U.S. Army looking for a new rifle...

[ExciteBike66]

39. I disagree

"If I would argue what would be worse, I would argue that a worse weapon would not be a firearm at all." This argument would make little sense. One could just as easily argue that a nuclear bomb would be even worse, and the argument would tell us nothing about our current discussion.

"Using your definition, should .22 rimfires in an AR type rifle, which are popular in the UK for three gun competitions, be "high powered"?" Probably, though I guess we would need to see how they work in a mass-killing scenario. The issue is less about caliber and more about ease-of-destruction.

"I was illustrating the fact that "high powered" in this context is a political term used for misleading propaganda that has nothing to do with the real issue..." The real issue is the amount of death a weapon is capable of dishing out if used correctly. Once again, the fact of several high-profile mass killings using AR-15s is all I really need to support my argument that the AR can legit be considered "high-powered". It's obviously not just the caliber...


Edit: I just thought of something, I think you and I are talking about two different things here. I think you are talking about how the AR-15 is not "high powered" relative to other guns while I am talking about how the AR-15 is high-powered relative to other weapons in general (or at least, weapons available to a given psychopathic killer).