I think what I wrote sounded much like an anti-gun argument, and many people are highly sensitized to that, so it wasn't a good choice on my part. My intended

I think what I wrote sounded much like an anti-gun argument, and many people are highly sensitized to that, so it wasn't a good choice on my part. My intended point was that, although this brand seems to be marketing adjacent to civilian "tactical" firearms enthusiasm, and maybe emboldened by conventions in that product category, I suspect it doesn't have the same protections. In hindsight, I should've asked that as a question.