Need arguments for AR/AK/"Evil" rifles

[Josh3239]

Here is another good video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfKADcfE90U

[trinydex]

Hey Calgunners, I'm not sure that this is the right place for this, but I'd like to ask for the help of the community. I've recently gotten into a debate with a few people on the topic of "Assault Weapons", and was having trouble coming up with 1) reasons as to why AR-style/AK-style rifles would be needed and 2) if there were any recorded cases in which an "Assault Weapon" was used to defend the home.

firstly not everyone's home is a little 800 square foot flat in san francisco dungeon high rise. some people have acres they have to look after and that be from creatures two and four legged.

another reason is you should have the most effective instrument to deal with a most effective threat. since there's no way of ensuring what types of threats are incident upon you... why would you then compromise your tool set?

The people have argued that there are 3 reasons for these types of rifles: hunting, killing and "compensating for a lack of manhood" (rephrasing in a way so that I don't get banned). They have also argued that the rifles are more dangerous because they have pistol grips, can accept suppressors/silencers, have "large capacity magazines" and utilize semi-automatic action (completely ridiculous, I know).

tell them they're only partially correct. guns are made for killing. if they don't like the idea then they should consult themselves as to whether or not they accept the idea that the taking of life sometimes saves lives.

then have them address the idea that guns are the universal leveler. if you take away one or any gun type or architecture or otherwise what you've essentially done is taken women, gays, lesbians, bisexual, transgender, minorities and any other marginalized group and removed from THEM the princple instrument by which they are made ABSOLUTELY equal in stature, strength and empowerment. ooor you can offer them the alternative which is he has has the largest muscles and the bigges club gets to take what he wishes. talk about primitive.

[barrykay]

Good Luck

[QUOTE=silvertear;1681977]Hey Calgunners, I'm not sure that this is the right place for this, but I'd like to ask for the help of the community. I've recently gotten into a debate with a few people on the topic of "Assault Weapons", and was having trouble coming up with 1) reasons as to why AR-style/AK-style rifles would be needed and 2) if there were any recorded cases in which an "Assault Weapon" was used to defend the home.

The people have argued that there are 3 reasons for these types of rifles: hunting, killing and "compensating for a lack of manhood" (rephrasing in a way so that I don't get banned). They have also argued that the rifles are more dangerous because they have pistol grips, can accept suppressors/silencers, have "large capacity magazines" and utilize semi-automatic action

.

These "Evil Rifles" are a less then a smart choice to defend your home. I also agree there is no real need to have such a rifle. For the most part they are not a good choice for game hunting either. "Compensating for lack of manhood" is an excelent choice of words.

[goober]

These "Evil Rifles" are a less then a smart choice to defend your home. I also agree there is no real need to have such a rifle. For the most part they are not a good choice for game hunting either. "Compensating for lack of manhood" is an excelent choice of words.

[grammaton76]

One I like to use when questioned about my trunk gun: "Have you ever seen a deer, or a dog, thrashing in agony after someone ran it over but didn't finish the job? I have. What kind of monster WOULDN'T be willing to put it out of its misery?"

[M. Sage]

These "Evil Rifles" are a less then a smart choice to defend your home. I also agree there is no real need to have such a rifle. For the most part they are not a good choice for game hunting either. "Compensating for lack of manhood" is an excelent choice of words.

Are you kidding? I'd pick up my NDS-3 (AK) over a shotgun for home defense any day. I know it better than any other gun at this point, and would bet my life on it without a doubt in my head.

AR and AK types actually make very good home defense weapons. What would make them better would be SBRs and suppressors. A suppressed Krinkov would make the ultimate HD gun in my book.

Not a good choice for hunting? Depends on where you hunt, and what you're hunting. If I put a ten or five round magazine in my AK, it'd make a great brush gun for deer or pigs. ARs with varmint uppers... well, the "varmint" tells the story there. The AR10 is a good choice for medium size game and long shots.

Are you staying that an AR10 is a worse choice than say, a Browning BAR for going out for mule deer? You're nuts.

"Compensating..."? Grow up, maybe then we can finish this conversation.

[hoffmang]

You should point out that there is a strong trend in police forces all over the US to issue semiautomatic AR15's to line officers to replace the shotguns they used to carry. [Sarcasm]And everyone knows that we issue firearms to cops so they can kill people....[/Sarcasm]

-Gene

[SkatinJJ]

Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than my guns,

This will now become my new sig line.

Brilliant!

[SkatinJJ]

These "Evil Rifles" are a less then a smart choice to defend your home. I also agree there is no real need to have such a rifle. For the most part they are not a good choice for game hunting either. "Compensating for lack of manhood" is an excelent choice of words.

I can find no "real need" for my AR-10 build. It's just some fun stuff to take out shooting. My manhood is not really an issue.

wait, I hadn't really thought it could be an issue...

Oh please help me find any kind of manliness to replace my bible clinging, gun hugging, now-out-of-the-closet-wimpiness.

please, please, please.....

















Oh yeah, sarcasm.

[JDay]

Are you kidding? I'd pick up my NDS-3 (AK) over a shotgun for home defense any day. I know it better than any other gun at this point, and would bet my life on it without a doubt in my head.

I hope you use frangibles in that thing for home defense.

[silvertear]

Hey guys. Thanks for all the replies. I really appreciate it. I've been looking for various stories about when the "EBR's" have been used in self defense at home. The best I've found so far was a case back in April 1, 1995, where the article explicitly mentions a Colt AR-15 semi-auto (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id...+defense+rifle). Other sites I've found have a wealth of stories in which people have defended themselves with firearms (http://www.claytoncramer.com/gundefe...g/blogger.html, http://www.healymilnelaw.com/publica...n/self-def.htm). However, these articles don't often mention what type of firearm the victim used to defend him/herself.

I'm trying to focus a little more on the "EBR's" since this person just will not accept the other legitimate reasons for owning them. I guess I'll focus on the 1992 LA Riots because if there was ever a reason to own a "Military Style Rifle", it would be that event.

Again, thanks a lot everyone.

[Josh3239]

I'm trying to focus a little more on the "EBR's" since this person just will not accept the other legitimate reasons for owning them. I guess I'll focus on the 1992 LA Riots because if there was ever a reason to own a "Military Style Rifle", it would be that event.

Again, thanks a lot everyone.

They think that self-defense is the only legitimate reason for owning guns? So recreation, fun, competition, and defense of our rights aren't good enough reasons?

The LA Riots are a fine example. Guess which people's stores weren't looted? How about Hurricane Katrina, guess who's property didn't get stolen? The answer to both those questions are the people who sat outside of their property with firearms.

On the other hand, don't play the game of comparing "assault weapons" to "non assault weapons", that is a never ending game. Instead change the argument by talking about the cartridge and crime facts. Ask them why an "assault rifle" firing a 5.56mm round is worse then a 7.62mm "non assault weapon". Ask them why "assault weapons" need to be banned when over 90% of gun related crimes are committed with a handgun (which obviously fires a pistol caliber).



Show them these 2 pictures. Can they find the Clinton post-ban "assault weapon", only one of them is an AW per the Clinton ban.

1)

2)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfKADcfE90U This is a good video regarding the Clinton AWB.

[silvertear]

Well, I presented the case for the LA Riots and he responded that this was an isolated incident. By isolated, he meant the frequency in which events like this occur. He then went on to compare the frequency to winning the MegaMillions Jackpot: Just because it happened once doesn't mean you shouldn't prepare for it. Then he shot out the Brady Campaign, citing that I'm 22 times more likely to accidentally injure myself than to shoot an intruder. I'm now looking up counter arguments to the cited "Injuries and Deaths Due to Firearms in the Home." article by Kellerman.

This guy just doesn't like guns.

[tunder]

What the hell does "need" have to do with anything?
I own several so called assault rifles and have no real "need" for any of them.
I WANT them.
They were all purchased legally, with money I earned legally and are used occasionally in legal pursuits.
Please tell your friends that some people actually enjoy target shooting with these same rifles.

Here's some statistics on how dangerous these rifles are.

http://www.nsc.org/research/odds.aspx

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=125453&highlight=statistics

[Ford8N]

Well, I presented the case for the LA Riots and he responded that this was an isolated incident. By isolated, he meant the frequency in which events like this occur. He then went on to compare the frequency to winning the MegaMillions Jackpot: Just because it happened once doesn't mean you shouldn't prepare for it. Then he shot out the Brady Campaign, citing that I'm 22 times more likely to accidentally injure myself than to shoot an intruder. I'm now looking up counter arguments to the cited "Injuries and Deaths Due to Firearms in the Home." article by Kellerman.

This guy just doesn't like guns.

I love talking to a "numbers guy". When you show them the errors of their ways, they will either grudgingly admit they were wrong or they will be keep playing the numbers game with a lot of "apples to oranges" arguments. Here are some numbers

http://www.the-eggman.com/writings/death_stats.html

It sounds like there are other issues with this person other than "guns".


I suggest taking him shooting, the conversions percentage is pretty good if you keep it simple and fun.