Quote:
Originally posted by spinningfetus
I was driving from a church function (not kidding) at a state park home. Last I looked that wasn't something that warrented the local redneck enforcement to get on my ass.
|
Waitaminute..."enforcement"? Were you talking about a *cop*? Somehow that got left out of the last telling. And you said something earlier about "bumping the Beastie Boys"....c'mon, what's the real story here? A cop didn't chase you out of the state for going to the church picnic.
Quote:
I have yet to see a good reason for assult rifles. They are pointless for hunting, they aren't really good for defending your home.
|
I disagree.
The rifle in question was an AR-15; ten rounds of .233, autoloading. It's a decent home defense weapon, unless you live in an apartment, where penetrating a wall is a problem no matter what you're shooting. A rifle can be aimed much more accurately than a handgun.
Nonetheless, reports from Afghanistan are that the AR-15's military cousins aren't the fiercest "assault rifles" in the world, since they lack stopping power compared to rifles shooting bigger, slower rounds. The main advantage it seems to have is that the rifle and it's ammunition are much lighter (and thus easier to carry and ship) than the competition...an advantage for the logistics people.
The whole "assault-style rifle" category is a canard, one the gun prohibitionists keep hyping on because it's guaranteed to generate an emotional reaction, as I see it has in you. You say "assault rifle" and people immediately imagine someting about the size and power of a BAR and start frothing at the mouth. Would you have been as excited about this if the news story said they guy had been shooting a 12ga shotgun? That probably would have been more likely to bring down the helo at that range.
I've actually fired AR-15s. They're just little rifles, mostly made of plastic, ferchrissiakes. The projectile is tiny (only .003" more than a .22) and tries to make up for it in velocity.
I'd rather have an M-14 at home, myself.