Sub-machine gun for home defense?


December 29, 2005, 03:18 PM
Viable option or no? Well maybe not a selectfire weapon but a semi-auto pistol caliber carbine .

If you enjoyed reading about "Sub-machine gun for home defense?" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!
December 29, 2005, 03:20 PM
That's a big no go... Even if they were more affordable.

December 29, 2005, 03:24 PM
No practicable value to speak of - let alone rate of fire even in burst mode, making for little control over wall penetration issues and so rule #4.

One hit is worth more than 10 misses anyways and skilled use of most semi's will be way more effective than FA. We are talking HD here, not warfare!:)

Not forgetting, even if FA legally owned - the legal repurcussions - <ouch>.

December 29, 2005, 03:24 PM
That's a big no go... Even if they were more affordable.

Care to elaborate why?

December 29, 2005, 03:27 PM
Maybe I shouldn't have said SMG... Edited original post for clarity.

December 29, 2005, 03:27 PM
If you are going to use a long gun for home defense, you'll almost certainly be more effective with a shotgun.

December 29, 2005, 03:29 PM
I think it was Jeff Cooper who said 'The SMG is the biggest builder of false self confidence there is.' Only good hits count so use a pistol of semiauto carbine.

December 29, 2005, 03:30 PM
Let's say you had one hypotheticly. Let's also say that you used it in self-defense sucessfully. Now here come the media saying that since you had a SMG, you are a person just itching to kill someone. Now a prosecutor wanting to make a big name for himself, has you arrested. Now you are on trial for murder. Now since the media has tainted the jury pool, you are found guilty of murder. You spend the rest of your life in prison. Unless you have the blue prints tattooed on your body & are a genius.:D

December 29, 2005, 03:30 PM
Now that you've editted the original question, my answer changes! :p

A strictly semi-auto pistol caliber carbine is perfectly fine for home defense in my book. Legal reprecussions are the main, and just about only consideration with your original topic.

December 29, 2005, 03:33 PM
Let's say you had one hypotheticly. Let's also say that you used it in self-defense sucessfully. Now here come the media saying that since you had a SMG, you are a person just itching to kill someone. Now a prosecutor wanting to make a big name for himself, has you arrested. Now you are on trial for murder. Now since the media has tainted the jury pool, you are found guilty of murder. You spend the rest of your life in prison. Unless you have the blue prints tattooed on your body & are a genius.:D

I live in Texas, I'd probably only have to make a report. ;)

kage genin
December 29, 2005, 03:35 PM
my 2 cents...
If you're going to use pistol rounds for home defense, better to shoot it out of something you can shoulder.

December 29, 2005, 03:41 PM
Only if you are in Israel..... And a semi-auto version is only good for the initial shock value (oh :cuss: , he/she has a machinegun) then you have to fire, cover and move (if there is more than one BG) with what amounts to a big heavy awkward pistol with a 30 round magazine limiting how low (John Woo firing position nowithstanding) you can get. You can get 'normal sized' duty pistols that has enough magazine capacity to equal a Mac-10/Uzi clone that will fit into a concealment holster.
A carbine style full-auto is like P95Carry said, but a semi-auto like the Baretta Storm or the Ruger/Marlin pistol carbines are a good option if you use the right ammunition ie HP or frangable(expensive).

Edited because of revision of original question.


December 29, 2005, 03:42 PM
Even if U are ok legally, U will not have a fun time at the civil suit when the family of the guy you shot sues you.

Sheldon J
December 29, 2005, 03:44 PM
TV, china, pets, kids, you know stuff you kind of want to keep.

December 29, 2005, 03:46 PM
There was a long discussion on this not too long ago with all the reasoning. Run a search and you should find it.

December 29, 2005, 03:49 PM
A pistol caliber long gun can certainly be fired more accurately than a pistol, especially at distance. That's pretty much your only real advantage. Velocity increases are generally small with the longer barrels and commercial ammo.

A pistol is much more compact and easier to manuever in the tight confines of your home. Weapon retention is also an issue with a long gun in close quarters.

If I need a long gun, I prefer a rifle caliber or shotgun depending on the circumstance.

December 29, 2005, 04:08 PM
As a prosecutor who has reviewed shootings, I can say that in the criminal arena, the facts of the case matter more than the gun. If the shooting is clean, so long as the gun is legal you'll be fine. At least in this jurisdiction.

The same cannot be said in the civil arena, where a slimy Personal Injury lawyer will go to great lengths to paint his client as the poor victim of society, breaking into a home to support the drug habit caused by his poor upbringing, while you, Mr. Rambo-wanna-be, laid in ambush with a machinegun in your hand and death in your eyes. Only good fortune kept the poor client alive, not you, a man for whom a handgun or a shotgun just was not deadly enough.

Of course, I wonder how some of the carbines might work out, like the Beretta Storm, or the old Marlin Camp Carbine, which don't have that "assault weapon" look to them. A pistol caliber lever action rifle might even make you look good to a jury, since it's just an old fashioned gun like Roy Rogers and Gene Autry used to use.

Carl N. Brown
December 29, 2005, 04:37 PM
A gun actually used in a self defense situation may end up
tagged bagged and in an evidence locker for years, and
may be never returned. I would not use a nonreplacable
gun like a collectors item or heirloom, but a good gun with
no high investment.

December 29, 2005, 04:42 PM
be really pi**ed when you shoot all those holes in the walls...........shoot em with #2 goose loads, non plated, with a shotgun. Emergency room docs love to practice taking stuff out of bad guys that have been shot.........chris3

December 29, 2005, 04:51 PM
Its amazing how many hoops you have to jump if you shoot somebody breaking in your house. It does not make sence.
So now we know to use a cheap gun that looks real nice and proper just to defend yourself or property.
Its all so crazy !!!!!!!!!!!!!

December 29, 2005, 04:51 PM
Stick with a 12 Gauge

December 29, 2005, 04:54 PM
so you guys are saying that $300 rossi lever action (win 92 pattern) in .480 Ruger i just bought is a better home defense option than my ARs, USC in .45acp, or wilson 1911?


as far as staying alive and delivering accurate fire under pressure, i'd always considered my SBR UMP clone to be the perfect option: .45acp, 30 rnd mags, stock, short barrel (no retention issues) and eotech.

but i would be pretty upset if it spent the next few years in an evidence locker. and it is pretty evil looking.

i wouldn't lose any sleep if i had to buy another $300 lever gun. it holds 11 rnds, which is more than my 1911. retention is a potential issue, but not overly difficult to resolve. i'll have to think about it.

December 29, 2005, 04:55 PM
No way I'd use my FA Uzi for HD - I do not want holes everywhere, but more importantly I do not want it seized if I shoot someone with it. I'll use my 1911's and AR first.

Jim K
December 29, 2005, 04:58 PM
The point about a collector gun is a good one, and should be given some thought both in home defense and in a carry situation.

IF you shoot someone, regardless of the situation, you might have to drop the gun on the street. In any case, the gun will almost certainly be seized by the police as evidence. Police are not noted for giving the best care to evidence guns. I have seen valuable shotguns kicked around the concrete floor in the evidence room, and handguns knocked of shelves.

Sometime back, on a thread about self defense, I mentioned that even if the shooter believed that he had no other choice, the police will almost certainly make an arrest and that the shooter should put down his gun, not merely holster it. One person replied that there was no way he drop his superdooper $2500 custom engraved gold plated handgun, or even lay it on the ground. I replied that he would have a choice - with cops around him with drawn guns, he could drop his gun or they would drop him. His reply was that he would rather be killed than to have his gun scratched and that he would shoot the cops if they tried to take his precious gun or so much as scratched it. How do you spell "lunatic"?


December 29, 2005, 04:59 PM
IMO If you need 30 rounds from a SMG you are more likely to just point in the general direction and just pull the trigger and not worry about surroundings or what is behind the target in question. The point, pray and spray mentality and are more likely to hurt an innocent loved one or neighbor than the potential attacker.

My Choice for perfect home defense and personal protection firearms would be a handgun with a minimum caliber of .40 for knockdown, penatration and noise factor, so even if you miss the sound scares the crap out of the intruder. 2nd choice and Ideally for those who may have less training, confidence and may not be a good shot I recommend a short barreled (18 1/2 ") 20 or 12 gauge with pistol grip or collapsible stock with home defense loads. 6-10 pellets no slugs and you want a moderate to tight choke pattern as well so it is sending a burst pattern that covers about 12-14" in my opinoin.

These are just my opinions and not 100% factual. But I use both of these for home defense and both have nightsights and/or mounted tactical light.

Remember long guns even in a pistol caliber may have a tendancy to over penetrate. Most open areas in your home are going to be under 25 yards. You might have 1-2 long hall ways or open areas that may give you 35 yards but pistols and shotguns are perfect for these distances and shorter which is what most home shootings would fall into.

December 29, 2005, 05:09 PM
A semi auto carbine is a good urban / sub-urban defensive weapon.

I use a Kel-tec Sub 2000 in 9mm. My Sub 2000 takes the Beretta mags. My SA XD 9 mags are modified to Beretta config and are usable in the Sub 2000. In fact at one time SA offered pre ban, high cap, modified Beretta mags for their XD series.

The extra 12 inches of barrel on the carbine will add about 250 fps to the 9mm thus putting it in the low end range of 357 mag. ammo. Not bad for a couple hundred dallors and gives you a 75 to 100 meter range. :evil:

December 29, 2005, 06:10 PM
I think a semi-auto carbine is an excellent home defense weapon. Many others indicate a shotgun would be better. I think a shotgun is fine for someone who is extremely adept with it. It takes a lot more practice to become adept with one, I think, than it does to with a carbine. A shotgun is harder to aim if using slugs, not as hard with buck shot. It kicks like a mule if using a 12 gauge. It is a powerhouse with which to shoot someone. A great gun yet, I would not want to miss with one for sure. I like them a lot but maybe a carbine could be better for home defense - I am in flux over this lately.

A well chosen home defense pistol caliber, coming out of a carbine, is probably less likely to penetrate walls than would be a shotgun slug and maybe even than would be 00 buckshot - a big consideration depending on what or whom is on the other side of the wall. Of course the pistol round would probably penetrate more than pepper shot. Whatever you decide on ammo, I still think the carbine would be a better choice for most shooters. Shotguns are much more difficult to wield in combat situations than are carbines. You can also fire much faster with a carbine for follow up shots and would probably be better able to maintain accuracy under stress than with a shotgun.

And a semi-auto version is only good for the initial shock valueAs for this, it makes me laugh. I speak from years of experience as a firearms instructor, specifically as an MP5 shooter and instructor. Granted I have not fired full auto for years, but I have done it. It was not spray and pray once you knew how to do it. In more recent years my job only used 3 round burst - semi-auto versions of the MP5 but I can tell you that when firing it in single fire mode (semi-auto) I could empty three full magazines, at multiple targets, faster than everyone I ever trained while they fired three round bursts. I did it with a good deal of accuracy too even though I had to change trigger fingers (index, to middle, back to index or to ring finger) once or twice before completing three mags of firing. Please tell me about the weapons use only for shock value in semi auto mode.

Of course a pistol is also a good alternative, with less chance of over penetration than a carbine shooting the same ammunition but, I think in many situations you will find more control with a carbine. Weapon retention is also an issue with a long gun in close quarters.As for people who believe that weapon retention is a factor to consider, I could not agree more but probably for a reason other than was thought of by the person who said the above. Therefore I would have to say - go with a carbine if you are concerned with weapon retention being a problem. While it may be a bit harder to grab onto a pistol someone is holding - it is definitely easier, MUCH easier, to do a weapon takeaway with a pistol than it is with a carbine. In other words, I believe you have a much greater chance of holding onto a carbine that someone tries to take from you than you do a pistol, that is once the bad guy has grabbed hold of your firearm. I also think a carbine is less likely to be jammed during a takeaway/retention attempt than would be a pistol - this can go for or against you depending on whether or not you retain the weapon. You are also more likely, in my opinion, to be able to control the direction in which the muzzle is pointed in such a confrontation if you are holding a carbine rather than you would be the muzzle of a pistol. If you are in doubt about any of this, just take hold of a red gun pistol (training gun that cannot possibly load or fire ammunition) and ask someone to take it from you - allow them to calmly grab hold of it, then on a count of 3 try to retain it as they try to take it from you. Do it a few times so each of you gets the hang of it. See who winds up being the winner as time goes on and the number of tries goes up. Then ask someone who knows how to do a gun takeaway, like a cop or a felon. Use a pistol first, then try all over again with a red gun carbine. (Make sure your finger is outside the trigger guard during each takeaway attempt with either pistol or carbine or your finger may get broken.) When doing this make sure to hold both in combat ready stance. I think some of you are going to be very surprised at how easy it is to lose the pistol, and how much more difficult it is for an assailant to take away a carbine from you. Sure there are probably some great takeaway moves for a carbine that would make it easy for a well trained and practiced expert but; the two hand hold on the carbine at two different points, many inches apart, in my opinion, makes it much harder to steal the carbine away from your grip.

Now after having said all of that, I will admit my personal preference for a home defense gun used to be a Remington 870 12 gauge shotgun. If there were none of the above tactical considerations, like who is where in my home, reloading, and so on - it possibly still would be my choice> Then again I am very adept with it regarding tactical shooting. While I also shoot an MP5 excellently, I do not own one, it belongs to my job and I do not think they would appreciate my routinely keeping it loaded in my bedroom - ready for action. I do like my shotgun although when I have thought about it lately the carbine comes out better and better. If I owned a carbine, it might be one that would share the same type of magazine as did one of my pistols. This way if I needed to reload, I could use the same mags in either pistol or carbine - a real tactical advantage over a shotgun/pistol combo.

Instead of either though, practicality has made me choose another weapon. I have chosen a pistol (which I sometimes now keep unloaded at bedside - up until recently I usually did not keep a pistol handy when sleeping but certain events have changed my mind about this). Why the pistol and not a carbine. First of all I have the most practice and training with a pistol. Secondly, this is a practicality issue for me; I do not currently own a carbine. I cannot currently afford to buy one. I did have one a Marlin Camp 9 - I believe it a terrible choice for a combat or home defense weapon - but that would be an issue for another thread. Then there is yet an additional concern I did not mention above. Despite my thinking the carbine would be a better choice of home defense weapon once in hand, the thing is getting it in hand that can pose a problem. I can walk around my home with a pistol attached to me somewhere and not even realize I have it on; I cannot do that with a carbine. Yet if ready access to a ready carbine was not a concern, it might well be the weapon I would choose to have if an intruder broke into my home (tough choice between a carbine and an 870 but lately I am thinking more and more of a carbine especially with each resounding thump of the 870 against my shoulder).

A carbine definitely could be an excellent home defense weapon for you and for me. Of course for me, all that would depend upon my ownership of a carbine. I don't currently own one. I may just have to do something about that like start scrimping and saving. If only one had the luxury to always practice that in which they believed - anyone want to make a donation???

December 29, 2005, 06:17 PM
I used to have a M3 .45 cal "grease gun" as my home defense weapon! :D

But, that was not at my American house!

December 29, 2005, 07:20 PM
I only know of one fatal shooting involving a sub machine gun. It was in Florida many years ago.

There were no additional reprecussions, either criminal or civil from the use of the auto weapon.

I still keep a long barreled 870 that looks just like the one that every hunter has in his gun rack. No flashlights or mag extensions to make me look like some wannabe tactical rambo type. Just an implement that the average homeowner would have in the house. I keep it loaded with #4s to keep from killing any neighbors in the next block. Sure makes a mess at 5 yards though.

December 29, 2005, 07:37 PM

You have people with various backgrounds and opinions telling you various things. Some with tactical training or instructors and 80% of the population without. You need to do what is best for you and go based of your background, training, compfort level. Your choices will be based off of these 3 main things and a few others. If you are a novice to moderately trained (IMO) I would recomend a handgun or shotgun for personal defense. A shotgun chambering a round is somewhat of a deterent in itself and as I recommended earlier, shot instead of slug of course.

2nd option is seek professional training in a CQB environment (house or apt type setting) to see which feels comfortable. Try handgun, Carbine and tactical shotgun. Sounds like you will have less training with the handgun.

M2 Carbine
December 29, 2005, 07:47 PM
Sub-machine gun for home defense?

Heck yes.
I didn't spend all that time and effort building a M2 Carbine just to made noise.:)

December 29, 2005, 08:02 PM
If you look at it from a weapon stand point only, and leave all the other baggage, like the media, police confiscation, legal problems out of it, I'd take the SMG, and specifically something closed bolt, like an MP5 or Colt, over a shotgun or semi auto only carbine.

Used properly, there is no "spray and pray", and good, fast hits are very easy. The SMG is easier to handle and shoot well than a 12ga, and offers more flexibility and ammo capacity.

The biggest down side these days is the collectors value on the SMG's. Hell, I quit carrying my P7 when they went way up in value in case it would be taken in a shooting investigation, so I'd really be annoyed to see my now $10-15000 MP5 get taken. For now, I'll just stick to my lowly AK. I figure the Rottie will have his fun with whoever came to play while I get my earplugs in. :)

December 29, 2005, 09:38 PM
A fellow who worked for me in Arizona collected MG's - we went shooting with his dealer one day (had of fun) and the dealer carried a surpressed MP5 in his car for self protection. It was also his home protection weapon of choice, and after shooting I discovered why. It was the only one of the bunch we shot that day (MAC11, MAC10, Thompson, Uzi and M16) that was easy to keep on target. Amazing gun.

December 30, 2005, 01:17 AM
Whatever you decide to use for SD, be able/buy 2 of them. After a shooting, regardless of outcome, you may never see it again.

December 30, 2005, 01:48 AM
I only know of one fatal shooting involving a sub machine gun. It was in Florida many years ago.

Were you referring to this one?

December 30, 2005, 03:06 PM
Another recent thread addressed this, generally concluding that an M4gery is the better choice. .223 rounds weigh less than 9mm, hit harder, do more damage, over-penetrate less, and do so in a carbine the same length, weight, and cost.

December 30, 2005, 03:29 PM
Were you referring to this one? also wrote an article about a guy who had to defend himself with an AC556 from two thugs in his employers parking lot. He had a very long legal battle. The fact that he used a machine gun was a major point of contention.

Master Blaster
December 30, 2005, 03:55 PM
I kind of like the m4gery its shorter and handier than an SAR-1 AK clone or an 870 with a shoulder stock also it has excellent accuracy out to 100 yards (as far as I can see in my suburban environment).
Full auto is not needed for home defense IMHO in my neighborhood there are too many opportunities for innocent bystanders to get hit with stray rounds.

I really prefer the .45 acp 1911, because I expect an in home encounter or any ccw encounter will be at no more than 5 yards and most likely less than 10 feet distance. A pistol in a large controllable caliber, one that I shoot well is the best choice.

Don't Tread On Me
December 30, 2005, 04:40 PM
Don't listen to these people, there's nothing better for home defense than a submachine gun - PERIOD.

If it weren't good for CQC, then they would have never been invented or used by any military or police.

The best would probably be a a medium cartridge for serious penetration power and serious terminal effects. 2nd would be a Thompson or an MP5...tough to say which. UZI is good too.

I wouldn't mind a grease gun either.

BTW, I do not believe in this over-penetration garbage that people espouse all over the internet. It is perhaps the biggest sack of garbage ever. Overpenetration is a benefit, not a liability. This was perpetuated by those close to law enforcement that claimed the switch from MP5's to AR's was because the .223 doesn't penetrate as much as 9mm. BS. AR's are cheaper for dept's and .223 frags the perps much worse than 9mm. If penetration was their concern, they'd use frangible ammo. They don't. They use some of the heaviest bullets, some of which are bonded, and some dept's have armor piercing. The worst .223 55fmj with thin jacket will easily clear through many interior walls. So much for their concern.

The only thing though...would be interesting to see how the state would deal with something like that being they are so heavily regulated, also, to see how the court would deal with this. Might not be good for the victim with a submachine gun in such an anti-gun, liberty-hating, politically correct brainwashed country.

December 30, 2005, 07:37 PM
So after all the arm chair tactical gurus have had their say, read this

My old friend Harry Beckwith thinks highly of a sub gun for defense.

December 30, 2005, 11:16 PM
Twelve gauge Ithaca 37 Featherlight with double-0 buck, and a P-38 loaded with hollowpoints, and a couple of spare full mags. No firing to keep the bad guys bobbing and weaving. That's NOT what your gunsights were designed for.

Oleg Volk
December 30, 2005, 11:36 PM
Having used a few SMGs for fun, I can say that 2-3 round birsts can be very accurate (such as with MP5, M3, MP40) at standard room ranges, not much exceeding the dispersion of the shotgun pattern. Suppressors tend to save your hearing and reduce muzzle flash (already low for SMGs). So, IF SMGs WERE READILY AVAILABLE, I'd use one in preference to a rifle or a shotgun (not fond of the recoil and the length or the noise). Some SMGs (Colt 635, MP5) come with 3rd burst selectors, some fire slowly enough (M3, MP40) that a burst position isn't necessary.

December 30, 2005, 11:53 PM
handgun with a minimum caliber of .40 for knockdown, penatration and noise factor, so even if you miss the sound scares the crap out of the intruder

Having experienced something as small as a .22LR handgun fired indoors without hearing protection, I can assure you that you don't need to go as high as the report from a .40S&W to make painfully loud and potentially scarey noises.

Regarding the original post, I'd rather have a shotgun than an SMG for indoor home defense. I have neighbors to think of. I'm certain that unloading a magazine in any direction is going to cause so much collateral damage (to cars, if not to people), that I'd be sued for many times the price of my SMG. Not to mention the things are so bloody expensive.

I'd still rather have a shotgun than a pistol caliber semi-auto carbine, too.


Double Naught Spy
December 31, 2005, 01:22 AM
Obviously, if you think you can be well defended with a pistol caliber, then a sub machinegun offers you that much more firepower. A collapsed MP5 is quite easy to manage in tight spaces, a real benefit over something like a shotgun, but a shotgun does have substantial power. If not going with a collapsed version, I think I would prefer the shotgun.

If not wanting full auto and not wanting a shotgun, then you are left with something like a carbine. Given the carbine size for a pistol caliber will be comparable to that of a rifle caliber, the power has to go to the rifle caliber. For the same package, you get so much more from a rifle caliber.

As for the supposed liability of full auto, it is only an issue if you shoot somebody and even then the liability isn't in the gun, but in the damage done. It sounds crazy, but a person shot with 3 rounds of 9mm from an MP5 might claim horrendous harm by the evil submachinegun, but those three rounds are a lot better than getting hit by one 1 oz slug, 9 pellts of 00 buck, or however many of #7 shot (1 oz) in the same area from a 12 ga. shotgun.

December 31, 2005, 02:01 PM
I can think of a few instances in which a Ma Deuce would be appropriate for home defense, so I can think of some in which a SMG would be appropriate as well.

Mainly if your home is far, far away from any help and you run the risk of having a lot of people angry at you for some reason, i.e. a rancher with a nearby meth lab or border crossing with drug runners involved.

In an apartment, I would not be so sure.


December 31, 2005, 07:57 PM
Ayoob also wrote an article about a guy who had to defend himself with an AC556 from two thugs in his employers parking lot. He had a very long legal battle. The fact that he used a machine gun was a major point of contention.

Wow, that's a great article. I can't imagine what Mr. Hamilton and company were thinking of when they chased Mr. Fadden, who had the electronic gate card, to the Heckler and Koch plant. :what:

Excellent example of problem two coming to fruition: problem two being criminal liability. You could even consider Mr. Fadden "lucky" that he did not have to face problem three, civil liability. I did a Google search on Fadden and could not find anything about a civil suit.

I feel that anyone involved in a HD/SD situation should already know about the possibilities of facing problems two and three, provided they survive problem one. And in the end, Mr Fadden succinctly describes his choice in solving problem one, "For twenty years now, I've cherished every morning I've gotten up, because I earned every moment of my life. I fought for it."

December 31, 2005, 08:12 PM
Sub-machine gun for home defense?

If you're home is the Mojave desert maybe so. ;)

December 31, 2005, 08:55 PM
From the article in the link above: Gary remembers, "Two prosecutors wouldn't touch it until the third took it. It was all political because of the automatic weapon." ... Asked what he thinks would have happened if he'd shot Hamilton with a Remington 870 Wingmaster instead, Fadden replies with certainty, "I would have gone home that night. I've told dozens of people since, 'Do not use a Class III weapon for personal defense."'Coming from a guy who's BTDT, I'd say that's rather conclusive.

Bart Noir
December 31, 2005, 09:11 PM
45Broomhandle, have you found any P-38s to reliably feed hollowpoints? I've only tried FMJ rounds because the feed ramp seems rather vertical in that design.

Bart Noir
So how come it ejects to the left?

December 31, 2005, 10:04 PM
A submachine gun would make a decent home defense gun. Depending on what submachine gun you had, it might make a pretty good one. It has a couple big advantages over the handgun, primarily the fact that you are hitting the person with multiple rounds per second. It is still firing a very poor cartridge, but getting hit by 3-5 of them almost at the same time is a very good deal.
All this stuff about shooting holes in the walls and damaging your property is crap. If you own a submachine gun and can't put a 3-5 round burst COM on a bad guy inside of 10 yards then the problem lies with you, not the weapon.
All that being said, I don't think the submachine gun would be the BEST weapon for home defense. That title goes to the shotgun. With the shotgun, you can easily mount a light on the forearm that allows you to operate the gun with both hands (available on some submachine guns, but not mine). It hits the bad guy with nine pellets at the same time that are similar in diameter to 9mm slugs. In my opinion the shotgun beats a submachine gun on every front for home defense. I suppose I could say that I have a choice in the matter. I own a submachine gun. I also own all manner of AKs, ARs, etc. But, my choice for home defense is definitely a shotgun.

January 1, 2006, 02:55 AM
Why not have the carbine AND a shotgun, ie M4 Masterkey system if you believe the SMG being insufficient in CQB? Has good points of both. Otherwise SMG is very effective CQB weapon, but also definite neighbour freaker.

January 1, 2006, 03:55 AM
okay, let's assume full auto smgs were as easy and cheap to buy as their neutered cousins. i'd say sure, provided you have decent training. a semi version is less than ideal, though, i think. you have the same size and weight of a rifle carbine with an underpowered cartridge.

i'm not sure why gun owners automatically assume that you're going to start foaming at the mouth and wildly spraying just because you have a fun switch on your weapon. this is like the gun nazis that think a normally safe, responsible adult will turn into a homocidal maniac if given a gun. it also reminds me of debates between bolt action owners and owners of self loaders. if you have fire discipline with a bolt, you can apply fire discipline with a semi. if you have fire discipline with a semi you can with a full auto.

short controlled bursts can be very effective at close range. at home defense distances, every round of a short, controlled burst will impact the target in the thoracic cavity if you apply the same training as you would with any other firearm.

i think it was mas ayoob who popularized the idea that politically incorrect firearms will get you into more trouble. i disagree. this may be true in some less enlightened districts but for the most part, the questions at hand will be whether you were justified in shooting, whether you stopped shooting when the threat was neutralized (jurys tend to frown on "anchoring" shots) and whether you hit anyone else's property or persons. if it was an otherwise good shoot, most jurisdictions won't care what tool you use, whether a flintlock or a p90. the civil case is another matter but the questions are the same, it's only a difference of burden of proof and other procedural issues. you will have to hire your own attorney for a civil case but i doubt it will be much more likely to have suit filed against you just because of the tool you use. i also think this idea of the deceased's relatives filing suit is over inflated. people who break into homes are usually poor and uneducated, their families usually follow this pattern. it is exceedingly rare that they can afford an attorney. if they do or find one that will do the work pro bono, advise them and the attorney that you will file counter suits against both. the problem will likely go away.

in short, a true subgun would be an outstanding home defense weapon if it were practical; a pistol caliber carbine isn't well suited to the role because of power limitations but is better than a pistol.

January 1, 2006, 10:11 PM
If they made Higher capacity mags for the ruger 99/44, as in more than 4 rounds, that would be awesome! :rolleyes:

pete f
January 2, 2006, 09:04 PM
After shooting a mini UZI with a can quite a bit, I can say no other weapong comes close to being as effective for home defense, save the claymore. And the neighbors tend to really frown on you slapping the clicker switch on those.

Seriously, in a society of intelligent people, no one would question a SMG for home defense. The weapon was created to deal with stopping man targets in close proximity in areas of limited manuverablilty. The development was driven by the lessons of WW1 and trench warfare. People needed to stop many people immediately and be able to move in a the narrow confines of buildings and trenches.

Relate that to your home and the only competitor is a 12 guage. recoil and repeatable hits are better with the SMG payloaad delivered may be better with the 12 guage but it might be said that the faster back up shot makes the SMG tops here too. When I shoot the Mini Uzi wih the can, I can put 3-5 shot groups into fist sized hole almost instantly. No other weapon would give that knd of performance so easily.

Carl N. Brown
January 4, 2006, 03:18 PM
SMG for home defense? My stuff would be in the line of fire!

Camp David
January 4, 2006, 03:24 PM
Viable option or no? Well maybe not a selectfire weapon but a semi-auto pistol caliber carbine .

I would have no objection to others using such a weapon to defend their homes, but to me it seems a bit much... If the nation disolves into civil war or an area becomes lawless like New Orleans during Katrina, then perhaps such a sub-machine gun would make sense, but to me, in my opinion, day-to-day home defense falls on a handgun in most cases: immediately available, which can be hidden just as quickly if necessary... Nothing against the semi-auto or sub-machine rifle lovers aboard, but storing such a weapon as these becomes a problem and they are hard to conceal if they need to be concealed. A pistol seems a better alternative....

January 4, 2006, 03:36 PM
If not for legal/economic obstacles, my home defense weapon of choice would be something along the lines of an HKMP5SD. More than adequate ballistics, and the suppressor would both reduce recoil and save my ears, assuming I didn't have time to put on muffs.

And it's used by police . . . there have been numerous threads regarding ammo choices where many say "You should use the same ammunition the police do" . . . so why not the same gun?

From a pure functional standpoint, a regular SMG (without the long 16" minimum "civilian" barrel) makes a lot of sense to me.

Alas, my "ready" house guns are all mere revolvers . . .

January 4, 2006, 05:20 PM
I really just think it'd be neat to buy ONE case of ammo and be able to feed ALL of your toys. I'm not finding a lot of .45ACP cal carbines though.

Edit: I didn't know Khar/Auto-Ordnance still made Thompsons. the LW model is less than a grand too... It'd make a nice companion to a 1911. :)

If you enjoyed reading about "Sub-machine gun for home defense?" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!