America should do as the Swiss, and require everyone have an AR-15 rifle.

[OldLady]

America should do as the Swiss government does and require everyone to have a Millitary type rifle. We are at war with terrorists who are all armed with fully automatic AK-47 assault rifles. Its time we wake up to that fact.

The AR-15 is not a military rifle.

It is an exact copy of an M-16 except for the full-auto option. The M-16 is a war weapon. If A=B, and B=C, then A=C. Get it?

It's the full auto option that makes it a military weapon

A semiautomatic rifle is a civilian rifle

Yeah, I've heard that argument. Am I supposed to be cheered up by the fact that you can't flick a switch and turn it into a machine gun?

 

[OldLady]

AR-15's are popular for a reason. They are easier to handle than an ordinary rifle. They are faster shooting. They are easier to load. The bullets do more damage. They were designed to make it as easy as possible to kill a bunch of people fast. That is what they were designed for.
Now explain why American civilians need or even deserve to have a weapon like that in the broom closet.

 

[Jitss617]

But the Swiss have a long history of recreational shooting. There are too many Americans I wouldn't trust with a large knife, much less an AR.

Plus, many people do not want to either own a gun or shoot a gun. Forcing them to own an AR goes against the grain of a free nation.

Well time to end immigration

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

America should do as the Swiss government does and require everyone to have a Millitary type rifle. We are at war with terrorists who are all armed with fully automatic AK-47 assault rifles. Its time we wake up to that fact.

The AR-15 is not a military rifle.

Yet the US Army buys the Colt LE6920 AKA Colt Model 750 as well as the M-4 and M-16 and uses it in combat situations. For not being a Military Rifle, it sure does fake it real well.

You can stop this nonsense right now. The AR-15 was introduced in 1958 specifically for the Military and wasn't offered to the Civilian world until 1962. My original rifle I qualified on for the AF in Basic was an AR-15. The original AR-15 had a diamond charging handle and the original M-16 had a T charging handle. The ones that I fired had diamond charging handles. In combat, both are used mostly in semi auto settings to conserve ammo. Even if you use the 3 shot burst on the Model 604, only the first shot is on target. With the M-4 in semi auto, it's exactly the same as an AR-15 you buy off the shelf in all manners in combat. There is a bunch of damned good reasons it's lasted so long as the #1 Combat Assault Rifle sought after and I think those have been covered over and over. I guess you think enough time has passed that you think we have forgotten them. Hasn't happened, cupcake.

Every rifle is a military rifle. They are all designed for military use, or re-designed from military rifles.

To say you want to rid us of military rifles means complete confiscation.

.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

AR-15's are popular for a reason. They are easier to handle than an ordinary rifle. They are faster shooting. They are easier to load. The bullets do more damage. They were designed to make it as easy as possible to kill a bunch of people fast. That is what they were designed for.
Now explain why American civilians need or even deserve to have a weapon like that in the broom closet.

Every rifle was designed to be easier to handle, easier to load, shoot faster, etc.

The bullets for the AR 15 were not designed to do more damage. They were designed to be lighter/easier to carry than the bigger NATO round.

American civilians need machine guns because (as the Miller case said) they are related to service in a militia.

.

 

[Blues Man]

AR-15's are popular for a reason. They are easier to handle than an ordinary rifle. They are faster shooting. They are easier to load. The bullets do more damage. They were designed to make it as easy as possible to kill a bunch of people fast. That is what they were designed for.
Now explain why American civilians need or even deserve to have a weapon like that in the broom closet.

No they really aren't. They are about as easy to handle as any small caliber rifle. They don't shoot faster than any other semiautomatic rifle. and the bullets don't do any more damage than any other round of the same caliber.

One theory why the 5.56 round was adopted by the military because it was less deadly not more. The 5.56 NATO round is small and light so a soldier can carry more into battle they are are less likely to kill and more likely to wound and incapacitate an enemy.

The strategy behind a less lethal round is that wounding more and killing less is a greater drain on enemy resources than killing an enemy soldier. An enemy can leave a dead soldier on the field and it costs him nothing but wounded soldiers require evacuation and medical attention thus using more of the enemy's resources

Another theory on the reason why the 5.56 round was adopted was that the politics of the world stage post WWII which is probably the real reason why the 5.56 came to be the standard round for American forces.

This is why the U.S. military uses 5.56mm ammo instead of 7.62mm


The 5.56 round is being found to be quite ineffective in battle and the US military is now considering a new basic combat rifle

https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Por...es/English/MilitaryReview_20120831_art004.pdf

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

AR-15's are popular for a reason. They are easier to handle than an ordinary rifle. They are faster shooting. They are easier to load. The bullets do more damage. They were designed to make it as easy as possible to kill a bunch of people fast. That is what they were designed for.
Now explain why American civilians need or even deserve to have a weapon like that in the broom closet.

They're popular because they're modular.

Various complete uppers in different calibers and configurations can be used with a single complete lower.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

America should do as the Swiss government does and require everyone to have a Millitary type rifle. We are at war with terrorists who are all armed with fully automatic AK-47 assault rifles. Its time we wake up to that fact.

This is as ignorant as it is ridiculous and idiotic.

 

[WinterBorn]

AR-15's are popular for a reason. They are easier to handle than an ordinary rifle. They are faster shooting. They are easier to load. The bullets do more damage. They were designed to make it as easy as possible to kill a bunch of people fast. That is what they were designed for.
Now explain why American civilians need or even deserve to have a weapon like that in the broom closet.

They are shorter and lighter than some rifles. And being magazine fed means they are faster to reload then other rifles. But that is almost all semi-auto rifles (except for a few .22s that have a tubular magazine).

There are several rifles I think are better for killing a bunch of people fast. Notably, any of the .308NATO/7.62x51mm semi-autos. The FN-FAL, M1A, and other .308s are more accurate at longer ranged.

As a matter of fact, a good bolt action (the kind used for hunting) makes an excellent sniper rifle. I think they are more dangerous than the ARs, they just don't rack up the numbers as quickly.

 

[OldLady]

AR-15's are popular for a reason. They are easier to handle than an ordinary rifle. They are faster shooting. They are easier to load. The bullets do more damage. They were designed to make it as easy as possible to kill a bunch of people fast. That is what they were designed for.
Now explain why American civilians need or even deserve to have a weapon like that in the broom closet.

Every rifle was designed to be easier to handle, easier to load, shoot faster, etc.

The bullets for the AR 15 were not designed to do more damage. They were designed to be lighter/easier to carry than the bigger NATO round.

American civilians need machine guns because (as the Miller case said) they are related to service in a militia.

.

What militia?

 

[OldLady]

AR-15's are popular for a reason. They are easier to handle than an ordinary rifle. They are faster shooting. They are easier to load. The bullets do more damage. They were designed to make it as easy as possible to kill a bunch of people fast. That is what they were designed for.
Now explain why American civilians need or even deserve to have a weapon like that in the broom closet.

They are shorter and lighter than some rifles. And being magazine fed means they are faster to reload then other rifles. But that is almost all semi-auto rifles (except for a few .22s that have a tubular magazine).

There are several rifles I think are better for killing a bunch of people fast. Notably, any of the .308NATO/7.62x51mm semi-autos. The FN-FAL, M1A, and other .308s are more accurate at longer ranged.

As a matter of fact, a good bolt action (the kind used for hunting) makes an excellent sniper rifle. I think they are more dangerous than the ARs, they just don't rack up the numbers as quickly.

they just don't rack up the numbers as quickly
Yes, eliminating AR-type rifles is pure damage control. That's all it is. Maybe a few less people will be killed with a slower rifle.

 

[Blues Man]

AR-15's are popular for a reason. They are easier to handle than an ordinary rifle. They are faster shooting. They are easier to load. The bullets do more damage. They were designed to make it as easy as possible to kill a bunch of people fast. That is what they were designed for.
Now explain why American civilians need or even deserve to have a weapon like that in the broom closet.

They are shorter and lighter than some rifles. And being magazine fed means they are faster to reload then other rifles. But that is almost all semi-auto rifles (except for a few .22s that have a tubular magazine).

There are several rifles I think are better for killing a bunch of people fast. Notably, any of the .308NATO/7.62x51mm semi-autos. The FN-FAL, M1A, and other .308s are more accurate at longer ranged.

As a matter of fact, a good bolt action (the kind used for hunting) makes an excellent sniper rifle. I think they are more dangerous than the ARs, they just don't rack up the numbers as quickly.

they just don't rack up the numbers as quickly
Yes, eliminating AR-type rifles is pure damage control. That's all it is. Maybe a few less people will be killed with a slower rifle.

So you want to eliminate all semiautomatic rifles right?

 

[OldLady]

AR-15's are popular for a reason. They are easier to handle than an ordinary rifle. They are faster shooting. They are easier to load. The bullets do more damage. They were designed to make it as easy as possible to kill a bunch of people fast. That is what they were designed for.
Now explain why American civilians need or even deserve to have a weapon like that in the broom closet.

They are shorter and lighter than some rifles. And being magazine fed means they are faster to reload then other rifles. But that is almost all semi-auto rifles (except for a few .22s that have a tubular magazine).

There are several rifles I think are better for killing a bunch of people fast. Notably, any of the .308NATO/7.62x51mm semi-autos. The FN-FAL, M1A, and other .308s are more accurate at longer ranged.

As a matter of fact, a good bolt action (the kind used for hunting) makes an excellent sniper rifle. I think they are more dangerous than the ARs, they just don't rack up the numbers as quickly.

they just don't rack up the numbers as quickly
Yes, eliminating AR-type rifles is pure damage control. That's all it is. Maybe a few less people will be killed with a slower rifle.

So you want to eliminate all semiautomatic rifles right?

No. I believe I said AR-type rifles, didn't I?

 

[OldLady]

AR-15's are popular for a reason. They are easier to handle than an ordinary rifle. They are faster shooting. They are easier to load. The bullets do more damage. They were designed to make it as easy as possible to kill a bunch of people fast. That is what they were designed for.
Now explain why American civilians need or even deserve to have a weapon like that in the broom closet.

They're popular because they're modular.

Various complete uppers in different calibers and configurations can be used with a single complete lower.

That's one reason.

 

[OldLady]

AR-15's are popular for a reason. They are easier to handle than an ordinary rifle. They are faster shooting. They are easier to load. The bullets do more damage. They were designed to make it as easy as possible to kill a bunch of people fast. That is what they were designed for.
Now explain why American civilians need or even deserve to have a weapon like that in the broom closet.

No they really aren't. They are about as easy to handle as any small caliber rifle. They don't shoot faster than any other semiautomatic rifle. and the bullets don't do any more damage than any other round of the same caliber.

One theory why the 5.56 round was adopted by the military because it was less deadly not more. The 5.56 NATO round is small and light so a soldier can carry more into battle they are are less likely to kill and more likely to wound and incapacitate an enemy.

The strategy behind a less lethal round is that wounding more and killing less is a greater drain on enemy resources than killing an enemy soldier. An enemy can leave a dead soldier on the field and it costs him nothing but wounded soldiers require evacuation and medical attention thus using more of the enemy's resources

Another theory on the reason why the 5.56 round was adopted was that the politics of the world stage post WWII which is probably the real reason why the 5.56 came to be the standard round for American forces.

This is why the U.S. military uses 5.56mm ammo instead of 7.62mm


The 5.56 round is being found to be quite ineffective in battle and the US military is now considering a new basic combat rifle

https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Por...es/English/MilitaryReview_20120831_art004.pdf

No they really aren't. They are about as easy to handle as any small caliber rifle. They don't shoot faster than any other semiautomatic rifle. and the bullets don't do any more damage than any other round of the same caliber.
11. Is the AR-15 more deadly than other types of guns?
Yes. Studies suggest that attacks with semiautomatics – including semiautomatics equipped with large capacity magazines like the AR-15 – result in more shots fired, more persons hit, and more wounds inflicted per victim than do attacks with other firearms.
What You Need To Know About The AR-15

 

[Daryl Hunt]

America should do as the Swiss government does and require everyone to have a Millitary type rifle. We are at war with terrorists who are all armed with fully automatic AK-47 assault rifles. Its time we wake up to that fact.

The AR-15 is not a military rifle.

It is an exact copy of an M-16 except for the full-auto option. The M-16 is a war weapon. If A=B, and B=C, then A=C. Get it?

It's the full auto option that makes it a military weapon

A semiautomatic rifle is a civilian rifle

There are no full auto M-16s or M-4s in the Military Inventory. All of them have been converted to 3 shot selective fire. Too many young kids went into a firefight and sprayed and prayed, ran out of ammo and were mowed down along with their units. Full Auto just wastes ammo. In fact, 3 shot burst wastes 2 out of the 3 shots as well. Only the first shot is on target. The model number of all the M-16s is M-16A-4 and all the older models have been upgraded to that model and restamped. The A-4 is 3 shot burst only. The same goes for the M-4 which is really what the modern AR-15 is a copy of.

If you want a fully auto M-16, you can buy one. It's going to be an older one. You can by a M-16A-1 that's a piece of crap that will have to be rebuilt starting at bout 30,000 bucks but you are going to need a FFL or an EFL license to buy it. And you had better check with your local laws to see if you can own a fully auto or not. Or you can buy a piece of history for 3 grand, the AR-15 Model 601 (M-16) that's probably in real good condition since it wasn't taken out of service until 1992 which is also full auto.

And there are some AR-15 Semi Autos in the Military Armories today. The only way to tell is to look at the selector lever. Alll other features are exactly the same as the M-4.

Point taken

So then it's the selective fire that make it a military weapon

Semiautomatic rifles are still civilian weapons

Nope, there are many semi auto military weapons in use today. Let me give you a piece of history on Stoner who made the first AR-15

Before Stoner, the widest used modern assault rifle was a tossup between the AK-47 and the M-1 Garande. Both are a drag to carry because of the weight. And it takes two hands to change out the mags.

Both used a Banana type mag to help keep the feed clean. This means you have to rock the mag in and out. You just can't hit the release and drop it. You have to rock it out. Since one hand has to be used to rock the mag out, the other hand has to come off the trigger guard to hit the release. Some can do it and keep their one finger inside the trigger guard but those people are far and few in between. Now that you have the mag out, you have to drop it and then take out the new mag and rock it back into place until it clicks in place. Now you have to either turn the weapon on it's side (if you leave your finger in the trigger guard) and hit the injector button. Then turn it back to firing position. If you ever watched a newbie, chance are, he's going to fumble getting out his new mag a few times. And when under pressure (aka, you have a person who's sole aim in life is to end your life) and you make mistakes. Your hands get shaky, things can and do go wrong. We are talking about an 18 or a 19 year old kid under fire. He, who gets the mag changed the quickest without jamming the weapon, is the one that lives and the one that doesn't is the one that dies that day. If this sounds very dark, it is more than dark. It's life or death.

Stoner worked out a way to feed a round out a mag where the mag was straight without an banana shape. He didn't invent it. When he made his AR-10 that started it all in the 308 caliber, he took some of the good features from the Browning BAR. But the BAR was very large and heavy. Stoner scaled it down using plastics, aluminum and pot metals. Normally the aluminum and pot metals, which are much lighter than steel, wouldn't be strong enough to handle the pressure so he devised a way to use a Chromium Plating making them as strong as steel and have less drag than the steel counterparts. The Original AR-10 also used a composite chromium lined barrel. It was light, very small in comparison. He placed the selector so that it could be operated by thumb on the trigger hand, placed the charging lever at the rear of the weapon so that either hand could be used to charge the weapon and put the release lever or button on the left side of the weapon. Your trigger finger never had to leave the trigger guard. The Mag would be released and drop straight down all by itself while you were readying a new mag. You just pushed a new mag in until it clicked and hit the charging button release. Most of this is done with your left hand and it's easy to learn to do it without even thinking. That same young kid can now make sure he is the first one to get off the next batch of rounds down range. And it's all about wholesale killing. Killing as many as fast and efficiently as you can.

You will notice I didn't cover full auto and semi auto or 3 shot bursts. Those aren't what makes the M-16/M-4 and AR-15 so deadly. The features above are what makes it deadlier than most others. And it's cheap.

He couldn't sell the AR-10 so he scaled it down to the AR-15 and found Militaries in Asia that fell in love with it. Malaysia was the first one and others followed. It finally saw combat in 1959. In 1964, the Air Force noticed it and ordered an AR-15 to their specification for the same reasons I listed above. It was cheap, light, easy to train and did the job. They ordered the AR-15 Model 601. That weapon was in service from 1965 until 1992. Around 1968, the Army decided to order their own. Theirs was the AR-15 Model 602. Since all weapons had to use a M designator, they called it the M-16. The Air Force added the same rails as the Armies version and added a stamp on the side. The Model 602 was stamped M-16A-1 and the Air Force 501 had a additional stamped added so it read AR-15 Model 601 (M-16). These were full auto selective fire weapons. By then, Stoner was out of the Picture and Colt and FN owned the rights.

Today, the Models 603 and 604 (Army, AF) are no longer full auto. They are select fire but the full auto has been replaced with a 3 shot burst which is pretty damned worthless. The problem with the full auto of the 601 through 602 was that in a firefight, that same scared shitless adrenlined up kid would hit the selector to full auto and empty out his mag, load another one, empty that one out, load (repeat until out of ammo) and all it did was get the enemy to put their heads down until he was out of ammo. Then he and his buddies would die when the enemy charged. Yah,I know, in the movies, they have unlimited ammo with them. But talk with some of the old hands about how important it is to conserve your ammo.

In 1962, Colt offered a Model 750 which was the Model 601 without the full auto feature. Nothing else was changed. There were only about 3 parts difference between the 750 and the 601. Even today, there are only about 3 parts difference between a shortened model of the 750 and the M-4. The Shortened 750 is what you know today as the AR-15. Today, you can buy a model 750 or a LE6920 AR-15 Colt for less than 1000 dollars. It doesn't cost any more to make a full blown M-16A-4 or a M-4 since almost all the parts come from the same bins. Why are the Full Auto versions so expensive? Because you can only buy a full auto version that was amde before 1986. That 30 grand for a piece of trash is artificially inflated. A brand new one would cost less than a thousand but you can't buy it unless you have special permission and licensing far above the normal permits and licensing for the normal fully automatic weapon permits.

The Army bought some semi auto AR-15s and they are issued out of their armories. I know of a couple that were issued them. Maybe there was a shortage that year and they just need more guns and the AR was all that was available at the time. Stamped on the side will be M-16 but the selector will have only the safe and single shot settings. We have some troops in the field using these and because of their training, they really can't tell the difference. And the enemy certainly can't. Dead is Dead. The 3 shot selector setting is so rarely used,it's not even worth mentioning.

There you have it. Is the AR a weapon of War? It always was and always will be.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

AR-15's are popular for a reason. They are easier to handle than an ordinary rifle. They are faster shooting. They are easier to load. The bullets do more damage. They were designed to make it as easy as possible to kill a bunch of people fast. That is what they were designed for.
Now explain why American civilians need or even deserve to have a weapon like that in the broom closet.

No they really aren't. They are about as easy to handle as any small caliber rifle. They don't shoot faster than any other semiautomatic rifle. and the bullets don't do any more damage than any other round of the same caliber.

One theory why the 5.56 round was adopted by the military because it was less deadly not more. The 5.56 NATO round is small and light so a soldier can carry more into battle they are are less likely to kill and more likely to wound and incapacitate an enemy.

The strategy behind a less lethal round is that wounding more and killing less is a greater drain on enemy resources than killing an enemy soldier. An enemy can leave a dead soldier on the field and it costs him nothing but wounded soldiers require evacuation and medical attention thus using more of the enemy's resources

Another theory on the reason why the 5.56 round was adopted was that the politics of the world stage post WWII which is probably the real reason why the 5.56 came to be the standard round for American forces.

This is why the U.S. military uses 5.56mm ammo instead of 7.62mm


The 5.56 round is being found to be quite ineffective in battle and the US military is now considering a new basic combat rifle

https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Por...es/English/MilitaryReview_20120831_art004.pdf

You do know you just argued against yourself and gave the reasons the AR was originally a Military Rifle and agreed with everything I have said. BTW. they are playing around with a composite cased 6.8 that is the same cartridge weight as the 556 meaning the rifle will operate the same, look the same but have a slightly heavier punch. In fact, if the test come off as they think it will, the existing M-16s and M-4s can be easily adapted to use the new round far cheaper than buying new guns.

 

[Blues Man]

AR-15's are popular for a reason. They are easier to handle than an ordinary rifle. They are faster shooting. They are easier to load. The bullets do more damage. They were designed to make it as easy as possible to kill a bunch of people fast. That is what they were designed for.
Now explain why American civilians need or even deserve to have a weapon like that in the broom closet.

No they really aren't. They are about as easy to handle as any small caliber rifle. They don't shoot faster than any other semiautomatic rifle. and the bullets don't do any more damage than any other round of the same caliber.

One theory why the 5.56 round was adopted by the military because it was less deadly not more. The 5.56 NATO round is small and light so a soldier can carry more into battle they are are less likely to kill and more likely to wound and incapacitate an enemy.

The strategy behind a less lethal round is that wounding more and killing less is a greater drain on enemy resources than killing an enemy soldier. An enemy can leave a dead soldier on the field and it costs him nothing but wounded soldiers require evacuation and medical attention thus using more of the enemy's resources

Another theory on the reason why the 5.56 round was adopted was that the politics of the world stage post WWII which is probably the real reason why the 5.56 came to be the standard round for American forces.

This is why the U.S. military uses 5.56mm ammo instead of 7.62mm


The 5.56 round is being found to be quite ineffective in battle and the US military is now considering a new basic combat rifle

https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Por...es/English/MilitaryReview_20120831_art004.pdf

No they really aren't. They are about as easy to handle as any small caliber rifle. They don't shoot faster than any other semiautomatic rifle. and the bullets don't do any more damage than any other round of the same caliber.
11. Is the AR-15 more deadly than other types of guns?
Yes. Studies suggest that attacks with semiautomatics – including semiautomatics equipped with large capacity magazines like the AR-15 – result in more shots fired, more persons hit, and more wounds inflicted per victim than do attacks with other firearms.
What You Need To Know About The AR-15

If you bothered to look into murders committed with guns you'll find that handguns are the weapon of choice

If the Ar 15 was "more deadly" then there would be far more murders committed with them than the less than 2% currently

 

[Blues Man]

AR-15's are popular for a reason. They are easier to handle than an ordinary rifle. They are faster shooting. They are easier to load. The bullets do more damage. They were designed to make it as easy as possible to kill a bunch of people fast. That is what they were designed for.
Now explain why American civilians need or even deserve to have a weapon like that in the broom closet.

No they really aren't. They are about as easy to handle as any small caliber rifle. They don't shoot faster than any other semiautomatic rifle. and the bullets don't do any more damage than any other round of the same caliber.

One theory why the 5.56 round was adopted by the military because it was less deadly not more. The 5.56 NATO round is small and light so a soldier can carry more into battle they are are less likely to kill and more likely to wound and incapacitate an enemy.

The strategy behind a less lethal round is that wounding more and killing less is a greater drain on enemy resources than killing an enemy soldier. An enemy can leave a dead soldier on the field and it costs him nothing but wounded soldiers require evacuation and medical attention thus using more of the enemy's resources

Another theory on the reason why the 5.56 round was adopted was that the politics of the world stage post WWII which is probably the real reason why the 5.56 came to be the standard round for American forces.

This is why the U.S. military uses 5.56mm ammo instead of 7.62mm


The 5.56 round is being found to be quite ineffective in battle and the US military is now considering a new basic combat rifle

https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Por...es/English/MilitaryReview_20120831_art004.pdf

You do know you just argued against yourself and gave the reasons the AR was originally a Military Rifle and agreed with everything I have said. BTW. they are playing around with a composite cased 6.8 that is the same cartridge weight as the 556 meaning the rifle will operate the same, look the same but have a slightly heavier punch. In fact, if the test come off as they think it will, the existing M-16s and M-4s can be easily adapted to use the new round far cheaper than buying new guns.

It seems you have some reading comprehension difficulties I was speaking of the 5.56 round as it was erroneously stated that it does "more damage"

More damage than what?

The 5.56 is not a powerful round.
But as far as the rifle that shoots a 5.56mm round it doesn't matter if that rifle is a blabk plastic rifle or any other rifle they all perform virtually identically

 

[Daryl Hunt]

AR-15's are popular for a reason. They are easier to handle than an ordinary rifle. They are faster shooting. They are easier to load. The bullets do more damage. They were designed to make it as easy as possible to kill a bunch of people fast. That is what they were designed for.
Now explain why American civilians need or even deserve to have a weapon like that in the broom closet.

No they really aren't. They are about as easy to handle as any small caliber rifle. They don't shoot faster than any other semiautomatic rifle. and the bullets don't do any more damage than any other round of the same caliber.

One theory why the 5.56 round was adopted by the military because it was less deadly not more. The 5.56 NATO round is small and light so a soldier can carry more into battle they are are less likely to kill and more likely to wound and incapacitate an enemy.

The strategy behind a less lethal round is that wounding more and killing less is a greater drain on enemy resources than killing an enemy soldier. An enemy can leave a dead soldier on the field and it costs him nothing but wounded soldiers require evacuation and medical attention thus using more of the enemy's resources

Another theory on the reason why the 5.56 round was adopted was that the politics of the world stage post WWII which is probably the real reason why the 5.56 came to be the standard round for American forces.

This is why the U.S. military uses 5.56mm ammo instead of 7.62mm


The 5.56 round is being found to be quite ineffective in battle and the US military is now considering a new basic combat rifle

https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Por...es/English/MilitaryReview_20120831_art004.pdf

No they really aren't. They are about as easy to handle as any small caliber rifle. They don't shoot faster than any other semiautomatic rifle. and the bullets don't do any more damage than any other round of the same caliber.
11. Is the AR-15 more deadly than other types of guns?
Yes. Studies suggest that attacks with semiautomatics – including semiautomatics equipped with large capacity magazines like the AR-15 – result in more shots fired, more persons hit, and more wounds inflicted per victim than do attacks with other firearms.
What You Need To Know About The AR-15

If you bothered to look into murders committed with guns you'll find that handguns are the weapon of choice

If the Ar 15 was "more deadly" then there would be far more murders committed with them than the less than 2% currently

The AR is the weapon of choice by the well dressed and fashionable Mass Shooter going for the record. Something that no Fashion Conscious Mass Shooter would leave home without.