Three burglars enter home, son shoots them all dead with AR-15 assault rifle

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

3 minutes ago, bcking said:

*Boredom

 

My patients are babies so I couldn't say if they are bored or not. They mostly sleep or eat.

 

(You're continuing to deflect from the actual content)

Yawn. Ok inside 75 yards or so the velocity of a 5.56 round means it will likely go thru you and not all of the energy will be absorbed by the body. Not so with the 9mm or 45 acp as most of the  energy will be transferred to the body causing more damage. 

 

 

[bcking 3,157]

4 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

Yawn. Ok inside 75 yards or so the velocity of a 5.56 round means it will likely go thru you and not all of the energy will be absorbed by the body. Not so with the 9mm or 45 acp as most of the  energy will be transferred to the body causing more damage. 

 

 

Here we go. Took awhile to come around to it.

 

Data on that? When you say "likely", how likely? Where do you get that from? 

 

I agree though on principle that a penetrating shot may be better tolerated so that is a good point. The are other factors though - How many shots can you get off with a 9mm in a minute? Compared to an AR-15? He had three assailants and from what I remember most articles said they had multiple bullet wounds. From reading it seems like people are naturally more accurate with an AR-15 since it is easier to "aim down the barrel" so to speak. Do you feel that is the case? I guess it would depend on the user's experience.

 

EDIT: As I've said from the very beginning, I would never suggest the defender change anything he did. I'm glad he defended himself and survived. I'm glad the intruders were stopped. The only place it which I disagree is that my "ideal" outcome would have been intruders failing, but living. Not saying he should have "tried" to keep them alive, I just wish the bullets had landed in such a way that they would have survived. Of course the defender's safety takes precedent though.

 

Edited April 3, 2017 by bcking

[8bit_Theatre 64]

Just to address the rifle vs handgun argument I see above - If you have a choice, you will want the rifle (especially if it is a carbine length). Rifles are fundamentally easier to shoot accurately then handguns especially in a high stress situation. Specifically with an AR 15, it can be outfitted identically to say a 9mm handgun. IE. same caliber, capacity etc. You don't have to use 5.56 in an AR15. I don't really have an opinion on that....in an enclosed space 9mm isn't going to be all that much different than 5.56.

[bcking 3,157]

3 minutes ago, 8bit_Theatre said:

Just to address the rifle vs handgun argument I see above - If you have a choice, you will want the rifle (especially if it is a carbine length). Rifles are fundamentally easier to shoot accurately then handguns especially in a high stress situation. Specifically with an AR 15, it can be outfitted identically to say a 9mm handgun. IE. same caliber, capacity etc. You don't have to use 5.56 in an AR15. I don't really have an opinion on that....in an enclosed space 9mm isn't going to be all that much different than 5.56.

Thanks for the insight.

 

I've been perusing what seem to be generally "pro-gun" websites, and they all agree. They argue that the AR-15 is a better "home defense" weapon than a 9mm handgun. Presumably then that means the AR-15 is more efficient at "stopping" your assailant. They don't tend to distinguish between "stopping" an assailant and "killing" an assailant. Seems like most gun enthusiasts don't seem distinguish between those two things.

Edited April 3, 2017 by bcking

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

7 minutes ago, 8bit_Theatre said:

Just to address the rifle vs handgun argument I see above - If you have a choice, you will want the rifle (especially if it is a carbine length). Rifles are fundamentally easier to shoot accurately then handguns especially in a high stress situation. Specifically with an AR 15, it can be outfitted identically to say a 9mm handgun. IE. same caliber, capacity etc. You don't have to use 5.56 in an AR15. I don't really have an opinion on that....in an enclosed space 9mm isn't going to be all that much different than 5.56.

Yup.. what I said from jump street. Basically.

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

5 minutes ago, bcking said:

Thanks for the insight.

 

I've been perusing what seem to be generally "pro-gun" websites, and they all agree. They argue that the AR-15 is a better "home defense" weapon than a 9mm handgun. Presumably then that means the AR-15 is more efficient at "stopping" your assailant. They don't tend to distinguish between "stopping" an assailant and "killing" an assailant. Seems like most gun enthusiasts don't seem distinguish between those two things.

If being attacked with deadly force I dont see how it matters 

[8bit_Theatre 64]

6 minutes ago, bcking said:

Thanks for the insight.

 

I've been perusing what seem to be generally "pro-gun" websites, and they all agree. They argue that the AR-15 is a better "home defense" weapon than a 9mm handgun. Presumably then that means the AR-15 is more efficient at "stopping" your assailant. They don't tend to distinguish between "stopping" an assailant and "killing" an assailant. Seems like most gun enthusiasts don't seem distinguish between those two things.

I actually think more people (and rightfully so) say a good shotgun is better. Really any semiautomatic rifle will work if its using a pistol cartridge or intermediate cartridge.

[bcking 3,157]

5 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

If being attacked with deadly force I dont see how it matters 

That has been apparent since the beginning of this thread and I believe no amount of conversation will change that. It is our primary (and possibly only, in this instance) disagreement. I see a difference in this scenario.

 

Certain scenarios I may agree with you (If someone opens fire in a school I say take him out as quickly as possible no matter what happens to him). In this scenario I see a difference between stopping the teenagers and killing the teenagers, but that is partly based on limited information about the events.

 

As I've said multiple times just because I see a difference doesn't mean I would have expected the defender to do anything different. It just means that I wish that his course of actions would have lead to their failure BUT survival. I realize that if his life was threatened he had to aim to "stop" them. I can still say that I wish they survived.

 

Based on what we know about the scenario, I don't think they HAD to die. Now if this guy says "They all ran at me screaming brandishing their knives" of course that is different. All I've read (unless more details have come out) was that they were breaking in, one had a knife, one had brass knuckles. Two were killed in the kitchen and one was running outside and died in the driveway. Has there been an interview with any of the home owners about what occurred in kitchen? Not that I've read but honestly I haven't been following it really.

Edited April 3, 2017 by bcking

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

Just now, 8bit_Theatre said:

I actually think more people (and rightfully so) say a good shotgun is better. Really any semiautomatic rifle will work if its using a pistol cartridge or intermediate cartridge.

I agree with the shotgun. Usually less chance of penetrating walls and killing our neighbor or god forbid your dog . I keep several weapons ready, a smattering of glocks of different sizes and caliber, a shotgun and an Ar-15 or two 

 

course I am married to an Asian woman. God pity the fool that gets near her Michael Kors collection 

[bcking 3,157]

4 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

I agree with the shotgun. Usually less chance of penetrating walls and killing our neighbor or god forbid your dog . I keep several weapons ready, a smattering of glocks of different sizes and caliber, a shotgun and an Ar-15 or two 

 

course I am married to an Asian woman. God pity the fool that gets near her Michael Kors collection 

So when would you pick the gun out of your selection? When you heard the door being picked? 

 

If they are really all just for home defense how would you choose depending on a situation? How would you know the situation ahead of time? Shouldn't there be like the "best all around weapon" for home defense and you stick with that?

 

Honest question from someone who doesn't own a firearm for protection. In my mind if you heard someone trying to break in you wouldn't know very much about the details so I'm not sure what would make you grab one or the other. Or do you grab a glock, shotgun and AR-15 and head to the door like some bada** with extra shells on a belt and a cigar in your mouth?

Edited April 3, 2017 by bcking

[8bit_Theatre 64]

2 minutes ago, bcking said:

So when would you pick the gun out of your selection? When you heard the door being picked? 

 

If they are really all just for home defense how would you choose depending on a situation? How would you know the situation ahead of time? Shouldn't there be like the "best all around weapon" for home defense and you stick with that?

 

Honest question from someone who doesn't own a firearm for protection. In my mind if you heard someone trying to break in you wouldn't know very much about the details so I'm not sure what would make you grab one or the other. Or do you grab a glock, shotgun and AR-15 and head to the door like some bada** with extra shells on a belt and a cigar in your mouth?

I own, but not for home defense. I guess if I needed to, I would pick a revolver or double action semi auto for the bed area (locked) and then a shotgun somewhere towards the bedroom door area (again locked).

[Umka36 781]

Honestly an AR15 would not be my first choice for home protection due to the liability issue of the bullet going through a person and the collateral damage it may cause. I would chose a handgun with hollow point bullets if it were me, but have neither since I have little kids.

 

I imagine one would pick up whichever weapon is available when one is being robbed, especially when you are scared. In that moment, your fight or flight instincts kicks in.  

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

37 minutes ago, bcking said:

So when would you pick the gun out of your selection? When you heard the door being picked? 

 

If they are really all just for home defense how would you choose depending on a situation? How would you know the situation ahead of time? Shouldn't there be like the "best all around weapon" for home defense and you stick with that?

 

Honest question from someone who doesn't own a firearm for protection. In my mind if you heard someone trying to break in you wouldn't know very much about the details so I'm not sure what would make you grab one or the other. Or do you grab a glock, shotgun and AR-15 and head to the door like some bada** with extra shells on a belt and a cigar in your mouth?

I grab whatever is close. They are all lethal 

[bcking 3,157]

Just now, Nature Boy Flair said:

I grab whatever is close. They are all lethal 

Oh gotcha. I imagined they were all kept in one safe so you are like opening an arsenal and deciding on a weapon.

 

So you keep them all in different places? All under locks? Lots of gun safes, unless you don't take the proper precautions.

[Boiler 47,499]

Not much use in a safe if you need to defend yourself, the one thing a .223 does not have is stopping power, benefit from a Military perspective is that you can carry lots of them. AR 15 would be illegal to hunt anything much bigger than a rabbit in my State for that very reason.

 

I did have a shot at a Bull Elk last year but it was a very long way away and I had not thought of the hold I would need that far out, I did check the stats later and it would still have had the needed energy if you had hit the right spot, but that was a .308.

 

I second the hollow point comments, you want something that will have enough energy (mass x velocity) and make a big enough hole and not just go through bits not important.