1911 or AK for HD

Status
Not open for further replies.
General Geoff said:
That's legal nonsense, jakemccoy. A 1911 is a firearm, it is deadly force. Just like an AK. They are the same class of force, legally. What matters in a trial where you claim self defense as justification to a homicide, is the perception of the defendant that his/her life is in imminent danger at the time of the shooting. That is all. And any defense attorney would/should spell this out precisely to the jury.

That's first year law school stuff right there. I do have to admit that those points are logical and correct, but after law school in the real world, an irrational jury factor is a major part of a trial and pre-trial. You're completely ignoring this aspect to a fault. So, I guess we'll have to be in disagreement. :)
 
Last edited:
mljdeckard said:
And if the prosecutor tries to dazzle the jury by demonizing the gun, he will get the ostensibility slapped off him.

If those are words of your lawyer to you, I recommend getting a new one...good luck.

Seriously, I wish you the best because I don't want to see any law abiding gun owner having to go through a trial.
 
Wow, lots of mall ninjas in this thread.

The question is not about the merits of the AK platform or the .223 round, it's the suitability of the rifle and round vs. a 1911 in a home defense situation.

Now, rule #1 is Have A Gun. If the AK is the only thing that's available, then grab it. But if you're going to choose a gun to make available, train with, etc:

I can think of a LOT of reasons why you WOULDN'T want to use a .223 AK for home defense, including but not limited to
-risk of overpenetration
-lack of maneuverability
-a rifle requires two hands, taking away your ability to manipulate a flashlight, telephone, door handle, etc
-an "evil" looking rifle could invite hostile attention from the authorities
-long arms can be more difficult to securely store for HD purposes

I can't think of a single reason why you would need to choose the AK over the 1911. Is there a home defense situation where a 1911 would not solve your problems, but an AK would? Do you really anticipate assailants with body armor coming through your windows (and are you willing to tell a judge that)?

A clean, reliable 1911 in good repair, 3 mags loaded with JHPs, a good flashlight and a charged cell phone. And lots of practical training. That's all you need or want.

Anything else is just fantasy land.
 
This is why I want a coach gun.

"Well Your Honor, Mr Gonzo here just had to shells on his gun. He really makes Bill Ruger and his 10 round magazines look like a mass murderer."
 
I can think of a LOT of reasons why you WOULDN'T want to use a .223 AK for home defense, including but not limited to
-risk of overpenetration
-lack of maneuverability
-a rifle requires two hands, taking away your ability to manipulate a flashlight, telephone, door handle, etc
-an "evil" looking rifle could invite hostile attention from the authorities
-long arms can be more difficult to securely store for HD purposes

1. .223 overpenetrates less than 9mm ball, probably less than .45 ball.
2. 16" barreled AK maneuvers just fine indoors.
3. Flashlight can be mounted on the rifle, and you should be using two hands to control your weapon anyway.
4. A 1911 could, just as easily.
5. What do you mean by "securely store"? My home defense rifle is propped up near my bed. Why would I want something securely stored and inaccessible at a moment's notice, when it is kept there primarily for emergency use?

I can't think of a single reason why you would need to choose the AK over the 1911.
1. 30 rounds vs 8
2. much more energy behind each shot
3. more easily and accurately aimed
Need any more?

Is there a home defense situation where a 1911 would not solve your problems, but an AK would?

Six punks break into your house, all armed and intent on killing you, raping your wife, and stealing your guns. This is just one of any number of theoretical scenarios where an AK would vastly increase your chances of survival.

Do you really anticipate assailants with body armor coming through your windows (and are you willing to tell a judge that)?

Yes, and if it is relevant, yes. When you need it, and don't have it, you sing a different tune.
 
oh and furthermore;

A clean, reliable 1911 in good repair, 3 mags loaded with JHPs, a good flashlight and a charged cell phone. And lots of practical training. That's all you need or want.

Anything else is just fantasy land.
I'll reiterate this: You can't know that. Maybe you're willing to bet your family's life on a 1911; if it's all I had, I'd do so too. But if I have an AK, you can expect me to use the most robust weapon available to defend myself and my family. And it ain't the pistol.
 
If those are words of your lawyer to you, I recommend getting a new one...good luck.
I recommend that you get out of California and move some place where the authorities side with the victim instead of the perpetrator.

In Ohio, if you use a lawfully owned firearm in a good shoot, that's good enough and you're immune from suit.
 
1. .223 overpenetrates less than 9mm ball, probably less than .45 ball.
2. 16" barreled AK maneuvers just fine indoors.
3. Flashlight can be mounted on the rifle, and you should be using two hands to control your weapon anyway.
4. A 1911 could, just as easily.
5. What do you mean by "securely store"? My home defense rifle is propped up near my bed. Why would I want something securely stored and inaccessible at a moment's notice, when it is kept there primarily for emergency use?

1 – Irrelevant, we’re talking about .45JHP. No.

2 – My 16” barreled AK measures roughly 34” long and weights almost 10lbs. My 1911 is about 8” long and weighs less than 3lbs. Now you’re telling me you can move through the close quarters of a house, open doors, manipulate phones, and still maintain control of your firearm? No.

Plus what happens when you need to quickly conceal your firearm? What happens when the cops show up? What happens if you have to walk outside, or even worse, bug out? A pistol easily goes into a pocket or holster – strolling around out in public with an AK over your shoulder is a great way to invite unwanted attention.

3 – See, the inherent problem with rifle-mounted flashlights is that they require you to throw rule #1 right out the window – anything you want to shine your flashlight on, you also must cover with your muzzle. Check out a “bump in the night” with a flashlight equipped AK, and you’ll quickly find yourself pointing your rifle at your family, neighbors, pets, etc. Plus you lose a lot of control over your light, because you either have to rely on a pressure pad (take your hand off the rifle, lose your light), or you’re stuck with a constant light attached to your muzzle, which isn’t a good tactical decision either. Try again.

4 - A 1911 is not an “assault weapon,” nor does it accept “high capacity magazines,” both of which are common targets for unwelcome legal scrutiny. This ultimately has to come down to a matter of opinion, but it would appear that most of the thread, along with authorities on the matter (Ayoob, among others) agrees with me on this one. One more try...

5 – A loaded rifle propped against the corner of your bed is hardly what I would consider “securely stored.” It may work for you in your state, but for most of us (those of us with family, or who live in states with storage laws), that ain’t gonna cut it. I'll have my pistol out of my gun vault before you can get the flashlight on your AK turned on. Wrong again...

Plus a shiny rifle sitting out in the open makes a great target for theft.

1. 30 rounds vs 8
2. much more energy behind each shot
3. more easily and accurately aimed

1 – I don’t have the numbers in front of me, but FBI data shows that the VAST majority of firefights occur under 30 seconds, and less than 8 shots are fired. I’m sure someone has the specifics at hand, but point being is that you don't need 30 round mags.

2 – Are you shooting at people, or bears? A hit is a hit. You don’t need more muzzle energy – anything you can stop with a .223, you can stop with a .45ACP.

3 – You’re not shooting the AQT, you’re blasting at an intruder from the doorway of your bedroom. I would argue that a pistol is much more accurate and easily aimed in close quarters. No need to bring the firearm to your shoulders, closer sight radius, easier to point shoot, etc.

Need any more?

Yup, how about a legitimate one.

Here’s the inherent problem – you’re living in that fantasy world I alluded to in my first post. You've decided you're going to use an AK for self defense, and now you're trying to come up with reasons to justify it. You’re daydreaming about mobs of heavily armed, methed-out gangbangers invading your fortress, and fighting them off with your AK and a stack of 30 rounds magazines. And if that’s your reality, you need to focus on getting the heck out of there, not the firearm by your bedside.

You’re focused on that moment, not the before, and certainly not the after. It’s all well and good that you were able to save your life, but being alive isn’t going to do you or your family any good if you find yourself in prison.
 
Then Ohio isn't part of the USA.

I recommend that you get out of California and move some place where the authorities side with the victim instead of the perpetrator.

In Ohio, if you use a lawfully owned firearm in a good shoot, that's good enough and you're immune from suit.

I'll bet that's what Garry Fadden thought about West Virginia.
 
If you knew you had to be in a fight, a longarm would always be what you chose. Sidearms are reactive weapons used for their convenience and concealability.

This is the case.
If you know you are going to be in a firefight then the long gun (with correct ammo selection for your particular concerns, including reduced penetration) is always better while in the firefight.

If however you are unexpectedly the victim of an attack the pistol you have readily available beats the long gun stored away every time.



Some folks here are so comfortable with guns that they forget, or don't understand, that many Americans are terrified of guns. If a prosecutor is hell bent on frying you, the odds are strongly against you if a prosecutor holds up your AK in court and calls it an "AK47" . The jury will mostly get that deer in headlights look and wonder what in the world you were thinking. They will not appreciate the wonderful differences between .223 and .308, or between FMJ and JHP. They will only see an AK47 sitting on the evidence table. Your credibility will be in jeopardy. If there is a question about your self-defense, the odds will be stacked against you if you use an AK. People on the jury can understand the 1911, but not the AK. Make your choice of weaponry with this reality in mind.


This is also the case. It may be diminishing as semi auto firearms with previously demonized appearances become more mainstream, but it still persists in the perception of most potential jurors. What region your jurors will be coming from can determine how big this consideration should be. Are they from a rural area where the AR is one of the most common and popular firearms? Or from the big city with polar opposite views or cultures? Politics of the state and local level shape the views those jurors were raised with.

Personally I know in most of the nation you would be perceived better in court after using a rifle designed for large African game that looks like your typical hunting rifle than an AR or AK in .223/7.62x39.
The game rifle may be several times more powerful, but your typical juror still will perceive the "weapon of war" worse.

Clearly the AR/AK would be the much more appropriate tool for the job and safer for the neighborhood, but the profile of that AK or AR in court amongst people that do not understand firearms hurts you much more.
These are not likely to be people that immediately recognize the ballistics of the weapon platform, but rather who make generalized assumptions based on the profile and appearance.

In an absolutely clear cut case of self defense against a total stranger it shouldn't make a huge difference, but those are far less common than on the internet, highlighted by gun rights groups, and in movies. It can be clear cut self defense to you because you were present, and still be suspicious to others who were not.

What if the attacker is a relative, or ex of your girlfriend/wife? What if they are someone you had some financial or other dispute with?
You don't get to choose who tries to victimize you, and statistics show more victims are known to their attacker than not.
You may know no other issue was involved in the need to use lethal force and it was complete self defense, but if there is any other angle the prosecutor will pursue it.
With that doubt of your innocence placed into the jury's mind seemingly less important things like the mere appearance of the gun used can play a critical role in determining the outcome.
 
TonyDedo-

If you can't maneuver and clear buildings with an M-4, I guess all those soldiers doing it in Iraq every single day should sling their rifles and draw their pistols. If you can't clear a room with a rifle, you need to learn how. This isn't fantasy, it's training. (Maybe it's fantasy for YOU.)

Chasing someone out of your house is no longer defensive.

An M-4 doesn't require high capacity magazines either, It uses STANDARD capacity mags just fine.

You are flat wrong in thinking that one shot from ANY handgun is a good stop. Most people hit by a handgun RUN AWAY. Handguns are emergency backup guns, not what you grab when you have time. My handgun is what I use to cover my retreat back to my truck or home where I keep the rifles and shotguns.
 
I can tell you without any shadow of doubt, from personal real world experiance.

Shooting a .223 indoors our of a 16 inch barrel, is louder than a 4 inch barreled 9mm. And theoretically a 9mm should be louder than a 45 yes?

Again I am not looking to pick a fight, but my experiance has been completly different. the 223 was not only louder, it rocked my world completly.
The peak sound level is indeed about the same. The sound spectrum is different (the rifle probably has more "bass" than the pistol, and you may feel it more, which may account for the subjective difference, but the effect on your hearing will be the same (i.e., bad either way). Neither is as loud as a .357, though (high pressure cartridge + barrel-cylinder gap).

I can think of a LOT of reasons why you WOULDN'T want to use a .223 AK for home defense, including but not limited to
-risk of overpenetration
-lack of maneuverability
-a rifle requires two hands, taking away your ability to manipulate a flashlight, telephone, door handle, etc
Once again, .223 JHP penetrates less, not more, both in both building materials and gelatin than do JHP's in handgun calibers, as has been demonstrated over and over.

I can't think of a single reason why you would need to choose the AK over the 1911. Is there a home defense situation where a 1911 would not solve your problems, but an AK would?

A clean, reliable 1911 in good repair, 3 mags loaded with JHPs, a good flashlight and a charged cell phone. And lots of practical training. That's all you need or want.
Capacity (20 or 30 vs. 7-10, and you may not have access to spare magazines), easier to shoot quickly and accurately under stress, less likely to exit the structure (assuming JHP).

The 1911 is a fine choice, but it's not the only rational choice. A .223 carbine is a rational choice also. So is a 12- or 20-gauge shotgun, or a Glock, or a revolver. There is no one right answer.

1 – Irrelevant, we’re talking about .45JHP. No.
Appropriate .223 JHP also penetrates less in both building materials and gelatin than .45 JHP.

My 16” barreled AK measures roughly 34” long and weights almost 10lbs. My 1911 is about 8” long and weighs less than 3lbs. Now you’re telling me you can move through the close quarters of a house, open doors, manipulate phones, and still maintain control of your firearm? No.
Depends on your house. And generally speaking, moving through your house with a 1911 looking for bad guys while talking on the phone and holding a flashlight would be a poor choice as well.

Again, the 1911 is not a bad choice, but neither is it the only choice. Length, weight, and two-handedness criticism apply equally to all carbines and all shotguns, yet plenty of rational and knowledgeable people choose shotguns and carbines.

Plus what happens when you need to quickly conceal your firearm? What happens when the cops show up? What happens if you have to walk outside, or even worse, bug out? A pistol easily goes into a pocket or holster – strolling around out in public with an AK over your shoulder is a great way to invite unwanted attention.
If you need to carry concealed, obviously a rifle or shotgun won't be the first choice. For most HD scenarios, concealment is not a requirement. For "bugging out" in "SHTF" scenarios, I'd be in my car.

It is not either/or; you can own both a handgun and a carbine/shotgun, and use them in different roles and at different times. I don't understand the "There Is Only One Right Answer" mindset here.

See, the inherent problem with rifle-mounted flashlights is that they require you to throw rule #1 right out the window – anything you want to shine your flashlight on, you also must cover with your muzzle. Check out a “bump in the night” with a flashlight equipped AK, and you’ll quickly find yourself pointing your rifle at your family, neighbors, pets, etc.
No, you don't, and no, you won't. You can illuminate anything in the room with the muzzle pointed safely at the floor. We're not talking Wal-Mart narrow-beam flashlights here.

Plus you lose a lot of control over your light, because you either have to rely on a pressure pad (take your hand off the rifle, lose your light), or you’re stuck with a constant light attached to your muzzle, which isn’t a good tactical decision either. Try again.
Modern lights generally use dual-mode tailcap switches, and why wouldn't you have both hands on the rifle if you don't need to open doors and aren't trying to walk around with a phone in your ear?

Yes, if you live in a home with lots of closed doors and for some reason forsee the need to clear it by yourself before the police show up, the handgun is a better choice. If not, a shotgun or carbine are perfectly workable.

A 1911 is not an “assault weapon,” nor does it accept “high capacity magazines,” both of which are common targets for unwelcome legal scrutiny. This ultimately has to come down to a matter of opinion, but it would appear that most of the thread, along with authorities on the matter (Ayoob, among others) agrees with me on this one. One more try...
Ayoob has never said don't use over-10-round magazines or modern-looking carbines. He says, think through the issues and be able to explain your choices rationally. I recall that he used a 20-round magazine and a mounted light with his Beretta 92 HD pistol that he kept at one time.

A loaded rifle propped against the corner of your bed is hardly what I would consider “securely stored.” It may work for you in your state, but for most of us (those of us with family, or who live in states with storage laws), that ain’t gonna cut it. I'll have my pistol out of my gun vault before you can get the flashlight on your AK turned on. Wrong again...

Plus a shiny rifle sitting out in the open makes a great target for theft.
Why the animosity? Again, there is not One True Way; pistols work, revolvers work, long guns work. Some of us own both and use both at different times and in different circumstances.

Yes, long guns require more thought (well, more expense) to securely store while you're away. You can, however, take the carbine out of the safe when appropriate, and put it back when appropriate; it is not required that you leave it unattended.

If a 1911 works for you, that's great! Run with it. But if someone else chooses a carbine, a shotgun, or whatever, don't bash them and call them names because they may choose differently. It's a free country (at least most of it).
 
Last edited:
Penetration is a major issue in my mind. Use the 1911, or buy a shot gun. How would you like trying to defend your family from a random round that came through your house's wall? Possibly a round that went right into your wife's stomach.

Sorry but that's my 2 cents. Protect yourself of course. But don't endanger others.
 
Penetration is a major issue in my mind. Use the 1911, or buy a shot gun.
I reiterate, appropriate .223 Remington JHP penetrates >>LESS<< in both gelatin AND building materials than .45 or 9mm JHP.

There are many valid reasons why someone might choose to use a .45 ACP pistol over a .223 carbine for HD, but overpenetration isn't one of them; if the .223 penetrates too much in your circumstances, then so does .45 ACP JHP and 00 buckshot.
 
benEzra, you and I have both covered the over-penetration issue in multiple posts even citing references, but I just don't think anyone is reading the whole thread. Either that or everyone is so set on the idea that "rifle rounds over-penetrate" they just gloss over the facts.

As for the legal issue, could anyone cite a case where a person was convicted of a crime in a case of self defense and where it could be shown beyond a reasonable doubt that the weapon used in the case was a deciding factor in the outcome of the trial? I know I've read cases where prosecutors tried to fry someone for their use of a certain weapon, but I haven't seen one where it actually mattered in the end. By no means am I saying it hasn't happened, I just think that if we're going to continue a discussion on whether using an AK would get you convicted the folks saying so should present evidence for this claim. So are there any cases like this?
 
both. there are more than one guns in our house that are unloaded, but with a FULL mag in place. cock it and your ready to go. i have no problem wielding my AK-47 around the house. it has a Tapco side-folding stock that i added to it which makes it more compact. but in reality, with the stock extended i can do the same job as i can with my H&K USP .45
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top