We always appreciate a good argument in the gun community when it comes to a topic where the two parties may have the capability to present various counter arguments. The Mad Duo decided to take on the argument concerning the use of rifles for home defense and plow it into the ground by utilizing their contacts with every big name in the business. They double downed on Lamb and got both Chris Costa and Travis Haley in the mix.
Whatever point they are trying to make was won just from a quick glance a the various profile shots within the article. I would personally recommend reading the first sentence of each paragraph and state you agree as well or you can tell your lazy eyes to get off their ass and provide you with some comprehension as to why its perfectly fine to rain down superior firepower on those that seek to do you harm. Plus, who can help but read a full statement by Pat Rogers with his voice in your mind as you follow along. Nonetheless we will get you started here.
A pro-2A writer says rifles aren’t a good choice for home defense. An anti-2A Judge says rifles aren’t “in common use” for “self-defense in the home.”
Tactical Tyrion and Grumpy CatI say, "What fuckery is this?" These are the two most disturbing recent developments in the firearms world (this week anyway). The article mentioned is 2 years old but recently recirculated the interwebz via social media (which all information good and bad is wont to do periodically). The judge’s ruling came just a couple of days ago. It upholds a Maryland law banning the sale of ‘assault weapons'.
Both are at least partially predicated on the idea that a rifle is not an appropriate weapon for self defense. I disagree, and will explain why. Then I'll give you the perspective of a dozen SMEs of different backgrounds so you can see what they think. Last I'll urge you to do some research, spend some time on the range and make some determinations yourself. Continuing reading the full article at: BreachBangClear.com