I think it is 1) legal 2) a good backup idea 3) inconvenient so I wouldn't do it that often if ever, 4) I don't worry too much about what police "might think" while using it as if it ever came to that my life would in danger from some heavily armed or armored bad guy as would theirs
Ah, inconvenience. Obviously, being inconvenienced is more of a concern than self protection. I never understood that sort of logic, especially when it comes to folks who can carry or transport large and do not because of inconvenience, like the P32 pocket carriers that coule carry a full sized and more powerful handgun, but don't want to be inconvenienced by all that weight. When it comes to vehicles, they will carry most of the weight for you. So what is inconvenient?
It seems to me if you are only carrying it in your vehicle, while within the law in my state, should a life threatening situation arise involving an armed assailant, it would be wiser to: press the accelerator, becoming a moving target at least, and get out of range, rather than: stop, dig for ammo, charge your weapon, leave the only cover and concealment you have, and go looking for the person shooting at you. Decision one gives you a good chance for survival.
Oh, you mean like those folks stuck in traffic at the turn lane into CIA headquarters in DC when the guy got out of his vehicle with an AK47 (or some such rifle) and walked down the line of cars shooting people. Here, you are assuming that your vehicle will run and that the situation, such as traffic, will allow egress. This is not always the case. In the CIA example, the only real cover was the engine blocks, only the guy was shooting in via the windows, side windows, where the engine block doesn't do squat.
But it depends on why, I got the impression from the other thread that some wanted to carry them for defense incase they get into a firefight. A civilian needing an AR15 for defense while driving a car?
Once again, assumes car can be driven and also assumes that you are the only person in the car. No, most won't drive and shoot an AR or other rifle, that is true, but who says you are driving when you need the gun?
In Florida during the 90's, we had something called the I-295 Sniper. They had National Guardsmen posted on the hi-way to stop him/them.
I was picking my girlfriend up from Jacksonville, FL going to Orange Park, FL. We heard a noise that sounded like a wheel weight had slung off of a rim and hit the chassis. It wasn't until the next day that I discovered a bullet had glanced off of the roof of the car, from the rear, just behind my head.
I had a good tactical rifle, but it would have done me no good, as I never saw the shooter or his position, or heard the shot.
Yes, but that isn't always the case, is it? In LA, the North Hollywood bank robbers managed over 40 minutes before finally encountering late arriving officers with rifles, during which time something like 7 people were shot. I watched it live and from the chopper footage, I could not understand why somebody in the neighborhoods by the bank didn't break out a deer rifle or other rifle for the cops. All that time and you know some of the home would have been occupied by firearms owners, though most were likely at work.
Is it smart? What in the world would you really need an AR for in your car? Don't get me wrong, I often carry a handgun in my car; but and AR? The way I see it, the handgun is for personal protection in case I get car-jacked, robbed, or the car breaks down on an empty stretch of highway late at night. The only way I would ever use the handgun would be if all avenues of escape are cut off. That means up close and personal. And probably either carrying concealed with a permit (e.g. sitting outside my car waiting for a tow truck) or sitting inside my car. An AR would not help in either situation. Probably do more harm than good.
And for urban combat a la North Hollywood bank robbery or University of Texas bell tower shooter, that's why they pay the SWAT guys the big bucks. Frankly, you'd be a fool to carry an AR around and get into that fight.
An AR would do more harm than good? Holy crap! It sounds like you are buying into the anti-logic that folks shouldn't have guns for self defense as they will only do more harm than good since the bad guys will likely take them from you and shoot you with your own weapons.
While you might be a fool to get into a fight. You would be a bigger fool to get into a fight without sufficient firepower. You know how it is. You don't take a knife to a gun fight and you don't take a pistol to a rifle fight.
First Freedom said,
3. Type? A truck or trunk gun should be commensurate with what you can afford to lose if stolen, etc. For me, that means an inexpensive rifle, not an AR. I think a Saiga would be about the max value I would carry. As it stands, the No.4 Mk. 1 gets pickup duty at present.
Sure, it would not have to be an AR. I know folks who carry lever guns as they are more inexpensive, reliable, accurate, and fire a rifle caliber projectile at rifle velocity.
---
All in all, there are some partially valid reasons for not carrying a rifle such an an AR in one's vehicle. No doubt you will likely not ever need to use it. If you do need it, chances are it won't be available to you especially if you are in a moving vehicle as the only person and the rifle is under the seat or in the trunk. If you do get it and are in a moving vehicle, you have a very slim chance of being able to shoot it in a responsible manner (actually aiming at and hitting your target) while not crashing. Shooting bystanders, collisions, or running bystanders off the road will still fall to you. You don't get to harm non-combatants regardless of how justified you feel. The only truly valid consideration I see for not carrying a rifle in one's vehicle pertains to the risk of theft, but that can be mitigated by having an inexpensive rifle.
If you subscribe to the percentage game and note that you will be unlikely to access and use a rifle in your vehicle (for which I do agree it is unlikely) then you probably don't need any form of protection like a handgun as it is unlikely that you will ever need to draw on a person and if you do draw, it is unlikely you will have to shoot the person. Since you likely won't need to shoot a gun even if you have drawn it, then you probably don't need to practice or attend defensive gun classes. What's the point of all those things if you are not likely to need the gun, right?
However, without said parameters, should you ever need a gun, the consequences for not having it or not being able to use it effectively are potentially deadly to you.
Personally, I don't find putting my rifle in my car each morning and then taking it in each night is an inconvenience. It is just part of gun ownership and self defense and is no more hassle than taking other valuables out of my car at night and locking my car.
Aside from the UT sniper case (of which folks here probably would not call the guy a sniper just like they didn't call the DC Beltway sniper a sniper) there is at least one other case where civilians have aided Tx DPS troopers about which I am aware. Apparently back in the 70s or 80s according to my CHL instructor, a Tx DPS trooper was involved in a shootout with a suspect he pulled over for some traffic infraction in a rural area. He was pinned behind his car that he was using for cover and could not move forward to radio for help. The fight was still going on when a man and his son drove by on the road, not realizing the firefight was taking place until they were passing by. The continued down the road which was in the direction behind the bad guy. At about 100 yards or so distant, the man ordered his son to stay inside the truck as he took out his deer rifle. He dropped the bad guy with one shot. A 100 yard shot isn't much for a guy with a rifle and who is used to shooting that far and farther while hunting.
In recent years, there have been several cases where citizens or off duty officers have realized a situation was bad and have gone out to their vehicles to retrieve guns that were then used to neutralize the threat. If you have time to run out and get a pistol out of your vehicle, then you had time to run out and grab a shotgun or rifle.
A local instructor here was giving a security class and asked about what folks carried with them or in their vehicles. Several folks carried guns locked in their trunks and he queried, "How often have you been in your trunk and had a gun fight? His point was simple. If you can't access your weapons, then they probably are not going to be of any use to you. That is a valid point. However, there are times when you will have access as noted already in the examples.
All in all, it just is not that hard to carry a rifle in the vehicle I drive. The vehicle carries it all day long, not me. It also carries a first aid kit, spare tire, extra cell phone battery, flashlights, etc. etc. etc. and a couple of spare loaded magazines for each of 4 different types of guns I own. The mags ride in the glove box. I may not be able to get out and get my rifle, but I will definitely have access to additional loaded magazines.
Oh wait, I don't need any spare mags, do I? Just how many examples have we heard about where a non-LEO has needed more than one magazine for a gun fight or ever did a mag change in a gun fight? Given the rarity, then I won't need the spare on my belt or the 2 spares in the glove box for my 1911....right?
in my truck with me.