Help me understand why people need assault rifles to protect themselves

For the sake of this thread, I’m going to ignore all the previous arguments for or against gun control, that poor dead horse has been flogged enough-You are well within your rights to bear arms and you will continue to enjoy that right unless there are radical changes in the constitution.

But I’m not here to talk about the gun control debate, I’m here to talk about the guns themselves.

What I can't fathom is how some folk feel the need to arm themselves with what could be considered as military grade weapons-weapons that would serve a purpose on the battlefield but would have little to no purpose in the family home. I've lost count of the times I’ve seen people posing with AR-15's, MP-5's, or other such weapons, claiming that said weapons will protect their family against those that seek to hurt them.

And that's sound reasoning to a point-one must protect ones family. But why do people arm themselves with such such weapons? Who are they expecting-Guerillas, spec ops, Spetsnaz? Your average home invader won't be adorned with kevlar and laser sighted weapons, more than likely the next burglar is just desperate for a fix and wants to lift your gear to pay for his habit, so why not use a sidearm with FMJ rounds to incapacitate them?

I need help in understanding the need for some to arm themselves to the teeth. A well placed shot from a pistol has the same stopping power as a spray and pray from an automatic weapon, but without the death.

So please enlighten me, I want to know the logic behind the purchase of these weapons.

a reply to: Thecakeisalie

Perhaps one would need to defend themselves from a large group of home invaders.
You would really need to be able to fire off at least 300 rounds per minute.

You know that you are purposely trying to restart a nasty debate on guns but here's my answer.

Because I can!

a reply to: Thecakeisalie

Because when the military comes for you , you will want military grade weapons to defend yourself

Or, like some other places in this world , you may have to resort to fighting tanks with rocks

Not my cup of tea

a reply to: Thecakeisalie

We buy the things we can.

Why do people feel the need to buy a Super sized Coke? Or a double bacon cheeseburger with super sized fries?

Because they can. They don't need that stuff, but it is available to purchase so people buy it by the millions of pounds.

I feel it is necessary to fight fire with fire. Not too many people feel this way. But I really don't care. Once these progressives get their way, and disarm the globe, then you won't be asking "why did you need an AR-15?"

a reply to: Thecakeisalie

No one has an assault rifle to protect themselves. The rifles they have are not the same rifles used in combat, they just look like it.

Because deer are getting tougher and smarter! They've got Kevlar for hides these days and they shoot laser beams out of their horns and... oh, wait. That was a drug fuelled dream.
On a more serious note - they don't need assault rifles.

How people choose to exercise their rights is up to them.

Some aggressively exercise their first amendment rights. They write books, they protest, they start churches, and so on. While others don't do much more than signing an occasional petition and joining a local church.

The same is true with second amendment rights. Some choose to have no guns. And some choose to have many and varied ones. And everything in between.

That's what having rights is all about.

a reply to: Thecakeisalie

Lumping in civilian type "assault-looking" weapons with the real stuff the military uses is like putting a fart can muffler on a Honda Civic and pretending it will run with the Porches.

But hey, don't let that little detail get in the way of another good ol' gun related straw man argument, I'm sure you'll rake in the S's & F's.

Perhaps you should ask law enforcement why they need military grade weapons. That should give you your answer.

Well OP, personally? I don't. In the last couple years I've sold several "assault rifles" with the last M-1 carbine going last year. My scoped rifles and very reliable .45 with buckets of ammo for both and spare parts to last my lifetime is all I really need.

Others aren't as confident in hitting what they shoot at or putting it down when it's hit, so need a gazzillion .22's on steroids (.223's).

Oh... I kinda like my Mossberg 500 too, but that's got all kinds of uses. I've really come to see high capacity rifles as high dollar, high waste methods of doing the same thing. Opinions do vary enormously on this one though, to say the least.

This is simply anti-gun trolling right here. The question has been sufficiently answered countless times on ATS and elsewhere already.

I'd love to see this thread closed asap.

originally posted by: Wrabbit2000
Well OP, personally? I don't. In the last couple years I've sold several "assault rifles" with the last M-1 carbine going last year. My scoped rifles and very reliable .45 with buckets of ammo for both and spare parts to last my lifetime is all I really need.

Others aren't as confident in hitting what they shoot at or putting it down when it's hit, so need a gazzillion .22's on steroids (.223's).

Oh... I kinda like my Mossberg 500 too, but that's got all kinds of uses. I've really come to see high capacity rifles as high dollar, high waste methods of doing the same thing. Opinions do vary enormously on this one though, to say the least.

HEHE! I also prefer the Mossy. I have a 500 persuader for home use. Dove hunting I have a Fox... old old gun. It was my grandfathers. One of the BEST American made weapons IMO and works as good as the day it was made.

As far as "assault weapons" ... I gotta laugh. Theyre dressed up pea shooters sold to the public so they look cool. Theyre not combat weapons... and you can only loosely call them assault weapons. Why do people get them? Cause they can, cause its their RIGHT to own a weapon and I read nowhere where it says the government can tell you what you can have and not have. They are not our parents... they are only our government that routinely oversteps its constitutional bounds.

Why does the SWAT team need high power assault rifles when they do a home invasion. Tactically a pistol is much better in close quarters and there is a much less chance of a bullet doing 'collateral damage'.


Shock, awe, and intimidation. That is why.

originally posted by: Moresby
How people choose to exercise their rights is up to them.

Some aggressively exercise their first amendment rights. They write books, they protest, they start churches, and so on. While others don't do much more than signing an occasional petition and joining a local church.

The same is true with second amendment rights. Some choose to have no guns. And some choose to have many and varied ones. And everything in between.

That's what having rights is all about.

This is probably one of the best responses that could be here. Star for you my friend, and mods please give this member some applause, definitely deserving.

To address the OP and some of the replies I have seen here,
Very correct in saying that a civilian AR-15 or a civilian AK-47 lookalike are nothing like their military counterparts. Ive owned both of the civilian models and used the military models.

As to an answer on why a civilian may 'need' an assault style looking rifle to protect themself, other members here have given some very good answers, and I will throw this into the mix. If I need protection from an attacker of some sort, and that attacker has an assault style looking rifle, I would like to think I can evenly match. A 9mm has an effective range of 25-50m (50m being generous) while a .223 has an effective range of 10x that. Which would I want to protect myself against another .223?

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
Because deer are getting tougher and smarter! They've got Kevlar for hides these days and they shoot laser beams out of their horns and... oh, wait. That was a drug fuelled dream.
On a more serious note - they don't need assault rifles.

Actually, most deer hunters prefer a little heavier round than the .223.

Plenty of deer hunters use a 7mm Magnum or the like. If the gun fearing lot were smart, they would try to outlaw those larger calibers. A guy with one of those can 'reach out and touch' someone at far greater distances than the .223 is capable of reaching.

Well OP since you ask...

I see it as a falic symbol. An actual extension of the penis.

Much like this Harley I ride to make up for my miniature member.

Why have nine shots when you can have two hundred and nine to blast all of the signs.

We have generally low IQ's so we make up for our insecurities with overwhelming force.

I hope that helps you understand the mentality...Now I want one.

a reply to: ScientiaFortisDefendit

Agreed. It's totally anti-gun trolling even though the OP stated in the first paragraph that it's well within peoples right to bear arms.

Oh wait-that's me. Try reading the post again.

a reply to: catt3

Exactly!
Assualt rifle are automatic.
These guns are semi-automatic

a reply to: butcherguy
I spent some time with family in the deep south this weekend. My brother was excited because he got to play with his AR-15(civilian semi) he put together. He spent a lot of money on fancy accessories like a nice scope and all. Sure you could use that thing to take a deer. Back home in Florida it would be effective in helping control feral pigs.

For deer hunting, I'd take my grandfathers old bolt action .30-06 with iron sites over the(semi)AR-15(.223) with a scope.