s legally an assault rifle, despite the fact that it doesn’t actually fire bullets.

  16. Gravitational Eddy says:

    Jeez Mary, The way this was written, it makes it seem as if he was in possession of a Kalishnikov or something like that. You need to do better, and not be so sensationalistic.
    I do suppose that you saw the article about the homeless guy in SF who has (had) a couple of handguns, a shotgun and a .22 LR plinker, yet the article called it a “huge stash of illegal weapons”. they even took his knives as well as arresting him on weapons charges.

    The real reason people fear weapons is that sometimes, the owners of them are nutcases.
    There’s no need to impune the weapons themselves.

  17. deesee says:

    Except it’s not an “assault rifle.” Assault rifles are automatic weapons and illegal nationwide. This is just a plain ol’ rifle, even though some people assume that any gun that’s long and black is inherently bad & scary. Plus, “assualt rifle” gets more page views, even if incorrect.

    • Bsamm09 says:

      Fully auto guns are not illegal. They are very expensive and can be difficult to obtain for an individual. Having a corporation or trust own the weapon by-passes one requirement but it is still costly and most times not worth it unless you own a shooting range or otherwise rent guns.

    • atomix says:

      desee, your view of the Assault weapons ban is SO 2003. The ban you’re referring to expired September 2004.

  18. John A says:

    Mistakes do happen, and can certainly be upsetting. Hopefully, the DA or equivalent will leave these people OK without charging them. And since joth shipments are expensive items, I expect them to have trackng info available.

    Still, once more: an “assault rifle” has, since the post-WWI intro of the Browning Automatic Rifle, been a single-person firearm capable of FULL automatic fire. Politicians and journos love to call all long guns “assault” weapons: yes, they can be used in an assault, but I have known people who kicked a cop to be taken on for “assault with a deadly weapon,” i.e. their shoes. A cibilian AR15 or Ak48 knock-off is no more an assault weapon than an old Garand M1 surplus rifle.

  19. TheMansfieldMauler says:

    Reminded me of: http://xkcd.com/325/

  20. CalicoGal says:

    It was probably shipped via A1 Courier.

  21. nikalseyn says:

    It would be nice to know just what brand and model rifle he received. That way we would know just how stupid these people were. A good “assault” rifle can be worth much more than a telly.

  22. Happy Tinfoil Cat says:

    The perfect gift. You want it but could never justify the cost, something you can’t even legally buy dropped on your doorstep, must be heaven sent. Thank God it wasn’t Buckyballs, a child may have been harmed! Nevermind the fact that guns accidentally injure or kill children hundreds of times a year. DC likely has more children killed by gunfire than all the toddlers that ever get their sweaty little pink hands on Buckyballs nationwide.

  23. Its_BS says:

    If I had to guess on the brand and model of the rifle, to start the Manfacture is stated on the foam; Sig Sauer and by the cutout in the foam, would guess a M400 SERIES TACTICAL RIFLE. Basic model of the Carbine is under $1000.

  24. Press1forDialTone says:

    Hey, Jeff Bezos, you know we love ya deep down but
    better call your whizbang Seattle lawyers and get out your
    checkbook….whoops…..I mean OMG!!

  25. Geekybiker says:

    Its really embarrassing how the media continually miss-characterizes semi-automatic rifles as assault rifles. If you’re going to argue that we should ban them you know know at least a little about them otherwise you come off looking like an idiot.

  26. Difdi says:

    > It’s illegal to transport in a car, so it can’t be returned.”

    So the police have to arrest themselves for hauling it to the evidence room at the police station?

    • axhandler1 says:

      Didn’t you know? Laws only apply to citizens, not police.

      • Difdi says:

        That, and if they can legally transport it away they can legally give it back too. Claiming it can’t be returned like that is silly.

    • falnfenix says:

      lol IRL

      it’s legal to transport through the District (there are federal laws about transporting firearms through areas that ban them…), but it’s not like DC cops have any fracking clue…

  27. Professor59 says:

    Amazon’s unfortunate reply: “So we sent you the wrong thing. What are you going to do about it?!”

    • Joedragon says:

      more if you don’t return the gun (we will pay for shipping) you will be billed the full cost of the gun.

  28. Razor512 says:

    He should have kept it, DC’s ban on guns violated the 2nd amendment and has lead to one of the highest crime rates in the country.

    High gun ownership reduces most lower level crime by raising the opportunity cost significantly.

    When someone breaks into a home, they don’t expect to walk out filthy rich from the loot. But since it is a rather low risk job. (police response times are no secret (and the saying still applies, in a life or death situation where seconds matter, the police are only minutes away)

    In my neighborhood, 2 hoses were robbed in a few minutes, the criminal broke into one home, robbed the place, then moved onto the next house and robbed it before the police came. (Police response time in NY sucks)

    in states or towns with very high gun ownership, you see fewer lower level robberies because on one wants to get into a life or death situation over a few hundred dollars worth of stuff.

    (if you believe that guns don’t reduce crime, then why not try robbing, or pitch the idea to a someone who robs homes, to pull off a heist at a local military base (military weapons are worts a ton of money) or at a gun store, given their size, guns are a better item to steal because their value actually goes up on the black market and they can have price tags in the thousands)

    (I wonder why criminals don’t target armed people when they are looking to rob someone)

  29. The_Fuzz_53 says:

    Which seller is this? I need to place an order.

  30. carterpeartford says:

    looks like a SIG 556, which is neither high caliber nor an assault rifle. these are sensationalist terms and completely factually inaccurate.