Quote:
Originally Posted by New Era
Which of the following do you think is more dangerous?
Yeah, people freak out over an AR-15. It's the name (Assault Rifle [sic]), the color (the black rifle), the look of it (it's a military rifle - no, its not), and so on. It's a semi-automatic rifle that fires a a lot of rounds in a short period of time. Lots of guns can do that, but the AR-15 has a special place in people's minds.
All of the above make it a prime gun to own. Plus, they are cheap and widely available. Plus the ammo is cheap, cheap, cheap. What not to like if you're a psycho looking to kill dozens? Fortunately most people who own them are not and are actually very responsible gun owners who respect the weapon and the danger they can do.
You can buy a decent one for under $400 these days. You can build a high quality one for $500 if you know what you are doing and select the right components. If you want to go all tacticool, then yes, you can deck out your rifle to some really ridiculous levels. If you do want to go crazy, optics alone can push your weapon into the thousands of dollars. But why spend money on optics if you're just going to spray and pray?
Great question. Anything with an extended magazine could have been just as deadly in the same situation. Could argue that a handgun with an extended magazine could have been more damaging since it is much easier to conceal and arguably easier to reload in a shorter period of time. The AR-15 is always going to be more deadly as it has a higher velocity round, but it is a tougher weapon to be stealthy with and slip into confined spaces where maximum damage can occur quickly. A smaller weapon is best for close quarter combat, but you need proper training to make those things work. There's the rub. Training makes all the difference regardless of the weapon platform. A well trained individual with two 15 round pistol magazines can do more damage that a person with an untrained individual with an AR-15. |
AR stands for the ArmaLite rifle, the company that designed it, not assault, they designed it for the US army in the 50's, ironically its early history as the M16 it was considered a dog, the FN was considered a way better gun (third one down in your picture I believe), the trouble is most of these wack jobs train for their wackery, they are pretty damn good at killing herds of people, they join a range and train on line for thousands of hours