For millions of Americans, particularly the elderly and physically disabled, the ability to defend themselves against violent criminals can mean the difference between life and death. Yet some of the very firearms that could help them survive have been turned into objects of fear through decades of political propaganda. That is not merely unfortunate. It is dangerous.
Let me begin with the deliberate confusion surrounding the term “assault rifle.” Historically, an assault rifle is a military weapon capable of selective fire, both fully automatic and semiautomatic. The ordinary civilian AR-15 is not such a weapon. It fires one round with each pull of the trigger. It is a semiautomatic rifle, regardless of what its political opponents choose to call it.
The term “assault weapon” has been promoted and expanded in political campaigns and legislation to include semiautomatic firearms based partly on their appearance and particular features. Gun control advocates have successfully associated these rifles with military machine guns in the public imagination. The result is that many Americans cannot distinguish a civilian semiautomatic rifle from a fully automatic military weapon.
The propaganda has been extraordinarily effective, and in my opinion, deliberately frightening. People who have never handled an AR-15 have been convinced that it is an unusually powerful instrument of destruction. In reality, the common AR-15 fires the relatively small .223 Remington or 5.56 NATO cartridge. The .308 Winchester and 7.62 NATO cartridges are substantially more powerful, delivering considerably greater muzzle energy. Some states even restrict .223 ammunition for deer hunting because of concerns about reliably and humanely killing the animal. That does not make the .223 harmless. Its high velocity makes it a potentially lethal cartridge.
Now consider the elderly homeowner, perhaps living alone, awakened by someone violently breaking into the house. That person may have limited strength, arthritis, impaired mobility, or little experience handling a firearm under stress. A handgun, despite its convenient size, can be surprisingly difficult to shoot accurately. Its short sight radius, relatively light weight, and recoil can make controlling it a serious challenge.
A lightweight AR-15 offers significant advantages. Its shoulder stock and multiple points of contact provide stability that a handgun simply cannot match. Its modest recoil makes it manageable for many people who would struggle with a pistol or revolver. An AK-pattern rifle can also provide the stability of a shoulder-fired firearm, although its recoil and handling characteristics differ from those of an AR-15.
Here is the cruel irony. The people who could benefit most from a lightweight, controllable defensive rifle may be the very people who have been frightened away from owning one.
They have been bombarded with images, frightening descriptions, and political accusations until merely touching an AR-15 seems unthinkable. Instead of learning how these firearms actually function, they have been conditioned to recoil from them. That fear may leave them dependent upon a handgun they cannot handle nearly as effectively.
There is also the matter of firearm safety. The compact dimensions of a handgun make it relatively easy for a careless or panicked person to point the muzzle toward their own body or extremities. The longer configuration of a rifle can make muzzle direction easier to recognize and control, although negligent handling of either firearm can produce a deadly accident. Proper training remains essential.
Of course, handguns have one overwhelming advantage: portability. They can be carried discreetly, while an AR-15 or similar rifle is simply impractical for ordinary concealed carry. On the street, that difference matters enormously.
But inside a home or business, the priorities change. Concealment is generally no longer the issue. Stability, accuracy, manageable recoil, and the ability to operate the firearm under extraordinary stress become much more important. Rifles also present challenges in confined spaces, and both rifles and handguns can penetrate walls and endanger innocent people. Those hazards require serious consideration.
What concerns me is that political propaganda has replaced informed judgment with irrational fear. People are being encouraged to reject firearms based on frightening labels and appearances rather than their actual mechanical operation and defensive capabilities.
I believe lightweight semiautomatic rifles deserve far more consideration for home and business defense, especially among elderly and physically disabled Americans. For many of these individuals, a properly fitted AR-15 may be substantially easier to control and shoot accurately than a conventional handgun.
At home or your business, the rifle is the best choice. When you’re out on the street, then you are limited to a handgun. Ideally, you should have both.
The decision should be based on facts, physical capabilities, competent training, and the realities of personal defense, not the political campaign against a particular class of firearms.
That is what makes this campaign of fear so deeply troubling.
Comments