- Registrado
- 6 de Oct, 2019
I understand your argument, but here's the thing. Name the scenarios where a normal joe would need a 556 to counter an immediate threat on his life. When does your average joe need to lay rounds at 200 yards? What kind of average joe needs a rifle and plates in his truck?Most of the literature and studies on the topic indicates that you don't really need more than five rounds, so why carry the extra mag? Just in case right, for that situation that needs more than five rounds or even the whole magazine. The same logic can and should be applied to owning and training with a rifle.
Good training is going to tell you to have a number of tools in your arsenal to meet situations appropriately. A Glock 19 isn't going to be able to shoot though barriers as well or have the the range of a 5.56mm rifle.
You can say that's a judgement issue but there was probably at lest one situation today where your Glock 19 wasn't the best tool for a problem if it where to arise. If we could give people perfect judgement then nobody would need a gun but isn't how the world works. The world can't really be prepared for 100% in a reasonable manner, but it's unreasonable to ignore a tool and instead insist in using the wrong tool for the wrong job.
I can think of plenty of scenarios, but most of them happen when you are outgunned by other rifle owners. If somebody else attacks me with an assault rifle, I have to defend myself with another one. But that's the circularity of the issue. Assault rifles are creating the very issues where they are needed to solve them.
If there's an active shooter with an AR, an AR and plates are handy, but wouldn't it just be safer than a lot less people could have such a platform? Especially that the police has proven themselves totally useless and cowardly.