I Should Have an AR-15, but not YOU! Gun grabber speaks honestly

[woodwork201]

That depends….,,,,,against what, when?

An AR-15, or a similar weapon, is the best choice when a gang of home invaders crash your front door.

When it's just one attacker, as in the case the DC cop mentions, it is certainly a suitable weapon but much of the advantage becomes excess.

So all we need is for bad guys to line up when they come in so we can count them and choose the exactly correct weapon based on count, size, clothing, etc..... Or we could, as I would, grab our AR-15.

 

[2aguy]

Can you quote/link those studies that you've seen that said a .380 is the most likely caliber to fully disable an attacker? I'd like to get that forwarded to people who need to know; you know, like the SEALs, the Army and the Marines, the FBI, every police department in America, etc.

Seriously, I'm not challenging your choice, every one should make their own choices on what tools they use for which job, but that's a new one on me so I would like to see the links.

Likely since it used to be one of the more popular ammunitions, they simply had more people shooting people with it......that is why they can't provide a link..

 

[AZrailwhale]

Can you quote/link those studies that you've seen that said a .380 is the most likely caliber to fully disable an attacker? I'd like to get that forwarded to people who need to know; you know, like the SEALs, the Army and the Marines, the FBI, every police department in America, etc.

Seriously, I'm not challenging your choice, every one should make their own choices on what tools they use for which job, but that's a new one on me so I would like to see the links.

A .380 is a pretty anemic cartridge. I wouldn't trust it for stopping power unless loaded with something like Glaser safety slugs that transfer a lot of energy to the target. Even then I'd prefer a full powered 9mm.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Can you quote/link those studies that you've seen that said a .380 is the most likely caliber to fully disable an attacker? I'd like to get that forwarded to people who need to know; you know, like the SEALs, the Army and the Marines, the FBI, every police department in America, etc.

Seriously, I'm not challenging your choice, every one should make their own choices on what tools they use for which job, but that's a new one on me so I would like to see the links.

A surprise encounter with a criminal attempting to rob you as a civilian is not the same as the situations that military people arm themselves for. As for police, of course they are going to want the most expensive and powerful weapons they can carry on the taxpayer dime. Doesn't mean that it is the wise choice.

I remember reading the studies, but I did not bookmark them or save the links.

Here is one article about it, admittedly not particularly scientific:

An Alternate Look at Handgun Stopping Power | Buckeye Firearms Association

by Greg Ellifritz I've been interested in firearm stopping power for a very long time. I remember reading Handguns magazine back in the late 1980s when Evan Marshall was writing articles about his stopping power studies. When Marshall's first book came out in 1992, I ordered it immediately...

www.buckeyefirearms.org

From that study:

The .380 performed above the handgun average across calibers in one stop incapacitation.

The article goes on to list percentages of incapacitation, and in particular, percent of people not incapacitated. In that stat the .380 is on par with the others.

If you're interested, I encourage you to research it, but I have no need to convince you. Carry what you like, while it is still a relatively free country.

 

[woodwork201]

A surprise encounter with a criminal attempting to rob you as a civilian is not the same as the situations that military people arm themselves for. As for police, of course they are going to want the most expensive and powerful weapons they can carry on the taxpayer dime. Doesn't mean that it is the wise choice.

I remember reading the studies, but I did not bookmark them or save the links.

Here is one article about it, admittedly not particularly scientific:

An Alternate Look at Handgun Stopping Power | Buckeye Firearms Association

by Greg Ellifritz I've been interested in firearm stopping power for a very long time. I remember reading Handguns magazine back in the late 1980s when Evan Marshall was writing articles about his stopping power studies. When Marshall's first book came out in 1992, I ordered it immediately...

www.buckeyefirearms.org

From that study:

View attachment 665743
The .380 performed above the handgun average across calibers in one stop incapacitation.

The article goes on to list percentages of incapacitation, and in particular, percent of people not incapacitated. In that stat the .380 is on par with the others.

If you're interested, I encourage you to research it, but I have no need to convince you. Carry what you like, while it is still a relatively free country.

Interesting article and findings. I don't quite believe the conclusion but I don't question that the conclusion is what his data supported. It just doesn't make sense that a .380 is more deadly than a 9mm, .40 S&W, or .45 ACP.

The article doesn't differentiate between types of rounds, for instance. If all of the larger rounds were FMJ and the .380 was some high quality hollow point or frangible round, across many or all of these separate incidents (doesn't seem likely) then the conclusion would make more sense to me.

Anyway, this is an interesting off-topic diversion; you can have the last word if you want, I'll get back to on topic. But thanks for the info; it was interesting and I do believe that the author was honest in his study.

 

[2aguy]

Interesting article and findings. I don't quite believe the conclusion but I don't question that the conclusion is what his data supported. It just doesn't make sense that a .380 is more deadly than a 9mm, .40 S&W, or .45 ACP.

The article doesn't differentiate between types of rounds, for instance. If all of the larger rounds were FMJ and the .380 was some high quality hollow point or frangible round, across many or all of these separate incidents (doesn't seem likely) then the conclusion would make more sense to me.

Anyway, this is an interesting off-topic diversion; you can have the last word if you want, I'll get back to on topic. But thanks for the info; it was interesting and I do believe that the author was honest in his study.

To be more accurate? He would have to list the years of the shootings....remember, .380 had been around a long time........

 

[Seymour Flops]

To be more accurate? He would have to list the years of the shootings....remember, .380 had been around a long time........

Yes, I said that the article was not particularly scientific. I guess if the goal was to show that .380 is the most successful ammo in self-defense situations, the data could be manipulated. But, I've seen enough to believe that the .380 is at least in the same league with .38 Spl and 9mm.

So, I fall back on common sense and personal preference. After years of carrying a J-Frame .38 Special, I read what I read a few years ago, and checked the .380 out. It has less recoil than my wheelgun, and carries two rounds more. The trigger pull is a little lighter, and I find double tapping much easier. Also, the S&W bodyguard is slimmer, so more comfortable to carry, and easier to draw, plus has a laser so I can point and shoot with confidence.

The drawback is that I don't trust hollow points in a semi-automatic after the first round. Plus I don't know how effective a hollow point would be in a weaker round like .380. I was never sure that the .38 hollow points would do any good, either.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

‘Some members of the tinfoil hat brigade have come up with the reply, “We need these weapons because we want to be effective against the government if it becomes tyrannical. That’s part of our Second Amendment right.” Personally, I think that’s ludicrous, but it has become an increasingly popular justification for purchasing a semi-automatic rifle.’ ibid

Correct.

It is tinfoil hat Red Dawn nonsense.

There’s nothing in the history, text, or case law of the Second Amendment that authorizes insurrectionist dogma.

No one ‘needs’ an AR 15, it’s a want – and that’s fine; if someone wants to possess an AR 15, he should be allowed to do to.

But don’t try to ‘justify’ possessing an AR 15 as some sort of a ‘need’ – it’s not.

Right.

I need belt-fed squad weapons.

Machine guns or Valhalla!!

 

[badbob85037]

‘Some members of the tinfoil hat brigade have come up with the reply, “We need these weapons because we want to be effective against the government if it becomes tyrannical. That’s part of our Second Amendment right.” Personally, I think that’s ludicrous, but it has become an increasingly popular justification for purchasing a semi-automatic rifle.’ ibid

Correct.

It is tinfoil hat Red Dawn nonsense.

There’s nothing in the history, text, or case law of the Second Amendment that authorizes insurrectionist dogma.

No one ‘needs’ an AR 15, it’s a want – and that’s fine; if someone wants to possess an AR 15, he should be allowed to do to.

But don’t try to ‘justify’ possessing an AR 15 as some sort of a ‘need’ – it’s not.

Here's an idea. How bout an AR-10. It's more fun and will reach out a lot farther? Of course then you will need a spotting scope and a good range finder with a ballistic calculator cause nothing is more fun than putting a piece of lead in the center of a target from 3 feet out to a mile. Anyone who don't think it is so has never done it.

 

[there4eyeM]

If it were offered, I'd gladly accept an AR15. It is very well made for its intended use. My knowledge and skill level are at its level or above. My safety obsession around firearms, entrained at an early age by a cop father, is adequate. I know what the arm can do and the range of its power.
I have zero confidence that these minimums are met, as they reasonably must be, by enough of those who possess them.
It is N.R.A. people who should be absolutely demanding that the seriousness of these weapons be taken seriously.

 

[woodwork201]

If it were offered, I'd gladly accept an AR15. It is very well made for its intended use. My knowledge and skill level are at its level or above. My safety obsession around firearms, entrained at an early age by a cop father, is adequate. I know what the arm can do and the range of its power.
I have zero confidence that these minimums are met, as they reasonably must be, by enough of those who possess them.
It is N.R.A. people who should be absolutely demanding that the seriousness of these weapons be taken seriously.

Offered by whom? If you want an AR-15, go buy one. They're readily available.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

This is lie.

Nowhere does the article’s author advocate for ‘grabbing guns.’

It's called incremental steps dumbass.

 

[Uncensored2008]

He will not only seize the rifle but arrest the person as well.

Unless he dies trying - which would be the preferred outcome.

 

[Uncensored2008]

A surprise encounter with a criminal attempting to rob you as a civilian is not the same as the situations that military people arm themselves for. As for police, of course they are going to want the most expensive and powerful weapons they can carry on the taxpayer dime. Doesn't mean that it is the wise choice.

I remember reading the studies, but I did not bookmark them or save the links.

Here is one article about it, admittedly not particularly scientific:

An Alternate Look at Handgun Stopping Power | Buckeye Firearms Association

by Greg Ellifritz I've been interested in firearm stopping power for a very long time. I remember reading Handguns magazine back in the late 1980s when Evan Marshall was writing articles about his stopping power studies. When Marshall's first book came out in 1992, I ordered it immediately...

www.buckeyefirearms.org

From that study:

View attachment 665743
The .380 performed above the handgun average across calibers in one stop incapacitation.

The article goes on to list percentages of incapacitation, and in particular, percent of people not incapacitated. In that stat the .380 is on par with the others.

If you're interested, I encourage you to research it, but I have no need to convince you. Carry what you like, while it is still a relatively free country.

Yet a .22 was equal and a .32 outperformed it significantly.

Reading that chart I would say that a .22 was the most effective, since it's the most easy to handle..

 

[miketx]

Here's an idea. How bout an AR-10. It's more fun and will reach out a lot farther? Of course then you will need a spotting scope and a good range finder with a ballistic calculator cause nothing is more fun than putting a piece of lead in the center of a target from 3 feet out to a mile. Anyone who don't think it is so has never done it.

No way, an AR-10 is 5 ars less!

 

[Dagosa]

An AR-15, or a similar weapon, is the best choice when a gang of home invaders crash your front door.

When it's just one attacker, as in the case the DC cop mentions, it is certainly a suitable weapon but much of the advantage becomes excess.

So all we need is for bad guys to line up when they come in so we can count them and choose the exactly correct weapon based on count, size, clothing, etc..... Or we could, as I would, grab our AR-15.

Hilarious. Preparing for a home invasion so gun a holics can what, shoot through the walls and kill innocents in the house next door and penetrate steel plates and be lethal up to 500 yards away ?

Geese’s, people who prefer the AR must love to be sued. These guys are mass murderers best friend.

These weapons now more and more in the hands of criminals because of easy access , are driving no police into armored vehicles and swat teams.

 

[Dagosa]

No way, an AR-10 is 5 ars less!

I see you jump in another thread and pretend you know more about the AR then you really did....

 

[Dagosa]

Offered by whom? If you want an AR-15, go buy one. They're readily available.

Yup, they are the gun maker’s best friend......it seems there a lot of toy soldier wannabes

 

[Dagosa]

If it were offered, I'd gladly accept an AR15. It is very well made for its intended use. My knowledge and skill level are at its level or above. My safety obsession around firearms, entrained at an early age by a cop father, is adequate. I know what the arm can do and the range of its power.
I have zero confidence that these minimums are met, as they reasonably must be, by enough of those who possess them.
It is N.R.A. people who should be absolutely demanding that the seriousness of these weapons be taken seriously.

It’s intended use was as a military weapon. Stoner would be flabbergasted that they are now in the hands of civilians. We ought to start suing companies that knowingly make them so available, they ultimately get placed in the hands of mass murderer s and are the choice for those intent on killing children and shooting into crowds.

 

[Dagosa]

Here's an idea. How bout an AR-10. It's more fun and will reach out a lot farther? Of course then you will need a spotting scope and a good range finder with a ballistic calculator cause nothing is more fun than putting a piece of lead in the center of a target from 3 feet out to a mile. Anyone who don't think it is so has never done it.

The AR 10 would never be as popular. Sissy boys find the recoil too much to handle. That’s why the. .223 variant is so much more popular. It extends the popularity to under 21 year old juveniles and other sissy boys too afraid to actually enlist.