AKs and ARs have no defensive value to self defense

[yeahYeah]

labeling them as not good for self/home defense is a slimy little argument they will use to try and taken them away from us.

If they are bad for self defense, how come SWAT/ATF use them when performing their stormtrooper shows? What's good for the goose is good for the gander

[samman23]

The FBI study definitely shows that overpenetration for the .223 round is definitely a lower danger then 9mm luger.

If you have a pistol and you ever had to use it in self defense, you would want at least 3 rounds to stop each perpetrator. Since many crimes are now committed with 3 -4 perpetrators, that means if 3-4 criminals/gangbangers/etc are trying to hurt you, that 1911 may not have enough be enough to safely remedy the situation. If the high cap ban comes back into effect, your 10 rounds may not be enough to survive such an event.

If you are at home with an AR and a 20 or 30 round mag, it seems you have a much better chance of survivability against 4 armed perpetrators then you do with a 10 round gun.

Rifles are much easier to aim accurately because of it's long radius which makes them safer because you are much less likely to miss your target and hit something else.

All this seems to give these type of rifles defensive value.

[PolsVoice]

Originally Posted by Barbarossa

I don't see why citizens who have the individual right to keep an bear arms, shouldn't have access to the same tool that is issued to our armed forces. I'd bet that the AR platform is the most common firearm in the U.S., making a very usual item.

This is my argument exactly. AR and AK platforms are necessary (and protected) by the 2nd amendment for defense against Tyranny. But I don't see much practical use for them in home defense outside of SHTF scenarios.

... or Zombie Apocalypse.

Originally Posted by samman23

If you are at home with an AR and a 20 or 30 round mag, it seems you have a much better chance of survivability against 4 armed perpetrators then you do with a 10 round gun.

Rifles are much easier to aim accurately because of it's long radius which makes them safer because you are much less likely to miss your target and hit something else.

All this seems to give these type of rifles defensive value.

... ok, that's a solid argument.

[MGD 45]

Originally Posted by yeahYeah

labeling them as not good for self/home defense is a slimy little argument they will use to try and taken them away from us.

If they are bad for self defense, how come SWAT/ATF use them when performing their stormtrooper shows? What's good for the goose is good for the gander

I'd have to agree with you on this one. When we conduct our drug raids, I take my AR every single time. The TAP ammo is awesome at instant expansion and won't penetrate as far through sheet rock as normal handgun ammo will.......making it safer inside a home. Plus, with the extra ammo provided (30 rounds vs. 15) per magazine, how can it not be good for home defense.

As long as your not using FMJ ammo in your AR around your homes.....I'd agree. Plus, you simply can't ignore the awesome intimidation factor that comes with this rifle. What thug carrying a Lorcin 9mm won't crap in his pants when he sees a homeowner pointing one of those things at him!! An AR might actually save more lives!!!

[leper]

Take a trip down memory lane. Back to the L.A. riots. Pay close attention to the shopkeepers who did not let their shops go down. AK47. Good for home and business defense.

[TeeJay]

"assault weapons have no defensive purpose for a citizen defending his own home"

break into my house and threaten my family and i'll show ya that a "assault rifle" will indeed serve as a self-defense gun.

[longun45]

Originally Posted by PolsVoice

I generally reject "slippery slope" arguments for two reasons:

1.) they are based upon fear which I believe is a poor reason to make any decision.

This is how most people make their arguements and drive public opinion. They use the ak and the cinder block routine.

2.) they usually substitute one argument for another. In the case of the above, the argument becomes whether or not semi-auto pistols should be illegal or not and then taking the conclusion to that argument and using it to support another (in this case, the possible AWB).

That is precisely what they do but they use emotion to win an argument while the person who argues logically has lost teh crowd due to mob fear. And the slipery slope is actually a cliff. Just look at Austrailia.

You have to use the safety, crime and lack of cops. Cameras are great if you want to record a crime. If you resist a robbery you 8 times less likely to be hurt of killed. People are more likely to be killed by medications than guns. Children are more likely to be car accident victims than gun causalities. The world is a dangerous place, look at Mumbai. A society of people with out guns. Do you want to be defenseless, at the mercy of people who would do you harm?

[yeahYeah]

once again, the govt. doesn't want their subjects in training having weaponry that is equally as powerful.

[Chapie+]

Originally Posted by yeahYeah

once again, the govt. doesn't want their subjects in training having weaponry that is equally as powerful.

Until "Predator" UAVs appear in shotgun news, I don't think citizens will have weaponry equally powerful.

It is not an issue of equality, it is simply the politics of fear. That fear runs both ways. Fear of Obama and a ban on guns is causing gun owners, new and old, to buy up guns in amazing numbers. Fear by liberals of the recent events in India and various shootings / massacres causes liberals to want to ban guns.

The ARs and AKs provide excellent home defense weaponry in urban and rural areas. They are intimidating, especially the tacticool variety with all but a satelight dish on top. They also intimidate liberals.

Chapie+

[Buffman]

Originally Posted by Chapie+

They are intimidating, especially the tacticool variety with all but a satelight dish on top.

Chapie+

They're available with microwave ovens and radios too (sorry it's late and I couldn't resist)