AR-15 for Home defense in Philly

[Severe]

Can I legally use an AR-15 for home defense in Philly? I've tried searching the forums for some particular answers but couldn't find any. I do own a Glock 26 and think that it would be more practical or maybe even a shotgun instead but I was just wondering. Thank You all for your replies.

[bogey1]

im sure, as long as its in your house. you could probably use a BAR as long as it is legally yours and in your home. be careful of collateral damage.

[danp]

Legal? Yes. Advisable? Probably not. Over-penetration may be an issue, plus
it will "look" scary to the sheeple when you're in court.

[TonyF]

Originally Posted by danp

Advisable? Probably not.

If the shooting was justifiable the weapon system / platform won't make a difference. The fact that handguns are significantly less effective than a long gun can easily be proven to a jury.

Over-penetration may be an issue

One of the reasons LE agencies have switched from sub guns and SG's to AR15's is that the 5.56 cartridge was found to have much less penetration in typical building materials than handgun ammo yet it still penetrates body armor. This is even true of M193 FMJ ammo. It's not just conjecture and speculation, there is allot of hard data on this issue.

plus it will "look" scary to the sheeple when you're in court.

On the surface this may be true but again, the argument in favor of the terminal effectiveness of the 5.56 can easily be made in court.

[danp]

Originally Posted by TonyF

On the surface this may be true but again, the argument in favor of the terminal effectiveness of the 5.56 can easily be made in court.

You don't have to convince me of that, but you do have to convince jurors and I'm not convinced they will be able to look past the "scary" related to such guns. I would use an AR15 for home defense only as a last resort, but that's just my personal opinion.

[GunLawyer001]

I believe that DanP is correct, that the DA is more likely to prosecute a shaky case of self-defense if the weapon was politically incorrect, and jurors in Philadelphia are more likely to believe the continuing propaganda that owning a semi "assault weapon" means that you were just waiting for a chance to kill someone.

Furthermore, even if you skate past the criminal case, there will be a Wrongful Death civil case waiting for you, brought by the perp's heirs. They will argue that you used excessive force. Remember that OJ Simpson was acquitted in criminal court, but found liable in civil court. He lost everything except what Florida law protects.

In civil court, this rifle will be described as a "weapon of war" used on poor little Rufus McInnocent, who was just offering to pay you for accidentally breaking your window at 3 AM during his night baseball game, when you opened up with your "illegal for deer hunting because it shreds the meat" evil-looking Semi Automatic Assault Rifle. His many priors for burglaries and drugs will be inadmissible, and every one of these thugs seems to have a school photo in which he looks very uncriminal; that photo will be on an easel in court. Not his various mug shots.

Philadelphia juries are notorious for throwing money at pathetic plaintiffs, they seem to feel that money grows on insurance companies and rich folks just so that poor people can take some from time to time; which is why the local courts had to change the rules to keep plaintiffs from picking Philly courts when, for example, the plaintiff was in Lehigh County, the defendant was in Montgomery county, and the incident happened in Bucks County. If the shooting happens in Philadelphia, you'll get a Philadelphia jury, and they will probably find you liable for using excessive force.

If it's the only gun handy as the axe-wielding maniac attacks your kids, then go ahead and shoot. But if you're figuring out which gun to load and stick next to your bed, pick a shotgun or a pistol. And not that "tactical" shotgun with the CAR-15 stock and laser sight that people seem to want to stick on everything, use a hunting shotgun with walnut furniture and standard ammo.

[RoyJackson]

I'd use what ever I had at hand for self defense...be it an AR15 or any other firearm.
I wouldn't buy an AR 15 specifically for defending your home. I'd go for a shotgun first and a handgun (probably a .357 Magnum with .38 +P ammo) second.

But, if the AR 15 was closest at hand..that would be the weapon.

[TonyF]

Originally Posted by GunLawyer001

In civil court, this rifle will be described as a "weapon of war" used on poor little Rufus McInnocent,

And my attorney will tell the jury that it is also the SAME weapon used by most police agencies throughout the U.S. PRECISELY because of the reasons I've already outlined.

He'll also tell them that the instructors from whom I've received training, many being current and former LEO's all ADVISED me that the 5.56 is much more effective and SAFER than a handgun or SG.

Everyone's certainly entitled to their opinion but with this way of thinking we're basically allowing the anti-gun forces to dictate what we'll be using to defend ourselves with by default. Not to mention using a platform that is less effective on the threat and less safe to others in proximity to the *event*.

[Farbmeister]

5.56 will go through MANY, MANY drywall walls.

Why on gods green earth would a 5.56mm NOT penertriate several walls?

LEO went to AR-15's/M-16's cause they are almost GIVEN away by the Federal Gubment.

Do you think LEO cares about 'overpenetraition'. Its GOOD to be able to go through several wall and still have enough left to inflict a mortal wound.

read the theboxotruth.com and put stop using the term 'overpenetraition'.

[dgg9]

Originally Posted by Farbmeister

5.56 will go through MANY, MANY drywall walls.

But not really more than handgun rounds, perhaps surprisingly.

That said, for my city home defense, it's an 870 with the first few rounds #4 shot, then 00.