You had me up to this point Then you lost me and I sent your novella to the round file with the rest of the trash.
I wasn't referring to the actual "street sweeper" shotgun, I was using the general idea of a close range, urban assault weapon. Would calling it a "room sweeper" or "room clearer" not have offended you as much, and simply write off what I say instead of listening? Are you more interested in picking a fight, instead of discussing ideas?
You can sit and stop reading my original post short and quickly jump to wild conclusions that I hate assault rifles, or M4's, or try to claim my sloppy use of a term proves my ignorance. I certainly hope not. And if you are willing to read, can I ask you this?
It appears to me you are more interested in looking for people to disagree with, then finding reasons to dismiss and undermine them. Admitting you can't even finish the post shows you obviously aren't interested in any views outside of your own, or perhaps you wish to jump to conclusions because you enjoy jumping to them.
I have no problem with AR's . They are fine firearms, with useful purpose. But that being said, it has also become the catch all rifle of every wanna be cop, "mall ninja" as they are called here, tactical guru, and yahoo that has come along. When you see an AR decked out with rails and equipment, you can either assume its a professional with real equipment for real tactical reasons, or some kid dressing up a rifle like someone throwing spinners on a Cadillac.
Its getting to the point that, yes, everyone is sensitive about hearing criticism about AR's, being the main target of gun controllers, so I can understand the touchiness you may have towards the subject, if you took offense to me somehow bashing M4's and AR's in general, I'm not, nor am I one of those guys looking to seek gun control of any kind. But the gun is being carried by more and more of the worst parts of the new gun culture with the wrong attitudes. I'm not calling out the gun, I'm calling out the mentality that comes with it.
Is it more practical for the average non-LEO citizen to own a standard, GI M-16 full barrel style AR than a SBR 11 inch M4 super compact with rails and all the trimmings? Is the average person, who will shoot at targets at ranges, not benefit from the old full size rifle? Will he, if he chooses to use the rifle for hunting, not benefit from the greater stability of the larger rifle again, and the superior terminal ballistics of the longer barrel? If he uses it for self defense, is the full size old rifle style not almost just as effective?
Why is it that every citizen seems to need to get a subcompact, SBR, decked out with 20 pounds of extras carbine AR, instead of a regular full size one? The average citizen is not trained enough to use those tools, not trained in how to maximize the greater maneuverability of the purpose built carbine? Should he go and purchase, with his hard earned money, a complicated and singularly purposed weapon, for a self defense situation he probably will never have to live through, when he could get a simple, more versatile rifle that is more utilitarian, that he can better use?
For those of us in the older school of thought, 20 year old kids who have never shot a bb gun before running around with tacti-cool AR's concerns us, and the image they bring to shooting. They are not practical, nor even purposeful (the shooters, not the rifles in many cases). Shooting has went from shooters building guns for purpose, to after market gun parts makers and vendors pushing useless **** on the general public, aimed at those kids. I'm afraid of what a future of shooting sports will look like when we quite making rifles for real purposes, and we're all running around with fancy, impractical close quarters carbines in order to look like the guys in Call of Duty.
The AR and the short carbines are not inherently bad, but what they represent and are bringing is.
