Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But, he's OK with innocent people dying because they are defenseless against armed criminals. I guess their lives don't matter. Another Media brainwashed leftist.
Agreed if you want an AR-15 just for plinking have at it. But a shotgun is a better home defense weapon.
Even with stand your ground states you’d be on shaky ground engaging at 100+ yards.
If we have a major disaster where the system collapses and I see an angry mob on my ranch, on my land, I am probably not going to let them get close to talk.
Agreed if you want an AR-15 just for plinking have at it. But a shotgun is a better home defense weapon.
Even with stand your ground states you’d be on shaky ground engaging at 100+ yards.
I'll agree to disagree all day long.
Why don't swat teams use shotguns as primary weapons but instead use Ar15?
In what would hypothetically be a home defense scenario were looking at engagement zones of 5-30 feet. You can very easily miss with a shotgun at that distance. The shot pattern will barely be larger than your fist. And your only going to have 3-5 follow up shots available. Short stroking a pump shotgun and causing it to jam under a high stress and pressure scenario is far more common that you would expect.
With an AR15 you point, aim, shoot, have controllable recoil and have multiple rounds for follow up shots especially if there are multiple attackers which is likely because usually home invasions are multiple assailants.
It is a good gun to defend from a home invasion. Obviously, not for carry. lol. People concerned with defense might have a carry handgun, a home handgun and a rifle and/or shotgun. AR15 is easy for many people to handle. Shotguns can be tough.
I've owned several, even one that used the AK .308 round. Had several different AK's also, and a H&K 91 G3 ( that was a decent rifle ). This was years back. Knowing what they are capable of, operation and capacity wise, They should never have been available to the public. But some think they are necessary. Get them while you still can, and not traceable to you.
I've owned several, even one that used the AK .308 round. Had several different AK's also, and a H&K 91 G3 ( that was a decent rifle ). This was years back. Knowing what they are capable of, operation and capacity wise, They should never have been available to the public. But some think they are necessary. Get them while you still can, and not traceable to you.
What does that say of a government that wants to keep its population 70 years in the past of technology?
If we have a major disaster where the system collapses and I see an angry mob on my ranch, on my land, I am probably not going to let them get close to talk.
Not even Texas allows deadly force in protection of land, just your dwelling. Even in disaster conditions that would just be murder without them displaying a threat to your life.
I sincerely doubt they would disappear but we need to start somewhere and stop this absolute madness. Over time it would improve but no I don't see them disappearing.
That's not what I asked you.
I asked IF they COULD magically disappear, would not people who wanted to commit mass shootings just find another gun?
And then what will you want to ban then since there aren't any more AR-15's?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.