Assault rifles for self defense

[Spoonman]

The guvmint already restricts your 2nd amendment rights by not allowing you to own ANY kind of arms you want. Which is not what the 2nd says.

Please relieve yourself of your ignorance.
United States v. Miller | LII / Legal Information Institute

Still not what the 2nd says, you're just rolling over for a tyrannical guvmint.

agreed. making an unconstitutional ruling and then referring to it as precedent years later just doesn't cut it

 

[Spoonman]

Assault rifles for self defense -

Real world examples of this happening in the U.S. when the person using the weapon for self defense is -

1. Not acting as a government agent nor using a weapon issued to him/her by the government
2. Not acting as a trained private security guard.
3. Not defending a criminal enterprise.

Any?

looks like deadly assault weapons aren't really all that deadly

And don't forget what people call assault rifles are only a subset of all rifles.

an extremely small subset.

 

[hangover]

Here's a clue, by overthrowing the Sunni government, the invasion gave the Shiite's the control of the government.

Popular elections in a country dominated by Shiites gave the Shiites control.

It's you that lies. Obama NEVER claimed to have destroyed Al Qaeda.

Another fucking liar for Obama.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcCcR4tfGas&feature=player_embedded]On Veteran's Day Obama Again Says Al-Qaeda Is on "Path of Defeat" - YouTube[/ame]

If you're not lying show the link where he said it. You're also lying about the Egyptian military being a faction of Al Qaeda, and lying about Obama installing it.

The military defeated the Al Qaeda government of Mohamed Morsi, who Obama had installed as ruler of Egypt.

Do at least TRY to follow along, sparky.

Republican habitual lying only diminishes the GOP credibility. You can fool the ignorant, but they are the minority. Never gonna win that way.

The "truth" is that which serves Obama, eh Comrade?

"On the path of defeat" IS NOT saying he destroyed Al Qaeda. Twisting the truth is you lying.

Obama didn't install Morsi and you know it. Your lies are moronic.

So you just doubled down on your stupidity. Get your head out of your ass.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Here's a clue, by overthrowing the Sunni government, the invasion gave the Shiite's the control of the government.

Popular elections in a country dominated by Shiites gave the Shiites control.



Another fucking liar for Obama.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcCcR4tfGas&feature=player_embedded]On Veteran's Day Obama Again Says Al-Qaeda Is on "Path of Defeat" - YouTube[/ame]



The military defeated the Al Qaeda government of Mohamed Morsi, who Obama had installed as ruler of Egypt.

Do at least TRY to follow along, sparky.

Republican habitual lying only diminishes the GOP credibility. You can fool the ignorant, but they are the minority. Never gonna win that way.

The "truth" is that which serves Obama, eh Comrade?

"On the path of defeat" IS NOT saying he destroyed Al Qaeda. Twisting the truth is you lying.

Obama didn't install Morsi and you know it. Your lies are moronic.

So you just doubled down on your stupidity. Get your head out of your ass.

Al Qaeda is dead. GM is Alive indeed, comrade...

 

[westwall]

The guvmint already restricts your 2nd amendment rights by not allowing you to own ANY kind of arms you want. Which is not what the 2nd says.

Yeah, we know. That's why we're fighting to have those unconstitutional laws rescinded.

 

[westwall]

So obviously you're still buying Shrub's "mission accomplished" schick. Here's a clue, Shrub installed a Shiite government in Iraq, which is best buds with Iran. Al Qaeda is stronger now than before his invasion of Afghanistan. And he wasted $3 trillion of our money doing it. You're looking at the moron in the mirror.

I opposed war in Iraq from day one.

Bush installed no government in Iraq, he allowed free elections. But guess what? The majority is Shiite, so what would anyone sane expect to happen? I never saw a good outcome in Iraq, and still don't. IF we needed to oust Saddam, which is open for debate, then the Shock and Awe phase should have been the ONLY phase to the war.

As far as your partisan bullshit on Al Qaeda, it is just that, bullshit. Obama claims to have destroyed Al Qaeda, which is obviously false - Obama lies, about everything. But Al Qaeda is a fraction of what they were on 9-11-2001. Obama installed Al Qaeda as the government of Egypt. A popularly backed military coup drove Obama's Al Qaeda allies from power, greatly diminishing their control.

Here's a clue, by overthrowing the Sunni government, the invasion gave the Shiite's the control of the government.

It's you that lies. Obama NEVER claimed to have destroyed Al Qaeda. If you're not lying show the link where he said it. You're also lying about the Egyptian military being a faction of Al Qaeda, and lying about Obama installing it.

Republican habitual lying only diminishes the GOP credibility. You can fool the ignorant, but they are the minority. Never gonna win that way.

On the path to defeat is what he says here.....

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fy_Z_zA2rZ4]Obama Brags "Al-Qaeda Is Defeated" on Same Day US Death Toll Reaches 2,000 Deaths - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Missouri_Mike]

The weapon of choice for the police is the AR, it's the perfect offensive and defensive weapon to have in any firefight.

Why would anyone not choose the same weapon for their own defensive needs?

Because it's pretty hard to fit an AR15 in my sock drawer....

I keep a .38 revolver in my drawer for home defense. The first cylinder has a shotshell with rubber pellets. The next two have rubber slugs. The last three have inverse hollow points.

Why?

Well, I really don't want to kill anyone. Plus that off chance of an accident. The first round is utterly non-lethal. At close range it will hurt like hell and stun the person.

The hard rubber slugs are usually not lethal, but they are solid and hit hard. Studies show that a head shot is often lethal with the rubber slug.

The inverse hollow points are there because if the first three shots didn't make my point, I want the motherfucker dead. They'll rip a grapefruit size hole in a person.

Sock drawers aren't the only place to keep your weapon but a bigger drawer would allow you to have more socks.

Sounds like you've thought out your defensive strategy with the ammo choices. My concern would be injuring the idiot and having him sue me. What if you hit him and he goes blind in one eye? I'm betting about the time you get that letter you're being sued you may wish you went with all hollow points. I figure if it comes time to pull the trigger I don't want to screw around just hit them hard with the most damage I possibly can.

 

[racewright]

one example... not too bad.

now lets compare that against the mass shootings involving guns:

Josh Sugarmann: 10 U.S. Mass Shootings Involving High-Capacity Ammunition Magazines (Slide Show)

List of rampage killers: Americas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So based on the CHANCE of someone using a weapon for criminal activites, I have to lose my right to own said weapon, even with no prior bad acts and no current indication of any potential malicous activities?

So I guess because I MAY use fighting words on someone, I have to be gagged and prevented from speaking entirely.

again, no one is talking about complete gun elimination, but it has been shown already that certain weapons in the hands of the public do not serve a public good. these include assault weapons and high capacity magazines. no one is talking about complete gun elimination, but if you are a real hunter, there a number of weapons available that are not assault weapons that have very high rankings.

50 Best Hunting Rifles of the Past 10 Years -- Photo 18 | Outdoor Life

Wrong Coast: just because you wish to lay down and take it up the(assssaa) does not mean the rest of the country is going to. Owning a weapon of any kind is not up to you or the government to decide--they are not just for hunting and the more you or any other left leaning person pushes the happier gun manufactures will be. Go to a gun shop Saturday and maybe you will get to purchase a weapon if you wait on line long enough.

There are over 300,000 gun owners that became criminals Jan 1 in Connecticut one of the
largest liberal states. They did not register there guns and will not. The legusalature can not believe it you want to know why. BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT IN TOUCH WITH THEIR ELECTORATE.
Again do as we say, well when it comes to guns only weak men and women will listen, and it is not a racial thing.

 

[Iceweasel]

We were discussing home defense though, not many people have 1/4" thick steel walls. Box of Truth or something like that, did the test with multiple sheets of drywall. The AR round was the worst for penetrating down the line.

Dry wall is soft, it doesn't take much to go through it.

My point is a 9mm is a fairly large slug, with not a lot of grains of powder - about half of what is in a .223 load. So a slug less than half the mass, propelled by over twice the powder; the velocity is exponentially greater.

When I was a teen in the 70's, "Guns and Ammo" did a series on the trend of police switching from .38 specials to 9mm. The main reason was that the .38 had a tendency to go through walls, car doors, bodies, etc. and hit what was on the other side. They wanted a firearm with similar stopping power due to slug mass, but less muzzle velocity. The 9mm fit the bill.

A 9mm has nowhere near the power of a .223

Yep, drywall is soft. So the .223 goes through the bad guy, or wall, then breaks apart. That's what they found in the test. Next time do a sheetrock test and see what you find.

 

[WinterBorn]

The weapon of choice for the police is the AR, it's the perfect offensive and defensive weapon to have in any firefight.

Why would anyone not choose the same weapon for their own defensive needs?

Because it's pretty hard to fit an AR15 in my sock drawer....

I keep a .38 revolver in my drawer for home defense. The first cylinder has a shotshell with rubber pellets. The next two have rubber slugs. The last three have inverse hollow points.

Why?

Well, I really don't want to kill anyone. Plus that off chance of an accident. The first round is utterly non-lethal. At close range it will hurt like hell and stun the person.

The hard rubber slugs are usually not lethal, but they are solid and hit hard. Studies show that a head shot is often lethal with the rubber slug.

The inverse hollow points are there because if the first three shots didn't make my point, I want the motherfucker dead. They'll rip a grapefruit size hole in a person.

Sock drawers aren't the only place to keep your weapon but a bigger drawer would allow you to have more socks.

Sounds like you've thought out your defensive strategy with the ammo choices. My concern would be injuring the idiot and having him sue me. What if you hit him and he goes blind in one eye? I'm betting about the time you get that letter you're being sued you may wish you went with all hollow points. I figure if it comes time to pull the trigger I don't want to screw around just hit them hard with the most damage I possibly can.

When I have been on the road, my (then) wife would have a .357 revolver loaded with 1 shot shell and 5 MagSafe hollowpoints. My current g/f has the same setup in both of her revolvers. It makes for an effective first shot (even if panicked), and lethal subsequent shots.

 

[Geaux4it]

I have a Daniel Defense M4 that is not a self defense firearm fir me. However, when SHTF and my neighbors join me in locking down our street, it will then be used.

-Geaux

 

[Jarlaxle]

Assault rifles are not a good choice for home defense. Likely engagement distance makes a long gun unwieldy and easier to deflect. Pistol's best in the home. Plus the penetration power of any rifle round makes it more likely after going completely through the target, it's gonna go through the walls and into a neighbor's home.

No, they are not the best choice for home defense. Unless you have some really BIG rooms or long hallways. lol

For home defense, it's really tough to beat a shotgun.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Assault rifles are not a good choice for home defense. Likely engagement distance makes a long gun unwieldy and easier to deflect. Pistol's best in the home. Plus the penetration power of any rifle round makes it more likely after going completely through the target, it's gonna go through the walls and into a neighbor's home.

That's not always true. A light AR round fragments when hitting sheetrock. Or flesh. A 9mm round has more penetrating power. ARs are not "long" and there's a reason SWAT type teams use them. A 30 round AR has a lot of firepower, manuverable, easy to control and is very accurate.

Depends on the round. A .223 hardball will go through Sheetrock or even plywood more or less intact. Some 9mm will, some won't. Most 10mm and .40's will, unless they're hollow-points. A .45ACP will not.

The lesson: if your home defense weapon fires high-velocity rounds, you need to use hollow-points.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Ok, here's a real question: do you kiss your gun goodnight before you go to sleep?

So let's actually discuss the topic, shall we?

Do you think there should be a ban on certain firearms based solely on the gun's appearance?

No. But I agree with another poster here who had the idea of putting a fingerprint scanner on guns so if they're stolen, or if a kid find s it in a closet... it won't fire because it won't be armed. And I would ban anything that's above a hunting rifle grade, like military style weapons.

I'm fine with that. Nothing more powerful than a hunting rifle allowed.

Technically, the .577 Tyrannosaur is a hunting rifle round...so pretty much anything up to and including a .50BMG should be good!

(Note: the most powerful rifles ARE, in fact, hunting rifles!)

 

[RetiredGySgt]

So let's actually discuss the topic, shall we?

Do you think there should be a ban on certain firearms based solely on the gun's appearance?

No. But I agree with another poster here who had the idea of putting a fingerprint scanner on guns so if they're stolen, or if a kid find s it in a closet... it won't fire because it won't be armed. And I would ban anything that's above a hunting rifle grade, like military style weapons.

I'm fine with that. Nothing more powerful than a hunting rifle allowed.

Technically, the .577 Tyrannosaur is a hunting rifle round...so pretty much anything up to and including a .50BMG should be good!

(Note: the most powerful rifles ARE, in fact, hunting rifles!)

I would never buy a firearm with a fingerprint lock on the trigger. They are unreliable and depend on a power source to work. Added weight to the weapon and a failure point on numerous levels, defeating the entire purpose of the weapon. Further I would argue they are an infringement on my right to own an operational weapon and my ability to resale or gift to my family.

 

[Jarlaxle]

That's not always true. A light AR round fragments when hitting sheetrock. Or flesh. A 9mm round has more penetrating power. ARs are not "long" and there's a reason SWAT type teams use them. A 30 round AR has a lot of firepower, manuverable, easy to control and is very accurate.

We put up a bunch of quarter inch thick, steel plates, hung from bailing wire in a server rack. At 50 yards, my Mini-14 shooting .223 - not the more powerful 5.56, drills a clean hole in them every time. My Glock 17 at 25 yards puts a small divot in the plates.

A .22-250 softpoint will do the same (at 250 yards!), where a .45ACP won't penetrate...but I know which one I'd rather have to stop a dude charging at me with a machete!

 

[Jarlaxle]

Again, in an emergency situation most people have a hard time keeping a handgun on its target thus miss the target. Missing a criminal in your house or on the street isn't a good thing if they have a weapon or are crazy enough to charge you.

An assault weapon can fire more rounds, more lethal rounds and hit the target with greater ease, thus protecting the shooter better than a handgun.

In the end it is clear liberals want criminals to kill innocent people when they want to ensure law abiding citizens can't properly protect themselves with the gun of their choice.

Of all the weapons available to the police they choose the AR, that should tell you something right there. It's the best weapon to be armed with in multiple situations. No cop want's a damn six shooter in a firefight but these left wing idiots don't think you should even get that.

It's quite simple: the AR is cheap (don't many PD's get them from the military?), ammo is cheap (they get it from the DoD). It's that simple.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

ABOVE a hunting grade? Perfect example of an idiot that has no clue what hunting weapons are. One hunts with powerful weapons to ensure a clean kill shot in one hit. Most AR's are not allowed for hunting big game and are restricted to small game as the bullet does not ensure a kill to a large animal. Further elephant guns are above 50 Cal size in some cases.

But to the point of supposed military grade weapons, those are EXACTLY what the 2nd protects as ruled in 1939 by the Supreme Court. The 2nd provides a means for citizens to assist an army in fighting an invader or resisting an out of control Government as in the revolutionary war.

Further the ENTIRE male population aged 17 to 46 is by LAW part of the Unorganized Militia. So the argument about belonging to a militia does not apply even if the court had not already ruled the 2nd is an individual right and applies to the States.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Anyone that thinks that "assault rifles" are useless for self defense is an idiot.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Small hole, high velocity.

That's the point. It's a .22 caliber slug at very high velocity. The piercing power is extreme.

Unless you have atypical ammo the bullet broke apart.

It very well might have, but not before it went through a quarter inch plate of steel. I shoot FMJ exclusively in the Mini-14's. No hollow points.

We were discussing home defense though, not many people have 1/4" thick steel walls. Box of Truth or something like that, did the test with multiple sheets of drywall. The AR round was the worst for penetrating down the line.

Dry wall is soft, it doesn't take much to go through it.

My point is a 9mm is a fairly large slug, with not a lot of grains of powder - about half of what is in a .223 load. So a slug less than half the mass, propelled by over twice the powder; the velocity is exponentially greater.

When I was a teen in the 70's, "Guns and Ammo" did a series on the trend of police switching from .38 specials to 9mm. The main reason was that the .38 had a tendency to go through walls, car doors, bodies, etc. and hit what was on the other side. They wanted a firearm with similar stopping power due to slug mass, but less muzzle velocity. The 9mm fit the bill.

A 9mm has nowhere near the power of a .223

A 9mm has higher velocity than a .38 Special and about twice the KE! (It's not far off the KE of a .357 Magnum.)