shotgun vs rifle for home defense

I'm a pistol owner thinking about getting a long arm for home defense. I live in a the city. In my area the .223 round is plentiful, however the rifles that shoot .223 are expensive. I've been told for home defense a pump shotgun is better than a rifle. But are there any disadvantage of a shotgun rather than a rifle for home defense? I'm not sure if I'm influenced by all those end of the world terminator movies that have the good guys with pump shotguns.

Either will certainly work. I own both.

An AR type weapon is smaller, lighter and more maneuverable than the shotgun. There can be little question that the round is effective. The cost of the weapon is going to be near 5 times the cost of a serviceable HD shotgun.

The shotgun has an extremely wide array of ammunition readily available and relatively inexpensive. It can be highly effective. The amount of firepower that you can put down range with the shotgun is pretty amazing.

With regard to recoil, the shotgun is certainly going to bump you harder than an AR.

Clearly the AR wins with regard to range, but again given proper ammunition the shotgun will take care of you out 100 yards.

Having said all that, the shotgun is my weapon of choice for HD. The primary reason is that I have taken professional training with the shotgun. I practice with it a great deal. I have total confidence in the weapon and my ability to effectively deploy it. I am not nearly as familiar with the AR. I fumble and fiddle and just don't have the familiarity with it that I do with the shotgun. With the shotgun, my hands just go to the controls. With no thought at all and without looking my hands just slide new rounds into the magazine. It seems to come to my shoulder and on target by its own accord.

So where all this leads us is that either will work admirably IF YOU TRAIN AND PRACTICE WITH IT!

Se above post about my Maverick 88 shotgun. Ideal HD weapon with it's 20" barrel and 8 round mag tube. :)

I live in the city here in Tidewater, VA.

It's not a really densely populated area, but it is still a suburban enviroment.

I have houses within an easy stones throw from my house and a .223 would

be way to much rifle for a HD weapon for me. I have shotguns that will do

what I need for ranges that would possibly be encountered in an HD situation.

I have various loads that can be utilized to handle an intruder within those

ranges and not hurt someone on the other side if my hard plaster, sub

lathework under plaster, covered with heart pine clapboard,covered with vinyl siding, walls.

A shotgun would be all you need in an urban enviroment and if you do a

search , you will find a plethora of good info regard the use of shotguns for

all manner of HD applications.:)

For home defense, it's all about stopping the threat immediately. Even with a direct shot through the BG's heart, he will have enough oxygenated blood in his brain for at least 10 seconds of willful action. That means 10 seconds to run up and stab you or hit you with a baseball bat.

What does all this have to do with shotgun vs rifle? Well, the only way to immediately stop a BG is to damage the central nervous system (CNS), meaning the brain or spine. Headshots are unrealistic so you aim COM. With 00 buck you have at least 9x (my HD load is 12 pellet 00 buck) the chance of hitting the BG's spine with a COM shot, putting him out of commission, than you do with a single shot of 223.

Just my 2 cents.

The primary reason is that I have taken professional training with the shotgun. I practice with it a great deal. I have total confidence in the weapon and my ability to effectively deploy it.

This is key. Training/practice will make you effective with whatever weapon you settle on.

For room to room fighting , a pump or semi-auto shotgun is hard to beat.

With 2 3/4" OO buck , you get nine .32 size bullets on the way with each pull of the trigger.

BTW -- check out the Saiga S-12 , truely a great HD shotgun.

I think both work fine with a slight edge to a lightweight AR type rifle. The rifle is smaller, lighter and easier to use in the home. Much less recoil. A shotguns main advantage, throwing a pattern that makes hits easier, is negated by the close ranges in homes. You must carefully aim either at these ranges.

Using soptpoint 223 ammo is quite deadly at close range and if worried about overpenetration don't. They will penetrate less than most handgun rounds after hitting people or building materials.

Of course the versatility, and much lower cost of the shotgun is a consideration as well.

Get a pump 12ga shotgun for home defense and keep it in "rack n' go" condition loaded with 00 Buck Shot...Equavalent to 9 9mm rounds to the intruders chest all at once will stop him in his tracks for sure.

Whichever one you have the most training on or can get the most training on.

As for all the folks saying you'll take out your neighbors with a 223 they need to do some research. Anything that will reliably incapacitate a 200 lb mammal will also penetrate multiple layers of sheet rock / drywall. There's just no way around it. If you stay away from steel core and heavy bonded JHP ammo almost every .223 round will penetrate as many or less layers of sheet rock than a 12 GA with buck or heavier loads. This topic has beaten to a pulp in the rifle forum. http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=210739

thanks guys. For the price the shotgun is the way to go. I'm noticed at our local sport authority stores there is plenty of 12 GA ammo available.
as far as minimal recoil, what is the lightest shot i can use for HD?

The lightest shot that reliably reaches the ~12-14 inch penetration required for incapacitation is #4 buckshot. You can buy reduced recoil 00 buck loads that have lower recoil and tighter patterns in most guns, but you sacrifice some velocity, though not any amount that would matter in a close range situation.

I have limited experience with HD shotgun loads, but the few buckshot loads I have tried are,

Remington Express 2 3/4" 8 pellet 00
Fiocchi 2 3/4" #4 buck
Federal LE Tactical 2 3/4" 9 pellet 00

The lowest recoil loads out of those three I tried would be the Federal LE Tactical 00 buckshot. They also have the Flite-Control wads which help control the spread of the shot so you get tighter patterns. I have yet to pattern this particular load since I wasn't shooting at paper last time I took my shotgun out.

Shotgun. Less penetration/range, more stopping power. A rifle is an OFFENSIVE weapon in my opinion rather than defensive like a shotgun. You're not going to be clearing rooms like Rambo in an Hd scenario. You're gonna be holed up in a safe spot while you try and assess the threat/call the police/make the scattergun go boom if threatened...if you know what's good for you.

Shotgun. Less penetration/range, more stopping power. A rifle is an OFFENSIVE weapon in my opinion rather than defensive like a shotgun.
Did you read the thread I linked? Have you looked at any ballistic testing? You're assuming that a shotgun with proper HD/SD loads (bitd shot isn't a proper SD/HD load) is going to penetrate less than a .223/5.56 carbine with proper HD/SD loads. That simply isn't the case.
You're not going to be clearing rooms like Rambo in an Hd scenario. You're gonna be holed up in a safe spot while you try and assess the threat/call the police/make the scattergun go boom if threatened...if you know what's good for you.
How do you know what's good for him? There are plenty of military installations on the Hawaiian Islands, so he may have access to a world class carbine instructor there. He may also have access to a world class shotgun instructor in Hawaii. I didn't assume anything, which is why I said "whichever you can get the most training on". I can assure you I'm no less affective holed up with a .223 carbine than I am with a 12 Ga shotgun. I own and use both. I've just had much more training with the AR-15 / M16. Use what works for you, but don't make false assertions about something else just because it doesn't work for you.

The common weapon used on board ship is a shotgun. I see lots of marine grade shotguns - and few marine grade carbines.

The use of shotguns on board ships parallels the application at home. Tight quarters, close ranges, and the ability to select the load gives shotguns an advantage. The streamlined profile of shotguns, like the Ithaca, Mossberg, or 870, is certainly a lot easier to use, and will hang up less on obstructions than a iron sighted, pistol gripped, magazine fed carbine.

Any weapon should be optimized to the average shooter in HD. Penetration of flimsy sheetrock construction is also a consideration. Varmint loads are notorious for wild richochets. Since family members may be just an inch of sheetrock away, it has a lot to do with caliber selection. What you choose does reflect how you intend to use it in your circumstances - but when you do need stopping power, the 12 ga slug is an option. A 5.56 doesn't guarantee it as well.

I believe the handling, use, versatility, and purchase of a HD shotgun offers a decided advantage over a military battle rifle that is hard to maintain, buy ammo for, or train with. Most civilian homeowners aren't prepared for the cost of purchase, expense, and use - but many of them can buy a shotgun, go to the range, and shoot a case of shells, which can be good familiarization. It far more likely to happen than signing up for a weekend at a CQC battle course.

Having used AR's for 22 years, and owned a HK91, the last weapon I would recommend for home use is either. Like 4 wheeling an Escalade off road on a camping trip, you may not like the cost, especially if that's all you ever do with it. Home defense shotguns are the better choice, and the average family will get more from them.

The common weapon used on board ship is a shotgun. I see lots of marine grade shotguns - and few marine grade carbines.
None of the commercial "marine grade" shotguns are in military use. Their military counterparts are black/grey phosphate finished just like military rifles.
The use of shotguns on board ships parallels the application at home. Tight quarters, close ranges, and the ability to select the load gives shotguns an advantage. The streamlined profile of shotguns, like the Ithaca, Mossberg, or 870, is certainly a lot easier to use, and will hang up less on obstructions than a iron sighted, pistol gripped, magazine fed carbine.
Infantry men have no trouble climbing in and out of the even tighter confines of trucks, APCs, and other land vehicles with carbines.
Any weapon should be optimized to the average shooter in HD.
Interestingly, many shotgun manufacturers are moving to AR-15 style collapsible butt stocks so that the pump shotgun's LOP may be easily adjusted to shooters of various sizes. .223 / 5.56 Carbines are lighter, have lower recoil, less muzzle climb, and are faster to make follow-up shots with. The average shooter can shoot a .223 carbine much easier than a 12 ga shotgun.
Penetration of flimsy sheetrock construction is also a consideration.
Buckshot is going to penetrate sheet rock just as much .223 hunting loads.
Varmint loads are notorious for wild richochets.
People used to assume that .223 carbines would penetrate more than pistol caliber carbines, but scientific testing showed that wasn't true. I've seen #4 buckshot ricochet as it shattered plate glass that it was skip fired off of. The ricochet argument can go both ways.
Since family members may be just an inch of sheetrock away, it has a lot to do with caliber selection.
Even bird shot will go through sheet rock. Once again, ANY load capable of incapacitating a 200+ lb mammal is going to penetrate multiple layers of sheet rock.
What you choose does reflect how you intend to use it in your circumstances - but when you do need stopping power, the 12 ga slug is an option. A 5.56 doesn't guarantee it as well. First you argue for a 12 ga with shot for lower sheetrock penetration than a 5.56 (which usually isn't the case anyway), and now you're arguing for 12 ga slugs for better stopping power. Again, First you advocate the shotgun as being easier to use, and now you're advocating some of the heaviest recoiling loads commonly fired from any long arm in North America. Which is it?
I believe the handling, use, versatility, and purchase of a HD shotgun offers a decided advantage over a military battle rifle that is hard to maintain, buy ammo for, or train with.
Really? I can field strip my AR-15s with no tools. It takes punches to field strip an 870 or a 500/590. There are plenty of online and print guides that show and explain how to maintain an AR-15. The US Military trains thousands of troops who've never even touched a gun in their life on how to use and and maintain an M-16/M-4. The US Air Force does it in just a few hours. AR-15s are not hard to maintain.

How is it hard to buy ammo for an AR-15? Seriously, I'd like to know. I can buy 08 Lake City headstamp 5.56 for $9 / box of 20 at the local gun store. Even cheap 12 Ga bird shot is $7 or $8 for a box of 25. Buckshot is $6 or more per box of 5.

How is it hard to train with an AR-15? Most indoor ranges have at least one rifle bay, and even though it may only be 25 yards it's still a place to shoot a rifle. They'll usually let you shoot shotguns too, but what's the advantage to shooting a shooting from fixed firing position shooting lanes?

Most civilian homeowners aren't prepared for the cost of purchase, expense, and use - but many of them can buy a shotgun, go to the range, and shoot a case of shells, which can be good familiarization. It far more likely to happen than signing up for a weekend at a CQC battle course.
Ohh, so you need a carbine course to learn to shoot an AR-15, but just going to the range on your own is sufficient training with a longer, heavier, and harder recoiling shotgun? So no one needs to take a defensive shotgun course to have training equivalent to what they'd receive in a defensive carbine course?
Having used AR's for 22 years, and owned a HK91, the last weapon I would recommend for home use is either.
I wouldn't recommend an HK-91 either. It's another heavy gun, with heavy recoil, and slower follow up shots.
Like 4 wheeling an Escalade off road on a camping trip, you may not like the cost, especially if that's all you ever do with it.
Escalades weren't built for off road use. You can buy a base model Toyota Landcruiser for the same money as an Escalade and have an incredible off road vehicle. In the same way, AR-15s are actually built to be run hard and employed for defensive use. A Browning BAR hunting rifle used for nothing but HD would be equivalent to using an Escalade only as an off road vehicle.
Home defense shotguns are the better choice, and the average family will get more from them.
To use your own automotive metaphor, you can play off road with a stock base model Jeep Wrangler . Alternately you can buy a Wrangler Rubicon off the lot, or spend quite a bit of money upgrading the base Wrangler and have a purpose built off road vehicle. Likewise you can buy an 870 Express and probably be just fine. Alternately you can buy an 870P or send your Express off to someone like Scattergun Tech, and get a purpose built fighting shotgun with beefed up internals.

In the end, the deciding factor for me personally is my environment. I live in a thin walled apartment with people, including family, all around me. The .223 has more penetrating power than the 12 gauge shotgun load I use. How much more is up for debate, but we know the two weapons are two different ballparks.

I can see how someone might use a .223 rifle for home defense, but in my scenario it's just not feasible and is possibly dangerous.

The current cultural climate against EBR's influences how people think, regardless of the actual facts. Shotguns are culturally more acceptable to use for home defense, hands down, and that has a lot to do with what people buy considering their neighborhood.

The use of shot or slug offers a wider variety of loads more commonly available, right down to the local store level. Shot or slug gives a breadth of response that no single caliber varmint round can duplicate, especially one that has had to be reconfigured to improve accuracy and reduce tumbling. You don't want overpenetration to endanger other building occupants.

While 5.56 may be available, it's not for a lot of folks right now as the hoarders continue to buy it up, and have caused prices to escalate beyond what I consider reasonable. Further, I can walk into the local Academy and find cases of slugs on closeout for cheap. Quoting a stacked comparison of prices can always make the other look good.

In my experience, the mag fed pistol grip configuration is a nightmare of snag-prone protuberances. Having actually spend weeks it the field training and hunting with AR type rifles and conventional stocks, the comparison is hands down a winner for the shotgun. Further, pistol grips and magazines force the user to expose more of their profile to an opponent as the weapon cannot have a reduced profile. If using a pump, you could say the difficulty still exists just to work the action - but apples to apples, the auto shotgun lays flatter.

Cleaning is a matter of circumstance - I do prefer military takedown methods, and companies that refuse to incorporate them in designs don't help the owner. Nonetheless, civilian owners have the time - and don't have to clean their weapons nearly as often. Frequent daily cleaning is the norm for a battle rifle that is literally dragged through every environment in combat within hours, covered in debris, and used as a aid in climbing or tool in combatives, and fires hundreds of rounds daily. With a reputation for stoppages directly attributable to the underweight bolt design and abusive environment, AR's darn well better be easier to clean - but it's of little value to a homeowner who keeps one in the house 24/7. The shotgun will be.

Training at the range - yes, any gun will do, most ranges want you there. But the AR is virtually banned from any skeet or trap range, and using the shotgun there is still good training and familiarization. It promotes shooting a moving target - something few CQC courses even address. A shotgunner has to learn that on a S&T range, and it's more available at more ranges. This offers the shotgunner a wider range of training facilities at reasonable cost close to home, and helps get the family involved. AR's can't do that as well.

Some experienced users will feel more comfortable with a weapon they have trained with for years. NEW USERS TO HOME DEFENSE need a weapon they can familiarize with rapidly at a wide variety of ranges, without breaking the bank. Daddy deals with a lot of decisions at home - and a new HDTV can quickly be a higher priority than an equally priced boutique firearm that sits in the closet, adding nothing to the entertainment menu. That's another plus for the shotgun - a good used pump shooter can often be bought same day as the TV, no breaking the budget.

Again, after 22 years of using AR type rifles, I don't see them as the best application in home defense. Frankly, I don't much care for them at all, having gotten over the love affair and finally seeing the warts, defects, and compromises in design. The average homeowner will be better served with a HD shotgun of plain and simple design, straight from the factory. Modifying it with a plethora of AR style doodads just complicates and degrades it's capability.

I carried an M16 for 3 years, and I'm a believer in the shotgun (pump in my case) for HD. The .223, as many pointed out, gives you more penetration - and this can be dangerous - than you need at "home" ranges. So does a shotgun slug - but #4 buck is a favorite load for many law enforcement applications, and with good reason. A good hit at home ranges with a load of #4 buck is pretty effective. Many like 00 buck, which is popular in the military, because it does have more penetration than #4. Military applications aren't always at that close range, so 00 gets the nod there. I'm sticking with #4.

My take on it, anyway.

Shotgun
pros: Cheap, cheap practice ammo, good "stopping power."
cons: Very, very, very heavy recoil compared to any of the other options. Pump action introduces possibilities for operator error, requiring a lot of practice.

Intermediate caliber rifle
pros: .223 and 7.62x39 both actually give you about the same size hole as 9-12 pellets of 00 buck, and with far less recoil. Magazine capacity is high. Semi-auto.
cons: ARs are expensive, AKs aren't very ergonomic.

Pistol caliber carbine
pros: Pretty cheap, in the same price range as shotguns. Ammo is cheap. Almost no recoil to speak of. Much less muzzle blast. Very compact and lightweight models are available. Semi-auto. High cap magazines are usually available.
cons: Far lower "stopping power" than any true longarm caliber. According to MacPherson's models, a 9mm JHP is equal to 3 pellets of 00 at 1290 fps. So 3-4 shots of 9mm = 1 shot of 12 ga buck, if you want a concrete figure based on real physics.

Pistol caliber carbines tend to be really overlooked, when people are considering home defense guns.

But the choice is, like everything else in life, a tradeoff. Decide what priorities are most important to you, for your particular situation, and go from there.

Shotgun - how do you control where the pellets go?

Anybody ever done an IPSC shoot where there are hostages and targets close to each other? I've never hit a "no-shoot" in IPSC because I use IPSC as a training tool. Hitting no-shoots is unacceptable. At 10 yards with a shotgun loaded with buckshot, I don't know that I could accomplish that easily.

If I am on one side of the house and a family member is on the other side of the house, and I fire a shotgun - how do I know those rounds won't penetrate and hit the loved one after not hitting the BG?

Box o' truth.... anything from .22 to birdshot is going to penetrate dry wall. I think a BB gun may be the only thing that won't.

So with a shotgun, isn't that a huge sacrifice to controlling where every round goes?

What SWAT teams are employing shotguns in roles other than breaching (serious question)? The reason is because if you live in an apartment or have family members.... box o' truth shows that #4 buck is going to penetrate drywall just as easily as .223. Even if only 2 of the 9 pellets miss, that's easily enough to seriously injure or kill someone in the apartment next to you.

My opinion, and take it for what it's worth... In most cases, it will be hard to say you used any firearm in self-defense at a distance greater than 10 yards. Go with the shotgun in 12 or 20 gauge with buck shot. If it's zombies, then all bets are off and you go with the AK or AR.

In most cases, it will be hard to say you used any firearm in self-defense at a distance greater than 10 yards
If I'm understanding you correctly, you are saying that it may be hard to justify to the police or the courts that shooting someone in self defense at a distance of 10 yards or greater wasn't justified. This may be true in some courts and with some juries, I can't commit on that. I will however say that the closest you want a BG to you is 10 yards. Let them get any closer and you're putting yourself in unnecessary danger.

The reason is that a human's reaction time is typically between 0.15 and 0.30 seconds. A BG in decent shape can cover 10 yards in 1.5 to 2.0 seconds, maybe quicker if he's an athlete. That leaves little time for error. With all that might be going on around you in a situation where you've got someone at gunpoint, the least little distraction could be deadly for you. You look away for a second and the BG has the time to close the gap to the point of being able to grab your gun or otherwise do you harm.

I went to a training course where the instructor asked how close we felt comfortable with a BG armed with a knife. Most people's response was about 10 feet. He then demonstrated just how fast a human can close such a gap and do harm. Very eyeopening for me who thought that 10 feet was more than enough. They trained us to shoot anyone that is armed (not a gun, but with a knife, baseball bat, etc.) that gets within 20 feet if they are slowly approaching. If they are approaching at a fast past, as in running, drop them at 30 feet. Do not let them closer because too much can go wrong too quickly.

Anyone in such a situation has to decide for themselves what their particular situation calls for in the way of what gives them cause to harm another human being. I just want to impress upon everyone that what you think may be a safe distance, very well may be way too close.

In the end, the deciding factor for me personally is my environment. I live in a thin walled apartment with people, including family, all around me. The .223 has more penetrating power than the 12 gauge shotgun load I use. How much more is up for debate, but we know the two weapons are two different ballparks.

I can see how someone might use a .223 rifle for home defense, but in my scenario it's just not feasible and is possibly dangerous.
The .223, as many pointed out, gives you more penetration - and this can be dangerous - than you need at "home" ranges. So does a shotgun slug - but #4 buck is a favorite load for many law enforcement applications, and with good reason. A good hit at home ranges with a load of #4 buck is pretty effective. Many like 00 buck, which is popular in the military, because it does have more penetration than #4. Military applications aren't always at that close range, so 00 gets the nod there. I'm sticking with #4.
You folks continue to repeat common knowledge that's based on an assumption. Testing has revealed that assumption to be false.
The use of shot or slug offers a wider variety of loads more commonly available, right down to the local store level. Shot or slug gives a breadth of response that no single caliber varmint round can duplicate, especially one that has had to be reconfigured to improve accuracy and reduce tumbling. You don't want overpenetration to endanger other building occupants.
I wasn't aware that .223 was strictly a varmint round. In first post I specifically said to avoid steel core ammo. Further, M855 ball was not developed to increase accuracy, nor reduce tumbling. It was developed during the cold war to increase penetration against Soviet soft body armor. Reduced tumbling was a side effect. The 1:7 twist adopted to stabilize the 64 grain M856 tracer, which is a much longer projectile, in any environment. The side effect is that M855 ball is slightly more accurate than M193 ball in barrels of that twist rate. Regardless, most civilian AR-15s have 1:9 twist barrels, and those are perfect for 55 to 64 grain softpoints. Those SP rounds don't rely on tumbling to wound. They expand and slow down.
While 5.56 may be available, it's not for a lot of folks right now as the hoarders continue to buy it up, and have caused prices to escalate beyond what I consider reasonable. Further, I can walk into the local Academy and find cases of slugs on closeout for cheap. Quoting a stacked comparison of prices can always make the other look good.
You're quoting close out pricing. I quoted pricing on two readily available, current production, rounds. I work in the industry, and I frequently look at current ammo availability from distributors to dealers. Even with current demand .223 / 5.56 still has better availability than 12 GA buck. You're the one making the stacked comparison quoting close out pricing from a single retail chain.
In my experience, the mag fed pistol grip configuration is a nightmare of snag-prone protuberances. Having actually spend weeks it the field training and hunting with AR type rifles and conventional stocks, the comparison is hands down a winner for the shotgun.
Your training was in the field. My training was in the field doing maintenance on comm equipment. When you walk into a comm van (kinda like a hallway in a house) barrel length is the biggest draw back - AF issued 20" A2s to us REMFs. An M4 with collapsible stock would have been far easier to maneuver than even a 12 Ga with fixed stock and 18" bbl.
Further, pistol grips and magazines force the user to expose more of their profile to an opponent as the weapon cannot have a reduced profile. If using a pump, you could say the difficulty still exists just to work the action - but apples to apples, the auto shotgun lays flatter.
Pistol grips and detachable mags don't make the gun wider. In a basic stance with the off hand at the back of the handguard or front of the mag well I can be just as compact as with a mag tube shotgun. Also, if we're talking semi-auto shotguns then your huge cost savings advantage just left town.
Cleaning is a matter of circumstance - I do prefer military takedown methods, and companies that refuse to incorporate them in designs don't help the owner. Nonetheless, civilian owners have the time - and don't have to clean their weapons nearly as often. Frequent daily cleaning is the norm for a battle rifle that is literally dragged through every environment in combat within hours, covered in debris, and used as a aid in climbing or tool in combatives, and fires hundreds of rounds daily. With a reputation for stoppages directly attributable to the underweight bolt design and abusive environment, AR's darn well better be easier to clean - but it's of little value to a homeowner who keeps one in the house 24/7. The shotgun will be.
So you now say that ease of cleaning doesn't matter because home owners have more time to clean their weapons. Yet, you say one gun has more value than the other, based on what exactly?
Training at the range - yes, any gun will do, most ranges want you there. But the AR is virtually banned from any skeet or trap range, and using the shotgun there is still good training and familiarization. It promotes shooting a moving target - something few CQC courses even address. A shotgunner has to learn that on a S&T range, and it's more available at more ranges. This offers the shotgunner a wider range of training facilities at reasonable cost close to home, and helps get the family involved. AR's can't do that as well.
There are more fixed indoor ranges in urban & suburban areas. Most IPSC & IDPA clubs offers regular three gun matches where you train with shotgun, rifle, and pistol. In most suburban areas IPSC clubs are just as available as trap & skeet clubs. This makes range availability & cost equal on the two platforms.
Some experienced users will feel more comfortable with a weapon they have trained with for years. NEW USERS TO HOME DEFENSE need a weapon they can familiarize with rapidly at a wide variety of ranges, without breaking the bank. Daddy deals with a lot of decisions at home - and a new HDTV can quickly be a higher priority than an equally priced boutique firearm that sits in the closet, adding nothing to the entertainment menu. That's another plus for the shotgun - a good used pump shooter can often be bought same day as the TV, no breaking the budget.
It's been my experience that new user learn better on a lighter weight, lower recoil gun which can be easily adjusted to fit the individual. Above you argue for the semi-auto shotgun to make the comparison apples to apples. Now you're back to arguing for the cheaper pump shotgun. You're having to cherry pick advantages of two different types of shotgun to attempt to match the advantages of a single carbine.

Also, if the HDTV is a higher priority than the best defensive firearm you can afford (whether it be a .223 carbine, a 12 or 20 ga semi-auto shotgun, or a higher end defensive pump shotgun) you need to re-evaluate your priorities. Stick with your standard definition TV for a few more months, get the better firearm, and then buy the new HDTV later. In the long run a few months without the new TV isn't going to matter. The firearm is also going to hold its value far better than a TV that will be outdated in two years.
Again, after 22 years of using AR type rifles, I don't see them as the best application in home defense. Frankly, I don't much care for them at all, having gotten over the love affair and finally seeing the warts, defects, and compromises in design.
You focus on the defects, and ignore the advantages.
The average homeowner will be better served with a HD shotgun of plain and simple design, straight from the factory. Modifying it with a plethora of AR style doodads just complicates and degrades it's capability.
The Knoxx recoil reducing collapsible stock actually increases a pump shotgun's capability. The LOP can be immediately adjusted to fit any family member. The recoil reduction makes the shotgun easier for a new shooter to learn on, and provides longer range sessions before recoil wears the shooter out. You can get a 20 ga 870 express with said stock, 18.5" bbl, and mag extension straight from the factory. It's more money than a base express, but less money than most .223 carbines. In that configuration it combines many of the best features of pump shotguns and .223 carbines.

I'm not at all opposed to shotguns for HD use. I also don't think they're always the best option either. Many of their asserted advantages are nothing more than more than assumptions that have been repeated for so long they're accepted as fact, but don't hold up under unbiased testing.

can anyone answer how you can account for all 9 pellets in an apartment? if even just one misses, it's going through the dry wall.

The first thing you want is a bag of cell phones. Any cell that is charged is supposed to be able to call 911. Put it/911 on speed dial. Hit 911 two or 3 or more times/phones and the emergency services will go nuts and you shouldn't have to shoot. Best outcome. No blood that is yours. Vomit maybe, no blood and if you didn't do the shooting, little legal liability.

Then ... You need to face the fact that "rats" like you would be justified in shooting come in packs. And they use chemicals. Anymore alcohol is just what they wash it down with. You shoot one and he may just get mad. Will he die in 30 days? Probably. Will he die in 30 minutes? Maybe. BUT What will happen to you in those 30 minutes. Of course his friends might get mad too, or they might laugh... In brief you want to be able to shoot repeatedly... shotgun rules here. Light target loads. Short, no choke barrel, COM target...

Take cover. Hide. Use the phones, ALL the phones. Don't get brave. If you have to shoot, shoot them all, then shoot them again... Don't stop until they are on the ground quiveriing and helpless. Then you will have "Hell" coming fro the legal system. They will be upset. When you shoot one of these rats and turn them off, guess what, a lawyer who might have represented him/her/it loses business. They are very unforgiving about that. Might want to have an attorney or 3 in mind too.

Last, how will you sleep. Might wish to review a biography of Audie Murphy. Killed more men legally in the 20th century than any other man. European Theater, WW II. Picked up every combat decoration including the Congressinal Medal. Watch the move "To Hell and Back" but read the book Spent the rest of his life sleeping with a pistol under his pillow. Lost 3 wives who got tired of being pistol whipped in his nightmares... Luck.

Then ... You need to face the fact that "rats" like you would be justified in shooting come in packs. And they use chemicals. Anymore alcohol is just what they wash it down with. You shoot one and he may just get mad. Will he die in 30 days? Probably. Will he die in 30 minutes? Maybe. BUT What will happen to you in those 30 minutes. Of course his friends might get mad too, or they might laugh... In brief you want to be able to shoot repeatedly... shotgun rules here. Light target loads. Short, no choke barrel, COM target...
I'm not shooting to kill anyone. I'm shooting to incapacitate a threat. If the threat is out his mind on drugs he isn't going to respond to pain. Light target bird shot loads induce pain, but they do not give enough penetration to reliability incapacitate a threat. If I need to shoot quickly and repeatedly to incapacitate multiple threats a 5.56 carbine trounces any shotgun. Low recoil from a round that actually has a high probability of incapacitating a threat (unlike bird shot), low muzzle rise, and superior standard sights will allow even a novice to make fast, accurate shots with a 5.56 carbine. If I need more than the 30 rounds in the mag I'm a button press and mag insertion away from 30 more. Have fun stuffing shells into your mag tube.
The first thing you want is a bag of cell phones. Any cell that is charged is supposed to be able to call 911. Put it/911 on speed dial. Hit 911 two or 3 or more times/phones and the emergency services will go nuts and you shouldn't have to shoot. Best outcome. No blood that is yours. Vomit maybe, no blood and if you didn't do the shooting, little legal liability.
Multiple 911 calls from cell phones, which don't the 911 operator your location, do nothing but clog the system. Make a single call from a landline which automatically (through e-911) gives the call center the address. Stay on the line if possible. If a landline isn't an option make a single cell phone call and relay your location as quickly and clearly as possible. Get the police on the way, but be ready to deal with the threat(s) until they get there.
Take cover. Hide. Use the phones, ALL the phones. Don't get brave. If you have to shoot, shoot them all, then shoot them again... Don't stop until they are on the ground quiveriing and helpless. Then you will have "Hell" coming fro the legal system. They will be upset. When you shoot one of these rats and turn them off, guess what, a lawyer who might have represented him/her/it loses business. They are very unforgiving about that. Might want to have an attorney or 3 in mind too.
Hopefully I'll be alive to deal with the legal system. If not,I've failed.
Last, how will you sleep. Might wish to review a biography of Audie Murphy. Killed more men legally in the 20th century than any other man. European Theater, WW II. Picked up every combat decoration including the Congressinal Medal. Watch the move "To Hell and Back" but read the book Spent the rest of his life sleeping with a pistol under his pillow. Lost 3 wives who got tired of being pistol whipped in his nightmares... Luck.
Again, I'll be alive to face that new challenge. I'll do everything I can to preserve my life and those of my loved ones until our Creator calls us home.

Choose what works best for you. Use the weapon you have the most experience with. If you don't have much experience, choose whatever you can get the best training on.

WOW!! Im not even gonna touch this one.

lolz @ internet rage.

At 10 feet, which would you rather get shot with? Put the other one next to your bed.

lolz @ internet rage.
LOL. Everyone has actually stayed pretty calm. A thread like this is bound to get biased responses one way or the other, dependant on which of the two long gun forums it's posted in. I'm simply providing alternatives, and challenging preconceived notions. I'm playing devil's advocate if you will, but doing so not not to be a jerk; rather to challenge folks to think. Sometimes those challenges lead to new thought processes, and sometimes they reaffirm existing thought processes. I don't care which they lead to, as long as folks have a better understanding of the situation. For many it will reaffirm their initial choice. For a few it may lead to the realization that another option is better for their situation. Either way, both groups will be equipped with more knowledge, and novices will see both sides of the defensive long gun debate.

Stick this in Rifle Country and you'll probably see me expounding on the benefits of a pump shotgun. I don't need to do that here because everyone else already has. Just as I wouldn't need to address the benefits of a carbine in Rifle Country because many there would do that anyway.

I'm happy having an M4gery and an 870P in the safe. I also know I'm fortunate to have the luxury to choose either. Of course, I put quality firearms higher on my priority list than fancy home entertainment devices. To each his own.

You folks continue to repeat common knowledge that's based on an assumption. Testing has revealed that assumption to be false.

All "shotgun vs carbine for HD" threads end up that way. Some people don't want to listen to reason.

Below is a gel test with Hornady TAP 55 grain .223:

http://i588.photobucket.com/albums/ss323/RatDrall/223_55_URBAN_4website.jpg

Use whatever you shoot better, and has a light attached to it, in the house.

not to beat a dead horse but,
can anyone answer how you can account for all 9 pellets in an apartment? if even just one misses, it's going through the dry wall.

can anyone answer how you can account for all 9 pellets in an apartment? if even just one misses, it's going through the dry wall.

Find a load that patterns well in your shotgun, stray pellets are a non issue.

The picture below is an example of Federal's "Tactical 9 Pellet 00" fired from my 18" shotgun at 10' or so:

http://i588.photobucket.com/albums/ss323/RatDrall/IMG_1736.jpg

I'd be more worried about firing numerous rounds from a handgun that failed to stop the threat, or didn't score a hit because it's not as stable as a shoulder fired weapon.

Light target loads. Short, no choke barrel, COM target...

wrong.....birdshot is for birds...use something that will penetrate and do the job.....don't spread BS information that has no support

In a non-SHTF home defense situation, you are likely limited to about 30 feet or less for a justified shooting. A 20 ga (600 grains of lead @ 1300 fps) is certainly capable of putting down an assailant. I had an old box of 20ga buck (#4?) but shot them up- for HD I have 3 inch shells with copper plated #2 lead-If you can find 20 ga buck by all means use it. No ricochets, far less penetration than a 55gr FMJ @ 3100 fps, make IMHO a pump shotgun the perfect urban home defense weapon. I have an XD-45 as a backup.

Thanks guys.
I can be reassured that if I cannot afford a rifle, the a pump shotgun will be a good choice for HD. The only thing harder than researching what firearm to buy is convincing my wife I need to buy it. I understand why it's hard to just have one, two or three guns.

I like both, and handguns too for HD and SD, so I don't have a real preference. I will say, however:

Unless you want to also take out your neighbors with an AR...

Wrong.

Get a pump 12ga shotgun for home defense and keep it in "rack n' go" condition loaded with 00 Buck Shot...Equavalent to 9 9mm rounds

Wrong.

to the intruders chest all at once will stop him in his tracks for sure.

...and wrong.

When will this stuff ever end?

i need a HD barrel for my escalade shot gun contact jimbo220

Get a 12 gauge pump and an AK for what an ar-15 cost. No need limiting your self to one gun or those little ground hog hunting rounds.

I have shot a few of the low recoil buckshot loads and while I felt less kick, I had the mental feeling that I was pumping out a lot less power than the 15 pellet 3 inch mags.

If I have to shoot someone I want to take them down as quick as possible and put them down to stay there. Dead man tells no lies.

Short answer: either one can work.

There seems to allows be a lot of disinformation concerning the risks of over penetration with a 5.56 rifle. For some reason people want to insist that a rifle is simply more prone to over penetration than a shotgun with HD ammo (often buckshot). This is not necessarily true.

far less penetration than a 55gr FMJ @ 3100 fps, make IMHO a pump shotgun the perfect urban home defense weapon.

This is a straw man arguement. There are many other and much better choices than FMJ. Better in terms of over penetration issues and better in terms of terminal ballistics. Who is going to use FMJ?

I know of very knowledgable and skilled people some of whom use a shotgun for HD and some an AR. I will repeat that either can work but each have strong points.

Strong points of shotgun as it pertains to HD:

A shotgun can bring a lot more power to bare. When one's objective is to stop a threat immediately the superior power of a shotgun is note worthy.

Servicable shotguns are cheaper although one can spend just as much on a shotgun if they want to.

Strong points of a 5.56 rifle

Lighter and smaller

Lower recoil (faster followup shots)

Both of the above make it easier for smaller statured individuals to use. My friends wife will shoot the AR but HATES his HD 870. My other friends wife keeps their HD mossberg on her side of the bed. So obviously this one comes down to individuals

More readily suppressed. Some people will jump all over me about suggesting a suppressor for HD but I'll take a suppressed rifle over a non suppressed rifle any day for shooting inside my house (and potentially at night). I will mention I live in a red state where the concern is good shoot bad shoot and strong castle doctrine.

Either will work. A others stated the one you shoot the best and are the most familiar with is the one to use. Seeing as you don't have either you may not know which one that is. I would suggest that the one you can afford to feed many practice rounds and obtain professional training with is the best. A trained and practiced owner of either one is much better prepared and much more formidable than an untrained unpracticed owner of the other. This is where a shotgun can shine for the budget minded. For the price of a solid fighting AR, one can buy a shotgun, a light, a bunch of ammo and take a shotgun course.

I carry an Ar for my department. During the class they showed us the difference between the duty ,Federal Tactical 55grn HP, and the training FMJ against cantaloupes. Some of the guys were not big gun guys and really didnt know the difference.

The FMJs would put a nice hole through the melon, usually breaking it into several big chunks. The HPs though would completely come apart in the melon, blowing it into little pieces.

The trainers, who are some serious gunnies, stated this round was known around the country as a "fight stopper". It stops aggression NOW!

I personally prefer my Colt light weight AR for HD but cant knock anyone for choosing a shotgun. As long as they dont use birdshot. I now of several occasions where the birdshot has performed miserably.

A good load of buckshot or slug in a shotgun is some serious close range firepower. If you hit what you aim at, you dont have to worry about collateral. Also the spread on a shotgun at in the house ranges is so small any shot that has pellets that miss, probably didnt incapacitate the threat to begin with.

That is of course in a "normal" sized house. I work in an area that pro athletes live and have cleared a couple of those houses when the alarms go off. Some of those hallways could possibly put a bad guy out of the effective range of buckshot. HA HA!

This is just my 2 cents worth. I work for a state law enforcement agency and we got into this debate when deciding to go with duty rifle or stick with the 870s. I went out with a few other officers and we built some mock walls with and without insulation. We set up these walls with a shoot-n-c target behind it since it just takes a little to knock off the black. We found that in a HD situation (3-10 yds) that the shotgun with #4 buck overpenetrated the wall and would even penetrate the sheetrock the shoot n c was mounted on. 00 buck completely demolished the "target" on the back side of the wall. We tried it with 55 grain Hornady TAP, it fragmented and barely stuck into the target behind the wall at 10 yds. This can be improved with frangible ammo. Then there is the argument to use #6 or #8 birdshot for HD. I do not recommend this due to the fact that I have seen hunters shot with #7 or 8 at close range on the dove fields and walk away on their own 2 feet, not what I want with a HD gun.

The argument over the .223 not stopping people effectively is fueled by the performance (or lack there of) of the round in the "sandbox". As civilians, we are not held to the same ammunition that the military has to use. I prefer TAP, I use it in my rifle, off-duty weapon, and shotgun. I have killed a several feral hogs where I work with 55 gr. TAP, it will put down a hog or medium sized game animal with correct shot placement (vitals not head). Also, more ammo can be easily carried for a magazine fed rifle, which may or may not matter in you case.

Another consideration is whether or not someone else in the house may have to use the gun for HD purposes. My wife loves shooting both the 870 and the AR, but when it comes to the 870 she is done after 25 rounds or so of reduced recoil loads. She will shoot a case of .223 if I let her. The point here is that your wife, girlfriend, kids, or whatever will be more likely to train with a .223 weapon than a 12 ga. shotgun, plus most ARs with a 6 pos. stock fit everyone better.

You may also want to consider other .223 repeating rifles other than an AR 15. There are 3 I can think of that are considerably cheaper than an AR and all of them take a magazine. Look into the Mini 14, Keltec SU 16 or Remington 7615 (pump .223 that uses AR mags). I know of some officers that carry the Keltec in their trucks and have had no problems whatsoever from them, they are not the most accurate rifle, but they are HD accurate.

Whatever you decide just remember: TRAINING, TRAINING, TRAINING and that you are responsible for every round that goes down range (9 in the case of 00 buck). Choose the gun that you AND your family are the most comfortable with and TRAIN with it.

At the risk of thread veer....We found that in a HD situation (3-10 yds) that the shotgun with #4 buck overpenetrated the wall and would even penetrate the sheetrock the shoot n c was mounted on. 00 buck completely demolished the "target" on the back side of the wall. We tried it with 55 grain Hornady TAP, it fragmented and barely stuck into the target behind the wall at 10 yds. This can be improved with frangible ammo. So you chose a platform and ammo based solely on what happened to the projectiles that miss the target, rather than evaulating the terminal ballistics of the projectiles that hit?

I do not understand this.

Whatever you decide just remember: TRAINING, TRAINING, TRAINING and that you are responsible for every round that goes down range (9 in the case of 00 buck). Choose the gun that you AND your family are the most comfortable with and TRAIN with it.Absolutely true. A HD gun that half the family cannot or will not use is not an effective HD gun.

Dead man tells no lies.

And with today's modern forensics, live ones don't either.....:rolleyes:

Nothing will stop an intruder or bad guy faster than a shotgun . Load it with #4 buckshot in 12 ga or #3 in a 20 ga and it will do the job in the home with less penetration than OO buckshot. Outside the home use OO buckshot. I load mine 12 ga with first 3 shots #4 buck and last 2 shots OO buckshot. If you shoot someone with an assault rifle, the Lawyers will have a good time trying to prosecute you. The shotgun is and has been accepted by our society as a home defense gun for generations.

The argument over the .223 not stopping people effectively is fueled by the performance (or lack there of) of the round in the "sandbox". As civilians, we are not held to the same ammunition that the military has to use.

Not trying to thread veer.

Just to help stifle another internet rumor. The 5.56 is working great in the "sandbox". Ask any veteran on here or one in real life. I have heard a lot of brother friends uncles cousin who shot a guy 12 times and didnt stop him, but have yet to actually meet a combat vet who has had problems.

Also many soldiers will claim hits just because they shot at someone. I remember one guy who was claiming a hit at a running bad guy, in an urban setting, at a couple hundred yards. Back on post this guy could hardly qualify many times. Not surprising, we never found this dead bad guy.

The only 2 legitimate complaints of the 223 I have heard from soldiers coming back are that it is not as effective when used at longer ranges, and its inability to shoot through light cover. Neither is a concern in a HD situation.

****.
Did this thread just happen?
I thought AR15/AK-47
Pistol/Shotgun/Carbine
9x19mm vs .45
and revolver vs. auto had been beat up enough.

gawd we are bored.
:)
[hangs head in shame]

A shotgun can bring a lot more power to bare. When one's objective is to stop a threat immediately the superior power of a shotgun is note worthy.

Is there ANY other reason to use deadly force in your home? If your goal is NOT to do that, why are you deploying a gun?

What is your realistic home defense situation. For most people, particlulary in urban areas, is that if you have an intruder it will be a single person or two people, lightly armed, poorly trained, robbers. You'll likely barricade yourself in a room and end the encounter quickly. If you have to shoot, it will be close distance (within 20 feet) with few shots fired. Prolonged gunfights, taking the fight out to the streets for a long range rooftop shot, reloads, etc. are just really unlikely given typical home defense scenarios.

What are the prime advantages of the AR in 5.56? 1) Capacity and 2) Range/accuracy.

Disadvantages of the AR/M4? 1) $800+ and 2) requires significant training to clear malfunctions and fire accurately

What are the advantages of a home defense 12 gauge? 1) Cost under $300 and 2) variety of ammo and 3) knock down power and 4) reliability.

Disadvantages of the 12 ga? 5-7 shells (which should be adequate).

The AR/M4 is great if you are clearing houses, moving from inside to outside, with a team of others similarly armed and up against multiple armed targets.

I've fired many AR/M4s, and own a couple. I've had a lot of failures to feed, eject, etc. I've NEVER had a failure with a pump shotgun. No matter what your weapn, if it fails you are in real trouble.

The shotgun has so much more to offer for home defense that it's a no-brainer for me.

Edited to add: However, my go-to weapon is a handgun. It's more maneuverable and within easy reach, and more than adequate for home defense.

Whichever you are trained with most seems like the most obvious answer, but the real answer is, AR15. :evil:

I keep a Makarov in a spare holster velcroed to bedpost near nitelite, a SXS 12 ga 'Coach' leaned in near corner left bbl hi-brass #4 buck right bbl hi-brass #6 and in case I have to go outside (I live about 150 yds off pavement) my Marlin Camp .45 with 10 shot mag loaded with +P 185gr jhp hangs on wall hook.
although over penetration isn't much of a concern for me I'd still hate to have hi-power rifle slugs zipping off my property into who knows where.

Just remember there are two sides to every story...9/12 pellets also means 9/12 pellets flying around and 9/12 increases in collateral damage. Have you considered an AR and varmit rounds? Maybe a pistol caliber rifle?

It would seem to me that the shotgun would be the better choice for the average person. They are easy to aim, cheap, simple to use, and extremely reliable in most cases which is a must for a HD gun. They have also more stopping power per shot than any other small arm a person is likely to use, for this purpose. However if a person is bothered a great deal by the recoil .223 may be a better option. They are also more socialy acceptable to most people to use for HD, which is important if you land in court. They offer alot of firepower in an easy to use cheap and simple package, in other words it is a weapon for the responsible masses.

I keep a loaded 12 ga coach gun loaded with buckshot near my bed at night , with a 38 caliber revolver near at hand for backup or in the waist band. The shotgun is the decisive weapon of choice for the home.

If a shotgun is too much to handle, even with reduced loads, you might want to think about a lever-action carbine in 357 or 44 - much easier to shoot than a handgun, not quite as loud as an AR, nor as expensive - those pistol calibers in a rifle length barrel get improved performance.....a carbine does NOT have to automatically mean an AR - even a nice M-1 would be very handy........just an idea

So you chose a platform and ammo based solely on what happened to the projectiles that miss the target, rather than evaulating the terminal ballistics of the projectiles that hit?

I do not understand this.

No this is not what we did, it is what we found after shooting some different loads of each through the mock walls. It doesn't matter what we found anyway since it was the higher ups that made the decision not to go with patrol rifle and stick with the 870s even though the money was coming from a homeland security grant. If you seen our duty ammo for our shotguns you would realize that terminal ballistics do not matter to the ones who make the decision, only the cost of ammo matters - the cheaper the better. Welcome to working for the state.

If a shotgun is too much to handle, even with reduced loads, you might want to think about a lever-action carbine in 357 or 44 - much easier to shoot than a handgun, not quite as loud as an AR, nor as expensive - those pistol calibers in a rifle length barrel get improved performance.....a carbine does NOT have to automatically mean an AR - even a nice M-1 would be very handy........just an idea
The pistol cartridge lever action rifles are a very good idea. I have a Marlin 1894C in .357 that does predator control along with my 870. I'm in a rural area and am less worried about wall penetration but the lever action is being used more and more. The .357 magnum is no slouch from an 18-1/2" barrel and the .38 Special is surprisingly quiet and is very effective.

So you chose a platform and ammo based solely on what happened to the projectiles that miss the target, rather than evaulating the terminal ballistics of the projectiles that hit?

First, I would point out that a careful reading of his post does not indicate that he is choosing SOLELY based on that. That was an unfounded inference that you read into it. His post indicates he considered that issue, not that he considered it in a vacuum or found it to be dispositive.

This should not be the only factor but it is not unreasonable to use it as one factor. If I lived in a town house or an apartment I wouldn't think it wise to use a .458 Socom for HD not withstanding the devastating terminal ballistics of projectiles that hit. Anything that can be counted on to go into a bad guy with reasonable expectations of reaching vitals will probably punch right through a thin wall. There is a balance to be struck between wont penetrate drywall and hits like Zeus' lighting. For lots of people it might well make sense not to use the rounds that have the most effective terminal ballistics (a 12 gauge slug, a .458 300-600 grain bullet, etc). It is silly to think people do not or should not consider whats beyond their targets (see 4 rules of gun safety) and evaluate the possibilities of their projectiles getting there.

As stated above, the shotgun will provide the most stopping power. It lacks the round capacity and range that an AR-type rifle has, as well as being heavier. If you are of small stature, wielding something like an 870 can be a little awkward, and can be too heavy/bulky for a spouse/girlfriend, whereas an AR/M4 can be handled easier. I'm just trying to provide the most ambiguous response possible.

a 'coach' type shotty in 20ga or even .410 with even a .22LR revolver or a .32acp for a back-up would be good for a small person. or a pistol round carbine, 9mm or such.

as far as minimal recoil, what is the lightest shot i can use for HD?
I would go to the online retailers, and look for (in 12 ga.) 2 3/4" reduced recoil #4 buckshot.
I have a pistol gripped shotgun that I added the Knoxx "Breachers Grip". I could shoot that all day from the hip and no sore wrist.
Don't discount the .410 shotgun either. The pellets are traveling just as fast as a 12 ga. and they are the same size, there are simply fewer of them.
Forget "bird shot" for H/D.

IMO a rifle is too dangerous for the neighbor's safety. For H/D distances (20' max) a shotgun is the way to go.

IMO a rifle is too dangerous for the neighbor's safety.

Why? Over penetration? How do you reconcile that position with the fact that provided the right ammunition is used a 5.56 rifle has been shown to have less over penetration than common buck shot loads?

[QUOTE]Don't discount the .410 shotgun either. The pellets are traveling just as fast as a 12 ga. and they are the same size, there are simply fewer of them.[QUOTE]

I think that is a valid point that people often dismiss. I have a little .410 that will group 5 rounds of 00 buck very well at HD distances. It holds 15 rounds and is lighter and easier to handle for some people I have shot with than the nearly identical 12 gauge model I also own. It has negligible recoil and allows for very fast followup shots. In terms of HD I do not think it is anything to sneeze at. I keep the 12 gauge handy (all other things being roughly equal I'd just as soon have the extra 4-7 projectiles) but there are people that I believe would be better served by the .410.

As for pistol caliber carbines. I own a few and they certainly could work, but unless price was a deciding factor I would rather have a rifle round.

When this thread started, my first thought was 'a .223? in a house? is this guy nuts?'. Since then, I've done a little Internet research and I'm starting to warm up to the idea. It looks like a .223 with a light SP bullet is indeed prone to penetrate fewer sheets of drywall than most other pistol, rifle or shotgun rounds.

My AR build is progressing slowly, though (my Del-Ton lower kit finally shipped after a two-month backorder) so it's going to be the 870 for awhile yet, though I think I'm going to go with #1 buckshot instead of the 00 buck it's loaded with right now.

like a .223 with a light SP bullet is indeed prone to penetrate fewer sheets of drywall than most other pistol, rifle or shotgun rounds.


Did you see a source for how many sheets of sheetrock different rounds will penetrate? Usually I see penetration arguments for sheetrock based on penetration results for gelatin. I don't know how correlated sheetrock (at least in seperated 1/2" sections) penetration is to geletan.

I don't think that a rifle can really compare to the close quarters, room-to-room capabilities of a tactical shotgun with 00 Buckshot. The spread pattern of 00 Buckshot is akin to 9 rounds of .32 caliber bullets speeding outward at over 1,200 fps. OUCH!

This is my latest project... A Mossberg Tactical 12 gauge (Home Defender). Say hello to my little friend!
http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/7097/mytac500a.jpg

Did you see a source for how many sheets of sheetrock different rounds will penetrate?


Here's one link:

http://www.230grain.com/

tribbles,

great link! The results are similar to others i had seen in a video.

Marlin 357 or 44 mag lever action rifle. Then again any bad guy should run like the wind from the sound of a pump sliding a round in ;-)

Amy

It never ceases to amaze me how many reply to these threads with "use the shotgun cause when you go shuck shuck the criminal automatically poops their pants and runs and turns themselves into the police"

If you're relying on a noise to save yourself you really need a plan B

Did you see a source for how many sheets of sheetrock different rounds will penetrate? Get thee to The Box 'O Truth (http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/theboxotruth.htm).....

From http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot3_2.htm :
Lessons learned:
1. Notice that the #4 and #1 Buck penetrated 6 boards. In previous tests, 9mm, .45 ACP, and M-193 out of an AR all penetrated all 12 boards.

So, it seems that these loads do not "over-penetrate" as much as some have led us to believe.

The 00 Buck penetrated 8 boards, but was stopped by the 9th. Still not as much penetration as the pistol or rifle loads.

The slug penetrated all 12 boards.

2. Once again, please notice the size of the entrance spreads....2 1/2" to 3 1/2". Therefore, anyone that says, "With a shotgun, you don't even have to aim. Just point it in the general area of the bad guy, and you can't miss", does not know what they are talking about.

You can very easily miss with a shotgun. You must aim to hit your target.

3. The slugs were "bad" penetrators. By that, I mean that they will penetrate several interior walls. If you have loved ones in your home, consider this as you select your home defense weapon.

4. I "racked" the shotgun several times during the tests, and no bystanders lost control of their bowels.
Conclusion: Racking a shotgun will not make the bad guy faint.

Frankly, I was surprised that the shotgun did not penetrate more than it did. I had been led to believe that they penetrated more than a .223 rifle or a 9mm or .45 ACP. Such was not the case.

Amazing what you can learn by doing a little testing.

For various reasons, which I wont bother mentioning so as to avoid any flame wars, for "general" HD duty I think the 12 ga. shotgun is superior to almost any rifle.

Still, I would not mind owning an AR-15 one day. But, even then, it would only be used for HD if nothing else were available at that time.

They have also more stopping power per shot than any other small arm a person is likely to use, for this purpose.

Not true, almost any rifle round, including the poodle shooter 5.56 NATO have much better terminal effectiveness than shot guns. That is why almost all entry teams only use the shotgun for breaching anymore. The carbines are much more effective.

Real life, blows many myths and unsubstantiated opinions all to hell.

Go figure.

Fred

I thought PD's are moving to 5.56 for a combination of range and penetration of body armor.

Do you honestly think 5.56 Nato does more damage more quickly than a 12 gauge slug or OO buckshot? Thats ridiculous. The slug would put a huge hole through someone and thats not even considering possible expansion, aswell as the tremendous kinetic energy that would be transfered. OO Buckshot can put nine holes throgh a person compared to the rifle rounds one and each seperate hole is larger than the 5.56 round. The police departments probably adopted 5.56 for its greater potential penetration and the high capacity relative to shotguns of the AR-15.

Yes, I agree, this is stupid.


You wouldnt hunt a deer with a 223, but a slug has no problems with quick and efficient death.

How in the world would it be different in a human?

You wouldnt hunt a deer with a 223, but a slug has no problems with quick and efficient death.
Maybe you wouldn't. One of my co-workers took a 10 point whitetail last year with a 55 grain Nosler ballistic tip .223. He's a retired police officer who was hunting with his personal AR-15 because he was still on recoil restriction months after open heart surgery. The .223 ballistic tip round entered the chest, and literally vaporized the heart and lungs. There was no exit wound, but a massive puddle of blood came out of the entrance wound. The deer walked about ten yards, then laid down, and died.
The police departments probably adopted 5.56 for its greater potential penetration
I thought PD's are moving to 5.56 for a combination of range and penetration of body armor.
Police departments are not using M193 or M855 ball; or the Hornady DOE penetrator load in their AR-15s. They're using rounds like Hornady TAP, loaded with SST (Hornady's version of the ballistic tip) to minimize overpenetration in urban environments (yes, even compared to buckshot from a shotgun).
Do you honestly think 5.56 Nato does more damage more quickly than a 12 gauge slug or OO buckshot? Thats ridiculous. The slug would put a huge hole through someone and thats not even considering possible expansion, aswell as the tremendous kinetic energy that would be transfered.
Here in reality, where the laws of physics are still very much at work, you get very little energy transfer when the round passes through the target. It keeps flying with most of its energy retained.

Do you honestly think 5.56 Nato does more damage more quickly than a 12 gauge slug or OO buckshot? Thats ridiculous. The slug would put a huge hole through someone and thats not even considering possible expansion, aswell as the tremendous kinetic energy that would be transfered.

Yes. Some times.
Depends on the load and other factors.


http://www.brassfetcher.com/M855bareblock1.html (http://www.brassfetcher.com/M855bareblock1.html)

http://www.hornadyle.com/assets/uploads/556_NATO_75_BTHP_WC_T2_4website.jpg

http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Ballistic_Gel_Experiments/BTAmmoLabsTest3/Test3_files/GP90.jpg (http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Ballistic_Gel_Experiments/BTAmmoLabsTest3/Test3_files/GP90.jpg)

http://www.jesseshunting.com/photopost/data/500/medium/WallProfile.jpg (http://www.jesseshunting.com/photopost/data/500/medium/WallProfile.jpg)

http://saxtech.eu/Zielwirkung/wound1.gif



http://www.stripersonline.com/surftalk/attachment.php?attachmentid=229358&d=1237785481
(http://www.stripersonline.com/surftalk/attachment.php?attachmentid=229358&d=1237785481)
http://www.brassfetcher.com/12gaugeFBITest32.html

http://www.chuckhawks.com/energy_transfer_12ga.jpg

http://saxtech.eu/Zielwirkung/Frog.html

I think the core of this debate centers around which particular load is used in either a rifle or a shotgun. Both can certainly be "one shot stoppers," depending on the chosen load (or caliber in the case of the rifle).

To me, though, I prefer the shotgun (pump shotgun anyway) because of its inherent reliability vs. say, a semi-auto rifle. In addition, the shotgun does afford a better chance of actually hitting an intruder. Now, before you begin the flames, I am certainly aware of "spread patterns" at the usual HD ranges. And yes, Im also aware that even shotguns need to be "aimed" vs. simply "sweeping and praying." Anyway, we are looking at roughly a 1 1/2" to 2" diameter of shot vs. (approximately) 1/4" to 1/2" or so; slugs, Im thinking, fall somewhere in between the two. Regardless, to me at least, the SG increases the odds of not only hitting an assailant but striking a vital area with enough energy for a potential one shot stop (depending on the chosen load). Of course, the semi-auto rifle can make up for certain things (lack of speed vs. the pump shotgun)...but, then again, so can the semi-auto SG.

Again, Im not disavowing the rifles effectiveness, Im just of the mind that more can be accomplished with the SG w/less "effort." For instance, I cannot guarantee that I would even have the time to properly shoulder any long gun during an HD encounter. Therefore, I would certainly feel more comfortable "hip shooting" a SG vs. a rifle...if absolutely necessary.

After all is said and done, the rifle seems to be more of a precision based weapon, with the shotgun being more of a "point and shoot" weapon. For me at least, if absolutely nothing else, the "point and shoot" nature of the SG makes it much more suitable for HD.

I think I would grab either a pistol for maneuverability or my winchester 1300 12gauge for knockdown power if I'm able to get to a bedroom for better positioning. AR-15 is a great gun, but I think I would feel more comfortable with one of the other options for what I'll need it for in my house.

After all is said and done, the rifle seems to be more of a precision based weapon, with the shotgun being more of a "point and shoot" weapon. For me at least, the "point and shoot" characteristic is more suitable for HD.

The bead and rib (or grooved receiver) arrangement makes for a good sight picture, and is simple and fast. All good attributes. One could do a lot worse.

Bigger hole= more damage

more wounds=more damage than less wounds

All other things being equal.

Of course there is 5.56 frangible ammunition that can be used, but the .223 bullet is so small it still doesn't make up for the difference in mass.

I can't believe I am even having this conversation, some people just want to believe that the AR-15 and everything that comes with it is perfect, with such people there can be no debate. Go ahead live in your fantasy.

Bigger hole= more damage

more wounds=more damage than less wounds

All other things being equal.
All other things being equal is the key, because they're not equal. You're not taking into account permanent wound cavitation caused by hydrostatic shock.
Of course there is 5.56 frangible ammunition that can be used, but the .223 bullet is so small it still doesn't make up for the difference in mass.
Ballistic tip ammo is not frangible. The lack of mass is made up for by driving that mass at so high a velocity that it has enough energy to create a permanent wound channel by way of hydrostatic shock. Buckshot doesn't do so well in this area. Slugs do it, but they're very likely to pass through the target, which causes a liability issue. You can also get saboted ballistic tip slugs, but you need a rifled shotgun bbl with rifle sights or an optic to effectively use them. You end up with a a heavy recoiling 60 caliber rifle, which takes away any advantage to using a shotgun. You might as well use a 45-70 lever action in that case.
I can't believe I am even having this conversation, some people just want to believe that the AR-15 and everything that comes with it is perfect, with such people there can be no debate. Go ahead live in your fantasy.
No, the AR-15 isn't perfect. However, the 5.56 NATO round in ballistic tip loadings offers an incredible amount of wounding capability with comparatively low overpenetration potential. Feel free to live in your fantasy where hydrostatic shock from rifle rounds isn't a wounding mechanism though.
After all is said and done, the rifle seems to be more of a precision based weapon, with the shotgun being more of a "point and shoot" weapon. For me at least, if absolutely nothing else, the "point and shoot" nature of the SG makes it much more suitable for HD.
There's the beauty of no and low magnification red dot sights. It's amazing how quickly you can acquire a target with one on any long gun (rifle or shotgun).

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/01/10/ballistic-gelatin-tests-of-wide-variety-of-ammunition/

Observation from testing the above Federal slug:



"The 16×6x6 inch block, upon being struck with the projectile, flipped 1.5 feet into the air and off of the test stand. Permanent cavity was 6” in diameter, until 10.5” depth."


I am not denying that 5.56 is a very deadly round and a messy one usually because it breaks apart quite a bit often, I do however think a 12 gauge slug is significantly more potent as a man stopper in the short term.

There's the beauty of no and low magnification red dot sights. It's amazing how quickly you can acquire a target with one on any long gun (rifle or shotgun).

My point is that you may not get such a chance. If not, "shooting from the hip" or something to that affect, may become necessary. In this case, I would feel better equipped with the shotgun...regardless of the sighting system used (including laser systems). Although, I will admit that laser sighting devices can help in target acquisition via unorthodox angles. However, I dont currently use them, so I must go with what is available to me.

I can be reassured that if I cannot afford a rifle, the a pump shotgun will be a good choice for HD.

iyn, I believe the carbine is a better choice in general than a shotgun.

Despite what some have said, I believe sighting is easier with an AR-15 than a shotgun (making good hits at 100 meters with an AR-15 or similar platform is easy for most people, but most shooters have a hard time making decent hits at the same distance with a shotgun).
I believe .223 poses less risk of overpenetration through an adversary than effective shotgun rounds. Despite what half of "everyone seems to know" expanding high-velocity rounds usually penetrate less than slower ones in tissue. This is especially true when the high-velocity rounds are lightly constructed, as many .223 bullets are.
I believe clearing malfunctions is easier with an AR-15 than shotgun. The drill is exactly like most autoloading handguns- tap, rack, bang. Too easy. Any serious malfunction with a shotgun will be hard to clear.
I believe good .223 ammunition is almost as effective at close range as the best 12 gauge ammunition, and any .223 or 5.56x45mm that's not a close-range training round will be more effective than most 12 gauge ammunition.
I believe the carbine will allow more hostiles/targets to be addressed in less time than a shotgun;
the carbine holds many more rounds than the shotgun;
the carbine can be reloaded much more quickly than the shotgun;
the carbine is more range-versatile, allowing hits from contact distance to 300 meters without ammunition changes;
the lack of recoil means it's easier to train inexperienced shooters on the carbine.

NOW, having said all that, I believe the very BEST reason to choose a shotgun for defense is either because the shooter already owns a shotgun, but not a carbine, OR because funds are limited. The 12 gauge shotgun, with practice and good ammunition selection, is still a highly effective close-range tool. It is powerful, and if a slide-action, fast enough with practice. If it's what you have the funds for, make a good choice, practice, and breathe easy. :)

John

Both the 12 gauge and the .223 are great home defense weapons. In a likely HD distance shooting of a bad guy's COM with a shotgun, buckshot is not going to have the spread to really take advantage of the multi projectile function. If you live in a rural area where intruders on property might need some investigation, thats different.

A slug will easily demolish a chest cavity, as will buckshot and a good .223. Basically a good COM shot with any of the three is likely to create similar actual damage to the target. It might look different. The slug is likely to leave a big exit wound and a expanding/frangible .223 isnt, but destroyed organs are destroyed organs.

Do you honestly think 5.56 Nato does more damage more quickly than a 12 gauge slug or OO buckshot? Thats ridiculous

No I don't think it does, I know it does. I have witnessed it, multiple times. It's that real life thingy going on, once again real life blows all those myths and unsubstantiated opinions to hell.

Understand the difference between the 12ga and a proper 5.56 NATO bullet isn't as far apart as that 12ga and any handgun caliber.

Remember we are talking about effect on a human target, not jello, the rifle/carbine is supreme.

I like the Shotgun platform for several defense applications, better than a rifle or carbine. But the rifle/carbine with proper pullets (just like with a hand gun or shotgun) has a superior effect on target, lighter, less recoil, higher rate of fire, more accurate, and most importantly, More fire power. The rifle/carbine is generally a superior fighting weapon, particularly up close and personal. Put'em down fast, and keep'em down.

If the Bad guy should be found in your loved ones bedroom, that accuracy may become very important. I would not want even the small spread of buck shot. And if you are using slugs inside, why are you using a shotgun to simulate a rifle in the first place, almost all disadvantages, and very few advantages.

Go figure.

Fred

No I don't think it does, I know it does. I have witnessed it, multiple times. It's that real life thingy going on, once again real life blows all those myths and unsubstantiated opinions to hell.

In my experience a 1 oz 12 gauge slug does significantly more damage than a 5.56 round. I've shot animals with both and the effects of a slug are notably different than that of a 5.56 round. Consider the following

How many debates do you see about whether a slug is adequate or ethical to use on deer? How many for the .223?

How many people have you heard of carrying an AR in 5.56 (I know of a guide in Alaska who uses a .50 Beowulf) for bear defense? How many a SG with slugs?

The energy of each. Energy is not the whole story of course but still. Comparing a 437.5 grain .72 diameter hunk of lead traveling 1500-1900 FPS to a .223 diameter 55-75 grain projectile traveling 3200-2600+/- fps is silly. A 2 3/4" slug at 1500 FPS has more than 1000 Ft Lbs of energy than a 75 grain Hornady TAP 5.56 round. I think the 5.56 is up to HD. I own multiple carbines chambered in it. That said, I have never seen a 5.56 round that I think would do more damage than a slug. A 5.56 carbine might have certain advantages over a 12 gauge loaded with slugs but power is not one of them.

And if you are using slugs inside, why are you using a shotgun to simulate a rifle in the first place, almost all disadvantages, and very few advantages.

I think the discussion above answers that nicely. One doesn't need to make 100 meter shots for HD. It is very very improbable that one would need 30 rounds. I am not saying that a carbine is a bad choice or that a slug gun is a better choice. I am merely pointing out that some of the rifles advantages do not really matter for HD. I have and use both SGs and carbines. I honestly believe that the one a person has training with is proficient with is the best choice. For me personally I vacilate between the two. I do really like a suppressed carbine for HD though.

the carbine can be reloaded much more quickly than the shotgun;

This depends on the shotgun. A magwell equiped saiga can be reloaded pretty quick. I would wager an AR is quicker on average but not that much.


I know it does. I have witnessed it, multiple times. It's that real life thingy going on,

Would you care to elaborate?

I like to use a pistol, specifically a 1911 loaded with .45acp as I like to have a hand free if need be. I also carry the pistol and train with it at every range trip, not so with rifle/shotgun. The shotgun is a backup to the pistol for me, specifically a Remington 870.

I see no reason to use a rifle in my home for defense, it just isn't that long that I would need the long range effectiveness of a rifle over my pistol and shotgun.

I have actually shot deer sized animals with both rifle rounds and shotgun slugs. I have been using the .243 winchester the last few years and the shotgun is a 12 guage. Within 40 yards (much longer distances than inside my house) the shotgun slug dropped the deer instantly in both instances, the .243 winchester did not. I can only imagine the .223 would be either the same or less impressive than the .243 winchester, which did the job but the deer did have a chance to run a little ways. When I say instantly, I mean it just plowed the deer over and the thing didn't move after. It surprised me the first time I shot one using a slug.

reason i would rather have my Bushmaster instead of a shotgun is cuz i know how to shoot and hit what i aim at, shotgun is good for those who dont have much range time you can just point and shoot without aiming and still hit the target you have a wider chance of hitting the target with a shotgun then an AR15.

but the pros is what if the BG has body armor? i would opt for the AR15 cuz alot of Bg these days are getting a side order of body armor to go with their handgun for armed robberies cuz they are adapting to the evironment - alot more homeowners are arming themselves.

best bet is get an AR15 with a 16 inch barrel and a flashlight mounted on the front-and the Magazine filled with FMJ you have a devastating weapon to even hit the bad guy trying to take cover .

I wonder what the 1 shot stopping power of a 12 gauge 00 Buck to the chest is?....:)

I love these threads, some people use facts, some people use fiction, some mix and match.
A shotgun is a fine choice for home defense, but it is not a magic wand
A carbine (AR or other) is a fine choice for home defense, also not a magic wand

I would not break into a house that was protected with either.

It comes down to what rounds you are using in the firearm. Slugs will over penetrate, as will FMJ. the overpenetration poses a risk to my family, making neither one of these a viable option. I care less about what it would do to a neighbor than what it would do to a member of my own family in theevent of a miss.
And miss you will, the talk i hear of shooting from the hip is frightening. I have been in combat, it is hard enough to hit a man when you are aiming at him, at close ranges. Let alone adrenaline pumping not aiming at close ranges.
I use a carbine with appropriate ammo for defense, 3-4 rounds into a targets chest will put him down. I also have a shotgun with appropriate loads for defense, 2 rounds in the chest will also work. I also have a pistol, battlerifle, pistol-carbine etc.
firearms are nothing more than ammo delivery devices, whatever the end user can use to put the accurate fire into the badguy the quickest is the answer.
I feel more confident using the carbine, but I have spent many years training to double tap (or controlled pair if you will) a man in the same room, a carbine is my choice. someone who has spent more time using a shotgun will have a different choice, no choice is more valid than the other.
But dont assume that one is a poor substitute or compromise over the other, or that the 5.56 will not put a man down, I am alive because it did. Likewise can be said for the 12 gauge.

one more thing, dont ever rely on the one stop shot. If you shoot once, and just assume you have hit the threat, you have wasted time, and the threat has gained time. Put 2 rounds from the pump gun into the target.

To me, though, I prefer the shotgun (pump shotgun anyway) because of its inherent reliability vs. say, a semi-auto rifle.

You know, I missed this earlier, and I would like to address it. So many things actually come down to personal preference, but I do NOT believe this is one.

So: I believe slide-action shotgun tend to be inherently more reliable than autoloading ones (even though prone to operator-induced malfs by short-stroking).

I believe military autoloading carbines are an order of magnitude more reliable than slide-actions shotguns. In my experience, it is considerably more common to encounter a bad shotgun shell than a bad rifle round. I believe this is largely a matter of construction- brass and copper are stronger than plastic.

Broken, Foster slugs at close range tend to not penetrate as deeply as 00 buckshot. "Slugs will overpenetrate" is an authoritative statement, but not necessarily true. It's also interesting to me that anyone who has put down (several?) enemy troops with a 5.56x45mm finishes that statement with "...as will FMJ". There's no good reason in most states to defend your house with FMJ when good expanding ammunition is available, but almost all .223 FMJ is NOT known as being very overpenetrative. What unit did you say you were with?


John

Im not sure what you were trying to say/ask there. anything with sufficient mass and speed to penetrate a person deep enough to cause incapacatation runs the risk of overpenetrating, you are correct, not all slugs will overpenetrate all the time, but the risk is always present, as for the 5.56 round, the 62 grain green tips are notorious for overpenetrating. that is why i will not use them in my home
steps can be taken to lessen this, but the risk is always present, soft pointed slugs and lesser grain 5.56 with the appropriate tips help. but dont make the mistake of thinking that they cannot overpenetrate
And if you must know what units i was in, I was with the 3rd ID for OIF 1, and the transitional MATT team run with tenth group in OIF 3, after my injury i helped out at the designated marksman school at benning, until i was med boarded

Hey a fellow broken TV patch man. What brigade/battalion were you in? I was in the 3rd brigade, 1/30 inf. Did OIF 1 and 3 with them.

I too have seen the green tips completely penetrate a bad guy on several occasions. Now most of the time the exit wounds were pretty nasty, leading me to believe the bullet was probably tumbling or in pieces as it exited.

M855 is more expensive, and harder to find for the average citizens. I'm fairly sure, if you're talking about .223/5.56mm, most shooters are automatically going to assume you mean M193 when you say FMJ, unless you specify "green tip" or M855

I was with the 1st of the 25th when I was first active, but later deployed with the 45th ID.

John

The shotgun has been a home defense gun for generations and is acceptable by our society today as such. The AR-15 is considered an OFFENSIVE weapon and is not accepted by most in our society as a home defense gun. That said, a prudent person should use a shotgun. The black gun will give lawyers in court the advantage and you could be prosecuted for using it. This has already happened . my 2 cents

Virtually anything, no matter how absolutely ludicrous, you could mention "has happened". My father was sued after a traffic accident (the other party's fault) because the other driver injured himself jumping out of his truck cab to see if Dad was okay after the accident. Hey, it's happened. :rolleyes:

We actually want to deal with probabilities. As long as you're not in a rabidly anti-S/HD state, if you have a good shoot, you should have no problems. If you are in such a state, you'll likely have some issues regardless of your firearm choice.

Incidentally, in court, common "knowledge" is easily and commonly refuted with expert testimony. Since many police departments are going to the AR instead of or to supplement the shotgun, the reasons for this make a very good defense. ;)

John

In Texas for the last number of years, I have not heard any spin on the lagitamacy of a SD incident based on the firearm used.

i was in 4\64 for the most of it, go broken tv patch

Go, electric strawberry! Go thunderbird! :D

and to those worried about civil prosecution after the fact, id much rather be alive and worried about a trial than the alternative. always better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6. i'll take my day in court with my evil black rifle

I believe military autoloading carbines are an order of magnitude more reliable than slide-actions shotguns. In my experience, it is considerably more common to encounter a bad shotgun shell than a bad rifle round. I believe this is largely a matter of construction- brass and copper are stronger than plastic.

Based on this description, the reliability (or lack thereof) is related to the load itself and not the platform. Yes? Plus, it seems that any weapon left on its own to do the "grunt work" would certainly be more prone to malfunction as a whole (even assuming quality ammo is used for both the semi-auto and the pump) vs. a weapon more reliant upon "manual intervention."

Broken, Foster slugs at close range tend to not penetrate as deeply as 00 buckshot. "Slugs will overpenetrate" is an authoritative statement, but not necessarily true. It's also interesting to me that anyone who has put down (several?) enemy troops with a 5.56x45mm finishes that statement with "...as will FMJ". There's no good reason in most states to defend your house with FMJ when good expanding ammunition is available, but almost all .223 FMJ is NOT known as being very overpenetrative. What unit did you say you were with?

Im not sure if this was addressed to me, but I did not mention slugs. But, now that you mention it, I do not condone their use for HD. In terms of 00 buckshot, it seems that this particular load is not nearly the "vast penetrator" many individuals think it is.

Regardless, my main reason for voting for the SG is that I truly believe it allows for greater hit potential w/less inherent effort. Yes, the SG needs to be "aimed," similar to the rifle; however, Im betting the SG is a bit more forgiving if a proper "mount" is not an option at the time. In addition, maximum "spread" or not, we are still looking at over 2 to 3 times the entrance pattern/size (and depending on the load...affording plenty of velocity/stopping power) when comparing the shotgun to the rifle; thus, Im thinking, increasing the odds of hitting something vital in the hopes of stopping a violent attack "on the spot." Now, the mulitple target/capacity thing...yes, the carbine could prove superior. But, again, given the point and shoot nature of the SG vs the rifle, I still think that within typical HD ranges, the SG is the better choice overall.

Of course, I will admit that Im a bit biased in that I cannot afford to drop $1500 (accessories and such) on an AR-15 or something similar.

Regardless, whether using a rifle or SG, its a decent bet that one would be well prepared for all but the most unconventional HD situation when meeting such a situation with a formidable long gun.

its only a better choice if you can afford the miss, some of us cant have stray projectiles plowing through our house, this might just be my situation, but in my house i need to know where every round is going, and cant afford to have a hipshot go sort of near the target.

once again, not knocking the shotgun for hd, just stressing the importance of aiming when there are friendlies in the house

its only a better choice if you can afford the miss, some of us cant have stray projectiles plowing through our house, this might just be my situation, but in my house i need to know where every round is going, and cant afford to have a hipshot go sort of near the target.

Are you referring to the SG or the rifle? When I say "hipshot" Im simply referring to a situation that may come up, given the lack of time necessary for a "proper" mount. Im not just centering on "hipshooting" here, but any unconventional angle(s) which may become forced upon an individual. In this case, Id personally prefer the SG over a rifle.

once again, not knocking the shotgun for hd, just stressing the importance of aiming when there are friendlies in the house

Yes...I agree. But, again, you may not have such a chance. Take "aiming" out of the equation and which would you rather have? The SG or the rifle?

Keep in mind...awareness (of where "innocents" are currently located) is just as, no...more, important than which weapon/load you are using. As I have mentioned before, there is no substitute for carelessness or bravado.

Any effective HD load/caliber can penetrate or go astray and cause vast collateral damage. Yes, the weapon provides the means (I dont care if its a shotgun, rifle or handgun), but the owner is responsible for everything else.

Keep in mind...awareness (of where "innocents" are currently located) is just as, no...more, important than which weapon/load

How long would that take in just the average family of four? Once the kids are walking, once you let your eyes on them/can't hear them, frankly you don't really know where in the house they are, let alone possibly being outside.

Same thing is doubly true of the wife, she just won't stay where she's told :)

Insight, why would you ask if something was addressed to you that begins with another poster's user name (http://www.iolani.honolulu.hi.us/Keables/KeablesGuide/PartFour/Commas.htm#12), and addresses comments they made?

Some one, in an earlier posting, asked me to “elaborate” on how I could make the statement, while discussing the effectiveness of 5.56 NATO vs. Shotgun slugs on humans: “I know it does. I have witnessed it, multiple times. It's that real life thingy going on”

My “elaboration” to fulfill your request:

10+ years in the Marine Corps 1966-1976, Two tours with the 3rd Marine Division in Vietnam 1967, 68, 69. We/I spent most of my 25 months on or about the DMZ/Laos area fighting primarily the NVA vs. the VC. Except for one operation of about 3 months in length I spent troopin and poopin in the bush in an area known as the “Arizona Territory“ SouthWest of Danang. At that time little did I know I would end up living in Arizona, I was a Florida boy. (that is what marrying a Los Angeles girl caused. Cause I would not live in California. One of the best decisions of my life, and time has only reinforced that choice.) By the way, I forgot to duck a couple times and had a successful career as a bullet stop too.

I was a Drill Instructor in 1971 at MCRD San Diego.

Please tell me how many times I had to have been “over run” and/or gone hand to hand combat, to be qualified to know something/anything about CQB to your standards. I don’t know what your standards are, but my guess is I might be able to qualify on both counts. (by the way, I was one of the “few & Proud” that got to play in what folks these days call MOUT. We didn't usually play that way in those days. I only got to do that one time for about 3 weeks in early 1968. But I think that would give some directly applied experience to this subject too.)

Some of my firefights were eventually called “battle’s” and a couple evolved into “siege’s”. Later I worked for a Sheriffs Dept, (just a side note: Because of my knowledge of fighting weapons I was placed on the weapons selection panel for that dept) and later I worked for the Florida Dept of Corrections (shot on our institutions Pistol team too). Been shooting since the early 1950’s and competing since the late 50’s, and still compete. Started Hunting in the early 60’s. For health reasons, I don’t hunt any more though.

Then I became a Registered Nurse and went on to became a CCRN (Critical Care RN) among many of my Critical care or ICU type assignments included Trauma ICU, Cardiac (Heart) transplant, Surgical, Cardio Vascular, Medical and Cardiac ICU‘s, and my last assignment before medical retirement was in an inner city ER. So I have a smidgen of experience on the damage the different weapons and ammunition do to the human body too. I would always be much more interested in Gun Shot cases than most because of my combat experience, along with the knowledge and enjoyment of the shooting sports. I have been on all sides of this REAL COMBAT shooting, wounding and killing thing.

I Hope that is a full enough “elaboration” of my “credentials” for you. I am sure your “elaboration” is “better” than mine.

AS to the OP’s question, I believe we are quibbling here. I believe, based on my own experience and knowledge, that the carbine/rifle is more effective by a small margin than the shotgun in most cases. And both the shotgun and rifle/carbine’s superiority, with appropriate ammunition, in CQB is vastly superior to ANY HANDGUN’S, regardless of ammunition used in the handgun, even the “good stuff“. (also the shoulder weapon is easier to deploy, intrinsically more accurate in use, and makes a better baseball bat if it comes to that). The smaller, shorter ranges that may be necessary in many smaller dwellings, desperately require the effectiveness on target of either type Shoulder weapon MUCH MORE than inside a bigger house with longer halls and bigger rooms. Yea, it does seem contra indicated. But it isn’t, if you really do understand the problem/situation. The closer the bad guy will be to you when you are able to get fire on him, the more effective your weapon had better be, not less. You will need all the "stopping power" small arms can deliver, that doesn't include handguns, unless you are unlucky or ignorant of the problem/situation.

Either the shotgun or rifle/carbine will do it well, and I would not feel badly served or under gunned with either. I use both in my own home. (Next to my bed are both a shotgun and a carbine set up for Home Defense and ready to roll. My handguns are purely secondary in nature in this defense environment. While up and about I do wear my CCW, of late most often a Springfield Professional, while in the house.) I do believe, the carbine, is the better platform and cartridge on most counts. That’s all. But then my “elaboration” being what it is, you can see I really only have limited experience and knowledge of the subject.

Now I recommend that everyone go get some training (particularly those without combat experience, but we all need and can use it), which is much more important than whether you are going to be using a shotgun or carbine, quality practice a lot, get more training. Do the reconnaissance of your dwelling and neighborhood, keep it currant, learn your dwelling/ground, set up several plans ‘A’, ‘B’, ‘C’ etc.. plan your defenses in depth and layers, harden your dwelling in as many practical way’s as you can. Get the best weapons and ammunition you can afford, as soon as you can, so as to get that training and quality practice with those weapons. (Unfortunately most folks answer to home defense is "I got a gun" period.)

Remember the bad guy(s) get a vote and often a veto on any of your plans or idea’s, whether you like it or not or agree or not. Those SOB's will probably have the unmitigated gall to want to live and not die when you want them to, and may even try to hurt or kill you and your loved ones. Get more quality training, quality practice too not just shooting at the range, maintain your fighting weapons. Include your family in as much of the training, practice, planning, and drills as practical and possible. Don't allow "It will never happen to me/us or here" to set in. Guess which kind of folks it does most happen to, yup, those who don't believe it can happen to them, here, and now.

Understand that there is a very good possibility of you being hurt or possibly killed in this fight. If you expect to be hurt, it will not surprise you when or if you are hurt. (get a trauma kit to add to your first aid kit) That should help keep you from getting shocked or stop fighting if you are wounded or injured. Never forget why and what you are fighting for, never give up. Keep your “eye” on the problem.

Remember being, looking or sounding cool doesn’t count in a REAL gunfight. Trying to prove you were “right” using your weak handgun instead of an effective shoulder weapon(s), training and quality practice with the shoulder weapon(s) will not gain you any points in that real world fight either. There is a good chance that the bad guys may appreciate that you chose a handgun to fight them rather than a shoulder weapon, but otherwise I can’t figure out any other advantage that favors the handgun, except convenience and/or cool factor.

Have a practical intelligent and REAL plan to win, and you will probably win, If you can execute it with all the intensity and energy you can muster. (mindset) If you fail to plan, you may just fail, and in these situations failure should not be an “unplanned” option. Fix it now.

I truly Pray that no one here will ever have to use any of these plans. A REAL gunfight win or lose, will change you and your loved ones in that house for ever.

I no longer fight the NVA to stay alive, now I fight the VA to stay alive.

Go figure.

Fred

M855 is more expensive, and harder to find for the average citizens. I'm fairly sure, if you're talking about .223/5.56mm, most shooters are automatically going to assume you mean M193 when you say FMJ, unless you specify "green tip" or M855

I was with the 1st of the 25th when I was first active, but later deployed with the 45th ID.

John
I agree with you 100 percent there J. From my days in the Army I automatically think of M855 when people say FMJ. I got out of basic just a couple months before we deployed for OIF1, so I never saw M193. But I bet many of the older vets here who used M193 think of that when people say FMJ.

Cheiftain...... Holy Crap Man!! Thats a very experienced life you have there. My hats off to you. Man I remember clearing the thick palm groves and thinking "I dont know how the Nam guys did this crap everyday!"

Chieftain:

Damn good advice, and thanks for your service. Oo-rah!

(Or, like we'd say in the Army, Hooah!)

John

C-grunt,

A lot of our practice shoots were done with M193, maybe 50%. But then, we shot a LOT in 2002, especially.

J

I Hope that is a full enough “elaboration” of my “credentials” for you. I am sure your “elaboration” is “better” than mine.

I am not trying to be rude or disrespectful in anyway. I did not ask for, or question your credentials. I asked for elaboration as to what specifically has caused you to believe that a 5.56 round has better terminal ballistics than a 12 gauge slug. If you read your post you'll find very little of it actually addresses that. You state you have been in firefights but nothing as to what about those experiences lead to your conclusion.

I am pressing not to be a jerk, but to get a more full view of the subject and out of genuine interest in the subject. I can also readily appreciate that the particular experiences might not be something you care to discuss. I would certainly not press were that the case.

I am not trying to say you are wrong BTW. I will freely admit I have never shot anyone and I sincerely hope that never changes. I have, however, shot a lot of animals. I have cut some of them open and preformed "autopsies" of a sort on them. In looking at what was hit by what and the amount of damage that was done, in conjunction with how they responded when hit, how far they went etc it has produced in me the belief that a single slug is much more powerful and destructive than a single round of 5.56. I will note that "more powerful" does not forcedly equate to better for HD. There are many factors to consider.

I agree with you on a great deal of your post however. I think either is more up to the job than most people wielding them. I believe that training, skill sets and mentality will likely be more important than whether one has a shotgun or a rifle.

I would actually say, on humans, .223 is probably as effective as good 12 gauge.

Based on what I've seen shooting stuff, .223 tends to make a hell of a mess out of what it hits (depending on ammo selection, of course). 12 ga slugs at further distances tend to just bore a nice large hole all the way through. (At very close ranges, Foster slugs tend to fragment or expand.) Yes, 12 ga has more energy at close range. Yes, in general, I prefer 12 ga over .223 for deer and large animals. No, I don't think it's more effective against people, especially with good .223 ammunition and proper training (at least two shots to target).

And sub-optimal 12 ga is much worse than virtually any .223 round for S/HD. Some of this depends on distance, too. Your magic HD load of #4 birdshot may be death on home intruders at 2 meters, but have completely different effects at 7 meters. Rifle ammunition won't be nearly as range-sensitive.

j

Police officers can use force to subdue a person if necessary. However, many have been prosecuted for use of excessive force . I have several class 3 firearms that are legal. Would I use them for home defense? No way. Nor would I use one of my AR-15s either because of the excessive force clause that can be used to prosecute me for manslaughter . It would be easy to get a jury that is not in your favor if excessive force is used. There is an old saying "REMEMBER WHEN YOU MAKE YOUR BED , YOU HAVE TO LIE IN IT". Being smart is better than being sorry.

It occurs to me, one might want to mention the importance of adding a quality light to whatever you choose to employ in home defense

Police officers can use force to subdue a person if necessary. However, many have been prosecuted for use of excessive force . I have several class 3 firearms that are legal. Would I use them for home defense? No way. Nor would I use one of my AR-15s either because of the excessive force clause that can be used to prosecute me for manslaughter . It would be easy to get a jury that is not in your favor if excessive force is used. There is an old saying "REMEMBER WHEN YOU MAKE YOUR BED , YOU HAVE TO LIE IN IT". Being smart is better than being sorry.
Excessive force has to do with using to much force to subdue a suspect. If I was trying to arrest a suspect who stiffened up his arm as Im handcuffing him and I punched him in the face for it, thats excessive force.

Shooting someone is the same level of force no matter what kind of weapon you use. If you are authorized to shoot someone, the type of weapon makes no difference. If they are able to prosecute you for shooting someone with an AR-15, then they would be able to do the same if you shot him with grand-daddies scattergun.

Now that being said, if you have some super anti gun DA, the AR might get his attention. But if your shoot is good, he should have very little to go on.

Regardless, my main reason for voting for the SG is that I truly believe it allows for greater hit potential w/less inherent effort. Yes, the SG needs to be "aimed," similar to the rifle; however, Im betting the SG is a bit more forgiving if a proper "mount" is not an option at the time. In addition, maximum "spread" or not, we are still looking at over 2 to 3 times the entrance pattern/size (and depending on the load...affording plenty of velocity/stopping power) when comparing the shotgun to the rifle; thus, Im thinking, increasing the odds of hitting something vital in the hopes of stopping a violent attack "on the spot."

This is exactly why I pick the shotgun for HD over the rifle. As I mentioned earlier in this thread, the only guarenteed way to stop a determined attacker is to hit the CNS (spinal column or brain). You have greater odds of hitting the spine with a COM shot with the 9 - 15 pellets found in each 00 buck shell than with a rifle round.

Nor would I use one of my AR-15s either because of the excessive force clause that can be used to prosecute me for manslaughter

What level of force is above lethal? One should familiarize them self with the statutes and case law of their state and the inclinations of law enforcement and the DA's office, but, generally speaking, if lethal force is justified then rifle vs shotgun vs pistol is probably a non issue. Where I live I do not see it as mattering one bit. An AR, an AK, a 18" barreled shotgun with extended mag tube and flashlight, a .22LR target pistol, a 30-30 lever gun, all are the same level of force. Admittedly some might look worse to a gun ignorant jury, but that is not really a level of force issue. It also requires the case going to a jury which it is much less likely to do if it is a good shoot. It is also more likely to be a good shot if one knows the law and has training. This will help keep them from making bad choices such as instigating a problem and then resulting to the use of their weapon etc. I'd be MUCH more concerned with the circumstance of the shooting than the particular weapon used

Insight, why would you ask if something was addressed to you that begins with another poster's user name, and addresses comments they made?

Answer: I simply was not paying close enough attention as, during that time, I had several things going on at once.

Not to nitpick, but I didnt necessarily "ask," per se. Rather, I inferred... and then commenced with taking my place behind that proverbial pulpit. ;) :)

Im not sure if this was addressed to me, but I did not mention slugs. But, now that you mention it, I do not condone their use for HD.

-------------------

I would actually say, on humans, .223 is probably as effective as good 12 gauge.

Based on what I've seen shooting stuff, .223 tends to make a hell of a mess out of what it hits (depending on ammo selection, of course). 12 ga slugs at further distances tend to just bore a nice large hole all the way through. (At very close ranges, Foster slugs tend to fragment or expand.) Yes, 12 ga has more energy at close range. Yes, in general, I prefer 12 ga over .223 for deer and large animals. No, I don't think it's more effective against people, especially with good .223 ammunition and proper training (at least two shots to target).

And sub-optimal 12 ga is much worse than virtually any .223 round for S/HD. Some of this depends on distance, too. Your magic HD load of #4 birdshot may be death on home intruders at 2 meters, but have completely different effects at 7 meters. Rifle ammunition won't be nearly as range-sensitive.

00 Buckshot anybody? Low Recoil 00 Buckshot? Certainly more than effective enough within typical HD ranges...without as much "training" or precise aiming, so to speak. Magic wand? No. Requiring less accuracy vs. the rifle? IMHO, yes. Not everyone involved in a violent HD encounter may get more than one or two chances at hitting/stopping their attacker. To add, not everyone may get the chance to properly shoulder/mount a rifle for an effective shot. I guess what Im saying is, I think the shotgun is a bit more forgiving regarding available options.


Either the shotgun or rifle/carbine will do it well, and I would not feel badly served or under gunned with either. I use both in my own home. (Next to my bed are both a shotgun and a carbine set up for Home Defense and ready to roll. My handguns are purely secondary in nature in this defense environment. While up and about I do wear my CCW, of late most often a Springfield Professional, while in the house.) I do believe, the carbine, is the better platform and cartridge on most counts. That’s all. But then my “elaboration” being what it is, you can see I really only have limited experience and knowledge of the subject.

Now I recommend that everyone go get some training (particularly those without combat experience, but we all need and can use it), which is much more important than whether you are going to be using a shotgun or carbine, quality practice a lot, get more training. Do the reconnaissance of your dwelling and neighborhood, keep it currant, learn your dwelling/ground, set up several plans ‘A’, ‘B’, ‘C’ etc.. plan your defenses in depth and layers, harden your dwelling in as many practical way’s as you can. Get the best weapons and ammunition you can afford, as soon as you can, so as to get that training and quality practice with those weapons. (Unfortunately most folks answer to home defense is "I got a gun" period.)

Chieftain- You pretty much summed it up here with nice, concise (and honest) points. While I still favor the SG (mainly due to my familiarity with the weapon), your points are, again, right on.

One thing keeps coming to my mind though- Comparing these two venerable weapons, for HD purposes, is almost like being asked, "Which would you rather be run over with...(as a cliche' comparison) a Ford or a Chevy?"

The whole point of having a weapon for HD is for stopping a threat. It goes without saying that if you cant hit the threat, you wont stop it one bit. All of this talk about "which is better" basically amounts to jack squat if, again, one cannot hit the threat in such a way as to stop him/her/they cold in the tracks. Whether a handgun, shotgun or rifle...pick a weapon (caliber)/round proven to be effective for stopping an opponent, one that you feel comfortable with using and then practice and familiarize yourself with anything and everything surrounding HD. All else is essentially speculation, theory and personal preference. As far as Im concerned, these 3 things have never saved anybody.

Good post.

I guess I would like to believe some of the people asking certain questions are the least experienced here. For those people, I would suggest a carbine if they have the funds. I believe the lower carbine recoil lends itself to learning good fundamentals.

I may not agree about certain specifics, but your comment about training is certainly on the mark. Hardware will not make up for software and programming deficiencies.

J

There are many cases that show excessive force by Police officers shooting someone with Pistols and being prosecuted for it. It happens. Some are in Jail for it, even though one bad guy had a knife and was shot 42 times by 3 officers. Also in my home town an older man is serving time for excessive force for killing a teen age intruder, in his home with an AK rifle. He shot the kid 7 or 8 times. The jury was not sympathetic to him at all because of the gun he used. After that case I put my assult rifles in my gun safe with all my class 3 guns and that is where they will stay. A shotgun or a levergun rifle will do the job without me being prosecuted. Regardless I respect your opinions . Heck, I am almost 69 and do not want to play that game. No disrespect here, just a different opinion. sincerely Snooperman

killing a teen age intruder, in his home with an AK rifle.

Outside of the Fish case in AZ, I've never heard of a legit home SD shooting going against the homeowner because he "overkilled" the perp. And the Fish case was not in the home, and Fish had a BAD lawyer.

Your logic may be good advice in some jurisdictions but not for the whole of Texas as far as I can tell. Personally I think you should bring the most you can. I always shake my head when folks start threads about what cheep Bryco or Jennings quality handgun they should use for SD. They don't want to use one of their "expensive" guns for HD because they might not get it back from the police :rolleyes:

Also in my home town an older man is serving time for excessive force for killing a teen age intruder, in his home with an AK rifle. He shot the kid 7 or 8 times. The jury was not sympathetic to him at all because of the gun he used.

Maybe shooting 7 or 8 times had something to do with it, not the type of firearm used.

to me, it is NOT a very long stretch to think that a judge and more importantly a JURY wouldnt be swayed by the fact someone used a


OMG! AK-47!


even an AR I would be more comfortable using, it is "Americas Rifle" in the eyes of most people. As opposed to a "Terrorist Machine Gun".


I think this IS a legitimate concern, and yet another checkmark in the box for a shotgun.

Shotgun people, it kills better, its more PC, its cheap to replace when they confiscate it, its just downright THE choice.



Now my wife doesnt like the shotgun, so its a pistol for her. She is lukewarm to the AR.

I am not sure that there is one correct answer. Everyone's situation and requirements are different. There is no one-size-fits-all scenario here.

I personally would prefer to use a carbine but... because of the neighborhood I live in and being in close proximity to neighbors, I could not, in good conscience, endanger them with over-penetration of rifle fire.

When I lived in rural WV this was a no-brainer for me. But here... I struggle with what I want to do and what I feel is the correct course of HD for me, and my neighbors. I am surrounded in every direction by neighbors.

Here is where I live. Does anyone disagree that this is not a carbine safe environment? As stated earlier, I don't think there is a blanket answer to this question.

http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z126/instag8r/Capture.jpg
(BTW, you can tell this photo was taken on a Monday, the garbage cans are out)

Tim,

I think you could use an AR15 with the right ammo, or a SG with the right ammo.

Does anyone disagree that this is not a carbine safe environment?

There is a segment of this board's population that either believe you can take only "can't miss" shots (so over penetration is not a problem) or sending lead into a neighbors house is ok because either a) memorize when they are home, b) their lives are insignificant compared to your own, or c) they will learn a valuble lesson about not wearing body armor.

Personally, if I were you, I'd chose my ammo on the conservative side in case you miss a shot but still go with a carbine. As far as guns go, the SG or a 5.56 carbine seem to give the best performance in stopping power for a given level of acceptable penetration.

J.Shirley could be correct in the 8 or 9 shot thing too. And TimM, I do think where you live and the type of people there can make a big difference. There really are no absolutes when it comes to the use of guns to kill another person. Attitudes seem to vary from place to place. I know for many years I kept my Colt SP1 Ar-15 near my bed each night. One thing is for sure , the media always show the assault rifles in a different light than a pump shotgun and will play it up too, and the Anti gun groups start their feeding frenzy.

Historically, the shotgun has been with us as a homestead protector for as long as we have had a country. And the lever action rifle or carbine has been seen in countless movies of the old west, makes these guns far more acceptable in the view of most Americans as Home defense weapons. Today I use the coach gun and pump shotgun as well as a lever action carbine for HD. Most of my hunting on my farm is done with an old Ithaca pump shotgun and a bolt action rifle. But I do enjoy blasting away with my Colt AR-15 on the back end of the farm after hunting season.

TimM

A light weight .223 hollowpoint or other type of frangible/expanding round tend to break up rapidly when hitting walls and many times penetrate less than your typical handgun and shotgun rounds.

Also, more importantly, I would take down that map of your house. LOTS AND LOTS of crazy people on the internet.

Whoa. seriously. You just posted where you LIVE on the internet. on a GUN forum. And then said that you have a valuable and desirable high capacity weapon for someone to just stop by and pick up while you are at work.

I think before long, the choice might not be so hard cause all your guns will be gone.

I have shot wild boar on my land with the .223 bullet using my old Colt SP1and it completely came apart in his skull. I have not done penetration tests but have done some blasting at some scrap plywood on my mini range and it does not seem to penetrate as much as my lever action rifle or 12 ga buckshot loads. I do not know how it would fair in gel, but I am sure there is data somewhere on it too. I do know that OO buckshot fired at room distances can go through several layers of wall boards in a home and still have enough kinetic energy to injure someone in another room.

Some of you guys make me smile. I am not sure what nut job could find my house because when I say "this is where I live" I am meaning my neighborhood. And no where did I say that I have a valuable high capacity weapon for someone to come and steal.

I do have three large dogs and I work from home so I feel pretty safe in my neighborhood. I may be a bit naive but I am definitely not paranoid. My house is properly secured and protected. Also other peoples big screen televisions and computer equipment are far more valuable than any firearm that I own... did I mention that I am self employed and don't have very much money??

Thanks for the concerns but I am sure everything will be just fine.

It was already brought up that the identity of anyone on these forums can be found without much of an issue without needing to look at satellite photos. Why would criminals go after TimM when there are people here that post gun collection photos of dozens or hundreds of guns?

The tin foil is getting would tight today!

I wouldnt be worried about burgalry, hell I live in the ghetto. I would be more worried about a stalker.

We arrested one guy this week who was hiding in a ladies closet waiting for her to come home so he could kill her, he admitted this. One time before she thought he was in her house she called the police. No signs of entry and no one found inside the house. Turns out he was able to make a spare key for her place and when she came home with the cops, locked himself in the trunk of her car and waited several hours until she went to bed to get out.

And how did he find her? She was at a hospital one day to pick up her son and he saw her and started stalking her.

There are some seriously crazy people out there. And while its not terribly hard to find out who someone is, I try not to make it too easy.

Here you go snooperman.

http://www.brassfetcher.com/M855bareblock1.html

And this is with military surplus FMJ with penetrator. A hollowpoint or softpoint would be even more devastating and penetrate even less.

The fragmentation and penetration of the ,223 round is incredible. I wanted to get a mini 14 with a wood stock for my farm and keep it loaded up But I shot one many years ago that belonged to a friend but was never really satisfied with its accuracy. That said, for home or farm defense the mini 14 should be good enough with peep sights.

I can see that there are quite a few carbine/rifle fans here. But, for those of us who either do not have or cannot afford such a weapon, I guess its back to the tired debate of birdshot vs. buckshot. :scrutiny:

why don't you stop debating, go shoot stuff with both, and make up your mind from that?

There is a segment of this board's population that either believe you can take only "can't miss" shots (so over penetration is not a problem) or sending lead into a neighbors house is ok because either a) memorize when they are home, b) their lives are insignificant compared to your own, or c) they will learn a valuble lesson about not wearing body armor.

Well, thanks for that dramatic mischaracterization. We "own" every round we fire. EVERY. DAMN. ONE. I personally prefer using a carbine or slug because it is easier to control the paths of those single projectiles (and slugs seems to be more reliable stoppers than buckshot, aren't nearly as range dependent, etc). Make your own choices, and live with the consequences. Just don't act as those your attempts to be responsible are better than others'.

J

There is a segment of this board's population that either believe you can take only "can't miss" shots (so over penetration is not a problem) or sending lead into a neighbors house is ok because either a) memorize when they are home, b) their lives are insignificant compared to your own, or c) they will learn a valuble lesson about not wearing body armor.

I thought this worth commenting on.

A. Taking "cant miss" shots- Well, "cant miss" is subjective to say the least. I guess the correct phrase should be "taking shots that are "safe," and most likely to hit." Anyway, Im of the mind that no shot (within the home..for HD) should be attempted until the "target" has been acknowledged, positively identified and is within "practical and/or acceptable" range. Sound good so far?

Now, I understand that the opportunity to "positively identify, aim, fire" is much easier said than done when your bodily system is treating you to an adrenaline dump of a very high magnitude. Still, you cant stop what you cannot hit and you cannot "take back" any shot you make (regardless of its penetration characteristics).

Trying to ensure an assailant is "close" and "attainable through fire" has less to do with the ammo you are using and/or trying to avoid penetration issues and much more to do with effectively defending yourself, your home and your family.

In addition, I do believe this mentality/practice can certainly lessen the chances of "missing" and thus, causing collateral damage/the harming of innocents...regardless of what is fired. Heck, Im sure there are many out there who, once things go "bump" in the night, would just assume it safer to "fire at whatever moves, sounds strange" or whatnot vs. taking the time to allow for a "safer," more effective scenario to unfold before reacting. So, IMHO, this "mindset" is a positive...not a negative.


B. Memorize when they (neighbors/family) are home- Nothing wrong with this and frankly, your use of the word "memorize" may be a bit extreme. I dont think memorizing anything is the core idea here. Rather, its developing an awareness of what is going on around you and being aware of "patterns" should they exist. To NOT pay attention to such details and remain cognizant is, well, a "lazy" mistake which could, one day, prove very unfortunate.

Essentially, there is much, much more to effective HD than what load/caliber one is using.


b) their lives are insignificant compared to your own, or c) they will learn a valuble lesson about not wearing body armor.

Who thinks this way....really?

--------------


why don't you stop debating, go shoot stuff with both, and make up your mind from that?

I agree. Shooting is always much more fun (and certainly more productive) than merely arguing about what to shoot!

"Shotgun people, it kills better, its more PC, its cheap to replace when they confiscate it, its just downright THE choice."

Forgive me as this is my first post here but I can't seem to figure out how to quote properly. Anyways, that's a pretty bold statement to make right there. Now I won't even pretend to have as much experience as many of the posters in this thread, but saying something like "it kills better" and "it's just downright THE choice" reeks of hyperbole to me.

I'd just like to add something as well. Many say they can't afford a nice 5.56 carbine, but have any of you considered a Kel-Tec SU16? I'm not affiliated with them in any way and not trying to sell anyone on anything, but I think anyone who can't afford an AR or the like(and even then) should look into them. They take AR mags unlike the Mini 14 and generally have better accuracy out of the box. They're also very reliable and if you have any issues KT offers a great warranty(if there's an issue, they fix it free of charge, period).

Their polymer construction makes them very lightweight. All models offer a folding stock of some kind. The A, B, and CA models can't be fired while folded, while the C can. The A/B/CA stock can also store either 2 10rd KT mags or a 30rd GI mag. Since they don't have a pistol grip(there is a factory accessory that gives a pistol grip with the ability to mount any AR stock though) they shouldn't really be seen as "assault rifles" by any liberals who may be on your potential jury if you're concerned about that. All but the C are commufornia legal too. They also come stock with a handguard that folds into a bipod but honestly it's just a gimmick since it's flimsy when deployed and it's a pain to deploy and even more annoying to return. Makes a comfortable grip when just used as a handguard though, IMO. Accessory rail handguards are an option too. They also make a pistol variant called the PLR16 which is exactly the same gun but with a pistol grip and no stock and a 9in barrel.

But best of all is their price. Everywhere you look they're less than $600, and last I checked, my local gun shop, which is admittedly a lot cheaper than most, has C models in stock for $475. Any decent pump shotgun will be around $300, so ~$500 for a carbine shouldn't be much of a stretch. I apologize for going so far off-topic, especially in my first post on this site, but I just wanted to point out this option for those who want a 5.56 rifle/carbine but don't think they can afford it. Personally, I plan on making one of these my first rifle as soon as funds permit.

If you aren't concerned with AR mags and long range accuracy and don't trust Kel-Tec or plastic guns in general, maybe a used Mini 14 is the way to go. A few months back my brother-in-law bought one from a friend for $150. That's a screaming deal and probably not too common, but I suppose the deals are out there.

Go with what you know, feel comfortable with and yes, what you can afford. Then, focus on learning, training and awareness. After all is said and done, ones HD weapon of choice (regardless of the arguments/debates) is about improving the chances of defending life and the lives of loved ones....period.

Its a shame that, sometimes, such a noble/important thing tends to get lost within the mire of "which is better."

Please, lets move on...:banghead:

The shotgun is almost always better for close quarter combat. The rifle round will be more accurate in a hostage situation. But unless you know where that round is going to stop, It's almost always better to use a shotgun for home protection. My 5 cent's worth, adjusted for inflation

I live in a semi-urban environment in an RV van, so I chose the Remington 870, an ex- LE trade-in. In these tight quarters, I'm going to have to get a folding stock to make it more compact for storage. I'm leaning toward the Knoxx folding stock. Might keep the police walnut fore-end just 'cause I like the old school look.

BTW, it also made a darned good HD arm when I had a house.

Who thinks this way....really?


I don't know if they really think they think that, and I am not going to read through all the threads to pull out all the quotes (including from a mod or two) that justified the increased risk buckshot/slugs pose to bystanders with justifications that fit into the catergory of bystanders lives are not as important as your own or your own family.

I would not say that is completely wrong, just that personally I don't belive it is completely right.

c) they will learn a valuble lesson about not wearing body armor.

I said that as a joke, but the rest of it I was not joking, and not attacking. Just because I don't agree with the reasoning of others does not mean I attack them.

Anything from #2 birdshot to 000 buck will work just fine at HD distances - typically 15 feet or so.....

don't want over-penetration? shoot smaller buckshot. I mean, really - this thread has gone on WAAAAAY too long

shoot what you feel comfortable using

I don't know if they really think they think that, and I am not going to read through all the threads to pull out all the quotes (including from a mod or two) that justified the increased risk buckshot/slugs pose to bystanders with justifications that fit into the catergory of bystanders lives are not as important as your own or your own family.

I would not say that is completely wrong, just that personally I don't belive it is completely right.

Check out the "box of truth" in terms of comparing the shotgun to many popular handgun HD loads. I mean, do you use a handgun for HD? If so, Im betting that handgun would prove to be just as penetrative, if not a bit more than, for instance, a shotgun loaded with 00 Buck. Yet many (and I mean many) prefer handguns over shotguns, go figure.

Nobody seems to think much of the comparisons, but it is certainly worth considering. Besides, I do not think that one should be considered irresponsible simply because he/she chooses to use 00 buckshot or even slugs out of their HD weapon. Now, I will admit that I think slugs (out of almost any SG load) are much more "specific" in nature and not quite as necessary/safe for HD use. But, in terms of 00 Buckshot...not the same category.

Many (as was mentioned within another thread) seem to base their chosen load on the "what if I miss" factor. Sounds a bit defeatist if you ask me. Im more concerned with hitting (and it being effective) vs. missing. Do I lack concern for my neighbors or loved ones? Absolutely NO!! But, if something horrible is going down within the walls of my home, I want to feel confident in my weapon, my abilities, and my chosen load....all of which, hopefully, would mesh together and provide an effective means of stopping a violent or potentially violent assault in its tracks.

Regardless of this debate; rifle or shotgun...Id take either in order to preserve life.

the 5.56x45mm NATO round is effective due to the hydrostatic shock when the bullet hits the torso, it can cause more devastating wound channel then a ak47 or a 12 gauge depends on the distance and type of .223 rem bullet.

i think the best results would be a 55gr FMJ cuz the hydrostatic shock will take effect closer ot the heart then a M855 .

M193 would be better coming out of a 16 inch carbine in a thin torso like aq somolian pirate.

i prefer my Bushmaster loaded with M193 bullets for self-defense and i choose the 11.5"HBAR cuz it will give me better barrier penetration then a 16 " carbine.