If you think no civilian ever needs an AR-15 (Page 2): That depends because there are many variations on home defense and home invasions and it depends where you live.

Rose42

BigWahoo wrote:

A shotgun with #9 buckshot is a much better home defense weapon

That depends because there are many variations on home defense and home invasions and it depends where you live.

FrumCA

RixPix wrote:

If no one had any guns there would be far fewer deaths.

Fewer deaths by what measure?

stbg1951 Loc: Lewes, DE

sb wrote:

I would worry that any rounds from my AR fired in my house would potentially penetrate my house and my neighbor's house, possibly injuring or killing them.

For this reason I keep my home defense guns (including AR15) loaded with frangible ammo. It's designed to disintegrate into dust when they strike a hard target like sheetrock. When I take those guns to the range I leave those clips home and use regular target ammo. It's a personal choice but I feel safer with it not to penetrate walls..

Elaine2025 Loc: Seattle, Wa

stbg1951 wrote:

For this reason I keep my home defense guns (including AR15) loaded with frangible ammo. It's designed to disintegrate into dust when they strike a hard target like sheetrock. When I take those guns to the range I leave those clips home and use regular target ammo. It's a personal choice but I feel safer with it not to penetrate walls..

Smart guy. Kudos to you.

FrumCA

stbg1951 wrote:

For this reason I keep my home defense guns (including AR15) loaded with frangible ammo. It's designed to disintegrate into dust when they strike a hard target like sheetrock. When I take those guns to the range I leave those clips home and use regular target ammo. It's a personal choice but I feel safer with it not to penetrate walls..

My home defense weapon of choice is a 12ga riot shotgun. It's much easier to find ammo and there is little risk of doing anything more than putting the target at the end of the barrel down if necessary. Thankfully I've never had to rack a round in the chamber to find out.

yhtomit Loc: Port Land. Oregon

thom w wrote:

How would he have been worse off with a shotgun?

Too much kick to shoot rapid fire...

Bunko.T Loc: Western Australia.

Huey Driver wrote:

If you think no civilian ever needs an AR-15

4 armed thugs against one disabled man. Tell me again why no one ever needs an AR-15 type weapon for defense that has rapid semi-automatic fire capability?

Oh yes, and a Democrat being exposed to facts.

So 4 big braves robbers had an arsenal of guns, to go rob a disabled guy. Big brave tough guys???

RichieC Loc: Adirondacks

RixPix wrote:

If no one had any guns there would be far fewer deaths.

Because nobody died before guns....

redlegfrog

RixPix wrote:

If no one had any guns there would be far fewer deaths.

I have to ask, This logic you use, is it just because you like to argue or do you really believe this.
I know somewhere far away over the rainbow no one needs guns but where we are now you need to be able to protect yourself.

FRENCHY Loc: Stone Mountain , Ga

RixPix wrote:

If no one had any guns there would be far fewer deaths.

Explain your dream to criminals and after we can talk.

cwp3420

sb wrote:

I would worry that any rounds from my AR fired in my house would potentially penetrate my house and my neighbor's house, possibly injuring or killing them. A shotgun or a semi-auto pistol loaded with hollow-points would be much safer for my neighbors and probably just as effective.

Well that certainly shows how much you know about MSRs.

cwp3420

thom w wrote:

I'm not sure why a taser wouldn't have worked, but he seemed to have come out OK without using an AR.
Few if any are trying to disarm cops, and if I were in a situation where it was a knife against a car, I would want the car, the guy with the knife might damage my plastic bumper, but I think I'd be OK. I've never actually hit an aggressor with my car, but I've sent a couple running.

Thom after seeing a scary AR.

Huey Driver Loc: Texas

FrumCA wrote:

My home defense weapon of choice is a 12ga riot shotgun. It's much easier to find ammo and there is little risk of doing anything more than putting the target at the end of the barrel down if necessary. Thankfully I've never had to rack a round in the chamber to find out.

Have you thought about the fact that most shot guns only hold about 5 or 6 rounds even the ones made for self defense unless you buy one that has a drum magazine. And inconceivable as it may sound especially in a panic situation it is possible to miss the target with a shotgun loaded with buck shot. While the noise of any gun may drive the perpetrator into fleeing you can make noise for a longer time with an AR with a 15 or 30 round magazine. Again we are talking about an honest citizens defending themselves and they should have the choice especially for self defense of a weapon of their choice. Those who want to limit particular guns don't want to admit they aren't tackling the real problem which isn't the gun. It's is the bad people using them. Why is that reality is never addressed. How to identify these people before the do something stupid? Those people don't follow laws.

redlegfrog

Huey Driver wrote:

Have you thought about the fact that most shot gun... (show quote)

I just read an article about mini 12 gauge shells. They might not be ready for prime time yet, not all guns like them but give it some time I think good things are coming.

https://www.gunsamerica.com/digest/mini-12-gauge-shells-saami-specifications/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=20190927_FridayDigest_245&utm_campaign=/digest/mini-12-gauge-shells-saami-specifications/

Fat Gregory Loc: Southern New Jersey

The best method I know of to disarm an intruder is a single shot the the head or chest!