Dishonestly selling a gun?

[henschman]

If you're going to go with a shotgun, a semi is superior in every way.

I prefer the AR in 5.56 to any shotgun for that role, though. Highly ballisically effective at close range, less potential for overpenetration with proper ammo selection, higher capacity, generally shorter and lighter, easy to mount a red dot sight and light, defeats armor better... what's not to like? Especially nowadays when you can put together a decent AR for 5 or 600 bucks.

 

[Panzerschwein]

Yes, this is marketing.

Just like the word "tactical", Springfield Armory is simply using these buzz words in there advertisements. This is pretty common in all industries.

IMHO, this isn't necessarily dishonest in that a SOCOM-II would work for home defense... no doubt... but things like noise and overpenetration are major concerns when using a rifle like that for the job. But, if you are one of those who keep ear defender on the bed post and live out in the middle of nowhere with brick walls and not many family members or neighbors... than a SOCOM-II might actually be good for HD work.

Now granted, for most people, using a SOCOM-II for this job wouldn't be wise for many reasons. But it's just a buzzword, I would take it with a grain of salt.

 

[DeepSouth]

You know the more I got to thinking about the arguement of the 308 being it loud the less I considered it a valid arguement. I mean really your talking about fireing the rifle inside, which is a faulty position to start with as a home defense can also be used outside. Like in my case I usually keep a handgun (my wife's XD) and a long gun (who knows what!) in my bedroom, if I hear a bump INSIDE the house I grab the XD if I hear something OUTSIDE I grab the long gun.

Anyway to my point. With a vary little bit of looking I found what is to me conformation. If you shoot outside they are ALL well beyond hearing safe. If you shoot a gun INSIDE you almost certainly will have hearing damage. It's going to be terrible no matter the gun. So to argue against a particular caliber because of how loud it is just seems silly, at least it does to me.


.223, in 18 _" barrel 155.5dB

.308 in 24" barrel 156.2dB

9mm 159.8 dB

.45 ACP 157.0 dB

.357 Magnum 164.3 dB

12 Gauge in 26" barrel 156.10dB


LINK TO SOURCE


To bring this back to topic at hand of it being dishonest, I'd have to disagree. It's not dishonest because ALL guns (- the .22 short) are to loud to shoot without hearing protection, not to mention the fact that it would be a very effective HD gun outside, at lest IMO. While it is a somewhat silly selling point, I can't agree that it is dishonest. Like someone said earlier. It's an opinion, not a fact so it can't really be dishonest.

 

[DHJenkins]

"Home defense" doesn't just mean *inside* your home.

From the OP's description I assumed I was going to have to watch a 15 minute sales pitch. Instead, it was a 1.5 minute blurb on which M1A some guy no one knows from gunsandammo.com (or something similar) preferred.

The guy mentioned once, because it has a tritium front sight, it would be good for home defense. If you live on a lot of land and it's dark, a night sight would of course be an advantage.

I don't understand the accusation of dishonesty; the person was stating their opinion on which one he liked. Of course he went for the SOCOM version - I would too if I didn't have to consider cost.

Personally, I think you're nuts if you can legally own a suppressor and don't have one for home defense. No hearing problems, no bright flash, and a massive recoil compensator all in one.