Beretta ARX100 (courtesy all4shooters.com)

“Gun company Beretta is tone deaf when it comes to calls for restrictions on powerful guns sold in the United States. It must be the chance to make money. Beretta’s website carried an announcement that the ARX100 is ‘shipping now.’ Beretta markets the rifle as ‘Italian Design — American Built.’ Regardless of its origins, the gun is unusually powerful.” – Douglas A. McIntyre in Beretta’s New Super Rifle [via finance.yahoo.com]

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

111 COMMENTS

  3. “Gun company Beretta is tone deaf when it comes to calls for restrictions on powerful guns sold in the United States.”
    It is the proper response when the gun control message is playing on a broken record.

    • Douglas A. McIntyre writes that as his first paragraph, basically editorializing on the business page. Interestingly the rest reads like a Beretta press release.

      I don’t read yahoo news much but it doesn’t look much like journalism.

      • Its not, and my GF’s sister is a school teacher and often uses those articles as lessons on finding grammar and spelling errors as well as logic errors. After a few assignments kids come up to her after class showing others they have found.

      • I wasn’t sure what that article was even supposed to be, either. The opening, editorial swipe at the company I thought was misplaced and out of line. The rest isn’t even an actual article, but as you said, seemingly verbatim a press release.

        It’s almost as though some overzealous, underinformed intern over there at Yahoo tacked on his own anti-gun snippet to a press release, then turned that in to his supervisor as sample work. It’s as though this piece wasn’t meant for publication.

        • Read it again. It IS a press release from Beretta. Because McIntyre says so, and because it is in quotes.

      • Yes, and a financial writer criticizing a company for trying to make a profit.
        I don’t generally read it, either, but had to go look at the rest of this one. The comments were a hoot.

  4. Unusually powerful? Not like this basic gun hasnt been around for a half century+ or anything.

    • Its a cool looking varmint rifle with a round that in some states is illegal to use on deer for not being powerful enough. Just more stupidity by the antis.

    • These useful idiots need to stop believing the Hollywood hype about how small bore rifles are these supposedly uber powerful canons that can obliterate people and throw them 10 feet in the air upon impact. If they took the time to shoot one at least once in their lives, they might be cured of the myth. I suppose fantasy is more fun that reality.

  5. “Regardless of its origins, the gun is unusually powerful.” – Douglas A. McIntyre”

    ???

    Thus proving Douglas McIntyre is completely clueless. But it comes as no surprise that that does not matter to Yahoo.

  6. I’m confused, if the company is tone deaf about what type of firearms American’s want then how is manufacturing the rifle a chance for them to make money?

    It seems to me that if nobody wanted the firearms, it would make no money.

        • Spelling police here; that would be “ordnance”, as “ordinance” is a rule of some kind.

        • “Spelling police here; that would be “ordnance”, as “ordinance” is a rule of some kind.”

          And the TTAG spell-check happily passes off both as correctly spelled. (Spelt?)

    • Being fired by a scary-looking black gun makes the 5.56 projectile take on all the ballistic characteristics of .50BMG, apparently. And makes it capable of shooting down airliners, sinking ships, and ripping holes in the very fabric of the universe.

    • Keep in mind that a 5.56mm is FAR more powerful than the standard by which the clueless media judges all ammunition: the fearsome 0.9mm!

      I mean, the 5.56mm is 6.17778 times BIGGER than the fearsome .9mm!!!! If that isn’t “unusually powerful”, I don’t know what is!!!!

    • Because now I want to read an article on finance from a writer that cant tell the difference between reality and marketing.

    • + 1

      Their side definitely could use better subject-matter-experts as opposed to their whip-your-ignorance-into-a-froth experts, so at least there could be an argument.

      Maybe we are already in the zombie-apocalypse, it’s just that they don’t eat brains yet. I dunno?

    • This is pretty typical for Yahoo. They hire all the writers that couldn’t get jobs at real papers.

    • Surprisingly, to me at least, was that the comments section over there was similar to here, with commenters incredulous about the tone and characterization of .223 as unusually powerful. Someone there also made the observation about its suitability and legality for deer hunting. I wasn’t sure what to expect at Yahoo, because I don’t read it, but some of the commenters at least seemed informed.

  10. From the article:

    “And maybe most important of all, the ARX100 is reasonably priced at $1,950, which does not include bullets.”

    Dang it. Now I want ALL my gun purchases to include bullets, and I guess I’ll have to pre-purchase dies, brass, powder and primers so I can load up and use the rifle right away.

    Note to Doug: You have no basis for writing on this topic, even just from a business / finance perspective. This is just embarrassing.

    • My Glock 17 came with bullets. It was my first handgun that I bought as soon as I turned 21 and the owner of my LGS threw in 100 rounds of 9mm for free.

  14. They are tone deaf to the sreeching of irrelevant ninnies. That’s why we make them wealthy by buying their products. Its called sipply and demand; you demand we surrender our property, we supply you with derisive laughter.

  15. Unusually powerful? ‘Super Rifle’? Reasonably priced? lol. What an asshat. Until these folks have a clue of what they are talking about, they will continue to drool on their bib. Frankly, their complete lack of a clue is pitiful.

    • On the other hand, those very same talking points could easily have come from Shooting Illustrated’s review on the R51… Perhaps Mr. McIntyre has a bright future in doing gun reviews for dead-tree media?

    • Well, ” the gun is unusually powerful.” and has a 30 caliber over capacity clip which can be emptied in 1/2 a second with a shoulder thingie that goes up with Ghost features.

  16. I can’t say I’d go to a financial news page for opinions on guns, bur considering they’re disdainfully accusing a for-profit business of making decsions based on profit, I can’t say I’d go there for business news either. No shit it’s about making money, genius. THAT’S THE ENTIRE POINT OF RUNNING A BUSINESS!

  17. This is just to rile you up. How do I know? He writes for the HuffingtonPost.

    Just sayin’

  18. It’s unusual features that make it more dangerous, according to this author, are:

    1) It’s “sturdy” (based on the Beretta ad).
    2) “maybe most important of all, the ARX100 is reasonably priced at $1,950, which does not include bullets.”

    Boy, nobody show this guy a $600 rifle that does the same thing. I like how about halfway through he stops actually offering any commentary and just uses the quotes from Beretta without any real attribution.

    • many Yahoo News stories get tens of thousands of comments, so apparently, a lot of people do.

      • I think most of them comment just to say how stupid the article is. Best I can tell Yahoo is primarily a purveyor of celebrity-gossip fluff

  20. Doug don’t know jack sh!t about firearms…. that is obvious to POTG. Sadly it is not to those who read and will be influenced by his “work”. “unusually powerful…..super rifle…” BWa ha ha ha…darn it-I coughed up my coffee…..

  21. They need some new f***ing writers. It is one thing to have a personal bias that influences your “news” article. But what we have is a writer in the FINANCE section of their website who is so stupid that he does not understand that THE POINT OF A BUSINESS IS TO MAKE MONEY.

    • I’m thinking it has twice the muzzle velocity of another gun firing the same round, right?

    • Brings to mind that demo CNN ran a few years ago, using a full-auto 5.56 rifle to demolish a cinder block to illustrate what kind of firepower would supposedly be unleashed on the streets with the expiration of the Clinton AWB (which, we all know, didn’t address full autos). And to compound the deception, they then fired a “non-ban” 5.56 with no discernible effect on another cinder block, and then marveled at the disparity. As it turned out, the deputy sheriff who fired the “non-ban” 5.56 actually shot it into the ground, not at the other cinder block, but that went [allegedly] unnoticed and definitely unremarked by the CNN reporter and the lickspittle sheriff running the demo. Obviously a lot of people fall for this kind of crap, even tho CNN ran a “correction” report a few days later (after Wayne La Pierre called them out for their false report on the air on one of their own Sunday talk shows)

  23. I don’t know about y’all, but “usually powerful” sound awesome to me.

    Like, usually attractive, usually wealthy, or an usually large male member…

    Reads more like a point of pride than shame.

  24. “Journalist” should be required to run a full disclosure statement on articles they write. Clearly this “journalist” has no inkling of the subject mater of which he writes. As well, his command of the English language is at a 7th grade level. Credibility level, zero.

  25. “It must be the chance to make money.” Well duh! Correct me if I’m wrong here but isn’t that pretty much the #1 goal of any for profit business?

  26. Given the source it seems more likely this language is aimed attention as opposed to trying to be anti gun.

    The guy would not get any hits if he was like “beretta is realizing a typically powered modern rifle And it uses the typical antiquated 30 cal mag clip as the ar15”

  27. “It must be the chance to make money”

    Seeing as how one of the objectives of a business is to turn a profit so they can stay in business….. DUH!!

  28. My favorite:
    “And maybe most important of all, the ARX100 is reasonably priced at $1,950, which does not include bullets.”

    DOESN’T INCLUDE BOOLETT$? WELLL, FORGETT ABUTDIT.

  29. This guy’s Investopedia page says he graduated from “Harvard” magna cum laude. Wow this is what graduates from the elite of the elite ivy league school now and with honors at that. Well worth the money it looks like. /sarcasm

    • Was once at a professional meeting, and a Harvard Prof was giving a talk. This was in a “hard science” field. Some of her comments were imbecilic to the point that the dude next to me and I kept exchanging incredulous glances.

      I thought about “calling her out” with a pointed question or two, but having heard her answers when others asked some good questions (good for exposing her ignorance of the subject matter), I stopped myself. The feeding frenzy was getting close to getting out of hand.

      It was truly embarrassing. Her only real credential seemed to be “Teaches at Harvard” without any substance underneath it.

      It was that day that “Harvard” lost ALL semblance of ANY credibility with me. Not sure what they are doing up there, but it sure is not in line with the reputation they have.

      With that, I’ll add that it does not really surprise me that Doug graduated Harvard with honors…because that really does not seem to mean a whole lot.

      • I know some people, particularly foreign nationals, who claim all sorts of ‘Harvard’ cred after having just attended some sort of summer program there. You’ll see them put “Harvard Alum ’12” in their signatures, stuff like that. I bet it’s similar for someone who teaches a single seminar there. Just like when some dude trains a group of deputies for free and starts calling himself a Law Enforcement Special Operations Trainer for the rest of time.

      • “With that, I’ll add that it does not really surprise me that Doug graduated Harvard with honors…because that really does not seem to mean a whole lot.”

        According to Dr. Ben Carson (Baby brain surgeon, and possible conservative presidential candidate in 2016, who is himself a Harvard grad…)

        Something along the lines of – “The best part about being a Harvard grad, you will never again be impressed by someone with a degree from Harvard.”

  30. Horrors!!!

    A company in business to make money!!

    What is the world coming to????

    And making money by selling a gun so “powerful” that some states don’t allow its use for deer hunting…..

  31. Oh the first comment on that yahoo article was epic, this guy is just a yahoo writing for other yahoos.

  32. I just checked all over the Beretta website on this, and watched MAC’s review, and I am severely disappointed nobody but Dougie here mentioned the power button. Where is it on this damn thing? When I push the only button I can find, all the damn bullets fell out!

    • Or the even more glorious most glorious 7.62×63 Sprg. Haha.

      Not starting a caliber/cartridge war, but really…this “unusually powerful” comment is just patently ridiculous compared to what was “normal” for battle rifles in WWII.

      Hathcock won the Wimbledon with a 300 Win Mag, so what’s that classified as in Doug’s universe? Phenomenally, fascinatingly, mind bogglingly more-than-unusually powerful?

  34. I read some of the replies at the site. Every single one shows the writer to be the ass that he is.

  35. I just read through the first 60 out of 1,825 comments on little Dougie’s article. Every one of them was critical of his scribbling. The people that read Yahoo articles seem to be in agreement, that boy would do better with a box of crayons. This is why Mother Hysteria and her fellow paid propagandists prefer to publish their lies in echo chambers with comments either disabled or heavily censored. Useful idiots who do not have control of feedback, like little Dougie, are immediately exposed with truth, reason and logic. The POTG are everywhere and we are countering the propaganda of the civilian disarmament complex relentlessly.

  36. I read Yahoo to see what’s up with the goofy left wing. And Huffpoo for thye same reason. Does unusually powerful mean it blow up tanks and shoots missiles outa’ the sky?

  37. It fires a fairly common caliber so it’d be more accurate to call it “usually powerful.”

  38. He meant to say “ugly” and instead wrote “powerful”. I guess that’s what happens when “journalists” try to use big words they don’t understand.

  39. the price tag doesn’t include bullets!!!

    What a ripoff!!! I want my money back!

  40. Stupid gun manufacturers. They should start making guns less powerful and less effective. What are they thinking? I know I can’t wait to buy a car that get 1 mile per gallon and has a top speed of 14mph. I mean, for the love of God, why would you want something that works well and is made to perform the best that it can? Doesn’t make sense to me. I think we should all turn in our unusually powerful guns for something with plastic bullets… but not too powerful because some of those plastic bullets can leave a bruise.

  41. Look at it this way instead –

    Beretta ad copy + McIntyre’s additions of:
    1. “super rifle”
    2. “tone deaf when it comes to calls for restrictions”
    3. “unusually powerful”
    4. “video game features”
    5. “remarkably sturdy”
    6. “reasonably priced”
    7. “for the real gun lover”

    If I was an 18 years old “Call of Duty” fanboy, I think I just sprung wood and am driving now to one of the “hundreds of locations, as this helpful search tool at the Beretta website shows.”

    And that’s exactly McIntyre’s send-off at the end of the article.

    Do you really think this is a gun-ninny piece, or more like forbidden fruit marketing?

  42. This McIntyre twit has a real axe he’s grinding. Has “written” a number of gun (anti-) lectures over the last few years.

    Search on: Douglas A. McIntyre gun

  44. if more powerful it can kill deader than dead ,,not just dead . guns should,only be powerful enough to only kill,dead , deader than dead is cruel and unusual.so ban such guns!

  45. ATF is testing a muzzle device to replace the flash hider on an AR 15 that will greatly reduce the power.. it would then be mandatory if approved.

  46. Compared to the SCAR the ARX is pretty reasonably priced (3k for SCAR vs 2k for ARX).

    Can’t wait til the 7.62×39 version comes out (also, how hard would it be to convert it to bullpup?).

  47. I bought a carcano in 1966 at a surplus store ,and some original ammo, it would not hit a small 1 1/2 ft diameter tree stump at 50 feet ,,nor a large standing buck deer at about 50 yds fired 3 times at the deer it just stood there ,, my partner pulled up with a springfield ’06 and dropped it ,one quick shot .sorriest gun i ever owned.

  50. When anyone tells me how powerful the 5.56 is I whip out a bag oof spent brass and ask them to identify it. The bag contains a 5.56, 243, 308, 30-06 and a 300 win mag, the most common pick is the 30-06. It looks big and bad without being too big. When I show them the 5.56 they are amazed how weak@$$ looking it is.

  53. There’s nothing “unusually powerful” about a semi-automatic .223/5.56MM. There just isn’t.

  54. Yahoo is disgusting sometimes.
    Their news section copies articles word for word, title included, without even listing the original as a source.
    Also this idiot. Unusually high powered my ass…

Comments are closed.