The most famous use of an AR15 for Self-Defense

A lot of people put down the notion of an AR15 for self-defense. Some of these reasons are:


1.) Who needs 30 rounds (so-called High Capacity Magazines) for self-defense?


2.) A rifle is easier for an assailant to grab out of your hands than a pistol.


3.) The AR15 is an assault rifle and no one needs "spray-and-pray" for self-defense.


4.) No one under 25 years old should be able to buy or own a rifle until 25 years old because people aren't mature enough and the brain isn't fully developed yet.



These are just a few of the reasons that people claim you don't need an AR15/Assault Rifle for self-defense.


17 year old Kyle Rittenhouse in Kenosha Wisconsin used a Smith & Wesson MP15 / AR15 on August 25th, 2020 to protect himself against 3 attempted murderers (4 if you account jump kick man / Maurice Freeland). Kyle used his AR15 against someone who attempted to kill him with their bare hands, a skateboard, and a pistol, all of which can be considered deadly weapons. Don't think that just because one person is 'unarmed' and another is armed that the armed person is the bad guy.

This also brings note to the fact when a police officer shoots an 'unarmed' individual and isn't charged with murder, just because someone is 'unarmed, doesn't mean they cannot cause grave bodily injury or death.



This is most likely the most famous use of an AR15 for self-defense that there will ever be.


Whether you agree with Kyle going to Kenosha to help protect property and render aid is neither here nor there, this is about his use of the AR15 which he used it intelligently, competently, and with precision making sure that his controlled firing hit no innocent bystanders and almost all shots landed on target.



1.) Who needs 30 rounds (so-called High Capacity Magazines) for self-defense?

No one knows how many rounds you'll need in a self-defense situation but no one wants to be limited in ammo capacity by an arbitrary number.

Kyle used 7 rounds in this situation which is more than most revolvers carry.

Also, reloading while being chased by numerous assailants would be hard for anyone to do.


2.) A rifle is easier for an assailant to grab out of your hands than a pistol.

Joseph Rosenbaum attempted to grab Kyle's rifle and he was able to expertly keep Rosenbaum from grabbing it and was able to get precise rounds on target shortly afterwards.


3.) The AR15 is an assault rifle and no one needs "spray-and-pray" for self-defense.

This is a perfect example of having an AR15 rifle and not using spray-and-pray as many suggest will happen.

Kyle used short, controlled bursts and hit almost every target without hitting any innocent bystanders.


4.) No one under 25 years old should be able to buy or own a rifle until 25 years old because people aren't mature enough and the brain isn't fully developed yet.

While some may say going to Kenosha (this thread isn't about that) may have been immature Kyle conducted himself in a very mature manner and protected himself and others without any damage to anyone else.

Kyle was a minor at the time of this incident at 17 years old and was not an adult although he carried himself as one when the situation arose.

Kyle used his AR15 and did it in a professional manner and he performed better under the highest stress situation you could be in and did a better job than many people in the same situation would do including many law enforcement and military personnel.


If anyone says, "You don't need an AR15 for self-defense or home defense" you can point to this world famous case as proof that an AR15 can be the exact weapon you'd want for self-defense or home defense.


Don't forget that AR15's/so-called Assault Weapons and High Capacity Magazines are still banned in many places.


I don't want this thread to get political so please don't let that happen.

 

I wish the pregnant woman in Florida who used an AR-15 to save her husband got more attention. That's another great example.

 

I think there was one in Florida to where 4 gang bangers decided to randomly shoot at some veteran out of their car, he had an AR15 because he was protecting his property from looters (I believe recent hurricane) and he fired, killing all 4 suspects in the car I believe. They took pistols to a rifle fight.

 

There was also a home invasion (Oklahoma, maybe?) where the son (19 years old, maybe?) used an AR-15 to repel 3 people, actually killing 2. The female getaway driver and the other who successfully escaped were convicted, but the families were crying "foul" because it was unfair. The home invaders brought non-firearm weapons to a gunfight and lost. I'm fuzzy on the details because it's been a few years, but I love all of these cases where someone uses an AR-15 for self-defense.

I will agree that the Kyle Rittenhouse case will be the most famous, but I'd LOVE to compile the stories where an AR-15 is used for self-defense and have them ALL at the ready.

 

Another point is that if you are outdoors like Kyle was and use a sling it will be much harder for an assailant to take your rifle, with a pistol and no sling it would be easier for an assailant to take away your pistol.

 

This might be more appropriate in tactics (if anywhere, really), but one of the first techniques I was taught after I made expert level in military Krav Maga was how to use a slinged weapon against its holder. As well as plethora of handgun and long gun techniques; how to protect yours, dozens upon dozens how to disarm a person holding different kinds of firearms and so on.

If a person holding any firearm knows what (s)he's doing, there's no way to get a grip on the firearm without getting shot multiple times, and if a person who knows what (s)he's doing wants to disarm and/or neutralize an inadequately trained person holding a firearm, it's much easier and less risky than some might want to imply.

But I digress. Just keep in mind that the firearm is a tool and the person holding it is a weapon. The other way around things go wrong in a hurry.

 

Would the outcome have been different if Kyle would have been using a "featureless" Mini-14 and a 10 rd mag?

 

This quote right here...is BRILLIANT! Bravo sir...

 

Thanks, but it's not really mine, I've copied it somewhere. But it sums up the reality well, nevertheless.

 

there's really no way to know

 

He was actually asked to help at a car dealership along with others. He was headed to car fire with a fire extinguisher when he was attacked by armed criminals shouting kill him. He didn't just wandar into town looking for trouble as claimed by the lying press.

 

I'd also like to point out that a long gun was Kyle's only _legal_ recourse for self defense here, as possessing a handgun under the age of 18 in Wisconsin is a crime.

 

He still would have been charged, IMHO. Since the case was not ambiguous, also IMHO, the gun might not have had much of an impact. However, I think the gun did influence the decision to charge and certainly media response.

This is what Joe Scarborough said (lying putz on MSNBC) -

 

And this to is from today......after all of of facts are known:

 

If it hadn't been for the video evidence, Kyle may have been found guilty......think about that......

 

Are you sure that is legitimate?
If so , the Independent website has revised that headline.

 

After all of my service related bad experiences with M16A1s, I hesitated buying an AR15.

Then in the '90s, when I was getting death threats from the neo-Nazi National Alliance, I bought an Eagle lower, 16" and 20" A2 uppers, a bunch of magazines and 1,000 rounds of M193. Prompted by last year's riots, I upgraded to a 16" Bear Creek upper, Magpul fixed stock, optic, 2,000 lumen Olight, and even more magazines.

To quote Doctor Channard from Hellraiser 2, "And to think I hesitated..."

 

Today's "mainstream" media are no better than Die Volkischer Beobachter and Der Sturmer.

 

If gun owners treat their own rhetoric honesty, then no.

On topic, this incident shouldn't be the poster child to make the intended point. Regardless of the outcome, the optics matter. This is reminiscent of Zimmerman. Gun rights are a big PR battle and if Rittenhouse is our battle cry, we've already lost. In a more general sense, we don't actually need real world examples of people using AR15s and >10 round magazines to make the point that firearms of all shapes and colors are legitimate for self defense. In fact, it probably hurts the cause more than it helps to cherry-pick examples in an attempt to prove this because doing so gives oxygen to the the anti-gun argument in the first place.

Let's be smarter about our activism.

 

A sling to a rifle is as a holster to a pistol.

With ANY long gun used for possible self defense, there is a risk of being disarmed and a long gun just in one's two hands is EZ-PZ (presuming little to no training) (which is safe, 'cause otherwise they'd be slinged)

 

Not exactly. Most people can't readily aim and fire a holstered pistol worn on the body.

 

I know one thing it proved. That just because a standard 30 round magazine or "scary high capacity magazine" was used, it seems that the extra 22 rounds were not just sprayed everywhere in some rage or adrenal fury.

I'm not even sure the left can remember why they want to ban high capacity magazines anymore. I'm sure they have to refer to their talking points in some email. Is it because they don't want criminals who could not care any less about the law in the first place to have them?.. or is it that they don't want law abiding citizens to have them? And to quote the disgraced sexual deviant Andrew Cuomo, in a wailing pitiful tone, "who needs 10 rounds to kill a deer?". lol Either way, it looks like KR helped solidify that maybe a 30 round magazine doesn't represent a clear and present danger to the earth after all.

 

Shall we begin implementation of such a policy in regards to military recruitment, and of course hiring of law enforcement professionals (keeping in mind that many Veterans are discharged after years of honorable service well prior to their 25th birthday, and a re highly sought-after in the hiring process for many LE agencies for their experience and maturity), as well as those who represent the US in activities such as the Olympic games?