The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

the tar-21 is a superior weapon to the AR-15

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/5/2014 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,639 times Debate No: 48406
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)




the AR-15/m-16/m-4 platform is dated and the proper alternative is the Israel made bull-pup tar-21. bull-pup meaning the bolt and magazine is located behind the trigger. leading to a more compact and streamlined look and feel.
open to any AR enthusiast.


I will start my response by defining a couple of terms,

AR-15: A weapon system designed by Eugene Stoner including all variants including the M16A1,M16A2, M16A3, M16A4 and M4A1.

Superior: Of higher rank, quality, or importance.

Weapon: Something (such as a gun, knife, club, or bomb) that is used for fighting or attacking someone or for defending yourself when someone is attacking you.

Tar-21: IMI Tavor TAR-21 assault rifle and all its variants.

The AR-15 and it's variants, the M16 and M4 have served in world class militaries for over 40 years. The AR-15 weapon system has served in Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, Kosovo, Bosnia, and Vietnam to name a few giving the weapon system combat experience that the Tar-21 has not yet had the time to see. In order for anything to be considered of higher rank it must have experience in its field, the field of a weapon is known as war. Due to such a lack of experience in war the Tar-21 can not be considered a superior weapon. The AR-15 is the primary weapon system in more countries than the Tar-21 due to the fact the the Tar is more the half the age of the AR-15 making it by definition a far less important weapon.

In addition to all of this the weapon is a bull-pup design making the bolt farther away from the trigger causing a less reactive trigger and more prone to what shooters call "milking" the trigger. Milking the trigger is when the torque required to pull the trigger causes the rifle to jerk away from the target. Another major problem with the bull-pup design in the Tar-21 is it cannot be changed from left handed shooting to right handed shooting in a quick manner that would be ideal for taking corners that alternate and in situations where a soldier must pick a weapon that may not be their own.

The Tar-21 has a barrel length maximum of 18.1 inches and a minimum of 13.0 inches in special variants giving the weapon system a large variety. The AR-15 has a maximum barrel length of 24.0 inches in special variants and a minimum of 14.5 inches giving it a larger variation but on the longer side of the barrel length spectrum. These barrel length differences give the Tar-21 a heavy advantage in urban environments but only 3% of the earth is covered in urban areas according to While the shorter average barrel of the Tar-21 gives it an advantage in close quarter combat the AR-15's longer barrel length gives is a superior edge in accuracy and recoil control that is needed in environments such as jungles, deserts, and mountains. All of those terrains have been widely fought in in the modern era of war.

The Tar-21 can not be considered a superior weapon to the AR-15 due to its lack of service time, inability to be fired ambidextrously at a combats notice, and a lack of a longer barrel variant demonstrates how you can not even compare two weapon systems that play a largely different role.

Debate Round No. 1


thanks to my opponent for accepting.

to reply, i do claim you are not giving the rifle enough credit. the first prototypes of the IWI tavor 21 started in 1991 and became standard rifle for the IDF in 2001, and it has spread throughout a fair part of the world since then(I.E India, Brazil, Thailand, Vietnam) replacing the m-16 in a large number of cases.

And as for the critique on the bull-pup design. the accuracy of the tar is just on par with the AR-15 at the various ranges, with the bolt located in the stock making the recoil can absorbed more easily and more directly into the shoulder.and i find the claim of it being non ambidextrous completely unfounded as it most definitely can be shot ambidextrously on the move as it was designed to be completely ambidextrous(i.e. charging handle, bolt/mag release) a feature the AR-15 lacks. along with this "Milking the trigger" claim as the trigger is meant to be squeezed as opposed to "pulled" as the misnomer is.

the TAVOR-21 is the superior weapon and can fulfill just as many roles as the AR-15.



Despite the apparent superior nature of the Tar-21 the country with the most superior military in the world still uses the AR-15 weapon system. One would think if a superior weapon were to exist it would find its way to the American military which uses weapons from every country already. However, they do not use the Tar-21 or any bull-pup assault rifle for that matter. Pro never negated therefore he must affirm the notion that because more countries use the AR-15 it is by definition a far less important weapon. He also never refuted the definition presented for superior which entails importance.

Pro did not refute the fact that the trigger mechanism being farther away from the bolt causes a less reactive trigger compared to the AR-15 as well as the fact that it causes shooters to milk the trigger. Pro's only refutation to tat point was the definition of "milking" the trigger and not whether or not this occurs with shooters of the Tar-21. Pro called my claim that the Tar-21 can not be fired on the move was unfounded. However, the Tar-21 has two ejection ports on either side directly above the magazine well. Being a bull-pup this means that ejection ports are adjacent to the face, the port on the opposite side of the rifle ejects casings away from the shooter and the port next to the shooter's cheek ejects casings toward the shooter. To switch the rifle between left and right hand shooting the bolt has to be changed out for bolt that matches (right handed bolt for right handed shooter, left handed bolt for left handed shooter). This being said a shooter can not disassemble his weapon and resemble while taking corners or even at all in most combat situations.

Pro also stated that the Tar-21's accuracy is on par with the AR-15 at various ranges. Pro failed to take into consideration the different barrel lengths that drastically change the range and accuracy of even the same weapon. The M4's effective range is 600m and the M16's effective range is 800m and that's the difference between a 18' barrel and a 14.5' barrel.

Pro even states that because the bull-pup has the bolt being located in the stock that the recoil is more easily absorbed into the shoulder is 100% correct. It is more absorbed into the shoulder of the shooter compared to the M16 which has a large buffer spring located in the stock that absorbs the recoil allowing more comfortable shooting and control of sustained fire.

Pro mentions that the AR-15 doesn't have a ambidextrous charging handle or bolt release. This claim clearly demonstrates the Pro's complete ignorance to the AR-15 weapon system. The charging handle is located at the top of the gun and can be charged with either hand regardless of what hand you shoot with. Also the mag release is directly next to the mag and can be pressed while the same hand pulls the magazine out.

Pro has failed to show any valid reason why the Tar-21 is a superior weapon to the AR-15, other than wikipedia. I have shown where Pro clearly does not have an idea on the mechanics of either weapon and can not claim that the Tar-21 is superior to the AR-15.

I strongly urge a negative vote on this resolution.

Debate Round No. 2
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by trpeckham 3 years ago
In MW2 yes. In real life no. I have fired all the weapons before. All bullpup's take more training in order to fire correctly and more accurately. Also your argument is not correct because. The M4 Carbine, M16, and AR15 are all completely different weapons. Honestly the best weapon out of all these would have to be a type of M16. The M16 has been around since Vietnam, and although back then they were very poor weapons, they have improved ten fold since then. In modern day it is the most used weapon in the world next to AK series weapons. It has very adaptable and adjustable parts, and a very diverse set of rail and attachment options. I have also grown on the M4 Carbine due to its ability to have more range and a higher velocity. The AR15 would definetely not be my choice weapon because it is way to underpowered and has a very bad range unless highly modified. And ofcourse the Mtar-21 would come in last, and although I do feel like I can shoot bullpup weapons pretty well, I still prefer a classic like the M16
No votes have been placed for this debate.