To answer your question, the firearms are needed for protection from both wildlife and people, but much more so people. It's useful to have a rifle to put down a cow that's been hit by a vehicle and/or broken a leg or something.
However, I live in an area where stumbling upon foreign cartel marijuana grows is relatively common. They are known to aggressively defend them with firearms which are not legal to own in the jurisdiction they're in. It's also not uncommon for a truck full of guys intent on committing armed robbery to roll up onto a client's property.
An AR-15 would be an ideal defensive weapon for that use-case.
I have to admit, I'm not very experienced in armed conflicts with drug cartels, but the idea that engaging their people with your AR-15 would be better than retreating and/or deescalating seems more like a gun fantasy to me than a realistic assessment of such situations.
I have significantly less experience on the topic than Enginerrrd seems to, but I can confirm that:
> the idea that engaging their people with your AR-15 would be better than retreating and/or deescalating seems more like a gun fantasy to me than a realistic assessment
is more a product of your
> not very experienced in armed conflicts with drug cartels
that it is a accurate assessment of how effective/possible retreating and/or deescalating is.
Thanks! I can definitely see the merit of the cartel argument. Also good point about putting down injured animals.
(I still think gun regulation is a good thing, with some background checks to reduce the chances of people with e.g. psychosis getting their hands on assault rifles.)
However, I live in an area where stumbling upon foreign cartel marijuana grows is relatively common. They are known to aggressively defend them with firearms which are not legal to own in the jurisdiction they're in. It's also not uncommon for a truck full of guys intent on committing armed robbery to roll up onto a client's property.
An AR-15 would be an ideal defensive weapon for that use-case.