I don't like the presstitutes crowing about the homeowner having a "bigger gun". The AR is actually a very poor choice in this situation. It's great for outdoor use, at range, against large numbers of targets. Indoors aagainst just 1-2 targets, it's clunky, unweildy, and far too over-powered (shots will go through perps and walls, where the shooter can't see, in violation of the Four Rules). A nice .45 1911 would have a better option, or possibly a Mossberg 500 (shotgun), given his "spray-n-pray" strategy.
The ridiculous notion that "bigger is always better" in a firefight ignores terrain, conditions, visibility, space, etc. Sadly, local and state LEO'd have been using the "can't be outgunned" meme to grab $10,000 BMG's and other toys that they will never need. Even if a perp has a .50 BMG, and is using it, he can still be taken down with one well-placed shot with a service side-arm or any deer rifle. By accepting and perpetuating the ridiculous notion, we simply allow the wanna-be storm-troopers to waste more of our tax money, and make things far more dangerous when things get "hinky".
“The AR is actually a very poor choice in this situation. It's great for outdoor use, at range, against large numbers of targets. Indoors against just 1-2 targets, it's clunky, unwieldy, and far too over-powered (shots will go through perps and walls, where the shooter can't see, in violation of the Four Rules). A nice .45 1911 would have a better option, or possibly a Mossberg 500 (shotgun), given his “spray-n-pray” strategy.”
Agree completely. If he was shooting .223, the round he shot through the wall while likely ended up across the street somewhere. Mossberg 935 with #4 shot would have been much safer and more effective IMHO.