What are the benefits of a rifle for HD?

Status
Not open for further replies.
If you have taken all the usual steps to protect your home; lights, alarms, dogs, heavy doors, good locks, etc and the guy is so good that he gets to your bedroom bypassing all of those things then the firearm type is of little importance.
Click to expand...

Do the above give you a better chance of having advance notice? Absolutely. Am I going to implicitly trust them to give me advance notice? No way. Dogs can be tricked, alarm systems can fail to function or be circumvented, locks can be picked, etc.. In that light, I want a firearm that is easily storable as close to me and as conveniently accessable as I can make it. That means a handgun. Kinda hard to store a rifle or a shotty in the nightstand or in a rapid-access strongbox.

Does that mean a handgun is the ultimate HD tool? Nope. It means it makes the most sense in my particular situation. And don't think that just because I pick up a handgun first it doesn't mean I haven't got other weapons located in carefully selected areas around my home (I don't have any kids, by the way).

Although every situation is unique, the choice of a good HD weapon will always be a comprimise of power, capacity, and maneuverability. But most of all, it needs to be the weapon(s) you are most likely to use, and use effectively. Having that Double Barrelled AK-57 Heat Seeking Shotgun is nice, but useless if you can't hit the side of a barn with it. After all, I'd rather be missed with a .50 BMG than shot with a .22.

I like threads like this. As long as everyone stays civil, debating these kinds of issues forces thinking on multiple levels.

Brad
 
My own personal choice of HD rifle would be a Mosin M-44. Even if you somehow miss him directly, the muzzle blast is going to blind, deafen, and (provided close enough quarters) flamethrower his butt. Failing all of the above, fix bayo and charge.:D Over penetration may be an issue, though...

Seriously, though, for HD, I have to turn back to the trusty handgun.
Personally, I'm a fan of the .32 Colt 1903. Powerful enough for the job, but small enough to carry at all times. Overpenetration isn't much of an issue, either.

I also keep my old Easton Hammer next to the bed. I like the fallback option of beaning someone over the head with an aluminum baseball bat.
 
If I feel the need to clear my house, I'm going to do it with a rifle. Specifically my AR15. Sure, it's not a shorty, but it's not significantly longer than me with a handgun in a proper shooting stance.

Meanwhile I have 2-4 times the ammunition, the rounds hit harder, I'm more accurate with it, etc...

It's still light enough for me to do any manipulations with it I have to, especially with a good sling. I can fire it one handed if I have to. I practiced a bit on the range that way.
 
Sorry if this has been covered above but heres my take. Rifles are easier to hit with and have more stopping power than handguns. They also offer faster follow up shots and hold twice as many rounds (M4). People claim their long and clumsy but I've found the muzzle of an M4 in the firing position protrudes less than a 1911 in the isocoles position from my center of gravity. The 223 also pentrates less than most handgun bullets usually fragmenting in the target. And finally in the case of a flat out miss I'll be sending a 40gr 5.5mm projectile that rapidly losses it velocity through any kind of barrier into the neighbors house rather than a 230gr hydra shock or nine round lead balls of buckshot per miss.
 
Long guns are usually easier to mount optics on. If it's dark I'd much rather have an aimpoint or EOtech than iron sights.
 
We cover this regularly on Personal Defense TV.

As we visit the top training schools in the country, we find that those who know teach that a handgun is something you use because you needed to carry a gun in a convenient/inconspicuous manner. ALL of the trainers prefer a long gun. Almost all of them, these days, appear to prefer the rifle. The AR-15 platform is the preferred rifle for all the reasons already stated here.

For those who have said they don't see the need for the rifle, or who just flat say that a handgun is better indoors, I'd suggest a three to five day course on Urban Rifle (a term coined by Clint Smith). Become proficient with that tool as well and the handgun, and you'll most likely come away understanding why trainers say a handgun is something you use to fight your way to the rifle you should not have put down in the first place.

<grin>
 
I always thought an M1 Carbine would be a good HD weapon. Power of a .357 magnum in a compact easy to shoot small rifle. Might have to get one.
 
I confess to not reading through the whole thread, but the first objection to a rifle for HD that comes to mind is overpenetration. Unless you are using a lever gun or carbine chambered in a hand gun round, and unless that round is a personal defense round loaded to pistol ballistics with a bullet designed for use against humans, I would think that a rifle in a centerfire rifle caliber would be less than ideal, particularly if you have family in the house. It would be better than nothing, but it would place an additional burden of safety awareness upon the homeowner precisely at the time when he/she needs fewer distractions, not more of them.

That being said, why not just buy a pistol or shotgun for HD, and keep your rifles for whatever they were originally designed for?
 
I confess to not reading through the whole thread, but the first objection to a rifle for HD that comes to mind is overpenetration
Click to expand...

Well you are right, you didn't read it. That was dealt with early on and proven to be totally false.
 
timothy75 said:
Rifles are easier to hit with and have more stopping power than handguns. They also offer faster follow up shots and hold twice as many rounds (M4).
Click to expand...
What if your rifle is a Remington 700 bolt action with a heavy barrel in .308? All of a sudden, your pistol (whether it's a revolver OR a semiauto) offers faster followup shots and holds more rounds. Not all rifles perform in the same manner as a M4.

I worked for 6 years on the crazy shift (3:00 p.m.-11:30 p.m.) in the ER of a level 1 trauma center in a busy city when I was in my twenties. I saw a LOT of people shot deader than doornails. I would have to say that, without exaggeration, at least 80% were killed with .22 LR firearms. I also saw a LOT of wounded. Of the ones who survived, it is true that many had taken multiple hits, but I had the opportunity to talk to quite a few of them. One of the questions I frequently asked them was, "what did you do when you were hit?" The answers varied from "I sat down" to "I ran like hell." But significantly, not one of them ever said, "I charged the SOB who shot me and beat his ass."

The point is, if you've got a Colt Woodsman in .22, and you dump a magazine into an intruder, he's going to stop what he was doing, and he's either going to run like hell, or he's going to beg you to call the paramedics. Whether or not you make that call depends upon whether or not you can live with the consequences of not making it.

I understand the concept of what Guntalk said about the opinions of trainers, and it does make a certain amount of sense. OTH, the vast majority of gun owners are not keeping a gun in the house for the next civil war or zombie invasion. They are just regular folks who have purchased a pistol in what they feel is a manageable caliber and they are not going to invest a whole lot of time or money in attending tactical training classes or do run and gun drills in a shooting house. They just want something they can keep in a nightstand drawer next to the bed in case they hear something go bump in the night.

For that person, the pistol makes the most amount of sense.
 
Geronimo45 said:
keep your rifles for whatever they were originally designed for
Click to expand...
Anti-personnel work is what 5.56, to the best of my knowledge, was designed for.
Click to expand...
No argument out of me. But, there is a difference between anti-personnel work out to 600 yards in a battlefield situation, and busting a cap in a burglar's ass. The former usually requires specific and rigorous training by a qualified instructor (who's name usually begins with "Sargeant"); the latter just requires a couple of hours at the range to familiarize yourself with the weapon, and the ability to hit a man sized target from across the room. Granted, one should make regular visits to the range to maintain proficiency, but the sad reality is that a huge percentage, perhaps even the majority, of gun owners are not going to do that.

I'm not saying anything against the AR platform. It's an excellent weapon, and my next firearm purchase will probably be one. But I do maintain that, for the majority of people who purchase a firearm for home defense, they are not firearms enthusiasts. Yes, they believe in the RKBA, but they are not gun enthusiasts. It's not their hobby, like it probably is for many of us here. They just want something that is not too intimidating for them (remember, this is from their perspective, not yours or mine) to learn how to use, and that they can just keep handy next to the bed AND hide from the little ones if necessary. I'm just trying to see the bigger picture.

I know I'm probably in the minority here, but that's just my 2¢.
 
They just want something that is not too intimidating for them (remember, this is from their perspective, not yours or mine) to learn how to use, and that they can just keep handy next to the bed AND hide from the little ones if necessary. I'm just trying to see the bigger picture.
Click to expand...

Once again, it's been shown over and over that if you take a totally untrained shooter and give them an equal shooting challenge they will do better with a rifle than a handgun all other things being equal.

Shooting a handgun does not come as naturally to an entry level shooter as a rifle.

You are right that the average gun buyer may THINK that way, but they would be wrong. For the people you describe, shooters with no training and little practice time, they are actually in WORSE shape with a handgun than a rifle or shotgun.
 
Long-arm vs. pistol is what made me get a PS90 and short-barrel it. Perfect HD carbine, in my opinion. 20" overall length, 50 round magazine, night sights.

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • ps90sbr.jpg
    ps90sbr.jpg
    7.2 KB · Views: 1,265
TexasRifleman said:
You are right that the average gun buyer may THINK that way, but they would be wrong. For the people you describe, shooters with no training and little practice time, they are actually in WORSE shape with a handgun than a rifle or shotgun.
Click to expand...
Again, no argument out of me. But wouldn't you also say that, while they might be better off with a rifle or shotgun than a handgun, they are also better off with a handgun than no gun? At least that's how it would seem to me. And getting uninitiated people to change their mindset about it is going to be difficult at best.

I can only recall what my first experience shooting a weapon was like. Unlike a lot of members here who grew up around fireams, I didn't. Other than having fired a friend's .22 rifle ONCE back when I was 17, I had zero experience with firearms until I inherited my dad's old Ithaca 1911 at age 38, in 1990. I asked a couple of friends who were knowlegeable to take me to a range and show me how to handle the gun safely, shoot it, and how to strip and reassemble it. It was a great afternoon. Both guys were sargeants in the CA National Guard, and both knew what they were doing, and they made it a fun experience for me. We did not shoot long guns that day. All I can say is that, for me, learning to shoot a pistol came relatively naturally, even though it was a little later in life (Learning to shoot it well came later. :D ). I did not buy my first rifle until three years later. It was a used Ruger M77 MkII in .308. I figured that one out by myself. But by then, I was familiar with the idea of shooting. I was going to the range regularly; and I observed a lot while I was there and I spent particular attention observing rifle shooters. I am sure that some of what I observed and imitated at first were actually bad habits. But over time, I read a lot, learned a lot, practiced a lot and tried to put into practice what I had learned, and I got better at it. But the truth is that I had acquired the firearms bug, so this was all a labor of love for me.

But for all those other gun owners I keep talking about, it's not a labor of love. They are not really interested in guns as a hobby, and they hold the idea of keeping the mongol hordes at bay only peripherally in their minds. For those folks, a pistol would seem to be better than no gun at all - although there is a certain amount of charm in a big wood bat.

Again, just my 2¢.
 
HTML: 
Is it just for people that also hunt or is it a matter of being prepared to turn your home into a fortress and fight at long range?

This is a very personal decision. I used to keep all of my guns in the safe and for and added level of safety, especially in a fire, all guns in the safe were unloaded. I didn't want guns "cooking off" rounds while the nice firefighters were trying to save my house.

The only loaded gun was my "ready gun" which was usually on my person, or within my reach, 24/7, EFD. I chose a handgun, for the perceived short ranges I would be firing in a home defense scenario. I didn't want the collateral damage to my home from a load of buckshot/birdshot, not to mention the amount of blood that would need to be cleaned up (BGs don't make a habit of living the healthiest lifestyles). My attitudes would soon change.

One night, I awoke to hear a heavy engine. I hear them all of the time, but not winding down. I heard the vehicle come to a stop, then, "crack, crack, crack, crack, crack!" They sounded like they pulled up to the next driveway and fired. Then the next, then the next. I was next.
I wiped the sleep from my eyes and grabbed my handgun. I realized that in the dark, at that distance, my handgun wouldn't solve my problem.
I went to the safe and grabbed the M-1A, and hoisted by my own petard, I couldn't remember where I put the damn magazine. I grabbed my Mossberg 590 and again, could not locate the required cartridges.

They pulled up to my driveway, fired, but I didn't hear any impacts (thank God!). I now keep a substantial rifle close at hand an a shotgun with a side saddle and butt cuff full of rounds.

I prefer a rifle if I have to be in a gunfight, because a handgun is made to be more portable than powerful (possible exception of some of the latest one-handed rifles) and a shotgun makes too big a mess. Also, I have to pay for any clean-up out of my pocket (patching, carpet, carpentry, glass, wall-paper, etc).
 
What if your rifle is a Remington 700 bolt action with a heavy barrel in .308? All of a sudden, your pistol (whether it's a revolver OR a semiauto) offers faster followup shots and holds more rounds. Not all rifles perform in the same manner as a M4.
Click to expand...

And what if your handgun is a single shot .22? We can all list examples of specific rifles, shotguns, AND handguns that are NOT good home defense weapons. A 28" barreled single shot shotgun wouldn't be all that great either...except for power. In both cases I'd have longgun in hand and handgun at my side.

I worked for 6 years on the crazy shift (3:00 p.m.-11:30 p.m.) in the ER of a level 1 trauma center in a busy city when I was in my twenties. I saw a LOT of people shot deader than doornails. I would have to say that, without exaggeration, at least 80% were killed with .22 LR firearms.
Click to expand...

Yes, .22s have killed many a person. Here's the problem. Once you shoot someone with a .22LR, there is a ton of evidence they frequently do not stop and die right away. Sure, they might die in the next 60 seconds, or the 10 minutes before they get to the hospital, but the .22LR has consistently demonstrated it's inability to decisively immediately stop the fight.
 
HTML: 
You can fire for the legs even without dropping. If you drop the stock a bit or step back, you're pointed at the leg/pelvic region almost naturally. Dropping to a knee or squatting will change the angle so that you are now pointed at the torso or head. That's when life gets interesting for both sides.

If you haven't fixed your bayonette:
If he's close enough to grab your barrel, he's close enough to receive a kick in the nay-nays. People forget that the operational word of gunfight, is "fight".
 
It's easy to get sidetracked.

1. The goal is not kill. An ice pick will kill. The goal, when you are attacked, it to STOP the attacker. Whether your actions are fatal to the attack is, in fact, immaterial.

A .22 most certainly will kill. It has a terrible record for STOPPING an attacker.

A rifle STOPS the attacker faster than a handgun does. In the circumstances of home invasions (more frequent these days) with multiple bad guys (more frequent these days), having a firearm which hits hard and holds enough ammo to (likely) solve the problem without reloading is a pretty good option.

HOWEVER, if you have not been trained in how to use a carbine inside a building, you'll probably get a lot of it wrong.

Software is still more important than hardward.
 
HTML: 
I cannot fit a shotgun in my nightstand

I don't recall where I read it, but some years ago, I read that "Cat Burglars,"
skilled at entering occupied dwellings, often go for your nightstand first, to relieve you of your firearm.

I keep one under my pillow, because I must be disturbed or awakened for anyone to get it. I HAVE twice been awakened by a BG standing over my bed with a gun or bludgeon, and once had a Shotgun on the far side of the bed, and once wished I hadn't left my perfectly good .41 mag under the seat of my car.

In both cases, I made an observation: if the BG doesn't waste you outright, he can't watch you continuously. In both cases the BG kept looking around corners and looking in case I was not alone. I could have retrieved the shotgun at anytime he exited the door to the room and checked around, but it looked as though I was going to get out with my skin so it wasn't necessary. The 2 rounds of 000 buck would have decimated him. He's now in the state penitentury for a murder he commited prior to our encounter.:eek:

Case two was interupted by police coming to a "shots fired" call with guns in holsters:eek:, telling the BG to put his gun down, but not making him.:what: (By the way, BG #2 had a Marlin .22 autoloader.) The police saved my life and I'm not gonna run them in the mud, but then they asked if there was a problem.:confused: A man is pointing a rifle at my heart pulling the trigger, I would assume it was more likely than not.:banghead:

Now my dog is my early warning, and I live in the boonies. I normally wake up at the softest footsteps, and hear vehicles pulling up from as far as 200 ft. on a quiet night. I keep at least one pistol handy, as well as a rifle (I like the .30 Carbine) and shotgun. I have a place I can observe anyone entering the house from behind cover, while not readily visible to an intruder that is coming in. (assuming I am alerted first. If not, I knew I'd never get out of this life alive.)
 
My long gun for serious social work in the house is a 12 ga pump, but a 5.56 with folding/telescoping stock and 30 rds ready to go also fills me with confidence. All-in-all a rifle usually delivers more crunch than a handgun, and I'm not going to clear my house. I will wait in the bedroom with the fusil-de-boudoir pointed at the door, and none of that guano about racking the slide/bolt. The only noise preceding BOOM would be click when the safety goes off about .25 sec before show time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

C
  • Locked
What kind of sights do you like on your HD shotguns
2
Replies
28
Views
1K
porterdog
P
C
  • Locked
Single loading a shot shell in a HD situation
Replies
17
Views
1K
Girodin
G
R
  • Locked
HD Sig P226 vs. Mossberg 500
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
Blackhawk 6
B
A
  • Locked
What autoloading shotgun for clays and hd?
Replies
15
Views
1K
Zak Smith
Zak Smith
O
  • Locked
Ammo carried?
2 3
Replies
53
Views
2K
CombatArmsUSAF
C
Back
Top