FAL for Home Defense?


PDA






Fisherman12
October 8, 2012, 01:23 PM
Would a 16" barreled suppressed FAL be good for home defense?

Would overpenetration be the only concern? Are there any light .308 loads or low penetrating loads that are practical?



Also, are there any other practical self defense reasons to own an FAL? I'm trying to find an excuse to get one :D

If you enjoyed reading about "FAL for Home Defense?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
jon86
October 8, 2012, 01:34 PM
I think wanting a FAL is enough of an excuse to get one. Don't pretend that it would be good for HD though. A $200 shotgun would be better IMO. Without even discussing overpenetration, a 16" 308 is going to be LOUD and REALLY BRIGHT when you touch the bang switch.


Sorry, missed the part where you said "suppressed."

I need more coffee this morning.

DeMilled
October 8, 2012, 02:06 PM
Yes, good rifle for home defense.

Here are the Reduced Ricochet Limited Penetration rounds.
http://www.ssarmory.com/7.62x51_ammunition_168grain_barnes_ttsx_bt-2.aspx

You don't need an excuse to own an FAL.
I'd ask "What's your excuse for not owning a FAL?"

almostfree
October 8, 2012, 02:24 PM
I've got 2 and enjoy owning them, but it wouldn't be my choice for home defense. I have other rifles & pistols that fill that role better. The only excuse you need to buy one is that they are fun to shoot!

falnovice
October 8, 2012, 04:48 PM
Love Fals. It is the gun that got me to get on the internet ten years ago as I wanted to build by own.

Having said that, there are better options for Home Defense.

And having fired a .308 indoors without hearing protection before, I would certainly looks for something else.

ny32182
October 8, 2012, 04:52 PM
For a "home defense rifle" I'd go suppressed 5.56 SBR instead, because it will be MUCH shorter and lighter.

W.E.G.
October 8, 2012, 05:01 PM
What are you defending your home FROM?

Where is this standoff actually occurring?

Anybody considering mounting a defense of their townhouse with a 7.62 rifle really should consider what will be the consequences of firing that thing even one shot in closed space.

You better make that one shot count, because you likely won't be firing any more after the first one.

Do you have any idea how much blow-back gas is generated by a suppressed 7.62 rifle?
Do you realize how loud a 7.62 rifle (even a suppressed one) is in an enclosed space?

The correct gun for mounting a defense of your person in an enclosed space that you own is the same choice as is correct for mounting a defense of your person in an enclosed space that you don't own.

Answer:
Something that is maneuverable in close spaces.
Something that can be handled with one hand.
Something that can be held in such a manner than a close attacker cannot easily get hands on it.
Something that can be quickly secured and transported if you need both hands for an immediate task.
Something that will not deafen, blind or asphyxiate you on the first shot.

A 14-pound rifle in large caliber aint it.

nathan
October 8, 2012, 05:53 PM
If its a home in the country, might be perfect. But in city limits with neighbors a few ft apart, forget it. You are looking at a lawsuit after the smoke clears. And expect to scratch your head if you killed your neighbor 's wife or husband or kids. You are setting for a long hard battle in court. A 1911 45 acp is about perfect for HD. Its fast and furious. Most home invasion are carried out by multiple badguys. A handgun can be brought to bear easily and finish the job done if you are that fast. The Fal can be long and the blast will damage your eardrums in a confined room. And then the overpenetration goes way yonder into your neighbors house.

Telekinesis
October 8, 2012, 06:45 PM
A FAL is probably not the best rifle for home defense, especially if you live very close to your neighbors. I would say it is borderline for the suburbs, but it would be a good choice if you were out in the country. If you can find a round that limits over penetration, it might be ok. The problem is that most of those rounds are high velocity, and velocity is the thing you're trying to avoid with suppressors (at least if you want to keep it subsonic, which would be a good bit quieter than if you were shooting supersonic ammo indoors).

Something else to consider is that most .308 suppressors are going to run around 8" long, which means your 16" barreled carbine will become a 24" somewhat hearing safe rifle. Personally, I would look at shortening the rifle (turning it into a SBR or buying one premade).

Another option (and something that I'm actually working on right now, so I'm probably a little biased) is to SBR an AR in .300 Blackout. It has 7.62x39 ballistics using supersonic ammo, but is only 126-129db using a suppressor and subsonic ammo (as quiet as a 9mm suppressed). It also works well with short barrels, so a 8" barrel and suppressor would put you at 16" out front. That gives you 7.62 ballistics that is as quiet as a suppressed 9mm and as short as a normal (Title 1) AR.

bozzman3
October 8, 2012, 09:41 PM
Be careful if you buy a FAL.They have a way of reproducing in your gunsafe. Not a home defense weapon,but one hell of a battle rifle.

mf-dif
October 8, 2012, 09:55 PM
No i would not use it for self defense but i live in a suburb with neighbors. I guess if its just you in the country go ahead. Keep ear muffs near your gun lol.

12131
October 8, 2012, 10:18 PM
Absolutely! That is, if the zombies are coming for you.:evil:

steves2
October 8, 2012, 10:43 PM
I agree with what the others said....

Buy one anyway. They're beautiful, handle great (for a 50's battle rifle!), and are really fun. I have two, and am planning on getting a parts kit to build one.

mljdeckard
October 8, 2012, 11:33 PM
Would I use it if I had to? Sure. Would I go out and get one for that purpose? No. For all the reasons listed in post #7.

Z-Michigan
October 9, 2012, 01:01 AM
The perfect HD carbine if you are being attacked by carnivorous moose or elk. Or soft-armored deer.

For more typical uses, rather long and high recoiling, and I wouldn't buy one primarily for HD use.

As for this:

A 14-pound rifle in large caliber aint it.

Why would I add 5+ pounds of extra weight to a HD carbine? They're not a mousegun, but nowhere near 14lbs.

leadcounsel
October 9, 2012, 02:29 AM
Love the FAL. One of the premier battle rifles and calibers. Would be a top choice for SHTF...

Rural HD. Yes.

Urban HD. No.

Either way, wear earpro. .308 noise is no joke. Permanent "I wish I wouldn't have done that" damage.

JShirley
October 9, 2012, 03:15 AM
There are better dedicated home defense platforms.

Those who are advocating a .45 ACP over the correct. 308, however, because they think it has less penetration, unfortunately do not understand terminal ballistics, and are too lazy to either shoot their own comparison, or look up the performance in gel of both.

I think most AR15s would be a better choice, but the right .308 bullets will be considerably more effective at stopping a threat, while offering LESS risk of shoot-through than any common handgun defensive rounds. If you don't handload, Hornady TAP would be a fine choice. The 110-grain TAP ( http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Misc_Images/DocGKR/308_TAP_comparison.jpg ) causes massive damage, but penetrates only 10"!

John

conhntr
October 9, 2012, 06:30 AM
I use to believe in the "overpenetration" hype; but after research and reading it seems to be a bit of a 2nd order concern... Summarized he says that worrying about an off chance your round will punch through the subject (or a wall etc) and happen to hit a bystander ith enough remaining energy is low compared to an errant shot doing so; or you "reduced penetration" load having inssufficent performance on the subject.
Failures to stop a suspect because of under-penetration, poor bullet placement, and completely missing the target are far more significant problems than over-penetration. With shots to the center of mass, if a handgun or rifle bullet fails to have enough penetration to reach the large blood bearing vessels and organs in the torso, rapid physiological incapacitation is unlikely and an opponent may remain a lethal threat to officers and citizen bystanders. Conversely, if a bullet fired by officers completely penetrates a violent criminal and exits downrange, the bullet will certainly have had enough penetration to reach the large blood bearing vessels or organs in the torso. As a result, it is more likely to have caused sufficient hemorrhage to induce hypovolemic shock--the only reliable method of physiological incapacitation in the absence of CNS trauma.

Unfortunately, according to the available published date, the majority of shots fired in the field by U.S. LE officers miss their intended target. According to published NYPD SOP-9 data, the NYPD hit ratio by officers against perpetrators in 2000 was 12.3% of shots fired and in 2001 13.5% of shots fired. The Miami Metro-Dade County PD had hit ratios ranging between 15.4% and 30% from 1988-1994. Portland PD reported hits with 43% of shots fired at adversaries from 1984-1992, while Baltimore PD reported a 49% average hit ratio from 1989-2002.

Given that the reported averages for LE officers actually hitting the suspect ranges between 12% to 49% of shots fired, more concern should be given to the between 51-88% of shots fired by LE officers which completely MISS the intended target and immediately result in a significant threat to any person down range, rather than excessively worry about the relatively rare instance where one of the 12%-49% of shots fired actually hits the intended target and then exits the perpetrator in a fashion which still poses a hazard.

Ash
October 9, 2012, 06:55 AM
Remember that misguided "artist" who the police took down last month? It took many rounds to get him, and the collateral damage was rather significant. The baddie didn't fire a shot, yet a handful of other folks on the street were shot.

Sam1911
October 9, 2012, 07:16 AM
Having run shoot houses with an FAL, I can say it is quite a handful. I'd take shorter and lighter (and correspondingly quicker and more manuverable) if I had any choice.

As I've said previously:

I've run our shoot house with an FAL (Stg.58)...it is fun, but it's a bit like steering a boat! Rather than a tool you've got with you as you maneuver through the structure, it's more like a cooperative journey the two of you are on together.

("After you!" "No, I insist, after YOU!")

fastest45ever
October 9, 2012, 07:56 AM
Perfect rifle to sit behind cover with, with a view of the entrance, and wait for the LEO to arrive from the cell phone call.

All of the other comments above seem to presume your personal conditions, which you have not shared. Therefore any comments on the viability of the FAL as a SD weapon are suspect, without particulars.

My idea of home defense does not mean clearing a house of possible bad guys.

Reasons to own an FAL:
One of the best battle rifles ever. Collectable. OK, maybe a bit of a stretch on the last part but, it sounds like a justify the gun to the wife scenario.;)

With a suppressor, it would be an excellent weapon for a women to cover entrances with. It weighs 10 pounds, and with light bullets, doesn't recoil much at all.

It is one of the most accurate battle rifles ever. Hit what you shoot at.
The open sites are fantastic.

Marshall & Sandow give most of the .308 rounds very high marks, over 91%
one shot stops, IIRC, with as high as 93 or 94%.

Ammunition for practice is inexpensive, and very accurate.
It is one of the most proven battle cartridges of all time, and one of the most effective. It's pretty amazing how similar ballistics are settled on by almost all the major military war cartridges, until war changed after WW 2.

Great magazines, and capacity, provided you don't live in a anti-second amendment state.

Even if you do, 10 rounds of .308 is no joke.

If attacked by Zombies, we are invaded, etc. you will have a rifle able to use a bunch of old mil-spec surplus ammo.;)

If you are concerned about ammo compatibility with our current .223 cartridge, and the corresponding cheap ammunition, you need FAL's
in both .308 and .223.

JUST BUY ONE!

If we get a Democratic Congress, a Democratic president, and a couple key Supreme Court justices resign, the FAL might become like a machine gun in value.

Hope this helps.

rbernie
October 9, 2012, 08:02 AM
Would a 16" barreled suppressed FAL be good for home defense?

The Brits found the FAL to be woefully mismatched to the task of clearing houses in, say, North Ireland. They chose to move to a different platform and different chambering in large part due to those protracted lessons.

fireside44
October 9, 2012, 08:16 AM
The Brits found the FAL to be woefully mismatched to the task of clearing houses in, say, North Ireland.

You mean their L1A1's with 21 inch barrel and extra long flash suppressor were too long? Eh, you can get a short gas system FAL for under 2k that is excellent for tight quarters use. Even a standard length gas system with 16" barrel is pretty handy. The Para is even better. Or were you talking solely about the penetration?

627PCFan
October 9, 2012, 08:40 AM
This thread reminds me of this

http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii15/JRSpicer426/untitled.jpg

rbernie
October 9, 2012, 08:47 AM
You mean their L1A1's with 21 inch barrel and extra long flash suppressor were too long? Eh, you can get a short gas system FAL for under 2k that is excellent for tight quarters use. Even a standard length gas system with 16" barrel is pretty handy. The Para is even better. Or were you talking solely about the penetration?
Put a can on the end of a 16" FAL, per the OP, and the L1A1 will look positively svelte. :)

ny32182
October 9, 2012, 09:08 AM
It is one of the most accurate battle rifles ever. Hit what you shoot at.
The open sites are fantastic.

...
Ammunition for practice is inexpensive,


You definitely aren't going to read THAT about the FAL every day...

Fisherman12
October 9, 2012, 12:25 PM
I live out in the country with a wife and two kids. My house is all brick on the outside.

BP Hunter
October 9, 2012, 12:36 PM
It sounds like the OP just wants to get one.:D I know you most probably won't use it for Home SD. A FAL owner most probably owns a few guns anyway and one of those would most probably be a better choice for home SD. I bought a DSA FAL a few months and use it primairly for shooting fun. It's too heavy and cumbersome for moving around the house and the .308 is an overkill for a perp.

DeMilled
October 9, 2012, 12:52 PM
I live out in the country with a wife and two kids. My house is all brick on the outside.

The only argument, put forth in this thread, that holds water is that some people think it's too big and heavy to use indoors.

If you think you can manage to go through your house with one then buy in confidence.


As a bonus you can use it on hogs, deer, etc.!
I'm in love with the 165 grain Sierra Game King Hollow Point.
I know what results that bullet gives on deer and I dare say it may do, in a pinch, as a home defense round as well...

Vern Humphrey
October 9, 2012, 12:58 PM
Not knocking the FAL, but in my not so humble opinion, the best long arm for home defense is a 12 gauge pump shotgun. Mine is an Ithaca Model 37 with a 20" slug barrel.

DeMilled
October 9, 2012, 01:02 PM
Not knocking the FAL, but in my not so humble opinion, the best long arm for home defense is a 12 gauge pump shotgun. Mine is an Ithaca Model 37 with a 20" slug barrel.
If we want to start talking shotguns I'd bring in the SAIGA 12.

That would be pretty far off topic in a thread asking about a specific rifle though.

JShirley
October 9, 2012, 01:26 PM
Main serious objection is weight. If you're built like Larry Correia, though, that won't be an issue.

DeMilled
October 9, 2012, 01:37 PM
I know JShirley is making a joke but seriously; I am 33 years old, stand 5'11", weigh 175lbs and I have no problem with the rifles weight.

This may not be the best rifle for an obese geriatric.
If this does not apply to you then I guess you may, somehow, manage to use the FAL... *sarcasm*

Dave1965
October 9, 2012, 01:54 PM
I know JShirley is making a joke but seriously; I am 33 years old, stand 5'11", weigh 175lbs and I have no problem with the rifles weight.

This may not be the best rifle for an obese geriatric.
If this does not apply to you then I guess you may, somehow, manage to use the FAL... *sarcasm*

I hate to tell you this but by army weight standards you are overweight.

DeMilled
October 9, 2012, 01:56 PM
I hate to tell you this but by army weight standards you are overweight.

I am.

Yet, even my out of shape arse has no problem with the FAL.

You see my point?

Z-Michigan
October 9, 2012, 03:11 PM
I am puzzled by the weight comments. You can get a nice 18" FAL that weighs under 9lbs. The mag and 20rds adds some weight, but no more than for any other .308 semiauto platform. It might be a chore to carry through a jungle for weeks and weeks up and down mountains, but for a rifle that sits in one place 99.99% of the time and gets picked up for a few minutes one time for defensive use, it should be just fine for any adult in good health and even modest physical condition.

I've run a carbine competition with an STG-58 (1/2 lb heavier due to steel lower) and had no problems at all. I almost forgot I was using a 9lb, 40" long rifle and in fact scored quite well that day.

NG VI
October 9, 2012, 03:50 PM
Another option (and something that I'm actually working on right now, so I'm probably a little biased) is to SBR an AR in .300 Blackout. It has 7.62x39 ballistics using supersonic ammo, but is only 126-129db using a suppressor and subsonic ammo (as quiet as a 9mm suppressed). It also works well with short barrels, so a 8" barrel and suppressor would put you at 16" out front. That gives you 7.62 ballistics that is as quiet as a suppressed 9mm and as short as a normal (Title 1) AR.


You kind of have to pick and choose here, you really can't have both the bolded ballistic performance and the italicized aural performance at the same time, and the ballistic x39mm performance is going to be much more difficult to get out of a very short barrel that may not affect the heavy subsonic loads as much and that give the .300 the reputation it has for working well out of a short barrel.

checkmyswag
October 9, 2012, 04:39 PM
Would a 16" barreled suppressed FAL be good for home defense?

No.

nathan
October 9, 2012, 06:03 PM
I owned a STG 58 for ten years and enjoyed the heck out of it. I even mounted a leupold scope for deerhunting and got a doe . I sold it and never regretted. The gun was too dang heavy with a full 20 rd mag. It looks cool though with how it looks but since i got my Garand HRA i m good to go.

Gtimothy
October 9, 2012, 06:08 PM
FAL for home defense.....NOPE!

Just buy one and have fun with it! Mine is fun at the range once in a while but for home defense, get a shot gun or a .45acp!

Telekinesis
October 9, 2012, 06:27 PM
You kind of have to pick and choose here, you really can't have both the bolded ballistic performance and the italicized aural performance at the same time, and the ballistic x39mm performance is going to be much more difficult to get out of a very short barrel that may not affect the heavy subsonic loads as much and that give the .300 the reputation it has for working well out of a short barrel.

You're partially right, I was mixing arguments there. Only the supersonic .300 Blk has full power 7.62x39 ballistics (the subsonic .300 Blk will have similar ballistics to subsonic 7.62x39). With the rifle and suppressor combo, you can shoot full power .300 Blk and have x39 ballistics (and still use good expanding .308" bullets) and have a similar acoustic signature to firing supersonic ammo through a 9mm pistol.

Barrel length isn't too much of an issue for the .300 Blk. Due to low case capacity (compared to other .30 cal rounds) and no doubt the design of the cartridge, the .300 Blk burns most of its powder in the first 6 or 7 inches of the barrel. You don't loose much at all going from a 16" barrel to a 9" barrel. According to these velocity numbers, you loose less than 200 fps from cutting 7" off the end of the barrel.

9 in barrel, 125 gr OTM - 2,030 ft/s
16 in barrel, 125 gr OTM - 2,215 ft/s

fireside44
October 9, 2012, 06:59 PM
Main serious objection is weight. If you're built like Larry Correia, though, that won't be an issue.

A rather nonsensical objection when plenty of guys have AR's junked up to ten pounds with accessories and other guys advocate M1A's which really aren't any more trim. I have noodle thickness arms and it's never a problem, even lugging it through the woods. The rifle is well balanced and handles fantastically unless you get silly with quad rails and things of that nature. It's the finest most well used 7.62x51 rifle ever fielded and for a reason.

Not a good rifle for urban home defense but a GREAT rifle for rural home defense. I think the weight issue really goes out the window when you consider you might find yourself using it from a fixed position anyhow.

meanmrmustard
October 9, 2012, 07:22 PM
I hate to tell you this but by army weight standards you are overweight.
By normal standards, he's built well, and can probably handle an FAL.

I'm 6', 200. I don't feel undergunned.

JShirley
October 9, 2012, 11:47 PM
"a rather nonsensical objection", he says, offering as proof things I have not suggested...:rolleyes:

fastest45ever
October 10, 2012, 06:09 AM
I live out in the country with a wife and two kids. My house is all brick on the outside.

Game over. Get the FAL. While your at it get a night scope for it for pig hunting. PERFECT pig gun.

Since your setup for HD is likely going to be find a good wall, get some furniture in front of you, and wait the 45 minutes for the police to arrive, I can't think of a much better rifle to be hunkered down with, other then my favorites, an M1A or a Garand.

You aren't fighting a war. Suppressive fire while your buds flank isn't an issue. You are going to sit down, identify field of fire with the family behind you, and protect them until they run out of bad guys, or, if they are smart, they get the heck out.

If you want to clear the house, use something else. For this kind of protection, and the ability to go through vests, just in case you have high tech bad guys, the .308 is pretty near perfect.

I've never really understood why internet experts fail to heed the tremendous amount of experience created by two world wars, and more, that developed the technology of the .303, 7.62 X 54, .308, and 30-06, not to mention the 8mm, and the Swede 7.5 x 55. NO other rounds have such extensive research, experience, and development, with ACTUAL use on humans, and the learning curve that comes with that.

The FAL was produced by a ton of countries, in all kinds of configurations.
It's one of the few production mil rifles that would shoot with my super-match grade M1A's.

You want an FAL? By all means BUY one. You'll have the SECOND best military rifle ever produced, behind the M1A.;):D

For the record, it's a BAD self-defense gun, as are all military rifles. However,
if you have to use your suppressed, nite scoped pig gun for home defense, it works better then a sharp stick, and it's what you had laying around.

ugaarguy
October 10, 2012, 06:20 AM
NO other rounds have such extensive research, experience, and development, with ACTUAL use on humans, and the learning curve that comes with that.
So the M16 isn't the rifle longest in service by the US Military? Vietnam, Panama, Grenada, Desert Storm, OEF, and OIF never happened? The Soviets didn't observe the excellent wounding capability of the 5.56 NATO and develop 5.45x39 in response? I must be living in an alternate reality.

meanmrmustard
October 10, 2012, 06:53 AM
So the M16 isn't the rifle longest in service by the US Military?
General use, maybe. But otherwise, I think that distinction belongs to the M14, possibly the M40.

Your statement about Russians noticing wounding effects of 556 seems a little subjective. Where is there data on this? One could say they wanted a smaller, less recoiling cartridge with which they could hit at longer distances more accurately and carry more ammo on a soldiers person. That seems more plausible, but I've not read nor heard that the goal was to copy wounding effects.:scrutiny:

45_auto
October 10, 2012, 07:25 AM
What's your definition of home defense?

Does it mean playing shoothouse and "Ramboing" through your dark house in the hope that the intruder isn't smart enough to hide behind a corner or piece of furniture and blow you away when you come by?

If that's your scenario, then you want something small and light (it'll also make it easier on the coroner to move it away from your body).

If your definition of home defense is holing up in a safe room waiting for the cops, then the FAL will be hard to beat. Anyone trying to come through a choke point (door) into .308 fire at across the room ranges (we're talking 3 or 4 yards here) is going to very quickly decide they need to be elsewhere. Another nice thing about it is that there pretty much isn't any such thing as cover from a .308 in most houses. They can run but they can't hide! ;)

fastest45ever
October 10, 2012, 07:44 AM
The function of a battle rifle changed during the post WW 2 era.

The key functions of the .223 are light weight, high capacity, and easy to carry, not to mention the importance of suppressive fire.

The issue of how many rounds can you carry is not one in HD.
Nor is suppressive fire. In fact, the advantages of the .223, lots of ammunition, allowing for lots of misses, and tactical use of fire patterns are the exact issues which we criticize LEO for. In other words, as civilians, we need to use as few rounds as possible, and hit our targets.

The .223 rounds are designed to allow near SMG type functions out of battle rifles carried by everyone in a squad.

The absurdity that the .223 is more effective then other battle rounds is just that. Wounding capacity? With modern bullets, we nearly double the weight of the .223, keep the same velocity, and increase caliber by a large number. There are WAY too many battle rifles that allow using double the weight of the .223, with expanding bullets, at way faster velocities, limiting penetration. If you really want a .223 bullet, and 55 grains, go with the old Remington Penetrator sabot rounds. Near 4000 fps with a 55 grain .223 bullet, that expanded, or really exploded.

Great thing about those big cases is you can put LOTS of powder in them, with a little bullet, like a 120 grains, have little recoil, super explosive expansion, and reasonable penetration.

While we would never recommend using an FAL for a HD rifle, it would make a GREAT pig rifle, and, the ammunition has been proven over 75 years of so far, the worst, or biggest wars we have ever had.

By the way, this does not mean that a .223 in an AR 15 type platform is not an excellent platform for a HD rifle. With modern ammunition, it will suppress, or stop most varmits, and is much more manageable, or lighter, then MOST variations of the FAL. However, with research, you can find Galili, FAL type rifles that are light, chambered in .223, and I think a bit more reliable then
the AR 15 designs.

If I lived in the country, I would want a rifle capable of other then just varmit work.

While I'm not saying I would turn down a .223, I have currently a .22lr, 30-06, .308, 7.62 x 54R, and 375 H&H.

While not ideal, I wouldn't feel undergunned with 6 down, and 270's at 2900 fps out of the H&H. With it's brake, it makes a nice, sit in the corner and cover the door. The M44 does that as well, as does the 30-06.

When Mexico cartels invades, the M1A is the choice.

Just because it's great on wood chucks and varmits doesn't make it the best cartridge for HD. Unless your home invaders are woodchucks and rats.

fastest45ever
October 10, 2012, 07:56 AM
Keep in mind it's a brick house. That means it's a built in back stop.
Overpenetration? Who cares. You don't even need to use frangible ammo with that setup. Use the best HP bullet in .308 you can find, at the highest velocity, and let the bricks do the safety check.

With such a situation the ability to turn cover into concealment is huge. NEVER use under penetrating ammunition unless you need to. In this situation, no need.

I once had a house that opened on the ocean. Entrance was over a wharf.
I didn't much care about anything overpenetrating. My sixgun had 230 grain VERY hard cast 230 grain Flat points in it, at 1800 fps, in .454.
The rifles had speer HP boat tails in em, and they are M1A's, along with two .223 AR-15's with varmit ammo, and a mac 10, suppressed, with 45 caliber ball.

They ALL worked.

If anyone came in, I'd back up in the bedroom, grab the M1A, and focus on the door and window. Pretty much a anything works for that situations scenario.

FAL would as as well.
Again, the SECOND best battle rifle.:D

JShirley
October 10, 2012, 09:30 AM
The M14 was the least successful general-issue rifle in US history. :)

The M1 Garand was designed in a lighter caliber...as was the FN FAL. Billions of dollars wasted in materials, and eventual conversion from battle rifles to assault rifles, that would have been unnecessary if the rifles had been made in their original chamberings.

NG VI
October 10, 2012, 12:02 PM
According to these velocity numbers, you loose less than 200 fps from cutting 7" off the end of the barrel.

9 in barrel, 125 gr OTM - 2,030 ft/s
16 in barrel, 125 gr OTM - 2,215 ft/s

Wow, I didn't realize the lighter faster loads did so well out of a short barrel, thanks for the post!

nathan
October 10, 2012, 12:09 PM
Those advocate using the FAL indoor, can i use my Garand as well? No problem with overpenetration ? If Clint Eastwood uses it in his last film in 2008, why not?

56hawk
October 10, 2012, 01:34 PM
My only thought would be to look at the shorter 11 or 13 inch barrels. I think the 16" FAL would be very good for home defense with the correct ammo of course. Adding a suppressor would just make it too big.

fireside44
October 10, 2012, 02:02 PM
"a rather nonsensical objection", he says, offering as proof things I have not suggested..

Except that you said it was "too heavy" and that is your reason for not using it for home defense. It's a nonsensical objection because weight is about the last factor I would consider in a home defense setting. It's not like it has to be carried far. Maybe your nightstand tips over easily.

Z-Michigan
October 10, 2012, 02:03 PM
My only thought would be to look at the shorter 11 or 13 inch barrels. I think the 16" FAL would be very good for home defense with the correct ammo of course. Adding a suppressor would just make it too big.

Ever shot a .308 with a short barrel? I shot a 14.5" braked .308 a couple years ago, and it was an attitude-adjusting experience. OUTDOORS. I can't imagine what it would be like to shoot an 11" or 13" .308 indoors.

DeMilled
October 10, 2012, 02:08 PM
Those advocate using the FAL indoor, can i use my Garand as well? No problem with overpenetration ? If Clint Eastwood uses it in his last film in 2008, why not?

Well, nathan, if you've gotten this far into the thread and cannot absorb the info that has been presented about the actual penetration depth of the RRLP http://www.ssarmory.com/7.62x51_ammunition_150gr_barnes_rrlp_fb_frangible.aspx and the 110 grain TAP http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Misc_Images/DocGKR/308_TAP_comparison.jpg then I don't think you should be using your Garand for anything besides punching paper.

DeMilled
October 10, 2012, 02:16 PM
Ever shot a .308 with a short barrel? I shot a 14.5" braked .308 a couple years ago, and it was an attitude-adjusting experience. OUTDOORS. I can't imagine what it would be like to shoot an 11" or 13" .308 indoors.

Was it one of the brakes that directs the gasses forward, out to the sides, or back at you?

The brake on my Imbel kit based FAL does a pretty good job of directing the gasses forward.
There are other options on the market that work even better at pushing the gasses out front.

A pair of these would help too...
http://www.midwayusa.com/find?newcategorydimensionid=10184&

fireside44
October 10, 2012, 02:19 PM
No one puts on ear muffs before they deal with an intruder. No one cares about the volume of a rifle or pistol going off indoors when dealing with an intruder. Preservation of life, not hearing, is the goal.

DeMilled
October 10, 2012, 02:23 PM
There is a moderator on here that has a signature line that reads something to the effect of "Let's be informed rather than opinionated." and in the spirit of that sentiment I'll post these links here.

http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Ballistic_Gel_Experiments/BARNES/Barnes_Ballistic_Gel_Data_Methodology.pdf

http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Ballistic_Gel_Experiments/BARNES/Barnes_7.62x51_140gr_RRLP.pdf


Can we please stop this "Over Penetration" fixation?
It's just plain not a valid argument against the 308 for home defense, with proper ammo. in the magazine.

DeMilled
October 10, 2012, 02:26 PM
No one puts on ear muffs before they deal with an intruder. No one cares about the volume of a rifle or pistol going off indoors when dealing with an intruder. Preservation of life, not hearing, is the goal.

I do.

Grab gun, put on ear muffs, grab flashlight and go see what's up.

I've done it three times in the past two years.

Why? I've shot rifles and pistols without hearing protection and I know better.


You can speak for yourself but please don't say that no one else does...

56hawk
October 10, 2012, 03:36 PM
Ever shot a .308 with a short barrel? I shot a 14.5" braked .308 a couple years ago, and it was an attitude-adjusting experience. OUTDOORS. I can't imagine what it would be like to shoot an 11" or 13" .308 indoors.

We are talking about a suppressed rifle. :) But no, I've only shot 308 with 16" barrels. And for that matter a 20" braked 308 is no fun to be next to.

dprice3844444
October 10, 2012, 03:49 PM
try to avoid the use of nfa act items if possible.the less agencies you get involved with shtf situations,the easier/cheaper it will be to defend in court.if it isn't an option,good shooting.

DeMilled
October 10, 2012, 03:56 PM
So....

Just how loud is a FAL indoors?

I dunno. I looked for the info but my google fu didn't come through.

I did find this though.
http://www.freehearingtest.com/hia_gunfirenoise.shtml

A 12 gauge with an 18" barrel came in at 161.50 DB.
A 30.06 with the same 18" barrel came in at 163.2 DB.


I think it's safe to say that a 16" barrel/carbine length FAL with out a muzzle brake is going to be just a little bit louder than a 12 gauge.

Wear your hearing protection and you'll be just fine.


Muzzle brakes=bad.

Vern Humphrey
October 10, 2012, 05:04 PM
The M14 was the least successful general-issue rifle in US history.

The M1 Garand was designed in a lighter caliber...as was the FN FAL. Billions of dollars wasted in materials, and eventual conversion from battle rifles to assault rifles, that would have been unnecessary if the rifles had been made in their original chamberings.
I disagree -- I carried an M1 rifle on my first tour in Viet Nam (borrowed from the ARVN infantry battalion I advised) and an M14 (sniper rifle, pre-M21) on my second tour.

The M14, due to its superior power and penetration was highly successful in battle -- but not so successful in Washington.

I have never shot the .276 Pederson, but have fired a lot of .30 Cal and 7.62 rounds in combat, and wouldn't want anything less powerful if I had a choice.

Ash
October 10, 2012, 05:45 PM
I believe the Krag was less-successful. The m14 was a battle rifle that was replaced by an assault rifle as nations reduced the power of their arms. The Krag was a full-power smokeless repeater replaced by a full-power smokeless repeater. The M14 was replaced because of a change in tactical deployment of small arms. The Krag was replaced because it was inferior to other arms carried by other nations.

The 276 Pedersen wasn't an intermediate round, it was just not as potent as the 30-06. However, we were in a pickle one way or the other. Had we gone 276, we would have had to junk or modify every BAR and Browning Machine gun currently in inventory, plus every Springfield and all the ammo we had in inventory. During the Great Depression, we were in no position to do that. And frankly, it was better spending the money on P38's, B17's, and building the USS North Carolina and Washington.

Now, had we gone with an intermediate with the M14, there may not have been an M16.

Vern Humphrey
October 10, 2012, 05:49 PM
The m14 was a battle rifle that was replaced by an assault rifle as nations reduced the power of their arms.
Actually, it was replaced by order of Robert MacNamara who was obsessed with proving he was boss.

Ash
October 10, 2012, 05:54 PM
Very true. The Air Force's security rifle became the nation's combat rifle. Still, that was no fault of the M14's.

fastest45ever
October 11, 2012, 02:04 AM
The M1A is a excellent, accurate, SEMI-automatic rifle. As a full auto rifle, M14,
it will eat you alive.

Even the E2 stocked gun was too much for me full auto.

I wouldn't feel under gunned with a 120 grain .280" bullet at about 2800-3100 fps, either.

Point is, the FAL is a great gun, second greatest gun for me, in a great caliber.
Why mess with success?

I understand if you are being invaded by rodents how one might want a .223.
:evil:

Seriously: would anyone fault the Swiss 7.5 as a battle cartridge, pretty much ideal for all?

TCBPATRIOT
October 11, 2012, 02:19 AM
I personally wouldn't mainly because if you have to use it you will never see it again. At least in the area I live at lot of nice firearms and well to be honest even some of the lower end ones never find themselves in the owner hands after it goes to police custody. I wouldn't use any weapon that is not easily replaceable.

vaupet
October 11, 2012, 02:24 AM
I wouldnt use my FAL or FN49. I would grab my Mosin Nagant M44, short, no need to call LEO (they can hear the blast), no need for a flashlight and in a real emergency, the bajonet comes in handy. ;):D

seriously, i once fired my marlin 336 indoors (muzzle out the window) without hearing protection: never again

I have about 15 long guns in the save and for home defence i use my H&K USP9 with 3x15 rounds of ammo.

But don't let this withold U to buy a FAL, by all means

have fun

Peter

Vern Humphrey
October 11, 2012, 09:57 AM
The M1A is a excellent, accurate, SEMI-automatic rifle. As a full auto rifle, M14,
it will eat you alive.

Even the E2 stocked gun was too much for me full auto.
Full auto fire from a hand-held weapon is pretty much worthless in combat. Full auto fire from the M14, in any configuration, is idiocy.

TCBPATRIOT
October 11, 2012, 03:01 PM
+1 Vern. I had an A1 lower on the rifle I carried on my last deployment and that switch was never put all the way back.

Fisherman12
October 11, 2012, 04:15 PM
Here's the run down on my thoughts so far:

-If I went with the FAL for home defense, I would most likely have the barrel shortened to NFA length and add a suppressor. This should take care of any noise/flash concerns, along with bringing it down to about the size of a typical 20" barreled shotgun.

-I'm confident that .308 is enough to stop a badguy, but I am still concerned about overpenetration. If I miss (depending on ammo) it could cause collateral damage. That said, I do have a brick walled house, and some of these low penetration and fragmenting loads show promise.

So overpenetration in case of a miss is my only real concern. Having a brick house, and using fragmenting/low penetration loads, what do yall think?

W.E.G.
October 11, 2012, 04:33 PM
I don't think you realize how LOUD a suppressed .308 is in a confined space.

Vern Humphrey
October 11, 2012, 04:49 PM
So overpenetration in case of a miss is my only real concern. Having a brick house, and using fragmenting/low penetration loads, what do yall think?
Get some bricks, wall board and 2X4s and test your combination.

For myself, I find #4 buckshot is ideal.

fastest45ever
October 11, 2012, 05:18 PM
Except for the suppressor, I wouldn't bother to tailor the gun to just HD.
I'd get something I would shoot all the time.

As I have said prior, your house offers excellent protection, and I'd get into a situation where all I had to do was cover the door, and wait for the police. Barrel length is not an issue in such a situation. FAL's and M1A's are pretty darn accurate, and efficient with 18-22" barrels.

If you want a house clearing weapon, then get another gun.

If you miss, a fragmenting bullet is going to do a lot of damage if it hits something down range.

Best setup is to play out how a HD would go in your situation.
Figure out where you would sit, or crouch, to cover the entry door, and then figure out what's behind it if you miss. Fragmentation rounds might help if the houses it would be going into are built of sheet rock. Don't know.
Seems like one of the websites did tests on bullets going into sheet rock, but I don't remember fragmentation rounds. I do remember the .223 penetrated way better then people suspect.

http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot1.htm

Couple things from BOT that may apply to you:

www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot2_3.htm

See lessons learned at the bottom of the page.

Fisherman12
October 11, 2012, 05:19 PM
I don't think you realize how LOUD a suppressed .308 is in a confined space.


I doubt it would be louder than an unsuppressed 12 gauge shotgun with an 18" barrel, which most consider acceptable for home defense.

Girodin
October 11, 2012, 06:01 PM
As I have said prior, your house offers excellent protection, and I'd get into a situation where all I had to do was cover the door, and wait for the police.

Unless you had to go secure other family members or the like. I doubt a lot of people are going to hole up in their bedroom when their kids are are on the other side of the house and possibly even on a different floor. Not everyone's home or situation is the same.

Vern Humphrey
October 11, 2012, 06:04 PM
Unless you had to go secure other family members or the like. I doubt a lot of people are going to hole up in their bedroom when their kids are are on the other side of the house and possibly even on a different floor. Not everyone's home or situation is the same.
That's why you should prepare a safe room and develop and rehearse a plan.

Girodin
October 11, 2012, 06:14 PM
In wake of the is thread I got out a 308 semi auto rifle. I decided to run some drills with it. The gun has a 16" barrel, an aimpoint, and a surefire flashlight. It has metal 20 round mags. It weighs in at 11+ lbs unloaded. A suppressor would obviously add length and weight. Importantly that weight is out on the end of the muzzle.

I then did some of the same things with a 16" AR with an aimpoint micro and a light. I do not know the weight of the AR. It was very noticeably lighter and handier though. The AR seemed like the gun I would much rather have indoors. I can also use a micro can that adds little length. Even something like an ops inc M4-M only adds like four inches. I don't know of a can for an FAL that wouldn't add more like 6-8" and weight more too.

If I felt 5.56 was lacking, I would still rather have an AR in 6.8 or 300 BLK. An SBRed and suppressed gun in one of those cartridges would, IMHO, be vastly superior indoors than FAL with a can. Either of those cartridges with 110 Vmax bullets offers good performance. With the 308 I would USe Hornady 100 grain TAP rounds anyway. I'd have to look but I imagine the 308 offers more velocity, but not enough to make be a deciding factor for me. I'm sure an FAL could get the job done. However, if I were going to get a gun for that express purpose I would go in a different direction.

Cal-gun Fan
October 11, 2012, 06:59 PM
HD doesn't seem like a "bigger is better" scenario. Remember-you're in your house. I don't want to be spraying 20 rounds of .308 around through my walls, appliances, electronics, pipes, electrical cords, windows, maybe your car, or wherever else stray rounds could end up!

Girodin
October 11, 2012, 11:03 PM
That's why you should prepare a safe room and develop and rehearse a plan.

So if your sleeping child doesn't hear the bump in the night and stays asleep how does that work? What if you are like my very good friend who has handicapped children? Or very young children? I can think of a lot of other scenarios where a plan will have to be adapted and you may have to move in unplanned ways or to unplanned places. As the saying goes, no battle plan survives contact with the enemy. Furthermore, a plan that involves rallying to a single point still involves moving. That is my original point. I believe rallying to a singe point is a good idea generally. However, it still requires movement, my original point.

doesn't seem like a "bigger is better" scenario. Remember-you're in your house. I don't want to be spraying 20 rounds of .308 around through my walls, appliances, electronics, pipes, electrical cords, windows, maybe your car, or wherever else stray rounds could end up!

So because one has a 20 round mag they will necessarily "spraying ammo?" A 308 110 grain V max tap round is less of a penetrator than many other options.

Ignition Override
October 12, 2012, 02:10 AM
DeMilled:
My only excuse for not acquiring an FAL is the price of the rifle, ammo and what most reloaders say about beaten brass from any semi-auto .308/7.62.
.308 brass from my Spanish FR8 can be reloaded numerous times, and the rifle was only $425 two years ago.

The looks, features of the gun, and large number of nations world-wide who were armed with the FN FAL are quite impressive.

A private seller at the Gwinnett GA (Atlanta area) show in June or July had an all-original FN FAL built in Herstal Belgium.
It might have been in the original box and was in excellent, maybe mint condition.

leadcounsel
October 12, 2012, 02:59 AM
Any gun you use could be confiscated and abused by LEO...

Why use a $1,000 pistol when a $500 pistol will do the job as well?

Same concept - why use a $1,000 rifle when a $500 AK47 or a $300 12 gauge will do the job just as well?

fastest45ever
October 12, 2012, 04:28 AM
Most likely, you'll never, ever use the gun for HD, unless you are running a meth lab, or are in the drug trade.

So, buy the rifle for whatever you really want to do, like kill invading pigs, etc.
and the secondary use is defense.

I do agree with the LEO not taking care of guns in storage, and lucky to get your guns back, after the Katrina gun grabbing. These are real issues, that we should not discuss here, but be aware of. In fact, discussing such issues
is against the 'rules', so stay away from these issues.

We need to stay on the FAL for HD.

Given that situation, I'm down with the Mosin Nagant M44 for HD, along with a bunch of pistols. Yes, it's noisy, has a huge fireball, and hits near like a 30-06. I have muffs next to my bed, with electronic control, to amplify my hearing, and also protect what's left.

Is a bolt action ideal for a HD gun? no. Will it work? Yes.

Touching off a battle rifle in a house also effects the bad guy, who isn't expecting it. I've shot .308 outside without ears, and it's not an experience that is wonderful. It's enough, if you are a bad guy, to make you head the other way.

Suffice to say, that due to factors I can't discuss, I would also recommend the cheapest possible rifle in the caliber you intend to use for HD.

A semi-auto rifle would be a bonus.

WardenWolf
October 12, 2012, 04:28 AM
A FAL for home defense is just a bad idea all-around. It's a big, heavy, LONG rifle firing a very powerful round that will dramatically overpenetrate. Even suppressed it's incredibly loud. I would not count on a brick house stopping a .308 round. Keep in mind this is just one layer of brick for your outer wall.

In a home defense scenario, you want to be nimble and maneuverable. It is very difficult to do this when toting around a 10-pound full-length battle rifle. This is one of the main reasons intermediate calibers were adopted. You would be far better off with an AR or an AK. If you want knockdown power, it's hard to beat 7.62x39 with a good bullet.

TCBPATRIOT
October 12, 2012, 05:39 AM
I use an xd 9mm with a cheap light/laser attached I have run numerous drills with it. The best scenario in an hd situation for me would be to deter any invader by having my bead on him or 2 grab my son.and wife exit the house and call the authorities. I've used a firearm in self defense before and it while it sounds cool I promise you the events that take place afterwards are not enjoyable by any means.

Ash
October 12, 2012, 05:56 AM
I use a Ruger Police Six in 357 for that purpose, but when I go to the cabin, I use a police-surplus Ruger Mini 14 GB, mostly for rabid racoons than for people.

ugaarguy
October 12, 2012, 07:06 AM
A FAL for home defense is just a bad idea all-around. It's a big, heavy, LONG rifle firing a very powerful round that will dramatically overpenetrate. ... You would be far better off with an AR or an AK. If you want knockdown power, it's hard to beat 7.62x39 with a good bullet.
So an FAL with Hornady VMAX or similar ballistic tip projectiles is going to dramatically over penetrate and I'm better off using an AR with M855 steel core ball, or an AK with heavy FMJ? You're saying ammo selection doesn't matter at all? I just want to make sure we're on the same page here.

Also, can you define this mythical knock down power? Are you saying an AK in 7.62x39 loaded with good ammo is better than an FAL at butt stroking someone and knocking them down? Or do you have a source for those Hollywood rifle bullets that actually will knock a person down? I thought those were vaporware.

Sam1911
October 12, 2012, 07:13 AM
firing a very powerful round that will dramatically overpenetrate....I would not count on a brick house stopping a .308 round.As pointed out many, many times, that's NOT at all a universal truth. There are good choices in .308 that provide explosive performance without deep structure penetration.

Keep in mind this is just one layer of brick for your outer wall.That is certainly variable. On most newer houses, yes, the brick is just a veneer. Brick houses built prior to the mid 20th century will have walls that are 3 or even more "wythes" thick. Certainly enough to stop any common rifle round.

...

Still, a full-size battle rifle like an FAL is something you COULD use to defend you home if you HAD to. Not (at all) the gun you should pick deliberately for the task. Even if you're plan is to hole up in a safe room, smaller, lighter, more maneuverable, faster follow up shots, and (to whatever degree possible) less concussive weapons are far better choices.

The analogy of the "commuter dump truck" applies. You could, use it but it isn't an efficient and appropriate tool for the job.

SaxonPig
October 12, 2012, 08:37 AM
1. A rifle is not the best choice for navigating hallways IMO.

2. An attacker has too much chance to grab that gun sticking out and wrestle you for control of it. A pistol held close to the body is more secure. (I know... I know... everyone on this forum is perfect and maybe Superman and no criminal would ever ever in a million years get a hold of his gun and I am being silly in suggesting that such a thing could ever ever happen even though about 1 in 4 trained police officers who get shot are shot with their own gun after a criminal took it away from them but nobody around here would ever ever suffer such a fate because... well, they are just better and perfect and all.)

3. A 308 is too powerful for urban use. Too powerful for indoor use, too. Think your hearing would EVER return after firing a 308 in your bedroom? Reduced loads? Yeah, I want reduced loads for SD. How about simply using appropriate ammo in an appropriate gun.

4. A Class 3 weapon for home defense sounds like trouble waiting to happen. A prosecutor or a civil attorney would have a field day with a jury portraying you as Rambo or some Killer Elite wannabe using a weapon of war to gun down that poor, misguided teenager who broke into your home. No thanks.

DeMilled
October 12, 2012, 09:13 AM
To all posters saying the FAL is too heavy for indoor use; it may be for you but please don't say no one else should use it.

I have no problem with the rifles weight.

To be accurate, you should just say something like "I think the FAL is too heavy for me to use."


Here is a video of other pudgy guys using the FAL without trouble.
http://youtu.be/CmJhFIPKmcc

There's even some good M4gery footage in there for the guys that like a smaller rifle too.
See, something for everyone...


P.S. You'll want to watch through to the end of the video.

DeMilled
October 12, 2012, 09:22 AM
DeMilled:
My only excuse for not acquiring an FAL is the price of the rifle, ammo and what most reloaders say about beaten brass from any semi-auto .308/7.62.
.308 brass from my Spanish FR8 can be reloaded numerous times, and the rifle was only $425 two years ago.

The looks, features of the gun, and large number of nations world-wide who were armed with the FN FAL are quite impressive.

A private seller at the Gwinnett GA (Atlanta area) show in June or July had an all-original FN FAL built in Herstal Belgium.
It might have been in the original box and was in excellent, maybe mint condition.

Yeah, they're not as inexpensive as they used to be and I missed out on getting the "Good 'Ol Days" prices people reminisce about.

The rifle is pretty hard on brass, just something I have to live with.

An all original Herstal? I bet that cost a pretty penny! :what:

Sam1911
October 12, 2012, 09:40 AM
To all posters saying the FAL is too heavy for indoor use; it may be for you but please don't say no one else should use it.

I have no problem with the rifles weight.


There is a difference between "I have no problem with the rifle's weight" and "this is the optimally efficient tool to use."

Doesn't matter if you're a ballerina or a linebacker, lighter is lighter and faster is faster. No one here (probably) has actual difficulty in holding, supporting, and using a large, heavy full-size main battle rifle, be it a Garand, M14, G3, FAL, or whatever else. But no one should try and convince themselves that there is no benefit to using a more compact, quicker-handling, ligher-recoiling weapon for many tasks.

Unfortunately, some of these benefits are difficult to grasp (apparently) unless you've put in time in direct comparisons of different weapons run in scenarios and/or against a timer.

Sometimes the difference between "good," "better," and "best" isn't important. Sometimes it is.

DeMilled
October 12, 2012, 10:11 AM
It's a trade off.

I'm sure you were pretty darn quick in running those scenarios against a timer with the smaller, lighter, quicker rifle, Sam1911.

I, however, have rejected the smaller, lighter, faster rifles (M4A2 specifically) after going over to Iraq and seeing how well they stop humans. Given my druthers I'd hit the bad guy with a 25mm HE but it's no longer an option. sigh

So, I use a FAL.

The extra weight does not bother me. I value putting 308 bullets into the threat, over 223 bullets, more than being quicker at the range shooting cardboard.

I guess it comes down to your priorities.
Weight of rifle over caliber of bullet.


To each their own...

Telekinesis
October 12, 2012, 11:13 AM
2. An attacker has too much chance to grab that gun sticking out and wrestle you for control of it. A pistol held close to the body is more secure. (I know... I know... everyone on this forum is perfect and maybe Superman and no criminal would ever ever in a million years get a hold of his gun and I am being silly in suggesting that such a thing could ever ever happen even though about 1 in 4 trained police officers who get shot are shot with their own gun after a criminal took it away from them but nobody around here would ever ever suffer such a fate because... well, they are just better and perfect and all.)

Those 1 in 4 trained police officers typically get shot with their pistols, not their rifles. Lets discount the fact that police officers have to be in much riskier situations than someone defending their home (lets say, handcuffing someone) and just focus on the actual matter of fighting over a weapon. A pistol is a hard weapon to fight over because you have very little leverage on the weapon. It also has some other problems like if someone is grabbing your slide, it is very likely that your gun won't function (try dryfiring your gun with the slide an eighth of an inch out of battery, most won't).

A rifle with a proper fighting sling on the other hand, does not have those same issues. Primarily, it's a lot harder to grab a weapon tied to someone else and get it turned around enough to shoot them. Secondly, as the shooter, you have MUCH more leverage to use against the guy grabbing your rifle. And because of the design of the gun, you can still fire the gun while an assailant is holding onto the muzzle of the gun.

A 16" rifle should also not be much longer than a handgun at arms length, but it still has advantages of being easier to hit with and having better terminal ballistics. If you move into SBRs, it is quite possible to have a rifle that takes up less room than a handgun would.


4. A Class 3 weapon for home defense sounds like trouble waiting to happen. A prosecutor or a civil attorney would have a field day with a jury portraying you as Rambo or some Killer Elite wannabe using a weapon of war to gun down that poor, misguided teenager who broke into your home. No thanks.

You only get into that if you are in a questionable shoot to begin with. If its a good shoot, it doesn't matter what you use. The defense of suppressors though is relatively easy. It is well documented that suppressors are used to protect the shooter's and bystanders' hearing both in the US and around the world. For example, several states have begun to legalize suppressors for hunting use as a means to protect hunter's hearing.
And "Class 3" is a tax code ;)

Sam1911
October 12, 2012, 11:35 AM
A 16" rifle should also not be much longer than a handgun at arms length, but it still has advantages of being easier to hit with and having better terminal ballistics. I've tried and tried, but at "in the house distances" I can't make better and faster hits with a rifle than I can with a handgun. I know it is a popular truism that "rifles are easier to hit with than handguns" but at close range it just does not seem to be true. As they say, the timer don't lie!

If you move into SBRs, it is quite possible to have a rifle that takes up less room than a handgun would.
Uh....really? :scrutiny: Unless your home defense "handgun" is an XP-100, I don't see how that is remotely possible.

You only get into that if you are in a questionable shoot to begin with. If its a good shoot, it doesn't matter what you use. Aaach. This again? And who decides it's a "GOOD SHOOT?" The folks who are looking at your weapon and trying to decide what kind of person you are and whether they believe your story.

(I sometimes think we should revise out standard "After the Shooting" guidelines to say that you should put on your white hat, adjust you personal halo, and announce, "It's ok, officers you may stand down! This was a GOOD SHOOT!" ;))

Dr. Meyer's study that we so often refer to here did show that characteristics of the weapon used can indeed influence whether shootings are found to be justified or not. Not because of any specific legal definitions, but because the folks deciding are absolutely swayed by appearances, biases, and impressions. In a way, it's a kind of marketing. Just like how a defense attorney will make you shave, get a hair cut, and wear a nice suit when you show up in court.

DeMilled
October 12, 2012, 11:42 AM
Would a 16" barreled suppressed FAL be good for home defense?

Would overpenetration be the only concern? Are there any light .308 loads or low penetrating loads that are practical?



Also, are there any other practical self defense reasons to own an FAL? I'm trying to find an excuse to get one :D

These are the questions at hand.

You guys are getting way off topic and should start another thread.

JShirley
October 12, 2012, 12:38 PM
A 308 is too powerful for urban use. Too powerful for indoor use, too. Think your hearing would EVER return after firing a 308 in your bedroom?

Well, I had an ND with a .270 indoors 24 years ago. Odds are good that my hearing is better than yours, even with a few 81mm rounds having gone off next to my head. So I'm going to see your hyperbolic rhetorical question and answer with practical experience.

110 and 155 grain A-MAX loads both will deliver massive fragmentation wounds and not be overpenetrative at HD distances. The 110 will penetrate less than almost all common defensive handgun rounds. The 155 will be in what a good many believe to be the ideal penetration range (14-18") for defense.

John

SaxonPig
October 12, 2012, 02:05 PM
T- What does comparing a pistol held at arm's length have to do with my statement that a pistol held close to the body is more secure? Of course holding a pistol at arm's length makes it just as bad as a rifle in terms of inviting a grab attempt. That's why I said hold the pistol close.

But thanks for supporting my contention that a gun sticking out there can be grabbed.

I have learned from past experience that many members here want to argue and insist that a rifle is great indoors... no bulkier than a handgun... and that it cannot be grabbed in the dark by an intruder. Frankly, I cannot fathom the reasoning.

SaxonPig
October 12, 2012, 02:08 PM
OK, I give up. By all means get an assault rifle with a silencer loaded with specialy ammo to protect your home. Ideal by any measure.

But excuse me if I pass.

DeMilled
October 12, 2012, 02:27 PM
Case of after thought, going to step out of the conversation...

DeMilled
October 12, 2012, 02:31 PM
Case of after thought, going to step out of the conversation...

Girodin
October 12, 2012, 04:21 PM
Same concept - why use a $1,000 rifle when a $500 AK47 or a $300 12 gauge will do the job just as well?

Personally I do not believe a $300 pump gun does do the job as well as some of my $1000 carbines. This again gets into how one envisions using a weapon for HD and of course who may have to use that weapon.

Further more given all the considerations of a defensive shooting, worrying about $500 or even $700 or $1000 difference in gun values seems rather silly to me.


4. A Class 3 weapon for home defense sounds like trouble waiting to happen. A prosecutor or a civil attorney would have a field day with a jury portraying you as Rambo or some Killer Elite wannabe using a weapon of war to gun down that poor, misguided teenager who broke into your home. No thanks.

That worries me less than the fact that if worst case scenario occurs and you are tried and convicted there are mandatory penalty enhancements for using those types of weapons in a crime. In a clear cut SD shooting it wont matter. However, there are countless examples of cases that are less than clear cut.

fastest45ever
October 12, 2012, 04:58 PM
Discussing legal matters are not part of this discussion.
They are pretty much against guidelines and rules. Also, since they are so area and situation specific, they aren't worth much, and just create anger and fighting.

For legal matters you need to know your county, your DA, your fellow possible jurists, and where your city sits on these issues.

Also it depends on how you plan on addressing an invader. I would find it very difficult to imagine any scenario where you would have problems if you are protecting your children, and wife, from armed invaders.

The ONLY one I can think of is where you shoot bad guy, and other bad guy picks up his weapon and runs, and you have an alive bad guy who denies he had a weapon, and just wandered into the house, trying to get help.

I think you have made the first mistake by posting this question. A prosecutor would try and find your posts, and topics, and how you engaged a group to help you design a gun just for home defense. Premeditation and all that.

As I have said prior: design the gun for pig or deer hunting. It just happens to get used for HD in a pinch.

Think of 12 average people in your area, and how they would react to a
FNFAL with a short barrel, and a suppressor. You will have to explain why the
gun deviates so far from the normal FNFAL to a jury, I imagine.

Pigs are a real problem. Vermin that breed quickly, and you rarely get more then one shot without the suppressor.

I hope you get my drift on this.

One rather major effect that might be a good thing is the bad guys might not like the look of a full battle rifle pointed at them, and it might change their attitude. Problem is darkness is your friend, so they might not be able to see it, until you have to use it.

Warp
October 13, 2012, 03:03 PM
I think you have made the first mistake by posting this question. A prosecutor would try and find your posts, and topics, and how you engaged a group to help you design a gun just for home defense. Premeditation and all that.

So every time a person asks about a home defense gun, or a self defense gun, or a carry gun...you worry that it is premeditation of a crime? :confused:

meanmrmustard
October 13, 2012, 03:21 PM
So every time a person asks about a home defense gun, or a self defense gun, or a carry gun...you worry that it is premeditation of a crime? :confused:
Agreed. I'd think it would be just the opposite: who would be dumb enough to insinuate premeditated crime on a public forum, unless of course they were a law abiding citizen who truly wanted the opinions of others on a firearms themed forum as to an effective weapon for defense against those who'd wish to do them or their loved ones harm? Not everyone wants to have a thief or a crack head break into their home and threaten the lives of family for the sake of shooting someone. I'd hate for that to happen, yet, if its going to then I want an appropriate weapon to end a situation quickly and effectively. If need be, I'll sweat the details in court while my family is safe and ALIVE, rather than be a cautious ninny.

fastest45ever
October 14, 2012, 12:50 AM
Discussing legal matters are not part of this discussion.
They are pretty much against guidelines and rules. Also, since they are so area and situation specific, they aren't worth much, and just create anger and fighting.

If a 10MM Glock can be twisted to be an overly powerful weapon, in Arizona...

Your response is going to be different depending upon where you live. I know it's hard for some folks to get, but there are places were suppressors, Class 3, 20 round magazines, etc. are all against the law, and vilified. They also make it pretty much impossible to transfer guns to people, and, not possible to pass on to your heirs.

The rifle we are discussing would terrify my states Senators, and most of the congress people.

I sincerely hope the U.S. Supreme Court rulings are put into effect, and perhaps Federal law enforced, rather then our states much more restrictive state laws.

I have a friend with an UZI, retired LEO, and he couldn't will it to me, or his girlfriend in this state. The only person it could be transferred to is another LEO.

I trot this information out so you can see the wide range of legal limitations in different states. Suppressors? I believe the components are a felony under state law here.

FIVETWOSEVEN
October 14, 2012, 01:03 AM
Full auto fire from a hand-held weapon is pretty much worthless in combat.

Support gunners be damned!

OK, I give up. By all means get an assault rifle with a silencer loaded with specialy ammo to protect your home. Ideal by any measure.

But excuse me if I pass.

1. The FAL is not an assault rifle, it's a battle rifle even if it was full auto. There are also numerous cases of people using AR-15s for home defense and guess what? They weren't painted as criminals, assassins, rambo, etc.
2. That's just an unproven myth about using a silencer for home defense.
3. Really? Specialty ammo like JHPs, reduced recoil buckshot, etc? What makes the difference? Can't buy it at Wal-Mart?

The ONLY one I can think of is where you shoot bad guy, and other bad guy picks up his weapon and runs, and you have an alive bad guy who denies he had a weapon, and just wandered into the house, trying to get help.

They don't need to even have a weapon to be shot in my own home in my state and many other states. I'm not going to even wait to find out if he does have a weapon. If you broke into my home in the middle of the night, you have some ill intent on me and my family.

If a 10MM Glock can be twisted to be an overly powerful weapon, in Arizona...

That was a Colt Delta Elite and he was later released and all charges dropped.

I trot this information out so you can see the wide range of legal limitations in different states. Suppressors? I believe the components are a felony under state law here.

I'm pretty sure that if he's seriously considering a silencer, he knows if it's legal in his state.

fastest45ever
October 14, 2012, 01:26 AM
Fish spent 10 years in jail before all the charges were dropped, and it was a Glock 29, along with evil 10mm hollow point ammunition.:cuss:

He also just died, and now his family gets his debt.

http://www.haroldfishdefense.org/



So, back to the FAL. I guess if I had money to burn, I'd have one in HD setup, another for pigs, and one for long range.

So, buy whatever you want, and can afford, and shoot the heck out of it.

They are a great rifle, period.

Your point also changes the dynamic. Depending upon your home size, range capability of the weapon becomes important. Really big house, maybe that wonder shotgun doesn't work so well?

Girodin
October 14, 2012, 01:55 AM
Fish had MUCH bigger legal issues in his case than using a 10mm. In fact, I find the amount of focus folks have given that to be laughable in light of the situation as a whole.

Warp
October 14, 2012, 02:11 AM
Fish had MUCH bigger legal issues in his case than using a 10mm. In fact, I find the amount of focus folks have given that to be laughable in light of the situation as a whole.

Do you not recall what jurors stated regarding caliber/ammo choice after the trial?

Girodin
October 14, 2012, 02:24 AM
My point is the whole circumstances of the shooting put him behind the eight ball to begin with. Furthermore, I believe his original trial lawyer was less than good. I actually have done trial work so I'm basing my opinion of that on more than mere whimsy. Lawyers can attempt makes stupid arguments, but if opposing counsel is half decent those stupid arguments don't go far (may not even come it at all) and often even backfire. It's a major thread deviation to get into the details but IMHO his 10mm was not as big a factor as is often made out anda there are much more important takeaways from that case.

fastest45ever
October 14, 2012, 04:16 AM
So let's trust that the OP has researched such information, and has concluded the issues we are discussing are not relevant, or not issues in his locale.

What is the scenario in OP's area for defense, local, range needed, etc.?

Trung Si
October 14, 2012, 10:28 AM
Using an FAL for Home Defense makes absolutely no Sense to me, when a shorter Shotgun or Pistol is available, unless One is outside defending One's Property, then by all means!:confused:

FIVETWOSEVEN
October 14, 2012, 12:46 PM
Fish spent 10 years in jail before all the charges were dropped, and it was a Glock 29, along with evil 10mm hollow point ammunition.

You're right about the Glock from what I see. I read that he used Silver Tip ammo though.

conhntr
October 14, 2012, 05:38 PM
Trungsi a 18" shotgun is not much shorter than a 16" fal. Unless the shotgun has a pistol grip?
Para carbine 37.5" /28.5 folded overall length
Rem 870 38.5"

GLOOB
October 14, 2012, 07:54 PM
Do you not recall what jurors stated regarding caliber/ammo choice after the trial?
Yes, I do. And yet, nowhere have I ever learned the breed of the dog, nor even a hint at how large it was, nor any info about its demeanor. Was it a wild hunting hound, a 100 pound pitbull, or a shih tzu?

Seems like the info we have kinda sucks, and something tells me the jury didn't have much better.

BTW, he was sentenced to 10 years. He served 3 before the decision was overturned.

Vern Humphrey
October 14, 2012, 08:01 PM
Quote:
Full auto fire from a hand-held weapon is pretty much worthless in combat.
Support gunners be damned!
"Support gunners be damned?"

You had people firing overhead supporting fire, full auto from hand-held weapons?:what:

When I was a company commander, that was done only from tripod-mounted M60s, applying the Gunner's Rule.

FIVETWOSEVEN
October 14, 2012, 09:51 PM
No I have not but plenty of real combat footage shows full auto from hand held M240s and M249s. No tripods seen there.

Vern Humphrey
October 14, 2012, 09:53 PM
I can show you films of all kinds of bad practices and mistakes. But full auto "support fire" from hand-held weapons is a recipe for disaster.

fastest45ever
October 14, 2012, 11:15 PM
In my prime, with open sites and a match grade M14, at 100 yards I was under an inch, all day. Ok, we did hand load match grade ammo as well.

On full auto the only thing I was good for was suppressive fire, maybe. An elephant would have been safe from my bursts at 100 yards. OK< maybe not the first shot, but the next two would have ended up in the next country.

FIVETWOSEVEN
October 15, 2012, 12:24 AM
I can show you films of all kinds of bad practices and mistakes. But full auto "support fire" from hand-held weapons is a recipe for disaster.

Must be why the military issues hand held machine guns without tripods and are mostly used without even the bipod. :rolleyes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9vGHU1RsF0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZ2SWWDt8Wg

What's so disastrous about fighting in a constantly moving war with belt feds? They aren't fighting waves of Vietcong or anything organized. Tri pods would slow them down.

Vern Humphrey
October 15, 2012, 09:53 AM
Must be why the military issues hand held machine guns without tripods and are mostly used without even the bipod.
People can make all sorts of dumb moves -- but the M240 and M249 are designed to be used from the bipod.

Robert
October 15, 2012, 01:37 PM
Holy drift Batman...

If you enjoyed reading about "FAL for Home Defense?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!