Other than putting holes in paper, or slaughtering innocents, what purpose can an AR15 serve?

They are very dangerous to use for home defense, as the bullets lose little thru walls. Sure you could use it like a hammer, or lock pick, but it literally has no uses.

Many will say, SHALL NOT INFRINGE, maybe I use it to get my sexual jollies, my biz.

NOT a proper answer.

 

Its fine for home defense, its fine for hunting things like hogs, its fine for sport or target shooting, and its fine for repelling the huns should they arrive at your door.

Also: The thing about how rights work, is that I don't have to demonstrate a need or otherwise explain myself.

Shall not be infringed

 

I believe lawful people use them for hunting in addition to target shooting and home defense.

 

It's a very customisable rifle thst allows the owner to mix and match parts for what ever purpose they wish from game hunting, to taeget shooting, to home defense. For those who are not rich the customizable nature of the rifle is ideal because you don't have to buy a new rifle for each purpose.

Is there something about the AR-15 that makes it any more dangerous for home defense than any other rifle?

If you have an issue with stray bullets going through sheetrock your issue is with rifles and handguns in general not the AR-15.

Shotguns too

Most shotgun loads will go through multiple sheets of drywall. For home defense it's the choice of round that matters.

There is nothing special about a .223 ability to penetrate through drywall.

 

I wouldn't call an AR15 CHEAP. Even if it is a one size.

I think large magazine, and fast fire rate, combined with MOST folks panic, makes ACTUALLY being confronted with a killer, likely to create such a panic SPRAY, that again, it is a dangerous weapon to use for home defense.

I have bullets with French ticklers, soes they don't go thru drywall.

 

As Dr. Hupp testified to congress in 1994, there are many uses, and the primary use isn't sporting, it is to "protect all of us from all of you people" (pointing to legislators).

She also mentioned a store owner with an AR-15 standing on his roof during the LA riots protecting his life and property with a single AR-15.

 

The Second Amendment isn't for home defense

 

Yes I know, G Gordon Liddy said what they are for. SHOOTUM in the head. Federal officers must be headshot, and double tapped.

 

Would you off0er to volunteer in a trail? We have you hard assed he-men patriots, advance on ONE national guardsman, in his Apache Gunship. Tell me how you will start your REVOLUTION. Oh, that's right. You right wingers think the military will turn treason, to allow you to end democracy.

 

It simply is a rifle. Dont be scared of the "evil" looking plastic.

 

BS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Just dont try to break into my home. The locks on the door are for YOUR protection!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

I don't like its rapid rate of fire, and I don't like YUGE magazines etc. If you are too friggin lazy to reload, GET A LIFE.

 

Home defense is an added benefit of the Second Amendment. But it wasn't written for that. So trying to ban guns or certain types of guns based on their suitability for home defense is not an argument.

 

Home defense, hunting, 3 gun competitions. Etc.

 

Killing non-innocents... unless you have innocent-seeking-missle-bullets.

 

So then you don’t like any semi-auto gun, handgun or rifle, since all semi-autos can be fired at a rapid rate.

 

I have a ten bullet 9mm, with French tickler bullets. It is semi auto. It will fire as quick as I can pull trigger. Why am I deprived?

Dear God, I cant go on. Give me an AR stat. COMBINE the two, and you risk massive harm.

 

What are you talking about? You previously claimed you don’t like the rapid rate of fire of the ARs. I simply countered that all semi-autos can be fired at a rapid rate. Therefore you must not like any semi-auto.

 

I most certainly would not consider banning all semi autos. But limiting the available magazines, for those, makes a ROOF CRUZ jaunt, MOAR likely to allow a person to intervene.

 

Actually the AR-15 is very affordable.

The rifle is separate from the magazine. Nothing about the rifle has anything to do with the size of the magazine.

Furthermore the idea that limiting the capacity magazine will accomplish anything. How man times has a shooter been taken down as they are reloading. Even someone without much training can change a magazine in under a second. You aren't going to rush a shooter. It's a myth.

Plenty if self defense situations have happened for real. You are just making up bullshit.

As I said before there is nothing special about a .223 ability to penetrate drywall.

 

I hear you. It’s not like a semi-auto with 10 round magazines could be used to kill lots of people. Oh wait...it can...Virginia Tech shooter killed 32 and wound 17 with handguns that had 10 round mags.

 

There is nothing unique about it's rate of fire and magazines are a separate component.

 

And, I don't like flippin bullets that make damage that is almost impossible to repair, if it is unintended etc.

 

Again you are taking out of your ass. How is a .223 more dangerous than any other commin rifle round? I'd rather get shot with a .223 than a 30-06.

 

IN WAR, you WANT your enemy to use all its resources, patching up all the guys that aren't dead YET. So, you design bullets that will make recovery so time consuming, and so unlikely you will be a danger to anyone, that they are NASTY. Those are the AR!15/M16 bullets.