1911 or AK for HD

[Dr.Mall Ninja]

I only own two guns right now and they are a converted saiga ak in 223 and a RIA 1911 tactical. I'm wondering which of these two should I use for things that go bump in the night, the thing that concerns me about the Ak is I can see myself in a court room if heaven forbid I ever used it and the lawyer talking about all the evil features it has.

 

[THE DARK KNIGHT]

I'd go with the 1911. Yeah AK will do a damn fine job of stopping an intruder, but I have no clue how the laws are in MO, or how your town may be, or what, but like you said if you had to explain to the court, I'd rather explain the pistol. AK has had a smear campaign branding it the evil gun for twenty years now.

 

[jakemccoy]

I'd go with an AK if I were trying to defend my neighbor's house that's a quarter mile down the road. I don't know about your house, but there would be serious penetration problems at my house if I used my Saiga 308 (similar to an AK) for home defense. My house is surrounded by houses in all directions. There really is no way to fire that gun without the round penetrating into another house.

Also, there is the aftermath of how the gun would look as evidence in court. To be prudent, you really do have to think about the legal aftermath.

By the way, my home defense guns are a plain Rem 870 shotgun (nighttime) and a Glock 27 handgun (daytime).

 

[LS240]

AK for sure. It's the most effective tool for the job, and when that job involves protecting yours or your loved ones' lives, effectiveness is the most important thing. As the saying goes, it's better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

 

[Gamera]

I'd stick with the 1911. Get a high quality 10 round mag and a flashlight and you'll be good to go.

 

[Dr.Mall Ninja]

By the way if somebody recommends a 12ga I already know thats the best HD weapon.

 

[Sediment]

AK for sure. It's the most effective tool for the job, and when that job involves protecting yours or your loved ones' lives, effectiveness is the most important thing. As the saying goes, it's better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

A rifle round in a CQB situation? Seriously? :banghead: I would think that being able to maneuver and engage effectively would be better handled with a 1911 compared to an AK. I have a 1911, Mossberg 500 and AR-15 hot and locked in my bedroom while sleeping. If I need to grab one the 1911 or shotgun is getting picked up.

Load the 1911 with hollow points, I prefer gold dots, and use that for HD. I honestly can't see the practicality in a semi-auto rifle for an HD situation.

 

[[Pb]]

The AK is so much more powerful and versatile it's not even a question... AK beats shotgun in anything but extreme close quarters too. 30 rounds of 7.62 is more than you need for anything survivable.

 

[LS240]

A rifle round in a CQB situation? Seriously? :banghead: I would think that being able to maneuver and engage effectively would be better handled with a 1911 compared to an AK. I have a 1911, Mossberg 500 and AR-15 hot and locked in my bedroom while sleeping. If I need to grab one the 1911 or shotgun is getting picked up.

Load the 1911 with hollow points, I prefer gold dots, and use that for HD. I honestly can't see the practicality in a semi-auto rifle for an HD situation.

Well notice he said it's a .223 Saiga. .223 reliably fragments in soft tissue and represents no more an over-penetration danger than .45. As for dry wall, both .45 and .223 will go through at least a dozen layers so that's pretty much a moot point.

 

[Sediment]

I mentioned an open door or window, not through a wall. Nor did I mention penetration issues. I also said rifle round meaning I saw it's a .223 round and not a 7.62x39.

The issue is maneuverability and being able to effectively engage a target. A pistol can be held in a position of quick target aquisition, and a shotgun well we all know just point in the direction of the BG and pull the trigger.

A semi-auto rifle should really be aimed and not shot from the hip to hit the BG. But it's your house, do what you want.

 

[jakemccoy]

Hold on a second. A rifle .223 has about the same penetration as a handgun .45?

Is that correct?

I'm thinking the .223 is most likely a full metal jacket and the .45 is most likely a hollow point. Plus, the .223 is coming out of the AK with more velocity/energy.

 

[LS240]

I mentioned an open door or window, not through a wall. Nor did I mention penetration issues. I also said rifle round meaning I saw it's a .223 round and not a 7.62x39.

The issue is maneuverability and being able to effectively engage a target. A pistol can be held in a position of quick target aquisition, and a shotgun well we all know just point in the direction of the BG and pull the trigger.

A semi-auto rifle should really be aimed and not shot from the hip to hit the BG. But it's your house, do what you want.

Well if you shoot through an open door or window, any round will travel for a good long while, possibly endangering neighbours and such. Why would .223 be worse than .45 in that regard? It doesn't drop as fast and that's about it.

Rifles are almost always more effective than pistols, period. When's the last time you saw a SWAT team clearing a house with all pistols? There's a reason both the military and SWAT use rifles and shotguns, even for close quarters conflicts; they're just more effective than pistols. If they weren't, our soldiers would be armed with nothing but a pistol.

You do not "point a shotgun in the direction of the bad guy and pull the trigger". It must be aimed same as any other firearm.

I still fail to see how that 1911 would be preferable to a .223 Saiga for home defense, except for the perceived legal issues, which to be honest I think is overblown.

 

[Sediment]

Rifles are almost always more effective than pistols, period. When's the last time you saw a SWAT team clearing a house with all pistols? There's a reason both the military and SWAT use rifles and shotguns, even for close quarters conflicts; they're just more effective than pistols. If they weren't, our soldiers would be armed with nothing but a pistol.

They're also well trained in their use and room clearing tactics.

My shotgun reference was poorly worded, so I take the hit on that one. Whatever the OP decides to use is up to him, and what you use is up to you. But I'll leave my AR in the cabinet and grab one of my other weapons for HD use.

 

[smallbore]

As a 'responsible' gun owner, I would go with the 1911. For me it's about my target and what's beyond it.

 

[Blakenzy]

So, you are going to be killed or seriously injured if you don't incapacitate your assailant right NOW.

Any other scenario does not justify use of lethal force.

Which weapon will accomplish that task the fastest and easiest?

Scoring multiple hits on target in a compressed time frame will be infinitely easier with a long arm than with a pistol. The .223 will make possible use soft body armor by your attacker a non-issue. The long arm being less maneuverable than a pistol is inconsequential because you should be camped behind cover waiting for help to arrive, NOT clearing you residence like a one man SWAT team. Over penetration risk of .223 is less than that of a 9mm NATO round, presumably because it quickly tumbles and fragments after striking most barriers; there are quite a few discussions on the topic.

Bottom line: Pistols are good for situations in which having a long arm accessible is impossible. For all other scenarios a long arm is the only logical choice.

 

[LS240]

So, you are going to be killed or seriously injured if you don't incapacitate your assailant right NOW.

Any other scenario does not justify use of lethal force.

Which weapon will accomplish that task the fastest and easiest?

Scoring multiple hits on target in a compressed time frame will be infinitely easier with a long arm than with a pistol. The .223 will make possible use soft body armor by your attacker a non-issue. The long arm being less maneuverable than a pistol is inconsequential because you should be camped behind cover waiting for help to arrive, NOT clearing you residence like a one man SWAT team. Over penetration risk of .223 is less than that of a 9mm NATO round, presumably because it quickly tumbles and fragments after striking most barriers; there are quite a few discussions on the topic.

Bottom line: Pistols are good for situations in which having a long arm accessible is impossible. For all other scenarios a long arm is the only logical choice.

Thank you. That's what I'm trying to get at. If someone chooses to use a pistol that's just fine, but they simply are not as effective as a rifle, and that's all there is to it. Some rifle rounds may over-penetrate and become a liability in close quarters with people around, but I don't believe that to be the case with .223. Above about 2700ft/s the normal 55gr FMJ rounds fragment almost immediately upon entering soft tissue and according to brassfetcher penetrate anywhere from 12-15 inches in ballistics gelatin. That doesn't sound anything like an over-penetration risk to me and is similar to most common pistol rounds. I'm having trouble finding data on .45acp specifically but I know off the top of my head it penetrates 12in or more.

.223 is just fine for home defense and honestly I don't see it being any more dangerous to your neighbours or kid in the next room than a .45 or 9mm handgun. Once again, the only reason not to use the rifle would be if you're worried about what a potential jury might think. Other than that it's a go.

 

[mbt2001]

1911

The reason is that God forbid you shot someone, if using the AK the prosecutor may try to make you out to be one of those culture of death people... Get used 30-30 / 357 / 44 (lever gun) and used that if you want a long gun for HD. Same punch, decent capacity, much more media friendly.

 

[Deanimator]

In MY home, a non-NFA long gun of ANY kind if nearly useless, so I'd go with the M1911. Not having seen YOUR home, I can't make an informed recommendation regarding YOUR needs.

 

[SharpsDressedMan]

Anyone that recommends a rifle for indoor home defense is either confused, or has never fired one indoors (I'm talking bottleneck rifle rounds, not pistol calibers). You PROBABLY won't be wearing ear protection, so any full blown rifle cartridge is going to deafen you and the family, along with the bad guy (who will probably even sue you over his EAR DAMAGE, even if he does survive). Yeah, it will stop the guy better, but there are other considerations. If it's ALL you have at hand, that is another matter. You often roll with what you have in hand.

 

[inherentical]

1911, hands down.

 

[dom1104]

I fully agree with Sharps.

Handgun or shotgun for home defense.

Shooting a Rifle indoors is.... memorable.

And probably 100% overkill.

And yes. Anyone who thinks a prosecutor wont JUMP on a "AK47" doesnt live in the USA. It is the evilest of guns.

I would suggest buying a used 870 wingmaster for <200 and have just as good home defense, in a much more "acceptable" package.

in the meantime, put the 1911 on the nightstand.

Oh and, get a light so you dont shoot your wife.

 

[Schofield3]

Use which ever one you can shoot and control the best. simple as that.

 

[Bailey Guns]

Anyone that recommends a rifle for indoor home defense is either confused, or has never fired one indoors...

[sarcasm]Well, gee. Thanks for definitively answering the question for everyone in every possible scenario.[/sarcasm]

Personally, I think anyone who tries to say that a long gun is useless for home defense is confused. And on this subject and most others people often confuse their opinion as fact.

I frequently recommend a rifle for home defense for some people, for some situations. I have a rifle for home defense in my home. I've trained with long guns indoors as a police officer, military member and civilian. I'm not confused on the issue. When used properly rifles are far more effective than handguns and pose no more risk than a handgun. And effectiveness is exactly what is needed in any defensive situation, whether it comes from using a rifle, shotgun or handgun.

I've fired (or been there when one was fired) long guns (5.56 and .30-30) and handguns indoors. Yes they're loud. But I wasn't deafened. My ears rang for a few minutes. It wasn't something I'd care to do over and over but neither was worse than the other, quite frankly.

How many threads have been posted on this exact question? The arguments are always the same and are never resolved. The reason is because people have different opinions, different circumstances and different skill levels.

 

[Mad Chemist]

I'm assuming the Saiga does not have a light or rails for mounting one. If that's the case, I would go with the 1911 and a good handheld light. Navigating around corners and using cover properly inside a home is going to be much easier with the handgun as well. I'm not implying that this is impossible with a carbine, just that it is considerably more difficult and requires a bit of training. Now if I was intending to barricade myself in a stationary position like a bedroom or saferoom then I would go with the rifle.

In summary:
dynamic movement and close confines = handgun
barricade and/or ambush the attacker = carbine

Just my opinion others will vary.

 

[Schofield3]

How many threads have been posted on this exact question? The arguments are always the same and are never resolved. The reason is because people have different opinions, different circumstances and different skill levels.

+1 to that