AR.
For many reasons.....better round in HD scenarios, ergonomic, faster mag changes, adaptable, modular, more accurate, lighter, potentially shorter (better in CQB), less recoil, better sights, easier to mount optics/lights/whatever, etc.
Bizarre. How does faster mag changes, adaptability, modularity, accuracy, and light weight possibly help in a home defense scenario? Optics are useless. Accuracy is moot. Ergonomics don't play a role since both the AK and AR are both ergonomic enough. In a HD scenario, you aren't going to lug either around for days or weeks like in a war. They are both plenty ergonomic enough to achieve the necessary accuracy in a HD situation.
The idea of using a semi-automatic is the faster rate of fire over a pump, lever or bolt action, and the 30rd magazine capacity. I'm definately one for "more is better"...but a mag change of a 30rd mag in a HD scenario? WOW, that would be quite a situation.
Now, lower recoil - that's a plus. That translates into greater rate of fire that remains on target. Sights? Will never be used in a HD situation unless you're shooting at greater than 30 yards. Even then, with the speed, pressure and stress of the situation, you'll default to point and shoot anyway.
Shorter barrel only comes into play if you go the SBR route and pay the tax. Lights...I'm not a fan of them, but I'll say that's a plus for the AR for "target ID"...
The AR just about has it all over the AK besides in reliability. You can pour w/e over an AK, dunk it in anything and it will continue to go bang bang. Not the AR however.
The above is a reoccuring theme in this thread. I agree with this for the most part, HOWEVER...who the hell is going to have a mud-packed, sand filled, filthy dirty AK as a HD weapon? Whatever you keep as a defesive weapon must be kept tip top shape. Regardless of its reputation. You know, the Soviets trained their men to clean their AK's after every single use. Filth accumilation is not only irresponsible firearm ownership, it is totally moot for the discussion of a HD firearm.
The AK suffers from a much poorer ammo selection for HD. I would not trust any military ball or the low-tech SP/HP ammo sold by the Russian outfits.
I think that caliber choice is over-rated and over-played for HD scenarios. So long as you choose a centerfire, you're 95% of way there. I think though, that a centerfire with a sufficient ability to penetrate medium density barriers, such as sofas, interior walls, kitchen cabinets etc...is a benefit, not a liability. That's why I prefer the x39 over the .223. But you're not undergunned with a .223 by any stretch of the imagination. Either is going to seriously wound or kill a home invader. And regardless of what you use, whether it be a .223 or a .308 FAL...don't use 1 bullet. That's why we have magazines. Anything worth shooting, is worth shooting twice (or more for that matter)
Don't forget that if you DO shoot someone with an AK they're more likely to present it before a jury and pull the old " Look at this gun he has! It is t3h evil terrorist gun!"
Right, as opposed to the civvie/hunter friendly looking AR? LOL...
I suspect that there are more of us here who are "peasants" as opposed to "professionals" than are willing to admit it. How many of us are actually using our AK/AR's "professionally?" I know, I know...some are going to say you don't have to be doing something "for a living" to be "professional" at it. But even so, I will be the first to admit that my need/use of an AK/AR platform is occasional, recreational, and prophylactic. A peasant gun suits me just fine.
I think this has nothing to do with why one is better suited for peasants. It isn't really what you do for a living, it is how you are as a person. As gunowners, we probably clean and treat our firearms even BETTER than the typical US ARMY soldier does. So, it doesn't matter what we own, we have all day and all night to clean, scrub and oil our firearms into a spotlessly clean perfection. Just because we aren't professional soldiers doesn't mean we are lacking in maintenance skills. Peasants do though, from lack of supply and from ignorance.
***
Barth has it right, training is probably a bigger factor than rifle. Warrior mindset and being able to produce and perform when you are about to die is bigger than all the little details about guns. However, assuming that's already in place, it is useful to determine which platform offers the most advantages and least disadvantages.
I tend to favor the AK for simple HD, but am not one of these delusional AK-fan boys that believes it is the most reliable, unstoppable rifle ever. I've seen plenty of them jam. And some have had trigger parts break. Enough to where I don't bet on anything.
You're digging your own grave when you start to believe that you own a rifle so reliable that you don't have to worry about malfunctions. Everything fails. Remember that.
Familiarity also plays a role. If you took carbine classes that used the AR, you practice with an AR, you drill with the AR, you use an AR at work (police)...it would be a bad idea to use an AK. Because under stress, your hands and fingers will be trying to work an AR, not an AK - and that's bad.
I favored the AK in my first post in this thread, and I still do. I like the rifle design, controls and caliber as a "system"...
