Misconceptions

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

From a post in LBN: https://www.democraticunderground.com/10142926347#post6

The bullet that comes out of the barrel of an AR-15 style semi-automatic rifle can easily penetrate the target -- the intruder or whatever person you are using deadly force to defend yourself or others from.
But it also will go through the wall behind that person, and potentially through that room and into the next wall. That power and accuracy are useful for military purposes, which is obviously what they were designed for. But it's far more power than should ever be in the hands of the average civilian.

This is an oversimplification. Typical AR-15 ammo is available in both full metal jacket (FMJ) and hollow point. FMJ is mandated by the military since hollow point and jacketless ammo is contrary to international treaties governing war. FMJ will tend to penetrate more than it will deform and mushroom.
The terminal effects of a bullet depend on a number of things. Hunting and self-defense often dictate against using an FMJ due to the chances of overpenetration. Having a bullet deform on impact causes a greater amount of its kinetic energy to transferred to the target with less chance of the bullet passing through and causing further injury. Consequently the absorption of that energy tends to cause more damage or greater level of injury.
As for the "power" of AR-15 ammo being far beyond what should be available to a civilian, .30-06 ammo has been a standard hunting round for years. This bullet has approximately double the muzzle energy of .223 ammo used in the AR.

A person wielding an AR-15 has a range beyond 300 yards. For an officer armed with a 9 mm pistol, hitting a target beyond 50 yards is going to be difficult, even for the most accomplished marksman.

I've not heard of any murders involving an AR-15 other than the 2017 Las Vegas shooting that involved a distance of more than maybe 10 yards. This has to do rifle vs pistol characteristics. Almost all rifles have a greater accurate range than any pistols.

The prevalence of these weapons means police sometimes are overmatched, as we saw with the mass shooting in Uvalde, Texas, last month. In a situation where you have small children near the shooter, you want to remove the threat as quickly as possible.

Many police departments issue AR-15 type rifles to their officers, these are usually secured in their vehicles. I saw video of LEOs at the Uvalde scene carrying AR-15 type rifles doing what appears to be crowd control. The rank and file on the scene were NOT outmatched in weapons and maybe were even well trained. Perhaps it was their commanders and chiefs that were overmatched and untrained. It is often said that your main weapon in tactical situations is your smarts, your gray matter. Whatever official, uniformed or civilian, who ordered the team to stand down for over 30 minutes, has a lot to explain.
That scum killed 21 people while the police were held back. Did he need an AR-15 to kill those children and teachers? No. The scum who shot 50 people, killing 33, at Virginia Tech 15 years ago had handguns typical of what law enforcement would carry.

I'm really not thinking a ban on AR sales will do anything. This shouldn't be about if I NEED an AR-15. It should be about the mass murders and it has been demonstrated that they certainly don't NEED one.