>>Small arms like the AR-15 family of rifles were designed to lay down large volumes of fire without interruption, and to be controlled in full-auto fire. Individually aimed shots are not even part of the Army Dept’s definition of “firepower” (which is shots per minute). Optimization for the volume-fire mission renders them less useful for the private-party owner, who would typically operate alone and will not have the money nor the field transport to support the lavish logistics needed to accomplish volume fire.
What are you even talking about? This was a discussion of semi-auto vs non semi-auto (revolvers and bolt actions and such). I’m not in the Army so their definitions are irrelevant. If the AR15 is too slow to be considered “firepower”, then the bolt action rifle is definitely not “firepower”.
I don’t think i said that the AR15 is “superior for every task” either. It is a good one-gun solution for just about anything that a private citizen will encounter. Obviously if you are in bear country, you take a bear gun. If you are taking sniper shots from a bell tower, you take a sniper rifle (but shots from a hotel seem to be pretty effective with a semi-auto, as are shots into a crowd, or even single shots at a distance).
You can carry a golf bag full of weapons for each and every situation if you want to. I’ll carry a Glock 17 and an AR-15.
“... I’m not in the Army so their definitions are irrelevant....
...I don’t think i said that the AR15 is “superior for every task” either. It is a good one-gun solution for just about anything that a private citizen will encounter. ...”
Military requirements gave rise to the AR-15 family of firearms, and have driven every development. Civilian adaptations are minor variants. This means that military definitions are just the opposite of irrelevant: they control and constrain everything Bryanw92 will be able to purchase, modify, or build.
If by “one-gun solution” Bryanw92 means a rifle/cartridge combination the average individual can master, with effective range no greater than that at which the average can score an acceptable percentage of hits, then I agree: an AR-15-style rifle isn’t a bad compromise.
But the moment the range lengthens beyond that, the AR-15 user is at a disadvantage, especially against an opponent firing a reasonably accurate rifle chambering one of the original bottle-neck military cartridges charged with nitro propellant introduced in the period 1886-1906. The bolt action rifles issued by the Euro powers, US, and Imperial Japan will outshoot the AR-15. Each and every one will: every time.
A Glock 17 is a great choice to go with the AR-15, not so by the way.