Inthemiddle
Rookie
- Oct 4, 2011
- 6,354
- 675
- 0
- Banned
- #61
No it's not.
Shotguns don't have the same range or accuracy as an AR-15.
Shotguns have different characteristics than an AR-15. It does little good to simply say that they don't have the same range or accuracy because that's a superficial analysis. And as with anything in life we have to look deeper to find meaningful information. For example, motorcycles don't have the same range (miles per tank) or safety measures as a sedan. But that doesn't mean that they are less suitable modes of transportation.
Now, I know that you're probably thinking that this is an odd comparison, but hear me out for a minute because it's actually a good one. Their different characteristics make motorcycles not less ideal, merely optimal for different circumstances and usages. Setting aside for a moment the fact that most people who ride do so for the sheer enjoyment of it, the improved gas mileage make motorcycles superior for shorter range travel, especially for daily commuting to work and back. Their maneuverability contributes to this if your commute often involves heavily trafficked roads and highways. Their superior vision range and acceleration, again in connection with their maneuverability yield a set of safety features that aren't available with a car. Avoiding a collision can be much easier on a motorcycle. The better gas mileage, cheaper insurance, and less complicated construction (which lends itself to easier self repair work) make a motorcycle overall cheaper to maintain. All in all, a motorcycle can be superior mode of transportation if the circumstances fit what you are looking for and/or need.
This same concept can be applied to firearms. An AR-15 and a shotgun have different characteristics that can make either or more effective for a different set of purposes. We need to consider their unique specific qualities and apply them to different scenarios. Shotguns use ammunition where each round produces a powerful spray of several projectiles across an area. By contrast, an AR-15 uses ammo involving a single projectile per round designed for precision accuracy. When shooting at moving targets at medium range, a shotgun will be more effective. Even though their pinpoint precision is not the same, the spread will serve the shooter better than a single precision projectile. Also, when shooting stationary targets at very close range, a single shotgun round will be much more damaging by peppering a target with multiple projectiles all at the same time. By contrast, an AR-15 offers less chance of hitting a moving target, and inflicts a slower rate of gross damage against targets it does hit. A single bullet in the leg extremely unlikely to be lethal at all. Even a single round to the chest has a relatively low chance of being instantly lethal.
So let's consider the scenario of mass shootings, such as classroom shootings, ect. These are relatively close quarter attacks at a range where a shotgun can still provide a powerful punch, but where the projectiles can still possibly spread enough to hit multiple targets at once while causing significant damage to each person hit. A quick flurry of shotgun rounds can subdue a room of scrambling people much more quickly and assuredly than trying to pick people off one by one with an AR-15. Sure, at longer distances an AR-15 is going to be more likely to hit a stationary target with enough force to do significant damage. But that also depends on you using it the right way. (Down in the prone, I have a good chance of hitting targets as far away as 300 yards. But in a standing position, the weapon becomes alot more difficult to control and chances of hitting a target aren't as good.) Of course, long distance scenarios don't really come into play in terms of mass shootings.