No, my argument was exactly what I stated. If your “assailant” is so far away you need to compensate for bullet drop then it isn’t self-defense.When you own a tactical rifle you ought to know how to use it and what it can and cannot do.
If you are not willing to be competent to engage beyond pistol ranges, then there would be no point owning this type tool.
So your argument could really be boiled down to "Only buy pistols for personal defense, since you dont need capability at more than close-up range, as a "civilian" engaged in personal defense".
Owning/operating tactical rifles, is exactly what "our betters" would love us to refrain from and have spent a lot of political capital and money to deter us from.
That alone, is reason to get an AR15 or similar class rifle and to know how to use it properly.
You’re talking about war. And what exactly is a “tactical” rifle anyway?