“I don’t understand … he’s an abhorrent person”

I recently commented on a Facebook post referencing Harry Reid saying “Fear is entirely rational” after a campaign of “bigotry and hate.” I simply said “they still don’t get it.”

A friend responded to my comment.

I guess what I don’t get is when people keep telling me to “get over it” and move on. In any past election in my life I was able to do that but this one is different. I understand the reasons peeps voted for T for political reasons some of which I agree with but I just find him to be an abhorrent person. I especially can’t understand how people who wanted to draw and quarter Bill C for being morally bankrupt now turned around and over looked what a pig T is and actually vote for him. And please don’t tell me I’ve been brainwashed by the liberal media against him. I heard with my own ears the hateful things he said.

We obviously can’t point to “one thing” to help understand why folks voted for Trump. A significant part of the equation was Democrats who stayed home or voted for Trump. Trump will end up with about the same number of votes McCain and Romney received, but Clinton ended up with 10 million and 5 million (respectively) fewer votes than Obama.

But I’ll stick to one thought for now: He fought back.

Liberals have been talking down to me for a couple of decades now, but I really started noticing when I started writing for this conservative website. Here are just some of the hateful things that have been said to me, about me, and other conservatives for decades. Strong language coming…

  • I’m a racist because I want our border secured and I want to limit legal immigration in defense of our American culture and ideals.
  • I’m racist since I absolutely do not agree there is “endemic” racism problem in law enforcement.
  • I’m racist since I think the current laws in place should be enforced.
  • I’m a racist homophobe since I think it’s absolutely insane to demand a practicing faithful Christian bake a cake, and have them pay $100k in fines because they are “bigots” if they say no to baking a cake.
  • I hate children because I think the federal Department of Education should be shuttered immediately.
  • I’m delusional since I don’t believe in anthropogenic climate change. I think the climate HAS been changing for millions of years and will continue to do so. To think we can stop global climate change is complete vanity, and when I say that, I’m labeled as someone who wants to destroy the planet.
  • I’m outright insane due to my gun rights stand, and I’m OK with kids getting killed because I think an “assault weapon” ban is absurd.
  • I must be “compensating” for something since I quietly carry a gun to protect myself and my family.
  • There must be something wrong with me because I own evil inanimate objects such as guns, gun magazines, rifles and hollow-point ammunition. Therefore, I must register with the government and be “monitored.” If I fail to register, I’m a criminal.
  • When I say the minimum wage should be zero, I’m a racist and hate poor people trying to raise a family. I’m not allowed to calmly explain why, since the protesting crowd is now yelling at me.
  • People claim I have violent tendencies since I believe in what the TEA Party stands for. When something bad happens, liberals and the media immediately claim it was probably a TEA Party member.
  • When I point out there is no such thing as a “gun show loophole,” I’m an uneducated idiot.
  • When I say it’s terribly sad and heartbreaking more black babies were terminated in NYC than born in 2012 and 2013, I’m a racist AND a misogynist asshole.
  • When I point out conservatives in Washington are not trying to block women from healthcare services or getting the pill, I’m an idiot and anti-woman.
  • When I think the federal government should get completely out of the health care business, I hate women, children and the poor.
  • I’m a racist since I think you should prove you are a citizen when you vote.
  • When I explain human rights exist simultaneously between people and human rights are limited to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness – not healthcare, education, food, housing, cell phones or broadband Internet – I’m a woman-hating, racist asshole.
  • When I say Roe v. Wade was a bad legal decision, heads explode and people start yelling at me before I can explain why.

The criticism, distain and outright hate towards my conservative beliefs continue. I could go on-and-on.

Every single one of these statements – and many more – have been either made to me in person, in an online comment, or sent to me in an email during my time writing more than 2,000 conservative blog posts. Thankfully, I’ve received no death threats, but I know of authors who have. I’ve seen them. Law enforcement dealt with them.

The attacks on some of my friends – who happen to be black conservatives – have been outright brutal. I’ve been present when a protester yelled at them …”you’re a traitor to your race.”

The verbal and written attacks – along with all the “they are stupid” jokes – on Sarah Palin, Palin’s family, George W. Bush, Bush’s family, Mitt Romney, Mia Love, Rand Paul, Alan West, Scott Walker, Clarence Thomas among many others have been BRUTAL for years.

Although Trump was not my chosen candidate, Trump fought back. He gave it out just the same the left have been dishing it out for decades. No national GOP candidate has fought back before. (Well, maybe Reagan.) It was all about “what can we do to get them to accept us.”

Well, Trump got through to folks who were done being bullied by the left.

At this point, I’m more than willing to give Trump a chance. I’ll continue to explain why Constitutional conservatism will work when given the opportunity. I’ll work to direct Trump on conservative policy if he’ll listen. I’ll disagree with him and point out where I think he is wrong just as I did during Bush 43’s term.

Ron Winter: Pollsters, pundits had anti-Trump agenda

From our friend Ron Winter…

All across the American media pollsters and pundits are gazing at their navels and wailing about why Donald Trump was elected president of the United States when everything they did for more than a year was geared to preventing exactly that outcome.

What did we do wrong? What did we miss? Why did the voting public not believe our polls and commentaries in sufficient numbers to make Hillary Clinton president? Woe is us; we are going to have to convene panels and study groups and committees to examine our polling methods to make sure this never happens again.

Read his full article.

 

CNN to DNC: Hey, we need questions for GOP candidate interviews

I don’t think my headline is stretching it all that much at all. Especially since the DNC’s Donna Brazile was fired by CNN for getting caught forwarding debate questions to the Hillary Clinton campaign.

On April 28, 2016, Lauren Dillon, the research director for the DNC, sent an email out to colleagues.

Subject: Cruz on CNN

CNN is looking for questions.

Please send some topical/interesting ones.

Maybe a couple on Fiorina.

Someone please take point and send them all together by 3pm.

Thank you!

So it’s clear someone from CNN contacted Dillon looking for questions to ask GOP candidates. I guess CNN staff do not have enough time or talent to do their own research and come up with questions. Does this prove collusion between the media and the DNC? Well how about another email sent by Dillon?

On April 25, 2016, Dillon sent another email out to DNC staff reminding them of her request the previous day.

Subject: Re: Trump Questions for CNN

Reminder

Kelly please take lead.

Folks, send your questions and any necessary backup to Kelly.

On Apr 24, 2016, at 10:24 PM, Dillon, Lauren <DillonL@dnc.org<mailto:DillonL@dnc.org>> wrote:

Wolf Blitzer is interviewing Trump on Tues ahead of his foreign policy address on Wed.

Please send me thoughts by 10:30 AM tomorrow.

Thanks!

When Dillon asks people to send her “thoughts,” she’s using her role as the DNC researcher-in-chief (leader of opposition research) to collect questions for Blitzer at CNN to use during his interview. Again, Blitzer can not seem to come up with his own questions, so he goes to the DNC for help.

But there is more. This one week in April was pretty busy for the opposition research team at the DNC. Eric Walker, the deputy communications director at the DNC, had a research request for his staff. Lauren Dillon was also looped in. On April 21, 2016, Walker sent to the following email.

Subject: research request: top 10 worst Trump quotes?

Milbank doing a Passover-themed 10 plagues of Trump.

Off top of my head, I’m thinking:

  • Punish women
  • Mexicans as rapists
  • Ban Muslims
  • Shoot someone in middle of 5th ave
  • Rough up BLM protestor
  • Anchor baby
  • Do a lot worse than waterboarding
  • Blood coming out of her wherever
  • Spill beans on ted’s wife
  • Talked about penis on stage at debate

Any other big things I’m missing? And can you pull bullets for these?

Thank you!!

The “Milbank” Walker is referring to is Dana Milbank, and opinion writer for The Washington Post. Less than 24 hours after Walker’s email, Milbank’s article is posted at the Post’s website… The Ten Plagues of Trump.

I would never suggest there is no collusion between the GOP and conservative journalists and opinion writers. In my opinion, this is why we need an extreme shake-up to the governing elite in this country. The establishment political class are all buddy-buddy with the Fourth Estate – The Press – who should be more involved with investigative journalism, coming up with their own damn questions, and reporting truth instead of trying to “make news.”

You’ll note we’re not seeing the original requests from CNN or The Post to the DNC. Back channels. You have the “work” email and then you have the somewhat cryptic free email accounts used by everyone in this great swamp. The stuff nobody wants to reveal is hidden in GMail and Yahoo account discussions. We’ve seen that proven thousands of times in the Podesta GMail leaks.

 

 

 

Clinton has wanted to hide communications for years

If you think Secretary Clinton’s kerfuffle with emails started when she became Secretary of State in 2008, you’d be incorrect. Prior to her US Senate run in the late 1990s – just as her husband President Clinton was winding down his final term in office – Clinton expressed terror at the thought of her email communications being exposed through freedom of information requests.

In this clip from an ABC News 20/20 segment on Clinton bundler and felon Peter Paul, home video catches Clinton mid-discussion concerning email communications.

Clinton stated…

As much as I’ve been investigated and all that, why would I … why would I want to do email? Can you imagine?

In an interview with Andrea Mitchell from NBC News, Clinton claimed they “didn’t really stop and think what kind of email system will there be.” She was lying, and the video from the Peter Paul fundraising event pretty much confirms she was concerned about hiding communications from view more than 16 years ago.

Of course, many millennials who were not politically aware – and many of us older – have mostly forgotten all of the crap that was happening as Bill Clinton was leaving office and Hillary Clinton was getting geared up for her Senate campaign. Here is the full 20/20 report. I would not doubt it if ABC News block the video, but if they do, I challenge them to put the full report online with commercials instead of hiding it.

 

Obama encourages illegal aliens to vote?

Not quite so fast. He did not understand the premise of the question, or he just was not listening. When Gina Rodriguez asked the question during the interview earlier this week, everyone freaked out about the answer. The video you’re seeing elsewhere cuts off a relevant comment by the president a few moments later in the interview.

But let’s be clear, the president is known for interviews with mixed messages like this.

Rodriguez asked, “Many of the millennials, dreamers, undocumented, ahh… citizens … and I call them citizens because they contribute to this country are fearful of voting. So if I vote, will Immigration know where I live, will they come for my family, and deport us?”

The president answers, “Not true.” He goes on with platitudes about how important it is to vote and not be afraid. It’s important to note Rodriguez just smiled and did not correct or clarify her question. At 1:12 into this clip, the president noted he thought it was important for Latinos – who are citizens – to vote because others in the community may “not have a voice, who can’t legally vote.”

To me, it’s clear what Rodriguez was asking the president, and she let him keep speaking. At 1:09, Rodriguez even mentions “the entire community.” The president did not get it … or did he?

Follow up

Let’s see if the president actually makes the effort to come out and say if you are an illegal alien, non-resident or non-citizen, you can not vote. It is illegal to do so. He won’t.

Here is a proper edit of the clip. If you’d like to see the entire interview – I’m certain it was edited like any other interview – click here.

Gina Rodriguez thinks it’s fine for illegal aliens to vote?

Another follow up. Rodriguez is an actress born and raised in Chicago to parents from Puerto Rico. A question for Rodriguez … is she now suggesting it’s OK for undocumented workers (non-citizens) to vote? In her opinion, did Obama give that opinion the green light?

Rodriguez is claiming the question referred to illegal aliens who are afraid of the voting process. Supposedly they think if someone in their family who is a citizen votes, they are at more of a risk to be tracked down and deported. If that’s the case, it’s one of the worst interview questions I could ever imagine. It’s actually an absurd question if you think about it.

Then she follows up with the following.

So if I vote, will immigration know where I live, will they come for my family and deport us?

Again, absurd question. If you are a citizen and voting, how is Immigration going to come and deport you? You’re a citizen. 

Bad interview all-around, and just enough “mixed messaging” to let illegals know they can vote with no consequences while the president and Rodriguez can claim “we never said that.”

Words matter.

Obamacare insurance can drive you to financial ruin

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) was meant to keep medical expenses from driving you to financial ruin, not for medical insurance to drive you to financial ruin.

But that is what we have now, and it’s exactly what everyone here at RVO predicted years ago. If you’re middle class on a non-subsidized ACA plan, a family of four spends about $1,300 a month in premiums. The deductible for those plans is $13,000 per year. So once you pay $28,600 out-of-pocket each year, your insurance kicks in.

Look at that number again. Twenty eight thousand six hundred dollars.

Where is that $28,600 going? Insurance companies are not keeping it*. The insurance companies are using most of it – or all of it it – to pay healthcare providers for services provided to other subscribers. Most of those other subscribers are on government subsidized programs or have very expensive pre-existing conditions. Of course, they will also use it to cover health care costs you have once you’ve paid your $28,600.

Insurance companies must also cover costs and payments to healthcare providers for mandated coverage requirements. You know, mandates requiring them to insure – without question – those with extremely expensive pre-existing conditions at “normal” rates. Think about that for a moment. It’s kind of like not having insurance when you wreck your new car in the morning. No problem, walk into Progressive in the afternoon and make you first $200 monthly payment on your new policy. Then, walk out with a check for $40,000 to replace your new car.

No, it’s exactly like that.

Obamacare Risk-Corridor Payments Fall Short

Still, insurance companies are losing money and pulling out of the market. This is not unexpected and we also predicted this. The risk corridor scheme was set up to help insurance companies cover losses during the first three years. But just as they got started, the government realized they would not have enough to cover the losses.

In the end ACA insurers collectively incurred $2.87 billion in losses exceeding the risk corridor boundaries, but only ended up owing $362 million in contributions. CMS was able to pay out only $0.126 on the dollar to insurers owed payments, although it reiterated its intent to pay out the full amount owed over the life of the program. This funding shortfall resulted in severe losses for a number of insurers, and several, including a number of consumer cooperative (CO-OP) plans became insolvent.

Are you still wondering why it is failing? It’s clear, there is no “affordable” in the Affordable Care Act.

* Yes, insurance companies do use some of the funds to cover administrative costs.

Obama administration created list of Muslims & Asians for top jobs

Imagine the total media firestorm George W. Bush would have been – or Donald Trump would be in now – if they had requested their staff put together an exclusive list of white Christians for top Executive Branch positions. Imagine an oil company or a Fortune 50 company doing the same.

Be honest, not only would the full force of the mainstream media come down on Bush, Trump or that evil oil company, the Department of Labor, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Department of Justice (DOJ) would be rushing to publicly hang every single individual involved. They would be going for complete personal and financial destruction and publicly discuss prison time.

They would get more than their pound of flesh, but if Barack H. Obama asked for a list of Muslims and Asians for top administration jobs, what do we get?

The co-chairs of the Obama transition team in 2008 were John Podesta, Valerie Jarret and Peter Rouse. Recently, WikiLeaks has provided some insight into the inner-workings of the transition team. Gayle E. Smith is listed as one of the National Security Team Leads for the transition, and she – along with Podesta and Michael Froman – received an email from Preeta D. Bansal with the subject Asian American Candidates, Muslim American Candidates.

Smith is currently the administrator of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). Smith has worked for years in various positions in the Clinton and Obama administrations, and she was a “working group chair” for the Clinton Global Initiative prior to working in the Obama administration.

Michael Froman was a classmate of Obama’s at Harvard Law, and an advisor during his US Senate campaign and a member of the 2008 transition team. He worked in the administration and is currently the United States Trade Representative. Bansal first sent the email to Froman, and then she immediately sent the email to Podesta and Smith. Smith then forwarded it to Podesta again.

Bansal – who happened to go to Harvard and was a supervising editor at the Harvard Law Review in the late 1980s – ended up working in the Clinton Administration DOJ in the mid-90s. More on her professional background here. She’s not listed as part of the Obama transition team, but she ended up working as general counsel and senior policy adviser at the Office of Management and Budget for a couple of years.

During the transition, Bansal was a partner at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, one of the top law firms in the United States. The email came from Bansal’s work email address so we can assume this was a professional request by the transition team.

What Bansal was tasked to do – presumably by Smith or one of the co-chairs – was to provide a list of “Asian American Candidates, [and] Muslim American Candidates” for top jobs in the administration.

Again, let that request sink in… Here is the email and attachments. This is the original part of the email, without the forwarding replies, but with my emphasis in bold.

Here are the compiled lists of Asian American and Muslim American candidates for top Administration jobs, sub-cabinet jobs, and outside boards/agencies/policy committees. A couple things to note about the list of Muslim American candidates:

  1. In the candidates for top jobs, I excluded those with some Arab American background but who are not Muslim (e.g., George Mitchell). Many Lebanese Americans, for example, are Christian. In the last list (of outside boards/commissions), most who are listed appear to be Muslim American, except that a handful (where noted) may be Arab American but of uncertain religion (esp. Christian).
  2. There is only one candidate I thought was a viable one for a Secretary-level job among the Muslim Americans. That said, on both lists, there are some very senior people listed in the last category (for outside boards/commissions) who conceivably could be considered for top jobs. The very senior people I put on the last list tended not to be terribly involved in politics or policy, or in the case of some Asian Americans, had already served in the Clinton and even Carter Administrations and so I thought we should seek new talent. But there’s no magic to some of the placements. I think the lists are fairly exhaustive, but some of the people may be moved to other categories.
  3. High-profile Muslim Americans tend to be the subject of a fair amount of blogger criticism, and so the individuals on this list would need to be ESPECIALLY carefully vetted. I suspect some of the people I list would not survive such a vet — but I do personally know, at least in part, virtually all of the candidates in the 1st two categories (but I know very few of those listed for outside boards/commissions).
  4. I listed the elected Muslim American democratic officials at the end of the second category, but for various reasons, I didn’t think any of them would necessarily be suitable for an Administration appointment. Nevertheless, I wanted to flag them for you in case you wanted to evaluate them further.

DOJ list will be coming in the next two days. Judges and USAttorneys will still take about 10 days. Let me know if the latter are needed sooner.

Preeta D. Bansal

The attachments (both MS Word documents) included one list of Asian Americans and one list of Muslim Americans.

I list and provide links to information about all of the parties involved since you are certain to see every single one of them involved in a Hillary Clinton transition team if she is elected president. These people most likely publicly condemn Republicans and conservatives for being racists and bigots, when all they seem to be able to see is the color of one’s skin or their religion. They are making hiring decisions based on race and religion.

I understand optics in politics, but to create lists that outright exclude qualified candidates based on their race or religion? Come now, you know this would be treated quite differently by everyone if the tables were turned. The same exact people I’ve listed in this post would be complaining on-air Sunday morning, writing op-ed pieces for the Times and demanding justice be served.

Hypocrites. Every one of them.

Stop visiting conspiracy websites

As a follow up to my You’re getting your news wrong piece a couple of weeks ago, let’s now review the “conservative” and “libertarian” conspiracy websites you should simply avoid. You’ll have to excuse my language in this post.

Similar to fake news websites, conspiracy websites make their living off click-bait headlines that are totally over-the-top. Here is a perfect example from Gateway Pundit, Infowars, and many others last week. The headline? Warning – “Day of Rage” scheduled by BLM for this Friday in multiple cities.

Bull shit. Total and complete BS. But you fell for it didn’t you?

Once you click through to one of the dozens of websites who pushed this garbage, you’ll get a listing all of the cities, locations and times for the “Day of Rage” supposedly “organized” by anonymous BLM, and funded by George Soros. (I added the last part, you know … his name shows up everywhere so why not?)

So know let’s get this straight.

  1. Someone anonymously creates a fictitious story and posts it online,
  2. Websites you think to be credible pick them up and drive traffic to their site so they can get hits and get paid, and…
  3. Because of all of the social media sharing, some credible news outlets pick it up, and…
  4. Because of the social media and news outlets picking it up, cops get called in for overtime, and…
  5. Nothing happens.

That’s right … nothing happens. But they got you all spun-up didn’t they? They got you to share the posts via social media didn’t they? You copied and posted it to Internet forums didn’t you?

So how does Gateway Pundit – who used to be pretty reliable – cover for passing along a totally fabricated story? Over the weekend they claimed protests “failed miserably.” Failed? Heck, they never were to happen in the first place. But you’re following along with the BS right?

You’re embarrassing yourself.

Note: I was in Times Square Friday night. Nothing more than the normal fruits and nuts, plus a few Turkish flags were seen.

So this morning we get an email from another chap who stayed up all night, worried sick, over articles they read on Infowars and another conspiracy site called Before It’s News. No, I’m not providing you links… You see, they claim the AP admits UN troops will impose martial law right here in the US!

Really? You’re embarrassing yourself. I can’t even figure out how anyone can get through reading the full article since there are so many pop-up advertising and clicks you have to make to read the “information.”

It’s total bull shit.

The email sent to us also claims Soros, President Obama and BLM are planning to take over America, cancelling conventions to ensure Obama will have to stay in office! And the BLM leader (who is that by the way?) is living in a house given to him by Soros! And Newt Gingrich has ties to the New World Order!

Oh, my, God, people…

Back to the “Day of Rage” that never was. Virtually the same exact anonymous false rumor was posted in August 2014. It even had the same locations listed. Not as many of you fell for it that time, but we will see it again. And conspiracy sites will post it again. And many of you will get all spun-up again. And not much of anything will happen.

Times Square … during the so-called “Day of Rage” last Friday night…

times-square

You’re getting your news wrong, all wrong

Bring on the comet! I’m not certain if I’m embarrassed for my fellow man, or ticked off at the ignorance many display when they find – and then share – the “news” read in a Facebook post, Instagram meme or other “news” websites. Take a step back from the keyboard and say this out-loud any time you’re about to comment, or share a news item or meme you find on the Internet. (I apologize for the language, but it’s necessary.)

“Most of the stuff I read on the Internet is total bullshit.”

Then, if the story seems over-the-top or contains any quote from Sarah Palin, Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, President Obama, or just about anything to do with guns, say this out-loud.

“This is certainly total bullshit.”

My approach may seem extreme, but it’s the only way we’ll save ourselves from total embarrassment.

Question everything, share nothing until you’ve checked at least six times to verify the information. If you are unwilling to follow these easy steps, you’re part of the problem. You’re also proving that you are totally ignorant about the subject and showing your uninformed bias. You’re a low-information person, who form their staunch, “justified” opinions quickly and without actual thought. Congratulations. I hope you don’t ever vote.

And don’t tell me that it “sounded like something he or she would say because of what they said in the past.” You idiot, that thing you heard “in the past” was most likely total bullshit as well.

If you are unwilling to put the time into understanding just the basics of the subject at hand, don’t comment on it or share it. It’s that simple.

The latest embarrassment showed up on my Facebook feed this morning. It linked to a fake news website targeting conservatives, libertarians and Republicans that has two buttons just below each headline; “Show Facts” and “Hide Facts.” I’m not kidding. That’s right, this parody website mixed one paragraph of facts, with five paragraphs of fake Sarah Palin quotes created from the mind of a totally delusional writer who is certainly chuckling about all the readers who will think their fiction is real and will share it.

Of course, you barely notice the “show” and “hide” buttons, and that’s all part of the plan to ensure you are dumbed-downed voters.

What’s disturbing is you’re reading this stuff and forming opinions based on total fiction. Then you’re sharing it with like-minded lemons who think it’s real. And then you vote! God, save us all.

The example is in the screen shots below. I really was tempted to leave the names in place to embarrass these folks, but this time I’ll cut them a break. No, I’m not providing a link or even the name of the website. Never even saw it before this morning, but it’s certainly totally full of complete bullshit targeting conservatives and Republicans. (There are sites targeting liberals and Democrats, so don’t think this is one-way stupidity.)

Facebook Thread

Note there were one or two folks who tried to point out this is totally fake.

facebook-feed-2

Fake News Story

Are they protected from liable laws by simply adding the show facts and hide facts buttons?

fake-news

Why a semi-automatic rifle a good choice for home defense

Originally posted in January of 2013, Jim Vicevich asked me to repost this today. Minor edits have been made. Please read and share this post via social media.

A firearm can be an appropriate part of a complete home-defense plan, but it should not be the only plan. Motion activated exterior lights, locking your doors and windows, an alarm system, and a barking dog (if appropriate) are important. Your plan should include where you will go and where your family members will go if someone breaks in. Call for help and take a defensive approach where you – and your firearm if you have one – are between the intruder or intruders and your family. This may be difficult in some home designs, but you need to figure it out. I personally do not think you should “clear” your house if you have, or strongly suspect, an intruder. Many law enforcement officers I know will not clear their home by themselves.

Why a semi-automatic rifle a good choice for home defense.

Here is a list of valid reasons, in no particular order.

  1. You can mount a light, red dot sight and/or a laser to the rifle to make it easier to used and aim during the day or night.
  2. They have a reasonable recoil, making the gun – for many users – easier to shoot as compared to a defense-caliber shotgun or pistol.
  3. They can be customized to “fit” a variety of body types and shooting styles. They can be configured and adjusted for different shooting distances (less than 5 yards to more than 200 yards).
  4. The .223/5.56 self-defense round is appropriate for use within a home, even in an urban environment. Ballistic experts have found rounds from these calibers “dump energy” quickly and break apart or begin to tumble after penetrating the first barrier. Will rifle rounds go through walls? You bet. Will pistol calibers like 9mm, .40 and .45 go through walls? You bet. Will shotgun rounds go through walls? You bet. That said, there is significant evidence the .223/5.56 self-defense rounds penetrate no more than, and often less than traditional handgun calibers and many shotgun rounds.
  5. A rifle is much more capable of stopping a threat as compared to a pistol.
  6. Semi-automatic rifles are more accurate than a pistol or shotgun.
  7. Ammunition is (normally) readily available and (normally) priced within reason.
  8. In a self-defense situation, you want to avoid manipulating the firearm at all except for pulling the trigger straight back. Law enforcement and civilians do not favor high-capacity magazines so they can shoot more rounds, they favor them so they can manipulate their gun less. If reloading is needed, it is possible but let’s be completely honest, in many self defense situations, ten rounds may not be enough.

For a more detailed review, check out this post.