A common question today is, "Why does anybody NEED an assault weapon?"
Translation the misleading 'assault weapon' into 'modern sporting rifle' such as the AR15, a reasonable answer would be:
For defense of my home, it's wise to plan for the worst event most likely to occur. Therefore I would prepare for an unwanted entry by multiple persons.
In order to meet that requirement, I would NEED: A firearm that is lightweight, manuverable, and dependable. It must be small enough to use in the confines of a room, but long enough to have natural point-and-shoot ergonomics. The weapon must be low-powered and low-recoil to assure good control when shooting repeatedly quickly and repeatedly.
Last week, Sen. Dianne Feinstein introduced a new, supposedly improved version of the federal "assault weapon" ban that expired in 2004. But like that earlier law, which the California Democrat also sponsored, Feinstein's bill prohibits the manufacture and sale of guns based on characteristics that have little or nothing to do with the danger they pose.
Although arbitrary distinctions are a defining characteristic of "assault weapon" bans, recent polls indicate that most Americans support them. New survey data suggest one possible explanation: Most Americans don't know what "assault weapons" are.
Feinstein's bill would ban "157 dangerous military-style assault weapons" by name,...
Anyone who has fired the AR15 rifle, equipped with the 'standard' 30-round magazine, will find that all of these characteristics are incorporated in the design.
It is a natural choice for 'personal self defense', and was so described by Department of Homeland Security in Section C of solicitation number HSCEMS-12-R-00011.
it also is justification for 30 round magazines,you need firepower to hold off a riot mob.
Not that we need any justification.