MachIVshooter
Member
Beats a sharp stick, but unless I'm being invaded by Monty Python rabbits, I want more than a .22 for defense.
Are rifles harder to master than a shotgun for HD?
- Thread starter 12Pump
- Start date
- Status
Beats a sharp stick, but unless I'm being invaded by Monty Python rabbits, I want more than a .22 for defense.
.22lr sucks at reliably stopping an attacker.
doubleh
Member
Maybe I'm missing something. The thread is about home defense. Very close range shooting. I really can't see any difference between a shot gun and a rife at these distances in placing your shot except for the recoil generated. I'm sure someone will be along to explain the difference.
Something else that confuses me about these home defense threads is that any cheap handgun is not to be trusted to be reliable but the cheapest shotgun is perfect for the task of saving your life.
'Scuse me, I'm just bored and sarcastic this morning.
Something else that confuses me about these home defense threads is that any cheap handgun is not to be trusted to be reliable but the cheapest shotgun is perfect for the task of saving your life.
'Scuse me, I'm just bored and sarcastic this morning.
That is because people with experience know that cheap handguns tend to be less reliable than economically priced pump shotguns.
That is without considering the short-stroke of course...but then there are a lot of ways for a newb to mess up a semi auto handgun too.
As for placing your shot, well, if it's only one singular shot and you don't anticipate the recoil, and the firearm isn't too long or heavy, and you didn't mess up loading/chambring it or leave it on-safe, placing one shot at across the room distances might not be much different. That's one shot, assuming you operated it correctly.
doubleh
Member
Any firearm that is to be used for defense should be shot enough to be trusted to perform without problems. Cheap or expensive. What I was getting at is the fact that any handgun that is not expensive is considered junk in most of these posts but any cheap shotgun will perform reliably.
I did mention recoil but didn't go into detail. What I though would be obvious is the fact both will have to be shot to a point of impact because shot won't have enough distance to spread in a home defense situation. Of course a 223 will have less recoil than about any shotgun. Bigger caliiberand the dufference goes away.
I did mention recoil but didn't go into detail. What I though would be obvious is the fact both will have to be shot to a point of impact because shot won't have enough distance to spread in a home defense situation. Of course a 223 will have less recoil than about any shotgun. Bigger caliiberand the dufference goes away.
While I can't ever see myself buying one, our local shop sells quite a number of Hi-Points (it's a poor town) and reports are certain models are pretty darn reliable.
The may not be pretty, they may be too big, they may be overweight, but they go bang every time you pull the trigger.
Their gunsmith tells me they have far fewer complaints / repairs with Hi-Points than Taurus.
Shotgun for me.
More hits on the target for the one or two shots you'll take during the couple of seconds that you'll have to shoot. I'd rather put 9 .33 caliber impacts on the target than one .223 caliber hit. A normal .223 round will put about 1300 ft-lbs of energy on the target but 9 double 00 pellets will deliver about 1500 ft-bls of energy. The average guy isn't going to be able to make a nice center of mass 9 round, 4 inch pattern with their AR, I'd bet that half those rounds will be sprayed all over the room. But with a shotgun you can put 9 .33 caliber hits inside of 4 inches with one shell.
Recoil? I doubt that the average person is going to notice it for the one or two shots that they are going to be able to get off. I'd only worry about it if I thought that I was going to get in to a protracted fire fight - which I don't see happening in a real home defense situation. Just remember, even with a shotgun you need to aim the front bead on to the target.
Most of you guys sound like you are talking about the kind of gun fight a military person or a cop would get involved with, not the kind of situation an average person would get in to with a home invasion situation.
More hits on the target for the one or two shots you'll take during the couple of seconds that you'll have to shoot. I'd rather put 9 .33 caliber impacts on the target than one .223 caliber hit. A normal .223 round will put about 1300 ft-lbs of energy on the target but 9 double 00 pellets will deliver about 1500 ft-bls of energy. The average guy isn't going to be able to make a nice center of mass 9 round, 4 inch pattern with their AR, I'd bet that half those rounds will be sprayed all over the room. But with a shotgun you can put 9 .33 caliber hits inside of 4 inches with one shell.
Recoil? I doubt that the average person is going to notice it for the one or two shots that they are going to be able to get off. I'd only worry about it if I thought that I was going to get in to a protracted fire fight - which I don't see happening in a real home defense situation. Just remember, even with a shotgun you need to aim the front bead on to the target.
Most of you guys sound like you are talking about the kind of gun fight a military person or a cop would get involved with, not the kind of situation an average person would get in to with a home invasion situation.
MachIVshooter
Member
Pretty sure the criteria for the P90 was a rear echelon PDW with the ability to penetrate PASGT armor at 50 meters, which the 9mm subguns it was replacing couldn't do.
Averageman
Member
I believe that if you are going to say without hesitation "X" is better than "Y" or "Z", then you need to take in to account other variables before stating one is better than the other.
There are other considerations than the gun and caliber in home defense.
Do you have a weapon mounted light?
Do you have a Security System?
Do you have a plan?
Are you Rural or Urban?
What State do you live in and how do their Laws effect you defending you life and Property?
Each situation is unique and makes choosing your weapon and it accoutrements unique.
An office worker living in an Urban Apartment in Massachusetts may need "X".
A Heavy Equipment operator who keeps his Equipment at home in Rural South West Texas may need "Y".
There is NO definitive answer without further details of the individual situation.
One may be best served by a Shotgun, the other by an AR with night vision and a mounted IR Laser.
There are other considerations than the gun and caliber in home defense.
Do you have a weapon mounted light?
Do you have a Security System?
Do you have a plan?
Are you Rural or Urban?
What State do you live in and how do their Laws effect you defending you life and Property?
Each situation is unique and makes choosing your weapon and it accoutrements unique.
An office worker living in an Urban Apartment in Massachusetts may need "X".
A Heavy Equipment operator who keeps his Equipment at home in Rural South West Texas may need "Y".
There is NO definitive answer without further details of the individual situation.
One may be best served by a Shotgun, the other by an AR with night vision and a mounted IR Laser.
-A lot of things 'should be' but are not
-It's not like all one has to do is shoot a gun 'enough to be trusted' and boom, it's reliable. If you buy an unreliable gun and shoot it enough to be trusted, and it has failures, well, you shouldn't have bought that gun people said might be unreliable
Oh, but they are.
And it's about more than just one or two shots. As mentioned above, a person SHOULD practice with their defensive arm of choice for familiarity and to prove reliability...recoil is a pretty big factory there, and is likely to mean people won't do the practice at all, or possibly that they will teach themselves to flinch.
The average person isn't getting 2 shots (and hits) off in 2 seconds with a defensively loaded pump shotgun they haven't practiced with, I'll bet, anyway.
Tcruse
Member
I would be more worried about the extra projectiles to doing unintended damage. I have several pets that I would suspect would be involved in one way or another for any intruder and would need to be assured that the bullet would only hit the intruder and harm any of the pets or other innocents. Also, any long gun would be secondary since it would not be as accessible as the handgun on my belt.
I definitely think the number of guns you need (Gn) can be defined by a function:
Gn = Ghave + 1
I definitely think the number of guns you need (Gn) can be defined by a function:
Gn = Ghave + 1
coloradokevin
Member
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2008
- Messages
- 3,285
Jim Watson said:
^^This! The first reply said it all. People who think that you don't need to aim a shotgun clearly don't have much experience actually using shotguns at defensive distances.
As for ease of use, that depends on the shotgun and rifle that are being compared. Neither one needs to be a particularly complex machine!
brewer12345
Member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2015
- Messages
- 2,753
Depends heavily on what you practice with/shoot a lot. I shoot a lot of trap and hunt with a shotgun a ton. I would pick one for home defense without hesitation. The recoil would not phase me and based on my experience with hunting shots when I am very excited, I doubt I would notice it at all in an armed confrontation. My shotguns are also heavy enough to be an effective club. For others an AR might fill the same role.
For someone who does not shoot, hunt or practice much, I would guess a handgun would be the easiest choice to handle.
For someone who does not shoot, hunt or practice much, I would guess a handgun would be the easiest choice to handle.
doubleh
Member
I just have to ask this. How many of the posters offering opinions on this particular thread, or for any self/home defense situation for that matter, have actual first hand experience to back up their opinion? I certainly don't and would guess about 99% posting don't either.
MachIVshooter
Member
No, you didn't. But it was inevitable that this ostensibly humble but actually sanctimonious comment would pop up at some point.
First hand experience...shooting handguns, rifles and shotguns, and instructing others in the shooting of handguns, rifles, and shotguns?
I would guess that quite a few have some of those and I know some of us have all of those.
I will also guess that even if anybody posting in this thread had shot another human being in self defense/home defense, they would not say so on here.
BTW: It also would not be of benefit to go into a thread asking about good carry guns and say "have any of you actually shot an attacker with your carry gun?". Having done so is not a prerequisite here.
entropy
Member
+1. I have a lot of experience with both shotguns and AR's ; I would be OK using either, but my HD gun is an Ithaca 37, or 1911, whichever I grab first.
I have recommended pistol caliber carbines for HD in the past; for some, they are a good choice. My sister and her husband have a Marlin Camp Carbine in 9mm, and it is a good choice for their situation. They initially considered a buying a .30-06 rifle for HD, I talked them into the Marlin. Their neighbors would appreciate it, if they knew. They had my Dad's 1100 before that, but he wanted it back, and they decided a rifle would be the way to go. (Lots of reading, little practical experience. Well, my sister is a dang good shotgunner; he was Air Force, so no rifle experience.
)
barnbwt
member
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2011
- Messages
- 7,340
First of all, it wasn't replacing 9mm SMGs, it was replacing whatever replaced the M1 Carbine originally intended for non-front crews if anything (which is to say, the full-size M16/FAMAS/SA80/HK33/AR70 223 rifles that were in service by many of these units when the RFP went out). 9mm never had the capabilities of range or AP that 5.7 was bringing to the table, the only real prior alternative was the 223 carbine. Second, the AP qualities were requirements for a particular load of ammunition, and only one facet of the design goal (and not even the most important one). The AP rating mostly served to set the base 'power level' of the various PDW rounds in competition (i.e. do you want a rifle round or a pistol round or something in between?)
I know you hate the 5.7, Mach, but c'mon; the PDW concept is tailor-made for domestic defensive scenarios (it's definitely underwhelming for a battlefield scenario, but that's specifically what it was not designed for). Surprise attack by superior numbers of superior-armed foes, and this gun was meant to have enough punch to hold them off or cover an egress; literally the exact same requirements as a civilian defensive scenario.
-"Rear echelon" non-combat personnel going about their daily lives sounds an awful lot like civvy home life or travel
-"Rear echelon" non-combat personnel with some, but not extensive, training in the use of their defensive weapons who would prefer a simple & easy to shoot platform, sounds an awful lot like civvy shooters
-The whole point of the PDW was to bring the capacity to engage & repel attackers with superior armament (to include armor) in a defensive scenario, while remaining as unobtrusive as possible otherwise. Sounds a whole lot like the ideal defensive weapon for anybody
-While automatic fire certainly increases the weapon's effectiveness, it is hardly fundamental to its utility (as we all know, even controllable automatic fire really doesn't bring huge additional capability to the table over semi-auto, especially in a defensive stance where the known approaches can be covered)
-While AP ammo is useful against armored targets (still rare, but will obviously increase in civilian life as tech advances & we insist on using defensive ammo uniquely ill-suited for armor-penetration), it's not like the 5.7 gives up anything on un-armored targets for this capacity when using the more common non-AP rounds. The end result is similar to 9mm, i.e. "good enough"
Yet I'm sure many will continue to miss the difference between defense and offense, and argue that since the P90 isn't the best tool for storming a building of hostile bunkered commandos, an SBR M4 in 5.56 at a minimum is needed for driving off or stopping determined hoods intent on doing harm. Doesn't matter that the gun is larger, louder, brighter, slower to get on target, has fewer rounds on tap, and causes a nasty flinch in most shooters who are more likely to find it too unpleasant to correct with frequent practice.
TCB
I was nodding in agreement up until the claim that an AR pattern rifle in 5.56 causes nasty flinching in most shooters. What?
First hand experience, training - yes. Actually having to use a shotgun for home defense - twice. In Arizona it ain't all that unusual to have to deal with this kind of problem, especially in Yuma. No, I didn't drop the bad guys but they sure as hell didn't like the look or the sound of that Mossberg 500.
Red Wind
Member
Sheesh, at least the cops will be able to spot the guy by his singed eyebrows if nothing else
Lol!
I really think it depends on personal choice , training, AND the layout of the particular home. For example in my layout someone entering my bedroom would be about 10-12 feet away. I think a 4 inch pattern would be useful in a stresseful, just woke up situation
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
