LogFAQs > #947422160

Aaantlion posted...

Given that the current major nation-wide issue is widescale rioting where you might be faced with multiple home invaders

Yes, that does seem to be your premise. I'm inviting you to share the empirical basis that I'm sure you have for believing that facing multiple home invaders is more likely for the average person now than it was prior to the "widespread civil unrest" you speak of. You seem rather convinced of this, after all, and it only seems fair to presume that you are so convinced because you have seen convincing evidence and not because you're gullible enough to fall for alt-right fearmongering. At least, it did seem fair, until you spent three posts simply reiterating your point instead of taking advantage of my generosity. Now I'm not sure quite what to think.

Aaantlion posted...

Regardless, it's a practical choice even for ordinary home defense.

You'd generally be better off with a handgun than any sort of rifle for home defense. Long barrels work against you in close quarters, plus it's not exactly practical to keep a weapon of that size close to hand. Toss in that higher penetration dramatically increases the risk of shooting through walls/doors accidentally and potentially hitting the people you're trying to protect, and it's really not ideal. It's better than nothing, but if home defense is what you want, a handgun or shotgun would be more sensible (the latter has some of the same unwieldiness issues, but offsets that by not needing to be aimed as precisely).

Bearing in mind that I've told you all of this at least once before, and there's really no excuse for making the same mistake again. Please pay more attention this time.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.