Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

On Fighting Shotguns....

Discussion in 'Shotguns' started by Dave McCracken, Apr 12, 2008.

  1. ar10

    ar10 Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2007
    Messages:
    1,356
    I don't disagree with you however are you absolutely sure you weren't spotted already? As far as my position goes. I'm not really going anywhere simply because there's just not that many options to choose from. I don't really care if they hear me or not, I will have a shotgun, I will rack it and I will not say "Gee, I have a loaded shotgun so you better leave".

    What does concern me though is in the "good-ol-days" there were just one maybe two buglers doing B/E's. The last thing they want is for someone to be home.
    In this day and age it's more like 3 coming in, 1 by the main door and 2 or 3 in the getaway car. At least 2 coming in are armed with a gun, and they don't care if you're home or not, or if it's broad daylight. The majority are between 15~23 and some reason they honestly believe nothing serious will happen to them. Sorry it's off topic, it's really about shotguns. BTW the CPD and range I work at did some really interesting real life tests using slugs, buckshot and birdshot. Buckshot then Slugs worked. Birdshot wouldn't even knock the plates over at 10 m.
     
  2. chieftain

    chieftain Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    1,264
    Location:
    The Free State of Arizona
    Only a fool would bet on 'may'. Every day you bet on probability. It's probable the water will continue to the house, the electric, the A/C etc. It is probable that folks will stay in their lanes and follow traffic signals. All probabilities that could effect your life, family and future. I guess you don't think your weapons will probably work and stop the BG? I sure think mine will probably work on both counts.

    Back to the 'bet'. I don't bet on 'may' or 'probably' of noise either but I use it. That's why if they don't stop when I shuck my shotty, it is often the last sound they will ever hear. It is part of a continuum. Only a very naive person thinks noise will work all the time, other naive people think some folks 'expect' the noise to work every time. If the noise does work, it has just saved you a lot of money, time, possible time in jail even in a good shoot, and prevented true trauma to your family. If the noise and light doesn't work, well the BG's decided their future right there. The good news is that among those of us that have seen the elephant, we do know that the light and noise often work, not always.

    You see most people, even BG's want to live. That gives you and edge if you use it wisely. Doesn't work all the time, but it does work a lot. You must get over your fear of what may happen soon.

    If I am in my home, when the BG(s) hear the noise and see my light, they are under my guns, and only their actions decide what I do with their futures, if any.

    If you are in a defensive situation, and the BG's don't know where you are, you aren't in a self defense situation, yet. Just like your light, noise is a tool in the continuum of force. You will have to light them up to ID them as BG's. A light punctuated with a Pump Shot Gun being shucked is a pretty good statement to a BG who is some place he knows he shouldn't be. (When my light and the shuck happens, he is in the killing ground of my choosing, I now control the situation and own the initiative) Might Work, might not, doesn't matter to me. If it works and the BG's go away, I win. I loose if I end up shooting the BG's, Or if someone in my family or I get hurt or the family traumatized.

    In some jurisdiction's the police are now entering homes to tell the homeowners their doors are ajar or unlocked, including entering their bedrooms. I would not suggest ambushing the police or your daughters boy friend, even in your own home. Bad Karma. Use your light and shuck your weapons as you blast them with 'LIGHT'. Then if necessary, after you have positive ID with no delay, waiting or deep breathing, shoot to kill.

    This is a lot like folks who worry about muzzle flash inside their own home. The guy on the other end is most often much more effected. Giving you a force multiplier if you use it wisely. But, what do I know, I have only been in approximately 97 military fire fights. Not in Iraq or Afghanistan.

    Sheesh.

    Go figure.

    Fred
     
  3. Robert Hairless

    Robert Hairless Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2003
    Messages:
    3,983
    If all it takes to prevail against home invaders are a dog and the sound of a shotgun being racked, you don't need or even want ammunition in that shotgun. Let the dog handle the intruders while you remain seated, racking that shotgun over and over while the bad guys flee. You don't even need the shotgun itself. You can get a recording of a shotgun being racked.
     
  4. mavracer

    mavracer Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2007
    Messages:
    4,417
    Location:
    wichita
    poor attitude and bad tactics.here I'll fix it for you
    If all it takes to prevail against home invaders are a dog and the sound of a shotgun being racked,great if not I keep it loaded with the first two 00 buckshot, then 2 slugs and the rest 00 buckshot.
     
  5. steveracer

    steveracer Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,554
    Location:
    VA Beach
    Someone breaking into your home to do you and yours harm is already a bold, dangerous person. It takes a lot of cojones to force entry into an unknown dwelling. Having done it with a squad of soldier and two gun trucks behind me, I can tell you it's scary, and requires mental toughness.
    Don't be so sure that someone already unbalanced enough and bold enough to break into your home will be deterred by your "sound of racking shotgun" tactic.
    The shot pattern in him and his buddies, however, will likely strike the boldness from him, and quick.
     
  6. chieftain

    chieftain Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    1,264
    Location:
    The Free State of Arizona
    Happens every day. Talk to the boys in blue.

    The problem is the quality of the people involved you and your guys have balls and guts, vs the vermin that do break into homes. The criminals don't have balls, otherwise they would have jobs outside of their criminal enterprises. Most criminals are cowards. If the criminal knows he is going into fire, the vast majority put their tails between their legs and run. They will look for easier and safer pickings, for them. That is exactly why the sound will often work. Not always.

    The criminal that doesn't stop and run, is usually drugged and/or drunk, psychotic, or in very rare cases truly evil. If the noise doesn't work, you have given up nothing, neither time or location. Continue to end the situation.

    Remember, unlike in combat, not firing your weapon with a successful outcome is the only true victory. Once you shoot, even a righteous shoot, you and your family will start paying a price. It is a better outcome than not shooting, but it isn't a walk away victory either.

    Unlike in the movies, it isn't black and white. Between the two extremes there is a lot of gray. I ain't afraid of gray, I just prefer white.

    Think of it in the terms of gangrene of an appendage. Don't want it, if given an option try it, but amputation is often the best option. Not a good one. But if you want to live, you do what you have to do.

    Go figure.

    Fred
     
  7. mavracer

    mavracer Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2007
    Messages:
    4,417
    Location:
    wichita
    just checking but your about the 10th guy who's made this comment and I haven't read where sombody suggested to keep an empty shotgun because the noise "always" works.maybe sombody can point it out to me.
    I for one hope ernestly that the sound of me racking the first round of 00 buck has the BG runnin' but if not, remeber I just said "I RACKED THE FIRST ROUND OF BUCKSHOT IN THE CHAMBER"
     
  8. JShirley

    JShirley Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    20,911
    Location:
    Atlanta
    Fred,

    It is difficult for me to believe this, considering you have just claimed you would attach a light to your weapon, direct it upon an intruder, and then believe you "own the initiative".

    NO. YOU. DON'T. While you may believe, and perhaps are, in a controlling situation, you have now become reactive. Action beats reaction. Anyone with a string of mil firefights knows this.

    Please provide ANY proof of this. You, in all seriousness, expect us to believe there are jurisdictions in which the police go and try all the doors of houses, and enter any that are unlocked? I call Bravo Sierra. Not only is that completely idiotic, it would be a crime.

    John
     
  9. DRZinn

    DRZinn Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2004
    Messages:
    3,991
    Location:
    In a pot of water, 200 degrees and rising slowly..
    It happened to one homeowner, in one jurisdiction.
     
  10. JShirley

    JShirley Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    20,911
    Location:
    Atlanta
    And homicides by police have happened, too. One isolated situation means nothing, except that something happened once.

    While we're on the subject, "probably" is very different than probability, which the likelihood of an event.
     
  11. chieftain

    chieftain Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    1,264
    Location:
    The Free State of Arizona
    You are right, I do know this. When the BG's are staring into either of my SureFire lights with my sights on their chest, I own them. What are they going to do? Try to look into the light? shoot? Before their weapons are raised they will wonder where the heartburn came from, along with all the Fire and Storm. And I will know exactly who and why I just ushered them into the hereafter.

    The act of turning the light on as I rack my weapon is an action. At least in my world. Pulling the trigger is not the only way to gain the initiative. In fact maneuver will more often give the initiative than shooting. Such as lighting them up with very bright white light, as I shuck my pump may have them reacting to my noise and light instead of my gunfire. Either works, I prefer the former, because it costs me and my family a lot less emotion, time and money.

    Apparently you think I should shoot without ID’ing my target. I don’t. My long experience in military combat tells me that often the wrong folks get hit. Maybe you never lit up a LP or OP pulling back or a patrol coming in. I have and have seen it happen numerous times.

    Civilian defense shooting is about “KNOWING” exactly who and “WHY” you are shooting someone. And if you can't see them, you don't know who, and except that you "think" they shouldn't be there, why they are there. I need light to do that, maybe you have implanted night vision, I don't. I use white light, a lot of it.

    Now you may not like a weapon mounted light. I didn’t either for many years. But when you learn, as I did, that you are allowed more than one light, the ‘bulb’ may go on.

    In fact often in the military we use flares to do the same thing. In Korea, after Chosin, while holding the line, they would often bounce the search lights off the normally low clouds, to light up no man’s land. None of these are reactive, they are all active.

    As long as I am inside of the BG’s OODA loop, I am acting. And having a light on a guy, in a living room or hall, with your shotgun sights resting on his COM, is action, not reaction.

    On to your second “accusation”!

    http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=372200

    And one of YOUR folks locked it, stating:

    Apparently you folks don’t think this applies. Now you DEMAND proof and tell me it is BS. Talk to your moderators. Maybe they would allow the proof to be openly discussed here on the High Road

    Off topic? I don't think so, but then I know it ain't BS either. I believe it would help these discussions. Apparently, you and your minions don’t. And now you accuse me of BS because you are not aware of it? It is your house and your rules, but what I am stating ain't BS.

    I accept your apology. I guess this is where you will now punish me.

    Go figure.

    Fred
     
  12. John G

    John G Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    566
    Location:
    Western NY
    97 firefights? Good Lord! Thanks for your service.
     
  13. JShirley

    JShirley Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    20,911
    Location:
    Atlanta
    Don't be (more) ridiculous. The police walked in an open door. They did not open the door. I just asked for proof, not an entire OT thread.

    An unwarranted assumption.

    This is true, though I have never lit up the wrong guys. We get court martials for that, these days. I'm not really certain how your (Vietnam?) experience really qualifies that much in what happens in defending your living room. Personally, whenever I get hit by light in a low-light environment, I automatically move, and fast. Weren't you trained this way in the Army? :scrutiny:

    J
     
  14. chieftain

    chieftain Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    1,264
    Location:
    The Free State of Arizona
    I give a clear example, that your folks say were off topic. Your house, your rules.

    But it really did happen, and has happened in other places too. Whether you believe it or not.

    Now you say that the article I started a thread with is NOT proof. Why? Only your articles count? It happens. You may choose to ignore it, I don’t.

    In that thread several folks started to discuss other examples too. But then it was locked. The discussion was locked. Again, your house, your rules.

    Now what could I use as “proof”. I can’t prove Pearl Harbor happened either, by your standards. Only photographs, film, and print. And yes I would find most of that on the internet.
    You may well choose to disagree with me, your option, but do not tell me I didn’t see and do what I did and saw. Please don’t insult me, take The High Road.

    What other assumption could I possibly make? Help me understand what you are having difficulty believing?

    Interesting, and I am glad for you. In our wars and earlier wars, friendly fire was a substantial casualty producer.

    Here is a reference about Friendly fire during the First Iraqi go around:

    http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=41973

    This article states that during World War II it is estimated that 15% of all casualties were friendly fire:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/feb/06/military.iraq

    For a historical perspective of Friendly Fire, this from the Napoleonic wars:

    I can get you references of more and other friendly fire situations, although I don’t think they called it that, back when they were fighting with Bows and arrows and swords and spears.

    This stuff happens in REAL COMBAT.

    As to getting off the mark, when you get caught in the other guys killing ground, you had better move, cause you ARE GOING TO GET HIT and get hurt, no matter how fast you move, assuming the other guy isn’t incompetent.

    You ID the target, normally with a White light and in my case a shuck for punctuation, (I am not going to night vision stuff), and right after you light them up, if they do anything but what they are told, you “lite them up”. You “Get Some!”

    A Sad example of this was the Tillman case. Unlike you, those Rangers apparently weren’t trained to move quickly out of the zone. In real combat real and dangerous stuff happens.

    The only court martial’s I know of were of folks that were not following procedure, usually, pilots. I know Dong Ha got hit by Army 175’s for about 40 minutes in the late summer of 69. The mostly hit the poor Sea Bee’s.

    What more ‘proof’ do you want? Of course disagree with me, but don’t be so uninformed to call BS.

    Once again, I accept your belated apology. I was a Marine, not in the army. Our doctrine is/was, when ambushed, immediate action, attack TOWARDS the fire, not runaway. Most ambushes allow for everything but for the instigators to be attacked. I know when ever I set up an ambush, with enough troops, I would set up additional surprises for the NVA that chose to escape along the routes I figured they would, or I would set up for them to use. Often didn’t have enough troops, but could and would use C4 & detcord, grenades and claymores etc.

    By the way, when combat is very intense, friendly fire situations will happen, I don’t wish it on any of our troops. God Bless ‘em.

    Go figure.

    Fred
     
  15. JShirley

    JShirley Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    20,911
    Location:
    Atlanta
    Fred,

    I haven't given an apology.

    You have failed to give any example of police randomly entering an unlocked door. Discussion of whether the thread was off-topic is a rabbit trail, like most of your post.

    Saying you are making an incorrect or even false statement is not an insult. You can feel insulted, but it does not necessarily follow that I have insulted you.

    If I had fired upon troops who- following procedure- were coming back into the wire, I would indeed have been court-martialed. Discussion of bad fire missions really has nothing to do with this overall topic or my questions to you.

    So you know that you are taking an action that will cause an immediate reaction- to which you will then have to react- and yet you persist in believing this is a wise course of action. Brilliant. :rolleyes:

    Once again, I have not offered an apology, because there is no need for one, and your comments about it are both silly and annoying.

    John
     
  16. chieftain

    chieftain Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    1,264
    Location:
    The Free State of Arizona
    I guess it only counts if the door is locked. I would bet a lot of money, at least one dollar cash money that everyone of those open doors the police entered were closed and locked. At least when the home owner went to bed. Stuff happens, in fact stuff still happens, particularly when you have kids.

    Apparently not in your world. I have had children, and it sure happened in mine and everyone I know.

    Thinking about it, where does it make any difference as to whether the door was open or not. How do you think many BG’s get in and later the police, if BG’s tried to get in and unlocked the door and or opened it, then left, scared or you can choose why.

    I guess you have not heard of police serving no knock warrants to wrong addresses, or bad warrants. I presume that doesn’t happen in your world. It does in mine. Do you need “proof” to your standards? Read your own board, multiple examples. So I wasn’t thinking of them at first, of course I don’t believe it is random. I am sure if the cops are in your house before you do anything, in the dark, you will find out if 1) your door was open/unlocked and 2) if this was random, before you act (but that ain't a reaction, right? do I have it right?)?

    Interesting rabbit trail indeed, as it DIRECTLY applies to the questions you keep repeating and are asking. It simply doesn’t matter whether it is random or not or whether the owner BELIEVED the door was closed and locked.

    SIGH!

    Apparently you didn’t do it under fire, while being under assault, and you must be good, to have wire in the bush. We didn’t. Bad fire missions are exactly the same problem. Identification, or in this case improper or lack of it, applies in every firefight and fire mission in both war and peace, military and civilian. You have got to know who and what you are shooting at. That means some kind of ID.

    I don't keep a recon team primed and ready to go at my house. I don't have the aircraft to run a Recon either. I have to do it myself. Please tell us how you ID before you shoot, without reacting? I am obviously not as good as you are.

    Your definition of react, would require EVERY CONTACT military and civilian to shoot indiscriminately. You don’t shoot until they are in the kill zone, I guess in your world that is a reaction. And yea…. I believe it is a wise course of action. Tell me exactly how you, would not react, and still ID and get the possible BG’s. Tell me how you do that with out reacting in your world. Only if you don’t ID or don’t care who the people are you are about to fire on are, then I guess so. But then by your apparent definition, the BG’s being in your home has you reacting too. This IS getting silly.

    You do understand Col John Boyd’s brilliant concept of the OODA loop, right?
    Here is a couple of references/'proof' for you:

    http://radio.weblogs.com/0107127/st...CycleByKenGouldDirectorSurefireInstitute.html

    http://www.valuebasedmanagement.net/methods_boyd_ooda_loop.html

    It is not silly. But I apparently annoy you. Can’t help that. I would suggest you get some counseling and find out why. In fact take this thread to you counselor and find out why you are so angry about it. John I do hope you get help.

    Now I understand, you are unable to apologize. No problem then. I am done.

    Go figure.

    Fred
     
  17. JShirley

    JShirley Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    20,911
    Location:
    Atlanta
    1. "Into the wire" is a common expression for returning to base or camp. So, either you don't know this common term or are deliberately being obtuse for unknown reasons.

    2. Fire missions are typically arty or air. Mis-id can indeed be a problem but a frequent problem is also incorrect data or computation. IOW, "friendly fire" often results from incorrect coordinates or mistakes made in delivering fire. I have seen a near-fratricide because the AG neglected to change the charge when an elevation change was made. Target id had nothing to do with it: he just neglected to add a charge back onto the round.

    3. The preferred method is to use lighting from other sources, instead of making yourself a target by using a weapon-mounted light. If you shoot at a clear threat, that is definitely an action, but whether you had to take that action reactively or chose to take action before they were aware of your presence and/or location are two different things.

    I find it interesting that someone with your claimed experience level is attempting to dominate instead of just engage a threat. Perhaps you have poor lighting in your house? Are we expected to believe police officers regularly traipse through your bedroom, or you expect a no-knock? What do you think will happen if you charge your weapon and direct a light upon a SWAT team?

    You keep saying "I accept your apology" with the deliberate intention of being annoying, and then suggest counseling when I do indeed find it annoying? "I apparently annoy you" is very different than "I find your argument less than logical and your claimed experience fallacious", but if you were apparently aware of that difference, we wouldn't be having this discussion, at least on these extended and often irrelevant terms.

    John
     
  18. ar10

    ar10 Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2007
    Messages:
    1,356
    JShirley:

    I purposely intended to stay out of this thread. I did read about an the police checking on resident doors to see if they were unlocked in the wee hours of the morning in one city, which one I don't know. I can't remember the whole article but I think they rang or knocked on the residents doors and if they didn't answer they would enter the house. It raised a pretty big stink as I recall and ended up in the papers. I believe the police chief stated they were doing it to help cut down crime.

    I'm pretty sure it was last year sometime after August I think. The link is:
    http://ohioccwforums.org/
    I'll see if I can find it again if it would solve anything, although I sort of doubt it. :(
     
  19. JShirley

    JShirley Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    20,911
    Location:
    Atlanta
    Thanks for mentioning it. Bad, bad idea, and illegal...
     
  20. mavracer

    mavracer Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2007
    Messages:
    4,417
    Location:
    wichita
    could you explain what point you were making here.
    because it seamed to me you thought lighting up the target is a bad idea.
     
  21. JShirley

    JShirley Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    20,911
    Location:
    Atlanta
    If you attach a light to your weapon, it not only illuminates what's in front of you, it also shows exactly where you are.

    If you were going to take the time to prepare, the wise homeowner "might" have lighting that would allow him to ID potential threats without giving away his position.

    In my apartment, for example, I have streetlights that are literally just a few feet away, and windows through which this light shines. I can easily ID from my darker bedroom. If I lived in a house, I would install lighting that would enable this, as well.

    It's just good general practice to help family not bump into things in the dark, too. :)

    I know it sounds cool and tactical to have a weapon-mounted light, but if one truly were worried about engaging a non-threat, it's a bad idea to point a loaded weapon at them, isn't it? Just sayin'. :cool: And if you're facing a legitimate threat, you don't want to give up any advantage. Racking a round and illuminating a threat is well and good if you have an armed team backing you up for both a show of force and to put rounds downrange for you while you're busy being commanding. Doing it solo is Hollywood, and IMO, poorly considered.

    J
     
  22. mavracer

    mavracer Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2007
    Messages:
    4,417
    Location:
    wichita
    yes, if your using a pen light taped to gun, I belive chiefton refered to a surefire.which I'd suggest you look into one (pun intended) because while Mr. BG will know your position he can not look at you without being blinded and no way he can get a sight picture.
    that would be a great addition to a hand held or weapon mounted light.
    thats great hopefully murphy and Mr BG decide to keep them on in your time of crisis.
    once again great assuming Mr BG goes where you expect him to.
    yes let's light up the whole house every time lil' Timmys got to go potty.
    hey, to each their own.Me I perfer a hand held surefire,but I have been thinking about getting another to put on the 870.
    I've also seen Clint Smith suggest the use of a good light.


    Also I must add that your banter and personal attacks on Chiefton were and are out of line and as an administrator of The High Road you should be above that.
     
    Last edited: Jul 3, 2008
  23. rbernie
    • Contributing Member

    rbernie Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2004
    Messages:
    20,605
    Location:
    Norra Texas
    Only if you get lucky and shine it directly into his eyes. If you're using it as a GP light source, you run the significant risk of telegraphing your position while 'searching' with the weapon light.

    Only to ID an assailant just before firing; not as a general source of light.

    I disagree. Fred was, as usual, being deliberately combative and imflammatory. He got what he dished.

    Life sux that way sometimes.
     
  24. mavracer

    mavracer Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2007
    Messages:
    4,417
    Location:
    wichita
    Bernie if you need luck to get Mr BG in the beam of your light no amount of luck will get your buckshot pattern on him.You should not have a gun.
    neither myself or chiefton have stated to use a weapon mounted light to search.
    yep same thing.
    IMHO an administrator of a board called "the high road" should be above that and as you said it SUX that he's not.
     
  25. rbernie
    • Contributing Member

    rbernie Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2004
    Messages:
    20,605
    Location:
    Norra Texas
    If you believe that
    is the same as
    then all I can say is good luck with all that.
     

Share This Page