You should always use the right tool for the situation, and sadly the AR-15 is meant to shoot people and people only. The assault rifle's only purpose is to kill another gun wielder, while a hinting rifle is meant to kill an animal for sport or for food. Same goes with a shotgun. You would never use an AR-15 for sport because it would be just plain silly and expensive. The way the question is worded allows for too much speculation. I would argue that an AR-15 is much more dangerous than a Glock in the majority of situations; so TECHNICALLY, the AR-15 is at LEAST more dangerous than your average pistol, fulfilling the requirement for the question. Most people who are voting NO are not seeing it at a technical standpoint, and are only defending their liberal "gun running" rights as opposed to actually taking the time to see that an assault rifle that uses 5.556 NATO rounds is meant for putting a bullet in someone's centre of mass and nothing else- and it will do it better than a pistol would.
Gunmen were armed with AR 15 Rifles took out 14 innocent people like nothing and injured several others. These guns are extremely dangerous in the hands of someone with a sick mind, semi auto and and full auto weapons should be banned for that reason. Try and tell the families of the innocent victims that these guns are not dangerous.
Define dangerous? The ability to kill? To wound? Then on paper, it would seem that an AR15 is more "dangerous" than say, a handgun. Some people will say that's bad, I say it's actually good. For hunting, sporting or self defense, higher kinetic energy transfer and larger wound profiles are a good thing on game and bad guys. But a lot also depends on the user. If the user can't shoot a rifle, then the AR15 isn't very dangerous.
The AR 15 and weapons like it have been the instrument of choice for countless school shootings and other similar tragedies. Yet still, our government, many of whom are paid off by the NRA, do nothing. The sooner that changes the better. The majority of Americans support gun control, and that the government isn't reflecting that means that our democracy is damaged. It's time for that to change. The AR 15 and other assault weapons were made for war and should be strictly used only for just that. With assault weapons off our streets, police officers armed with handguns will be far more efficient in protecting our schools and other public areas. For a good example of this, just look at the Ohio State University attack, where the attacker was armed only with a knife, and was the only casualty. The NRA would have you believe that candidates with gun control policy are simply trying to take your guns. This lie is corrupt, and is poisoning our nation. All that they are trying to do is keep assault weapons off the streets, protect our public institutions, and make sure unstable people never get armed. If you have a rifle or similar, and went through complete, legal, and carefully executed process to get it, it won't be taken from you. This argument isn't about if you can own a gun. It's about if you can walk through the streets without being worried about being shot at.
. The AR 15 is a weapon of war, and it's purpose should be restricted to just that. It shouldn't be out there for any unstable person to purchase, especially because our gun control policy is weak, thanks to lack of action largely paid for by the NRA. The NRA doesn't care about your 2nd amendment rights. They just want money, and the 2nd amendment is a stepping stone to get it. Ignore their useless banter that gun control supporters are trying to take your guns. Without assault weapons attacks can happen, but far fewer lives will be taken. For examples, just look at the Ohio State attack, where the attacker was armed only with a knife and was the only casualty. Support sense gun legislation, and get these weapons of war off of our streets so that our schools and citizens can be safe.
Gunmen open fire killing 14 people and injuring 20 others in no time. Semi auto and fully automatic guns should be banned for that reason. These weapons in the hands of a sick minded person can do more killing in a short period of time than a conventional gun. Try tell the families of the innocent victims these guns are not dangerous.
The AR -15 is only as dangerous as the person wielding it. In the hands of people like myself it's not a threat to anyone who is not putting my life in danger. And as far as it stalking up to other firearms it has it's purpose and affective range which is about 200 meter that's not to say you can't shoot further with one because clearly it can be done. People have hit targets out to 600 meters with this platform but ideally this is a 200 meter firearm. With that said there are a range of firearms that are very lethal at ranges far beyond the 5.556 NATO round. A few examples are 7.62 x 51mm, 300 win mag, 338 lapua mag, 408 cheytac, 50 BMG, 30-06, and so on and so forth. And shot guns and handguns serve there purpose as well for close range. Handguns are concealable, and shotguns can do massive damage and close range with a slug or buckshot. And there are shotguns like the siaga 12 that take magazines. Not to mention shotguns and handguns have speed loading accessories. It's amazing how fast trained shooters like jerry miculek can fire a gun and reload it. These modern thugs that shoot up places with unarmed people are one trained shooter away from never making the news. People don't need firearms to kill eachother or knives. Almost anything in your surroundings can be a weapon if you put your mind to it. Guns are just an equalizer anyone can be trained to use them. Do you really think a 120lb woman can take on a 200lb man in most cases no but if you give that woman training and a firearm she now has the advantage just pulling a gun on an attacker is enough to deter them. And concealing a firearm in a crowd of people gives someone who could've been a victim a tactical advantage. For example the theater shooting in Colorado. That man had a crowd of people he was shooting at if there was only one person who had a gun there that was part of the crowd that person has a clear threat to terminate. Where as the assailant doesn't know where the threat is. In a case like that it doesn't matter if the assailant has an AR15, ak47, scar 17 you name it they are at a distinct disadvantage given the scenario. So no the AR15 is not the most dangerous firearm. Every firearm has it's niche and it's only as good or bad in that niche as the shooter behind it
Its not so much that they don't think it should be used as a sporting weapons as it is that they're afraid of the people's power. The fact is that power is where people believe it to be, and if people begin to believe that the government is being unjust and grows into a war of the like that it will well be in the favor of the people. So in any case they try to find any subtle way to restrict the people as a precaution so that they can keep the federal government from capsizing in the seas of malcontent.
I've noticed that opinion and proposed legislation often advances the idea that the AR-15 is more dangerous than other guns like handguns, shotguns or hunting rifles. Should this weapon be banned? Or only belong in the hands of military professionals? If so, why??? Is it just ignorance or is there a legitimate argument against the AR-15?
The gun pictured could be a toy, or an Airsoft Rifle! Any gun in any caliber can be dangerous and deadly. Scissors in the hands of a mad man can be deadly, and in the hands of a child just part of Art class. The problem is 99.99% of the people that want the gun pictured banned, is because they are uneducated, know nothing of ballistics, nothing about weapons in general, and have no way of forming an intelligent argument. People that want objects banned fail to accept that people are bad, not objects...
It's a semi automatic rifle like hunters have been using since they've been available, at least 70 years or so. It's standard chambering , the .223 Remington , is a relatively low powered round, suitable for hogs and coyotes. It's design makes it easier to shoot accurately, and important point if shooting at game. Replacement upper receivers are available to make it into a rifle suitable for larger game or for. Smaller game. Example, an upper receivers chambered in .450 Bushmaster makes the AR-15 an effective deer rifle, an upper receiver chambered for the .22 lr makes it a squirrel rifle. There are even muzzle loader upper receivers available, so a hunter could conceivably use his AR-15 during the muzzleloader only season.
Go ahead, ban the AR-15, but it isn't going to make much of a change. There are way more powerful and deadly firearms out there that aren't even being talked about, because, let's face it, they don't look as scary. Actually do your research on a gun before deciding if it should be banned, or maybe you just think it can do more damage solely based on appearance.
All the issues with the AR-15 are merely myths created by the media and uneducated non-gun owners. One myth is that it's more dangerous than any other gun; however anyone could easily do the same if not more damage with a handgun. Another myth is that the round is more powerful than most others (available to civilians). Again, that's so false; the round used in the ArmaLite Rifle-15 is less powerful than the common hunting rifle rounds which include but are not limited to: .30-30, .306, 30-06, and much more. The other common complaint is that it can shoot faster than any other rounds, no. I mean, if you have a very impressive trigger finger than sure, but again I could put a hair-trigger on a pistol and have the same if not even greater results. When it comes to firearms and banning firearms I like to say "No gun, no opinion", it may seem like you've heard it before. That's because I based it off of the chant used regarding abortions, "no womb, no opinion".
Almost any gun in the last 10 years can shoot just as fast and do the same amount of damage. An ar just looks like a military rifle. Some hunting rifles will do way more damage. Their are people than can shoot revolvers faster if ur gonna tell me that an ar-15 is dangerous I’m gonna laugh my ass off
The AR-15 style semi automatic rifle is a fantastic firearm. It shoots more reliably than some (but not as reliably than an AK-47), it shoots very accurately, it can be shot very quickly (with or without the help of modifications), and it is highly customize-able. Saying it's more deadly than ANY other is simply ignorance. The ammunition it uses, for example, is typically 556. This ammo uses a projectile that is actually very small, traveling at high speed. Almost every other rifle caliber uses a larger cartridge that has more "power" in terms of both muzzle energy and in terms of lethality. Yes, the AR-15 may be more deadly in a mass shooting than a musket. But any of the following would inflict more damage more quickly on a crowd of people than an AR-15: AK-47, PTR 91, Origin-12 shotgun, TriStar KRX, and Kel-Tec RFB18 Bullpup just to name a few I googled in just 5 minutes. Some of these are magazine fed shotguns that wouldn't be banned by an "assault weapon" ban.
The AR 15 is a civilian semi-automatic rifle like others on the market today. It has not been adopted by any military in the world because it does not have a full automatic capability like true assault rifles, which are banned in the US. It just looks like an assault rifle to the press and leftist politicians who want to ban it. It is useful as a home defense weapon, for plinking, and for introducing America's future soldiers to the feel of a military weapon. However, it is no more lethal than a handgun using hollow point self-defense ammo designed to dissipate energy within the body and not over-penetrate and pose a danger to others. There are ways to stop or limit school shootings, but the gun debate merely sucks the oxygen out of the room and we never get to the solutions that will work.