Sub-machine gun for home defense?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Why not have the carbine AND a shotgun, ie M4 Masterkey system if you believe the SMG being insufficient in CQB? Has good points of both. Otherwise SMG is very effective CQB weapon, but also definite neighbour freaker.
attachment.php
 
Last edited:
okay, let's assume full auto smgs were as easy and cheap to buy as their neutered cousins. i'd say sure, provided you have decent training. a semi version is less than ideal, though, i think. you have the same size and weight of a rifle carbine with an underpowered cartridge.

i'm not sure why gun owners automatically assume that you're going to start foaming at the mouth and wildly spraying just because you have a fun switch on your weapon. this is like the gun nazis that think a normally safe, responsible adult will turn into a homocidal maniac if given a gun. it also reminds me of debates between bolt action owners and owners of self loaders. if you have fire discipline with a bolt, you can apply fire discipline with a semi. if you have fire discipline with a semi you can with a full auto.

short controlled bursts can be very effective at close range. at home defense distances, every round of a short, controlled burst will impact the target in the thoracic cavity if you apply the same training as you would with any other firearm.

i think it was mas ayoob who popularized the idea that politically incorrect firearms will get you into more trouble. i disagree. this may be true in some less enlightened districts but for the most part, the questions at hand will be whether you were justified in shooting, whether you stopped shooting when the threat was neutralized (jurys tend to frown on "anchoring" shots) and whether you hit anyone else's property or persons. if it was an otherwise good shoot, most jurisdictions won't care what tool you use, whether a flintlock or a p90. the civil case is another matter but the questions are the same, it's only a difference of burden of proof and other procedural issues. you will have to hire your own attorney for a civil case but i doubt it will be much more likely to have suit filed against you just because of the tool you use. i also think this idea of the deceased's relatives filing suit is over inflated. people who break into homes are usually poor and uneducated, their families usually follow this pattern. it is exceedingly rare that they can afford an attorney. if they do or find one that will do the work pro bono, advise them and the attorney that you will file counter suits against both. the problem will likely go away.

in short, a true subgun would be an outstanding home defense weapon if it were practical; a pistol caliber carbine isn't well suited to the role because of power limitations but is better than a pistol.
 
If they made Higher capacity mags for the ruger 99/44, as in more than 4 rounds, that would be awesome! :rolleyes:
 
After shooting a mini UZI with a can quite a bit, I can say no other weapong comes close to being as effective for home defense, save the claymore. And the neighbors tend to really frown on you slapping the clicker switch on those.

Seriously, in a society of intelligent people, no one would question a SMG for home defense. The weapon was created to deal with stopping man targets in close proximity in areas of limited manuverablilty. The development was driven by the lessons of WW1 and trench warfare. People needed to stop many people immediately and be able to move in a the narrow confines of buildings and trenches.

Relate that to your home and the only competitor is a 12 guage. recoil and repeatable hits are better with the SMG payloaad delivered may be better with the 12 guage but it might be said that the faster back up shot makes the SMG tops here too. When I shoot the Mini Uzi wih the can, I can put 3-5 shot groups into fist sized hole almost instantly. No other weapon would give that knd of performance so easily.
 
Sry0fcr said:
Viable option or no? Well maybe not a selectfire weapon but a semi-auto pistol caliber carbine .

I would have no objection to others using such a weapon to defend their homes, but to me it seems a bit much... If the nation disolves into civil war or an area becomes lawless like New Orleans during Katrina, then perhaps such a sub-machine gun would make sense, but to me, in my opinion, day-to-day home defense falls on a handgun in most cases: immediately available, which can be hidden just as quickly if necessary... Nothing against the semi-auto or sub-machine rifle lovers aboard, but storing such a weapon as these becomes a problem and they are hard to conceal if they need to be concealed. A pistol seems a better alternative....
 
If not for legal/economic obstacles, my home defense weapon of choice would be something along the lines of an HKMP5SD. More than adequate ballistics, and the suppressor would both reduce recoil and save my ears, assuming I didn't have time to put on muffs.

And it's used by police . . . there have been numerous threads regarding ammo choices where many say "You should use the same ammunition the police do" . . . so why not the same gun?

From a pure functional standpoint, a regular SMG (without the long 16" minimum "civilian" barrel) makes a lot of sense to me.

Alas, my "ready" house guns are all mere revolvers . . .
 
I really just think it'd be neat to buy ONE case of ammo and be able to feed ALL of your toys. I'm not finding a lot of .45ACP cal carbines though.

Edit: I didn't know Khar/Auto-Ordnance still made Thompsons. the LW model is less than a grand too... It'd make a nice companion to a 1911. :)
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top