“American Icon,” a new series from The Washington Post, explores how the AR-15 became a powerful political, cultural symbol in America

Comment on this story

Comment

In a groundbreaking series published this week, The Washington Post explores the impact of the AR-15 on the United States and chronicles the rise of the weapon in a polarized country.

More than 60 journalists across The Post newsroom took part in the project, called “American Icon,” which captures both the appeal of the gun to many Americans and the damage it has wrought as an easy-to-use killing machine wielded during some of the country’s darkest moments.

The seven-month examination found that the AR-15’s rise over the past two decades was sparked by a dramatic reversal in strategy by the country’s biggest gun companies as they looked for new revenue.

As part of the series, The Post created a visualization of how bullets shot from an AR-15 can blow apart a body. The piece, The Blast Effect, features 3-D animations of the entrance and exit wounds of two victims whose families consented to the depictions.

“We recognize that this presentation may disturb readers, but we determined the information it contains is critical to the public’s knowledge,” Washington Post Executive Editor Sally Buzbee wrote in a letter to readers.

The Post and Ipsos also surveyed nearly 400 AR-15 owners about why they own the weapon, one of the most detailed polls of its kind. About 1 in 20 U.S. adults — or roughly 16 million people — own at least one AR-15, according to Post-Ipsos polling.

“This series reflects the commitment of The Washington Post to examining, in a deep and clear-eyed way, the role of guns in shaping the life, politics and culture of the United States,” said Peter Wallsten, senior national investigations editor.

“The AR-15 is more than a gun. It’s a powerful symbol with a grip on the American imagination — a readily available and easy-to-use killing machine wielded during some of the country’s darkest moments, and a tactical weapon championed as the ultimate expression of Second Amendment rights.”

To understand the AR-15 and its impact, The Post interviewed more than 200 people with expertise or relevant firsthand experience — including firearms industry executives and lobbyists, gun owners, shooting survivors and victims’ families, lawmakers, trauma surgeons, first responders, activists, armed militants, academics and ballistics experts, among others. Our examination also relied on a review of more than 1,000 pages of documents, including internal company records, court and regulatory filings, and autopsy reports, many of them obtained through public records requests.

In The Blast Effect, The Post shows the mechanics of the AR-15 and the toll its high-velocity rounds exact as they move through human tissue, bones and organs. The first part of the piece models a hypothetical gunshot to show the effect of a single bullet if it were to hit a person in the chest. The second part features separate illustrations that depict the actual entrance and exit wounds of two victims, based on the public records.

In her letter to readers, Buzbee explained that the catastrophic damage that bullets from AR-15s cause inside human bodies is rarely made public in detail. The Post sought to share this information in an “an unflinching but respectful manner.” The principles that shaped the approach, Buzbee wrote, were to show the impact on a body with precision and to share findings through visualizations that met The Post’s ethical standards.

The series also includes compelling videos of survivors of AR-15 shootings and first responders, as well as testimonials from AR-15 gun owners about why they own the weapon.

Readers can find a visual timeline of advertisements showing the evolution of AR-15’s marketing and an account of the impact on police whose departments have increasingly turned to AR-15s and other long guns as officers are more likely to face suspects armed with such weapons. The series also highlights the role of high-capacity magazines in mass killings, and how a growing body of research has found that laws restricting the devices would reduce deaths.