What utilitarian value does an AR-15 have

In My Humble Opinion
21

I’ve shot a Colt AR-15 twice. Yep, it’s a semi-auto medium cartridge carbine. Small caliber, high velocity. Very accurate. Well, for a semi-auto carbine.

I own 10 guns, all given to me or inherited. Shotguns, .22s, a few pistols and lever action rifles.

For myself. I wouldn’t mind owning one except for the stigma. I think that against some beliefs they would be a very good home defense weapon. Though I don’t have to worry about a round going through a wall and hitting a neighbor. I live rural Rocky Mountains. Note that sheet rock will hardly stop buckshot or a .357. But I digress.

Pretty much no one including police that are trained for stressful situations can hit shit when the rubber hits the road. A short carbine with a collapsible stock and 30 rounds would be one hell of an advantage even in pretty close quarters. Pistols/Revolvers are great defensive weapons in closets and elevators. IMHO.

We do have black bear where I live, and moose. If I HAD to shoot one for some reason, I would like a much larger caliber than a .223. I have that covered with a 336 Marlin ER in .356win (it’s kinda a rare rifle and caliber. Basically a .308 rimmed up to .35 and the casing built for the lever action carbine. My dad gave it to me).

Guns are to be respected and can be fun. I have $1200 dollars invested in an air rifle. I can target shoot off my deck without worrying about making any noise. Heck my wife napped inside last time I shot it. This old target shooter (I was 9yo when I got my first .22) is very impressed with it’s accuracy. There are options for target shooting. If you have a quality rifle, it’s just ballistics,and you.

22

How about mid-century? I’ve had a lot of fun with Colt Model 1851 Navy replicas. I have a Winchester 94-22, though I haven’t fired it yet in the 10+ years I’ve owned it. Then there’s early-20th Century firearms. I have a civilian s/n Colt’s Government model, a Mauser C96 ‘Red 9’, and a Webley Mk VI, all built in 1916. (I’ll probably sell those handguns, too.) I also have a Shiloh (U.S.-made) Sharps No. 3 Sporting Rifle. Paid $1,600 for it new, and never used it. But it sure is pretty.

I’m building a ‘retro’ CAR-15 with a fixed stock. It’s only 4" shorter than an AR-15 (because it has a 16" barrel instead of the ‘real’ 14.5" one); but I like the look and it represents a variant that was seen early on. I should finish it, but I don’t have the funds.

I have no idea how much I have invested in my collection. Conservatively, I’d say $30,000 over almost 40 years. Possibly as much as $45,000. I don’t shoot anymore, and I don’t need them Better to sell them.

23

I disagree (slightly). That argument isn’t a phony appeal to emotion—it’s a sincere appeal to emotion, though no less wrongheaded.

I’m politically liberal and I’d be quite happy with European-style gun control. Yet I cringe when my compatriots wax acidic about assault rifles. They sound grossly misinformed (to me), but IMHO they sincerely believe that “guns designed to kill people”—assault rifles—are terrible. There’s nothing phony about their appeal to emotion.

Pistol grips and folding stocks don’t add lethality. 5.56/.223 rounds aren’t extra-deadly because they’re military ammunition. (Most deer rifles would do way more damage than a .223 AR-15). Replaceable 30-round magazines are worth focusing on, though.

I’ve shot an AR-15. It was fun! If I were going to buy a rifle, an AR-15 would be high on my list. They’re among the cheapest “real” guns to shoot (“real” meaning centerfire, not rimfire .22), and work for game as big as deer (where legal). If you’re buying your first rifle, you may not know whether you prefer recreational target shooting, competitive shooting (like two-gun matches) or hunting. The AR-15 can do all of those things pretty well. In that sense, it’s very practical.

24

It’s an odd thing for me as my guns, given to me and handed down, are sort of heirlooms. I have no children.

Seeing what some maniacs do with them gives me pause to sell them.

25

I used one in the military and would buy one for target shooting . Can’t see using one for home defense or hunting.

26

That’s fair enough. In most cases of fairly plainly bogus arguments, as I feel ‘AR15 [types] are weapons of war with no utilitarian use’ to be, there’s a question if the people making the false argument are sincere but lack the mental ability to learn the facts and process them to see that the argument is false. Or have the mental ability but really don’t care to critically examine the argument, perhaps because it’s just easier in their social circle to nod in agreement and leave it at that. But also some people might make the argument though able to inform themselves and reason to where they’d see it’s false. They might even intend to mislead other people. I’m not insisting that the most negative assumption has to be made about any given person making that argument. But OTOH ‘sincere intentions’ don’t matter that much in my worldview when it comes to bad arguments.

I also agree you can argue on facts that ‘small caliber high velocity’ (5.56mm M193 or NATO etc) rounds from a relatively light and compact gun but with a reasonably long sighting radius, and box magazine of large capacity are more ‘efficient’ for mass murder than say carrying a pair or several automatic pistols with big magazines. Just probably not a lot more, and the fashion of using the ‘assault weapons’ in mass shootings (usually, not always) is probably partly just that, as well as optimizing when the next ‘best’ thing would not be a lot less terrible.

Still I think you can make a reasonable argument to ban sale or even possession of box magazine semi-auto rifles and/or big magazines for them (or particularly big magazines for pistols), with important qualification that it not focus on stuff like non-wood furniture, bayonet lugs etc. which is complete nonsense. The problem is getting the votes to ban sale, and banning possession of previously legally bought weapons is a big step form there in how much it would rile up opposition. My state has an ‘assault gun’ ban (though with loopholes since partly based on cosmetics) and more recently a magazine capy limit that’s actually not grandfathered, previously legal 30 rd magazines are now illegal in NJ AIUI. It doesn’t make life unlivable here, for me.

27

It’s not the bullets; it’s the muzzle velocity that increases lethality. The AR-15 and its cousin, the M-16, punch out at 3300 fps, which means that the hydrostatic shock to surrounding tissue and organs upon impact is severe.

28

They have been holding national marksmanship matches for over 100 years, and AR’s are often preferred, because they are as accurate as any other platform, and a lot easier to shoot.

CMP has also sold me a fully functional, semi-automatic, high powered rifle, that General Patton described as “the greatest battle implement ever devised”.

http://thecmp.org/cmp_sales/rifle_sales/m1-garand/

29

Sufficient velocity that, with the proper bullet, the temporary wound cavity shears tissue, as opposed to merely stretching it. The effect, more or less, and of course depending on a slew of other factors , starts at about 2200 feet per second for most projectiles. Which is why, since handgun bullets rarely exceed 2200 fps, handgun wounds are nearly always a small, circular in cross section wound. The ‘crush cavity’, continues for as far as the bullet penetrates, similar to a stab wound.

Higher velocity rifle rounds can have large areas of tissue destruction many multiples of diameter of the actual bullet. And some, like the 123 grain, typical 7.62 x 39 AKM, Soviet M43 bullet, act like handgun rounds. See, e.g., https://www.frfrogspad.com/smallcal.jpg

In the above .jpg, the external thin line represents the extent of the temporary wound cavity, depending on the shear strength of tissue—skin is very elastic, brain tissue far less so—this temporary wound cavity only stretches tissue, it may not tear it. The darker, internal cavity in the diagram represents the extent of permanent tearing of the ballistic gel medium (think yellowish Jello), into which the bullets were shot.

All of which is to say high velocity rifle bullets are qualitatively much superior to either handgun or shotgun projectiles. We see this in different mortality rates from rifle wounds versus handgun. Most people shot with a handgun live. Iirc it’s about 7 of 8. A little over half of people shot center of mass with a rifle, won’t.

Paradoxically, high velocity rifle bullets may exhibit LESS over penetration than either effective shotgun projectiles (buckshot) or handgun bullets. Frequently, due to their high velocity, certain rifle bullets will readily fragment in common building materials, and as fragments, penetrate less than a slower handgun bullet that retains most of its mass.

We’ve gone through this before here. The AR-15 pattern rifle is ideal for home defense. It is easier to aim than either a handgun or most shotguns (which if loaded with defensive ammunition, require aiming, myths aside). It recoils far less than a shotgun. It is usually lighter and easier to manipulate indoors than most shotguns. It contains more ammunition than either a handgun or shotgun. Each individual projectile is much more effective than any practical handgun bullet. And the AR’s bullets can penetrate only as much or less in building materials than most defensive handgun bullets or shotgun loads. Police have realized this, hence the move to widespread adoption of the patrol rifle versus the shotgun, and the use of the patrol rifle in preference to the handgun for tasks such as forced entry, barricaded suspect, or when there is sufficient time to employ the patrol rifle.

30

I was hoping someone would point this out. They rule the roost in service rifle and most civilian centerfire marksmanship competitions. Long bullet (75 grain plus) 5.56 does just as well at long range as the '06 or 7.62x51, absent truly windy conditions, and Berger probably has a bullet that’ll do better there too. Really long range, all of the cool kids are using some 6 or 6.5 hybrid anyway.

Anecdotally, it is a lot easier to make an AR accurate, and keep it that way, than the Garand/M-14 style platforms.

The AR-platform has a tremendous amount of utility. It is America’s best modern selling rifle for a reason.

31

I own a couple AR-15s. I don’t shoot them much, because I prefer my semi-auto .308 rifles. :cool:

Having said that, there isn’t much utility for them in my neck of the woods (rural Ohio). They’re not good for home defense. As for hunting, I know some people use ARs for coyote hunting.

None-the-less, I ain’t giving them up. :slight_smile:

32

I have an old intro to marksmanship book that discusses only .22 LR (bolt-action) and the M16, so presumably the author felt these were suitable subjects for novice target shooters.

ETA I don’t know anything about hunting, but someone I know got rid of some feral pigs using a bow and arrow. He didn’t try to shoot them with a gun.

33

Yes, yes, but beside predator control, varmint control, hunting certain animals, historic and engineering interests, casual target shooting, and competitive target shooting, do they have any utilitarian value?

34

I used them in the military too, and if I wanted a weapon for home defense, and they were in any way legally obtainable here, I’d get one - purely because it’s the weapon I feel most comfortable with. I wouldn’t now what to do with a pistol or a shotgun.

35

The AR-15 platform rifle is a reliable, versatile, lightweight, accurate, and accessible to relatively inexperienced shooters. It’s accurate at close and mid range targets and has good stopping power.

Each of the items in the OP - too powerful, too expensive, etc. - are inaccurate.

36

Yes, the AR is fun to shoot. But I am interpreting the question of “utilitarian value” to mean, “Is it a practical tool for anything?”

37

You mean like predator/varmint/hog hunting and competitive shooting?

38

Yeah, but there’s nothing as intimidating as a shotgun slide being racked.

39

Is a quick question ok?

What’s the deal on AR-15 brands? Cheaper Than Dirt lists ATI, Del-Ton, Diamondback, Bushmaster, Rock River etc. I only see one S&W on Cheaper Than Dirt.

Are these gun shops that a have a ATF license to assemble from import parts? Or actual manufacturers?

I would buy from a local gun show or dealer instead of a web site.

40

My 500 grain subsonic loads are about the same recoil as a .308 Winchester. The load only uses 20 grains of H110, I had to take the lead weights out of the buffer and cut down the spring an inch to make it pick up the next round from the magazine and lock open when empty.