I suggest that you start learning lip readin.gMy night stand pistol is a 357 snub nose revolver loaded with 124 grain semi jacketed hollow points.
I suggest that you start learning lip readin.gMy night stand pistol is a 357 snub nose revolver loaded with 124 grain semi jacketed hollow points.
A "machine pistol" covers a lot of things. The OP wasnt really specific about whether it had a stock or not, he said "machine pistol". If it doesnt have a stock, theres really no point, but most dont seem to understand that. And the reason why is pretty obvious I think.I'm not disagreeing with anything you say here. For a moment though, let's separate concept from reality and the square range from downrange. Shooting an SMG can be terrific fun. Obviously, carrying an SMG around all day is way easier than toting an 18 or 20 inch twelve-gauge pump or semi-auto shotgun around. Not too mention, if you've got an MP5K or MP7, there's serious CDI points there. In experienced hands, they are great entry weapons. But as shoulder-fired weapons. The OP was about "nightstand pistols."
Teaching someone to get "well-placed hits" with a sub-gun on the square range is one thing. But, in over 20 years on active duty and another 16 in LE, I've seen what happens with full-auto guns as the pucker factor increases. And I think we may have a fundamental disagreement regarding the actual purpose of full-auto fire. I know, you keep bring up "bursts."
Also, you note the radical difference between what's considered a machine-pistol and something with a solid shoulder stock (and no, a cheesy "arm-brace" ain't gonna do it for me). I've met a handful of guys in my life (maybe three or four) I'd say would be well-served using a terrifically-expensive sub-machine gun as a "night-stand pistol." Being as I subscribe to the notion of "A good man's gotta know his limitations," I know I ain't one of those guys. I'll keep my 590A1, my M-4 and a high-cap .45 w/WML as my nightstand armament.
I suggest that you start learning lip readin.g
Any firearm fired indoors can cause permanent noise-induced hearing loss, and a short-barreled .357 Magnum is likely to do so with one shot.But where's the problem? If you don't get terribly offended by my asking.
OK, I agree but my point was that the pistol/rifle caliber combo is (or seems to be) several times louder than the already terribly loud 357 Mag. I read that when under pressure of an emergency shooters don't hear muzzle blast. I don't think that is going to be the case with these new pistol sized AR's. In my younger days I fired a 357 Mag w/out ear protection (once) & it was painful but I was not deaf forever. These short barreled AR's are so loud they are uncomfortable even with good ear protection. To me even in the heat of battle that huge blast will impair the shooter's performance which is the most important element of a gun fight. .Any firearm fired indoors can cause permanent noise-induced hearing loss, and a short-barreled .357 Magnum is likely to do so with one shot.
That's a psychological phenomenon. The ear damage is physical, and it is permanent..I read that when under pressure of an emergency shooters don't hear muzzle blast.
Some authors did not help. Mass A wrote something in one of his books along this line back before Algore invented the net. Saying something like using reloads "could" result in problems.
Convincing jury of what? I am a lawyer and I would be interested in the difference in the defense scenario where one has shot the intruder with a 9mm pistol vs taking his head clean off with a shotgun slug.
Do you even know just what it is that Mr. Ayoob has said about reloads for SD? 'Cause it isn't anything close to what you seem to be suggesting.
That's nice. No offense, but what kind of lawyer? What's your specialty?
And since you are a lawyer, I'm pretty sure you know what you're doing here. I know I do. It's called moving the goalposts. We're not discussing defending oneself with a 9mm vs. a 12ga slug, We're discussing "normal" guns vs. full auto.
Convincing a jury that it was reasonable and prudent to hose down an assailant with a machine gun, that's what.
And spare me the lecture. I know about controlled bursts. You know about controlled bursts. We ALL know about controlled bursts. Most people don't. They only know what they see in the movies. It's hard enough to get the average person to wrap his head around the idea of having to shoot someone more than once, do you really think it won't be a much steeper uphill battle to convince them that it is OK to spray them down in a hail of automatic gunfire?
Yeah, I know. I know, you know, we all know. But you also gotta know that's how a prosecutor is gonna paint the picture.
It' been a hell of a long time since I read the book. IIRC it was in his one called the Gravest Extreme, maybe, but again it's been decades. Again as I said he, (Mass) said something along the lines of using reloads "could be" a problem. Now if he never said this at all is what you are saying? Anyway over time this morphed into many claiming there were court cases where some DA used the loads as a "thing" against the shooter. This was re-told over the net for decades on many net forums. Many of the people saying this were so convinced it was true they would get over the top angry when told it was not true, just as it seems to have done you. <shrug>. In any case every time I read someone asking for anyone to cite a court case where this argument was used against a person who used a gun to defend themselves no one could ever find one. So again not sure what I said that set you off, I made no direct quote of the man, I said he said "something along the line of re loads could" be a problem. I do remember in one of his books he said to scream POLICE if you have to draw. Then saying after to say you were screaming for someone to call Police. Again I personally thought this was poor tactic. To each his own on stuff Mass wrote in his books. He had and still has quite a following.Do you even know just what it is that Mr. Ayoob has said about reloads for SD? 'Cause it isn't anything close to what you seem to be suggesting.
I have wondered about that too, the bast. I LOVE my AR pistols in Pistol caliber but, last time someone was shooting next to me at the indoor with one in .223 I thought they had some kind of huge magnum. I was wearing plugs with muffs over them. The blast was amazing. When I saw the brass I realized it was "just a 223" I thought damn what must that sound like with no muffs? Kind of reminded me of when Ruger made those pistols in .30 Carbine. They had a muzzle blast that was amazing for the little cartridge. I do now keep a couple sets of the electronic muff around. So if I have time I can slap a set on before I check what's going bump at night. Since they enhance my hearing and will block the blast.My night stand pistol is a 357 snub nose revolver loaded with 124 grain semi jacketed hollow points. I also have a shotgun handy but it's obviously not resting on my night stand.
Pistols chambered in rifle calibers like .223 are in my opinion not needed for close quarter work. Also the noise issue has been already discussed here but my personal experience with pistols chambered in .223 is limited to being nearby when other folks fire them at the range. All I can say is that the muzzle blast is enormous. I don't look forward to firing my 357 Mag revolver inside the house but I would be doubly concerned about doing the same with a full auto pistol chambered in a rifle caliber.
I been to a lot of indoor, and outdoor ranges that dont allow any full auto, and their ceilings, and just about everything else were all shot to hell. So whats your point here?A full auto would work well if you wanted to put holes in your roof.
LOL, the place I go sure as hell shows how many "oops" happen all the time which is why I do not like to be there when it's busy. I would have to guess they must have some really good clips from the camera system that records the people back there. Walls used to be covered with some kind of commercial carpet. Every stall had huge furrows in it and no full auto here They finally tore all the carpet down and just put diamond plate steel tiles on the walls. While back they took out the tables and replaced them with a rack that holds 3 metal pans. Idea being you could just tip them up to dump brass. Neat idea and of course the next time I went several of them have holes shot in them already.I been to a lot of indoor, and outdoor ranges that dont allow any full auto, and their ceilings, and just about everything else were all shot to hell. So whats your point here?
I been to a lot of indoor, and outdoor ranges that dont allow any full auto, and their ceilings, and just about everything else were all shot to hell. So whats your point here?
It' been a hell of a long time since I read the book. IIRC it was in his one called the Gravest Extreme, maybe, but again it's been decades. Again as I said he, (Mass) said something along the lines of using reloads "could be" a problem. Now if he never said this at all is what you are saying? Anyway over time this morphed into many claiming there were court cases where some DA used the loads as a "thing" against the shooter....
Having a Machine Pistol does not mean you “hose” down an intruder with spray of bullets - its an added option to semi mode if there is a need for full auto....
I just thumbed through my copy of In the Gravest Extreme and the only mention of reloads I could find was on p. 125 where Mr. Ayoob mentions the "heavily handloaded ammo" kept in a .45 so as to operate a stiffer recoil spring (presumably installed as a child safety measure).
But no matter, that book came out 40 years ago and is chock full of ideas that are, shall we say, dated. Much more recently (2014), in Deadly Force he talks about the issue with handloads being, not that you will get hung for using them, but that if GSR evidence could be a factor in corroborating your side of the story it will be inadmissible. (p. 217)
In fact, time and time again, every time I see him recommend against using reloads for SD, his argument revolves around GSR evidence.
As far as the "ain't no case" BS: https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...-handloads-trivial.172213/page-6#post-2129976
So no shotguns for you I guessAs far as using a machine pistol for home defense - if I'm legally responsible for every bullet I shoot, I don't want to be dumping 10 of them every second.
So no shotguns for you I guess
All depends on you being able to shoot either, and having the experience to know.Ehh, what's the spread on an 870 loaded with buck compared to a Glock 18.