Just a fun thought experiment at close of business on a Friday. I don’t usually indulge this type of silly stuff, but a conversation about business operational risk management versus inventory cost management today - for some reason - hit me squarely upside of my “gun brain,” and I thought it might elicit some interesting discussion.

Parameters:

• Home defense on a budget
• Relatively remote area
• SHTF scenarios people like to discuss such your choice is an AR-15 carbine with irons, red dot, or LPVO
• No other purpose specified for the rifle(s)
• Solitary person (context for which makes sense later)

Given these options only, would you consider yourself better armed with:

A) A single $700 AR-15
B) Two identical $350 AR’s

Which of these two options, and why?

Neither. Give me a 12 ga pump with an extended magazine.

Given only these options which is really hypothetical I'd go with 2. My reasoning is that the more expensive ones usually have more extras like ejection port cover, load assist and are likely more accurate which in this scenario is not necessary. I could have one hidden and easily accessible and one at the ready. (bedside)

just bought 2 of these, total cost each was 420.00 including sights. barrel length is 7" pretty accurate at 100 yards.

RR

16" ar15 mid length gas system.

with a scope, something in the 1-6x, 1.5-10x type.

price, whatever you can do.... I always thought 3 ar15s made the most sense... ie spare parts. probably should keep the basic spare parts on hand anyway.

In a long term low infrastructure/non permissible environment situation, two $350 AR's
In a normal situation, a single $700 AR

Oh, and my actual situation...