June 14, 2016 at 10:09 pm #20773proud2baconservativeSpectator
I believe the model of rifle used in recent mass-shootings was the AR-15. A question was posed on the board why anyone would need such a weapon for personal use.
It turns out that there are many advantages. It is lightweight and can be handled easily by a woman or someone who is not very strong or who can only use one arm. It is easy to control and takes less marksmanship and skill to use it effectively.
Here are some excerpts from an article posted by American Rifleman. I don’t think it would hurt to try to understand the perspective of the “gun nuts”:
The AR is very easy to shoot. Head out to the range and test my theory. Ask anyone who wants to join in on the fun to try shooting a scored event, under pressure, with a pistol at home-defense ranges. After you see their performance, try the same with an AR, I will bet money you see much better control of the system. Men and women alike just shoot better with a carbine than with a pistol. As long as the carbine is light enough for the shooter to handle properly, the learning curve will be straight-up.
The AR is unbelievably versatile, from contact shooting distances out to 300 yds., the carbine will outperform the pistol. Most of us don’t think of 300-yd. shooting as a likely home-defense scenario, and, in many areas, it wouldn’t be. But if given an option of defensive tools, and considering our country’s independent heritage and past experiences, why wouldn’t you want extended-range capabilities?
The AR has little to no recoil. Even when fired from a strong- or support-hand-only position, its recoil is negligible. Pistols and shotguns recoil far more than most .223 carbines. Less recoil means more time on target—that is a good thing when the shooting starts.
With a red-dot or low-power scope on your carbine you won’t need to align sights as you would need to with your pistol. Simply keep both eyes open, place the red dot on the threat and squeeze the trigger. I am not trying to oversimplify the process, but in reality it will be easier to stay proficient with a red-dot mounted on the carbine than iron sights on a pistol. That’s not a guess, it’s a fact.
This article was not written to justify AR rifles, but was the author’s reasons why he chooses it for himself and recommends it to others for home defense. Other firearms experts have other suggestions, based on their personal preferences and circumstances.
Here’s an excerpt about the AR-15 from another article, which includes various firearms recommended by experts for home defense:
The AR-15 platform is much easier to shoot well than a pistol or shotgun. Pistols require time and training to master and maintain proficiency. I shoot a pistol almost every day and feel comfortable with my capabilities with the pistol, but that is not the case for my wife, as well as most readers’ family members. My take on shotguns is also based on the other family members who may need to use it. The weight and recoil of the shotgun can be a load for smaller-framed shooters. The AR-15 in my house is less than 6 pounds, and the recoil impulse is much more manageable. For all of these reasons, I feel that if the need arises for myself or someone in my family to defend us at home, the AR-15 is the best all-around tool for the job.June 15, 2016 at 2:41 am #20778skepticalParticipantJune 15, 2016 at 7:45 am #20779duxruleParticipant
Hey, Bacon, it wasn’t an AR-15, it was a Sig Sauer MCX carbine. The 2A Zealots are pissing all over themselves over this “misidentification” by “the Media.”June 15, 2016 at 8:50 am #20781LurkingGrendelParticipant
No-one remotely serious and honest could state with a straight face that a military grade assault rifle is an intelligent choice for home defense. All you’ve done is post the NRA (and by proxy gun manufacturers) talking points. That’s literally what that is.
No other country in the world has allowed the proliferation of these kinds of weapons among the civilian population. No other country in the world has these kinds of mass shootings.
There’s no-one in the Democrat party at any level that has ever been after your guns. While I would personally not own one, I respect the rights of responsible (and vetted, which is a whole other issue the NRA and Republicans cannot show any level of compromise or reasonableness about) citizens to own a pistol or rifle for either home defense or sport.
Semiautomatic rifles like the one that’s being breathlessly fetishized by that propaganda article were built for one purpose and one purpose alone: To kill as many human beings as possible in as short amount of time as possible.
It’s inarguable. Attempting to state otherwise is either grossly ignorant or incredibly mendacious.
As long as we continue to allow such weaponry to be easily purchased it will continue to be the preferred weapons of those bent on mass murder.
And you’re abetting it.
To be clear, I find you utterly offensive on a number of levels.June 15, 2016 at 2:04 pm #20795Andy BrownParticipant
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.