M193 versus M855 for home defense carbine ammo?

[Inazone]

But really anything EXCEPT varmint bullets would be fine by me.

Not being much of a "bullet guy" with any appreciable experience outside of cheap FMJ plinking ammo myself, can you elaborate on what characteristics of varmint bullets would lead you to feel that way? Expand before penetrating sufficiently?

 

[medic15al]

Tark:
There is nothing better than a shotgun for inside a home.

Hard to argue with this, an excellent close range weapon

Tark:
And forget the buck shot and slugs. #6 of 7-1/2 shot is all you need.

No. Just...... No. Birdshot doesn't penetrate enough to guarantee stopping an assailant. Bird shot at close range creates large nasty but mostly superficial wounds. I have seen a number of people shot with shotguns as well as suicides attempts. Birdshot takes the face and eyes off permantly leaving the attemptee mostly in a state of blindness and tastelessness.

Buck and slugs work if you hit them In the vitals. Birdshot... Not so much.

 

[Arizona_Mike]

If you are considering .223/5.56 for home defense, please read this:
http://how-i-did-it.org/drywall/index.html

Skip to the punch line: Almost everything penetrates drywall much better than you would think except for Winchester 64gr Power Points.

Lots of ammo was tested. Here are the results for .223/5.56:

Mike

 

[Gordon]

Ranger 64 grain has always impressed me in even 10" barrels. It actually has a little more penetration in the real short barrels. John Noveske , RIP, Once remarked to me in his Diplotmat pistol it was the optimum antipersonnel round.

 

[Whiskey11]

medic15al - I too have seen what bird shot (out of a 20 gauge) does with suicide attempts, only mine was successful in taking his own life and the images will linger in my mind till the day I die. I've seen some seriously jacked up things in my time as a police officer, but that one hit me pretty hard. Probably had a lot to do with being there so recently after it occurred (less than a minute). At least he was DRT according to the forensic pathologist who did the autopsy. One of our officers got to see the result of a Hornady PDX 12 gauge round about an hour after its use.

ANYWAY... I disagree that it can't or shouldn't be used as it wont be fatal. Keep in mind what ranges bird shot is intended to kill birds at, then factor in cutting that range to about a tenth of that range and increase the size of the target. I suspect that bird shot is far more lethal than people give it credit for and if it what I had at the time Joe Dirtbag crashes my door, you bet he's receiving it. A quick search on YouTube will show a healthy number of videos showing the damage it can inflict to soft tissue.

 

[Driftertank]

Whiskey - If you dont mind my asking, was the suicide in question the result of a head or chest wound?

I only ask because a story related to me by a fellow i knew who was an EMT had an attempted that he responded to that had a load of #4 in the sternum that stopped most of the pellets and the man made it to the hospital. Apparently he had to be resuscitated at one point, but mostly due to the blood loss from the grievous flesh wound.

With my shotgun, i load 00 for home defense.

 

[Whiskey11]

Head, center of the fore head. Judging from the entry, it wasn't in contact with the end of the barrel. The exit was less than pleasant as I'm sure you can imagine.

 

[justin22885]

most expanding and fragmenting bullets are designed to work within a specific velocity range and for a rifle this velocity may exist at distances greater than inside your home.. to reduce overpenetration, why not reduce muzzle energy by reducing muzzle velocity while making your home defense rifle more compact by putting on an 8" barrel on top of using fragmenting or expanding ammo.. you may get better results then

personally, i prefer handguns for home defense, not as loud, even more compact, and best of all can be used one handed if you have to reach for the pistol or shoot across your body, unless you absolutely cannot get a handgun, even a hi point (yes theyre ugly and akward, but they work), only then would i even consider a rifle

 

[benEzra]

most expanding and fragmenting bullets are designed to work within a specific velocity range and for a rifle this velocity may exist at distances greater than inside your home.. to reduce overpenetration, why not reduce muzzle energy by reducing muzzle velocity while making your home defense rifle more compact by putting on an 8" barrel on top of using fragmenting or expanding ammo.. you may get better results then

With fragmenting rifle rounds, reducing velocity tends to increase penetration, rather than decrease it. There's also the noise/blast issue; an 8" .223 would be stupendously loud.

 

[Pilot]

For me an AR-15 is not an indoor firearm without ear protection, and I am not in the habit of wearing ear protection in bed when things go bump in the night. I can't imagine how disorienting that would be. YMMV.

 

[dpadams6]

For me an AR-15 is not an indoor firearm without ear protection, and I am not in the habit of wearing ear protection in bed when things go bump in the night. I can't imagine how disorienting that would be. YMMV.

If in life /death situation, I'm not worried about my hearing. I want what is best going to keep me and my family alive. In the heat of the moment, you will barely hear the shot. The bg will be way more startled

 

[tark]

Medic15al, I defer to your superior knowledge in such matters, I have never seen someone shot with birdshot. And you also need to factor in heavy winter clothing, which would limit the effectiveness of small shot. # 4 buck sounds better, but I live in the country. I couldn't hit my nearest neighbor with an elephant gun if I aimed at him, therefore I WANT all the penetration I can get. I guess it just boils down to the proper firearm for the situation. If I can hear an intruder that I know for sure IS an intruder, on the other side of a heavy wall.... Well, I want all the penetration I can get. (Before anyone starts, I live alone)

Anyone that breaks into MY house will be looking at the wrong end of an M-1 Garand.

 

[Balrog]

I would not use bird shot. I have seen a lot of people with nasty wounds from birdshot, but they have generally not been lethal. I had a guy a couple years ago who took a shotgun out of his truck in an unsafe manner, and ended up shooting himself in the abdomen at basically contact range. He had a lot of intestinal injuries, but survived easily.

 

[d2wing]

Several of you have mentioned fragmenting bullets. Military bullets and hunting bullets are not designed to fragment nor is that desirable or accurate.
Release of energy occurs at a much higher rate when a bullet deforms or expands do to increased resistence. It is preferred that bullets deform but remain intact. Fragmentation disparates energy. Bullets that fragment do the most damage as they deform. The fragments do cause some wounding but not the main cavitation.
That is one of the many errors in the article that Hummer often refers to that was written by a self taught quack not an expert.

 

[benEzra]

For me an AR-15 is not an indoor firearm without ear protection, and I am not in the habit of wearing ear protection in bed when things go bump in the night. I can't imagine how disorienting that would be. YMMV.

In terms of peak dB, a 16" or longer AR in .223 without a muzzle brake is comparable in peak dB to an 18" 12-gauge or a 4" 9mm/.40/.45, and a lot less loud than a .357. Very short barrels and brakes will make an AR louder, though.

 

[Whiskey11]

Maybe I'm just being pedantic, but I'm not interested in lethality, I want to stop the threat. If that means the person dies, then so be it, but I'm not interested in killing them. In fact, intending to kill them is called murder. You'd be wise to pay attention in self defense classes about how you word things when speaking to members of the law enforcement community and lawyers after you've shot at someone. You are going to have a lot less headache in saying "I shot until the threat stopped" and then have them die, then to say "I shot him until he died" and then have the person die. The key change in there is intent. We all understand that death is a serious possibility but it should NEVER be the intention to kill someone, only to stop the threat.

 

[tark]

in some scenarios, it is better to kill than to wound. Dead men tell no contradicting stories

 

[tark]

Sorry, got interrupted and had to cut short my post. Whiskey11 I don,t want to kill anybody, but If I shoot someone in my house, at close range with my M-1 and hit him anywhere near center, the choice is out of my hands, He's probably dead, after one shot.

I know a lot of do's and don'ts when a self defense situation arises in the home. I have talked to Mas Ayoob at shot shows through the years. I learned a lot of don'ts from him: No automatic weapons for self defense. No handloads. No stupid "trespassers will be shot, survivors will be shot again." bumper stickers. Never shoot someone in the back. Stop shooting when your attacker stops moving. I could go on.

But He also told me he has been called in as an expert witness on several cases where it would have been easier for the defendant if the bad guys had simply been killed in the initial exchange. They weren't and the were able to conjure up stories, aided by their lawyers, that contradicted the defendant's. Stories that were hard to disprove.

I am an army veteran, been to Nam and Germany, but I have never shot at anybody and I hope I never have to. I don't even know if I could, when it all really hits the fan.

but I believe I could....

 

[dpadams6]

Maybe I'm just being pedantic, but I'm not interested in lethality, I want to stop the threat. If that means the person dies, then so be it, but I'm not interested in killing them. In fact, intending to kill them is called murder. You'd be wise to pay attention in self defense classes about how you word things when speaking to members of the law enforcement community and lawyers after you've shot at someone. You are going to have a lot less headache in saying "I shot until the threat stopped" and then have them die, then to say "I shot him until he died" and then have the person die. The key change in there is intent. We all understand that death is a serious possibility but it should NEVER be the intention to kill someone, only to stop the threat.

"I was forced to shoot him to stop his felonious assault"

 

[d2wing]

I agree with talk and whiskey 100%. It is never a good idea, except in combat, to intend to kill someone. There are all kinds of problems with that, not just legal. You might be haunted all the rest of your life if you kill someone intentionally. If you shoot them to stop them you may have to kill them, or they may die. But that is easier to live with and justify both in law and to yourself and those that live with you.

 

[Balrog]

I agree with talk and whiskey 100%. It is never a good idea, except in combat, to intend to kill someone. There are all kinds of problems with that, not just legal. You might be haunted all the rest of your life if you kill someone intentionally. If you shoot them to stop them you may have to kill them, or they may die. But that is easier to live with and justify both in law and to yourself and those that live with you.

I think this is unnecessary handwringing. Will you be any less haunted if you just paralyze a guy than kill him?

You may just should stick to pepper spray if that's how you feel. Guns will kill people.

 

[Jack19]

Frankly, I don't think it matters much at home defense distances.

My advice, know what's behind every one of the places/walls you'll take the shot.

 

[d2wing]

You have a point Balrog, if you are going to confront an intruder you should have made up your mind that you are going to protect yourself and be prepared to do whatever it takes, and intentional wounding is very risky.
I was referring to the attitude you might want to have. Hopefully it will never be needed.

 

[Panzerschwein]

Even a .308 can be used for home defense with the right load. Hornady has a 110 grain TAP "Urban" load for .308. Very similar performance against common home barriers in terms of penetration vs. the .223 fragmenting rounds, same in ballistics gel. However, that .308 load produces twice the permanent wound cavity as any .223 round I've seen.

I use a PTR-91 loaded with these TAP Urbans for home defense work.

 

[tark]

Actually, Balrog I think I would rather kill him, my post #42 being relevant in some situations. (Possibly most)

But to repeat myself, I have never fired at another human being and I am sure that I could......but...

Like your username. Where's Gandolf?