PDA

View Full Version : Automatic weapon


Firepower!
February 9, 2009, 01:32 AM
In a HD situation would chose an automatic weapon or not?

Assumption: cost and law are not factors to be considered. Setting is urban but not densily populated.

Please discuss your reasoning.

B. Lahey
February 9, 2009, 01:55 AM
I would probably stick with a regular shotgun. At close range it's tough to beat.

vox rationis
February 9, 2009, 02:12 AM
full auto? shotgun?

why not have both friends?

Saiga 12 full auto shotgun (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUe4NWiOq5A)

Smallgame2100
February 9, 2009, 02:14 AM
I would never choose a full automatic for anything.
Shoots too much and ammo isnt cheap by any means.

Not to mention with a full auto going off in the middle of the night, you'll wake up much more than just the neighbors.

exprt9
February 9, 2009, 02:17 AM
I got to get me one of these!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4ebtj1jR7c

Smallgame2100
February 9, 2009, 02:21 AM
That thing is pretty dang nice!
Huge and bulky, but won't have a bad guy/intruder think twice about running.

evan1293
February 9, 2009, 04:37 AM
I would still take a shotgun over a submachine gun.

A subgun would be fun though. :D

garryc
February 9, 2009, 05:09 AM
Full auto for SD, a prosecutor would eat you alive! I had several full autos years back. Boring.

Lee Lapin
February 9, 2009, 08:02 AM
No.

If I can't get it done with a shotgun, a rattle gun wouldn't help any.

lpl

The Great Mahoo
February 9, 2009, 08:42 AM
No.

I dislike full-auto in general. It wastes ammo and usually makes for sloppy marksmanship. (Some) People start to expect the gun to do the work and don't do their part.

Tennessee Gentleman
February 9, 2009, 09:38 AM
I dislike full-auto in general. It wastes ammo

Spot on. During my time in the military we trained our soldiers generally NOT to use full auto for that very reason. FA is difficult to use and is really only good for fire suppression and area denial neither of which is suitable or appropriate for civilian SD.

Mas Ayoob wrote a story about a guy who used one to defend himself (I think we worked for H&K) and he had some trouble for it but can't remember it fully.

freakshow10mm
February 9, 2009, 10:14 AM
The guy used an automatic HK rifle. The DA wanted to come down on him but HK lawyered him up good and he beat the charges.

I wouldn't hesitate to use an automatic rifle for home defense. Police use automatic rifles for defense, why can't citizens?

B. Lahey
February 9, 2009, 11:29 AM
I'm pretty sure that guy worked for FN-USA, and they dropped him like a rock as soon as trouble started. He was involved in a road-rage incident where some brainless weirdos chased him and shot at him. He pulled into an FN plant, got out an AC556 (full-auto mini-14) that he had in his truck for some work-related purpose, fired a warning burst into the pavement, and told them nicely to stop. One of the weirdos decided to continue the attack while screaming the tremendously stupid last words "F%&^ you and your fancy machinegun!". Mr. Ayoob and some others stood behind him in the horrendous legal adventure that followed, and he eventually came out on top.

That's what happened in the US, though. Other parts of the world are more MG-SD tolerant.

freakshow10mm
February 9, 2009, 12:00 PM
No, he worked for H&K.

grymster2007
February 9, 2009, 12:24 PM
Nope. It would be real easy to get too much lead flying around. Can't think of a plausible situation where that would be desirable.

bigghoss
February 9, 2009, 12:31 PM
as a primary HD I'd stick to a 12gauge but under the right circumstances I would not be opposed to keeping an smg close at hand.

Firepower!
February 9, 2009, 12:33 PM
So majority here thinks automatic is not preferred, however, i cant imagine not using MP5 SD.

Vanya
February 9, 2009, 12:43 PM
Oh, yeah. I'd keep the first mag filled with blanks, and let off the whole thing at the first hint of an intruder -- I've heard that this works even better than racking a shotgun to scare the pants off a BG... :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Seriously, no way. What Grymster said: "It would be real easy to get too much lead flying around." That, and hard to explain to the judge. :eek:

The shotgun seems perfectly adequate.

kraigwy
February 9, 2009, 12:48 PM
Its been my experience in 40 years of firearms instruction, to the military, police and civilians. I've learned that most, including military and LEOs cant hit poop with a full auto.

I have demostrations of this several times. Example: I had 4 guns in a SF unit, fire 20 shots each at a E sil. target at 100 yards full auto. I fired 20 rounds at my target, same range, in a 1 min time period. I averages more hits then the 4 other shooters.

Another exampe: I was running a sniper school when an army MG crew wanted to use part of my range to qualify the MG Team. After words I let them pick any two of my students and their two best MGers. We fired fom 400 to 1100 meters, again in one minute, my sniper students registered more hits then the MGers.

This is just two examples. Autos have their place, its called fire superioity, needed on the battle field, but not needed in your bedroom against a home invader, or in your car during a car jacking.

You're openning youself up to all kind of problems because you have to account for all those rounds flying all over the place.

Milspec
February 9, 2009, 01:12 PM
With the exception of close ambush an individual doesn't need full auto. After about three shots you're just hosing the trees...which is why we put the three round trigger group in the M16A2. For HD I'll stick with a shotgun, handgun, and AR-15 carbine...with lasers & lights of course... :)

Milspec

freakshow10mm
February 9, 2009, 01:43 PM
Full automatic fire is not meant for ranges beyond 50y. Trying to put someone in their place by having them run automatic at 100y and beyond doesn't impress me one bit.

Putting sharpshooters against machine gunners is like putting a Honda up against a Ferrari. They accomplish the same thing in very different ways; apples to oranges.

onthejon55
February 9, 2009, 01:51 PM
I would if the laws and prices were prohibative.

A good 5 round burst from a subgun is scarier than the pump of a shotgun any day.

ronto
February 9, 2009, 03:02 PM
9 pellets all at once out of a 12ga. pump should give the BG something to think about on his way to the deck.

Wyo Big Bore
February 9, 2009, 03:32 PM
FA is difficult to use and is really only good for fire suppression and area denial neither of which is suitable or appropriate for civilian SD.

Wellllllllllllllllllllll, it seems like "fire suppression and area denial" is exactly what I want. By the way, they work tremendously well for both of those.

freakintoguns
February 9, 2009, 03:47 PM
in our current state of Living a Full auto would be useless for HD imo. first of all spray and pray could technically put 30 rounds into a BG, which most DAs and judges would look at as murder. now if we had a complete meltdown of government and became a true 3rd world country with roaming bands of Gangs Mad Max Style, i feel the only adequete SD gun would bea dillon Mini gun. but since thats not likely to happen anytime soon.....

gollbladder13
February 9, 2009, 03:50 PM
Quote:
FA is difficult to use and is really only good for fire suppression and area denial neither of which is suitable or appropriate for civilian SD.
Wellllllllllllllllllllll, it seems like "fire suppression and area denial" is exactly what I want. By the way, they work tremendously well for both of those.

Area denial, fine. But the OP was home defense. I doubt the first thing the BG is going to do is break your door down, come in and start firing down your hallway before seeing what they can take first.

DieHard06
February 9, 2009, 04:07 PM
I would definately take advantage of one. I would take a MP-5 though not an automatic rifle. I am not real good or completely confident in a shotgun. I wouldn't want to fight someone coming into my home with a FA gun.

If FA guns were legal I don't see why explaining using them on a person to a judge would pose such a problem.

freakintoguns
February 9, 2009, 04:21 PM
If FA guns were legal I don't see why explaining using them on a person to a judge would pose such a problem



its a probelme because your using exessive force. some states ( ive heard, only stater i know for sure is my own) you can only respond to a threat with lesser or equal force. say your attack with a knife, then you can only use a knife or hands to defend yourself. pumping 20-30 rounds intoa BG is excessive force. usually they consider more then 3 to be excessive, along with shooting someone in the back

Milspec
February 9, 2009, 04:57 PM
In Ohio you're not supposed to kill bad guys...just "stop" them from killing or seriously injuring you. I'd probably be able to explain a series of double taps...but cutting the guy in half with a three second burst might be a stretch... ;)

Milspec

raimius
February 9, 2009, 05:00 PM
Semi-auto shotgun would be my recommendation.

Saiga 12 with a 10 round mag, anyone?

Short, controlled bursts are best in FA, but I'd still put money on multiple 00 rounds to do the trick just as well (unless you are expecting intruders with body armor).

Tennessee Gentleman
February 9, 2009, 06:53 PM
Wellllllllllllllllllllll, it seems like "fire suppression and area denial" is exactly what I want.

I am not sure you would want it, particularly after the dust settled. Both fire suppression and area denial are military terms for military applications. Not I think for civlian SD.

NickW
February 9, 2009, 06:57 PM
Maybe I’m missing something here but, the poll/question was “would you recommend an automatic weapon for HD?” So full-auto, no I would not, semi-auto I would.

tony pasley
February 9, 2009, 10:33 PM
No to much brass to clean up and way to much home repair work afterwards.

Crankylove
February 10, 2009, 12:19 AM
Semi-auto rifle would be fine, but I would take a nice Benelli M-4 over a full-auto for self defense any day.

El Paso Joe
February 10, 2009, 12:41 AM
No to the full auto. I will not use anything that I have not gotten a fair bit of range time with and felt that I was competent to use. Haven't shot a FA since some time in 1972 (or maybe it was 1971...). 1st choice would be a 12ga pump loaded with #4 buck. If not that, then my m39 or m639. AND a 911 call...

BuckHammer
February 10, 2009, 01:57 AM
I wonder if many of the people on this thread realize that Firepower! is outside of the United States. His question is probably for his own purposes, where "DA's eating you alive" may not be a major concern. Also, the "would you choose a FA weapon" is pretty wide open, because it seems that if you are even open to the idea (with the assumptions he made in mind), then you must vote yes. I voted yes because, if cost or the law wasn't a concern, an MP5 would be great for defending my home, partly because there are no houses anywhere near mine. Where taking the law out of the equation does eliminate the legal problems with stray lead, it does not eliminate my neighborly concern for those who live near me, which is none, so FA for me (with those assumptions) would be a go.

If only those assumptions were reality for me...

Dwight55
February 10, 2009, 12:29 PM
I voted no, . . . but I been thinking that I like the idea of having a tripod mounted M-60 sitting in a sandbagged bunker on my front porch.

Of course, . . . I'd have to have my old ass't gunner on my left, . . . and that would put him in the guest room, . . . permanently.:barf:

Nahhhhhh, . . . maybe just continue with the 1911.

May God bless,
Dwight

rsgraebert
February 10, 2009, 01:58 PM
You may want to provide suppressive fire if you haven't got your trauma plates taped on. In that case, I can't see carrying anything less than a full auto MP5 to defend your home. I mean, suppose the BG is attacking at a distance with a .308. You could theoretically employ an armored briefcase for cover until you got into your wheelbarrow but isn't sending a wall of lead his direction a better solution?

Anyway. I suppose it's overkill when there are plenty of viable solutions to home defense which do not involve 20+ rounds, of which only the first few are controlled.

Erik
February 10, 2009, 02:42 PM
I'll play:

Concerning the compromises which come with the various popular options, I prefer 5.56 carbines that are three round burst capable with the understanding that the selector switch should default to semi-automatic. Concerning close quarters, where necessary the round burst capability offers a controllable, reasonably accurate, decisive option.

Erik, whose work guns are class III, and whose personal guns are not. Do I feel underarmed and at-risk with my personal options? No.

DVC9
February 10, 2009, 02:46 PM
The original poster Specifically Stated that "Cost and the Law"]were not considerations.
Why do so many posters chose to ignore the actual question or circumstance as stated in a thread and therefore lose entirely what the questions original author intended.:mad:
It would seem logical and certainly more considerate to the author to either address the issue as stated, instead of "Jacking" the thread or keep your thoughts to yourself!!!!

To state his original question another way,

If you were asleeep in a house in a third world S---hole where killing and kidnapping were a constant and you woke up to to a home invasion with the sounds of multiple invaders, which system would you prefer to defend yourself with???

Given this scenario, (as with the original post) my answer would be entirely different than it might be here in the states with our NFA laws, DAs,
etc etc.

AK103K
February 10, 2009, 04:02 PM
I'd take the full auto without hesitation.

I think most of the negative responses are due to people not having access or training with them to know. The comments about "hosing", or "pray and spray", "shooting at 100 yards", just shows that many dont have a clue of how they work or when to use them.

Like anything else, they are simply a tool and you need to know when, where, and how to use it.

With just a little training, people who would have difficulty shooting a 12GA loaded with buck, will have no troubles making good, fast hits on targets at realistic ranges.

Most pistol caliber SMG's are also a lot lighter and more compact than your average "riot" type shotgun. They are easier to maneuver and shoot quickly with (especially in tight spaces). This goes for everyone too, but especially for people of smaller stature.

They are also quicker and easier to load/reload, and if the need should arise, you can go from 0 to 50 yards (or more), without making an ammo change. Even if the gun doesnt have a selector, many guns will give you a one round "burst" if you know the gun and trigger.



Another thing that amazes me here is , how afraid and influenced by politically correct ramblings about "overkill", "over penetration",or "what the DA will say", etc.

First and foremost, who cares what the law or public opinion says, the idea is to win the fight, not worry about the possible consequences afterwords. If you have anything but the prize in mind while all this is going on, then you stand a very good chance of losing it, and for what, political correctness?

I have to wonder sometimes about some peoples priorities and mindsets, or lack thereof.

Hkmp5sd
February 10, 2009, 07:22 PM
I'd use one for home defense, no problem. I think my HK MP5SD would be excellent for home defense.

Unfortunately, it is worth too much money to risk its loss to LEO confiscation following a shooting. Even if I get it back, no telling what its condition would be.

Terry A
February 10, 2009, 08:22 PM
I'll say not for me and here's why. I'm very firm in my belief that a high capacity pistol is best for indoor work. Easier to do other things with a free hand and also, should you get jumped somehow, it's easier to keep a pistol pointed at the BG reather than a long arm. And also, my walls are thin...with a fully automatic, no telling who or what else will look like a screen door! :D

My M4 is the weapon of choice for outside work.


But the thought IS mighty tempting.....especially if I can have an H&K MP5 w/ 3 shot bursts!

cookhj
February 10, 2009, 08:39 PM
its a probelme because your using exessive force. some states ( ive heard, only stater i know for sure is my own) you can only respond to a threat with lesser or equal force. say your attack with a knife, then you can only use a knife or hands to defend yourself. pumping 20-30 rounds intoa BG is excessive force. usually they consider more then 3 to be excessive, along with shooting someone in the back



i think you might want to look into that. if someone comes at you with a knife, they are threatening the use of deadly force; therefore, you are authorized to use deadly force to stop that threat. deadly force is authorized (and i'm sure this is the same in every state) when there is an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to yourself or someone else.

jjyergler
February 10, 2009, 11:20 PM
Very few people understand the proper tactics or techniques to employ full auto safely or effectively. I voted yes, but I have been through several tirehouses using live ammo full auto. The question is too vague. In a home, an MP5 or similar weapon might be appropriate. On my farm in Arkansas, a SAW or similar might be appropriate. An MP5 wouldn't work on the farm as well as a semi auto AR-15. A SAW wouldn't be appropriate in the house...But it would be FUN, FUN, FUN!!!!!:D:D:D

Firepower!
February 11, 2009, 12:29 AM
Excessive force, DAs, Legalities etc....GUYS did you even read the OP? I have held these concerns constant to purely focus on tactical aspect. Plus you dont know how many BGs, so how can you go with a 6 shot shotgun or 1911?
And one of you made a comment regarding third world s***hole. Entirely uncalled for.

B. Lahey
February 11, 2009, 01:03 AM
Plus you dont know how many BGs, so how can you go with a 6 shot shotgun

That's why you practice stuffing fresh shells in at every opportunity with tube-fed shotguns.:)

Also, I just got some 12 round magazines for my Saiga 12 that function perfectly. If one were to go that route, they would have 12 instantaneous "bursts" of eight to twelve projectiles, where someone armed with an automatic rifle with a 30 round mag practicing good trigger discipline would only have 10 non-instantaneous bursts of three projectiles. Seems like a pretty even matchup, with the shotgun having the advantage at close to moderate ranges.

When you consider that the shotgun is easier for most people to shoot well compared to a full-auto rifle, that's another factor in the shotgun's favor.

Shotguns are nothing to sneeze at.

OttoJara
February 11, 2009, 01:09 AM
I like my Taurus Judge for HD, short, and controlable, with a laser grip and 2 #6 shot, with a couple 000 bucks following, it will tear up an intruder.

AK103K
February 11, 2009, 07:37 AM
When you consider that the shotgun is easier for most people to shoot well compared to a full-auto rifle, that's another factor in the shotgun's favor.
I believe this to be just the opposite, and especially when the full auto is a pistol caliber gun.

Shotguns loaded with buck or slugs are not easy for "most" people to shoot well, but especially for women or children. You have to practice to be proficient, and I can pretty much guarantee, that after 25 rounds of buck or slugs, that "most" will tell you to take the shotgun and shove it.

Pretty much anyone can shoot an M16 or MP5 or something similar all day, actually accomplish something without going down hill as you go, and have fun doing it to boot.


I have both, SMG's and 18-20" barreled shotguns, and I shoot them both on a fairly regular basis. The older I get, the less I like the shotguns. Just tired of the bulk and beating I guess. An MP5 is a lot easier to shoot well and move around with and is a lot more precise at longer distances. Its also a lot easier to get a red dot on. (a couple of my shotguns have night sights on them too. Whats the point of this type gun if you dont?)

The best shotguns for this type of thing would be one of the 14" Benelli's or something similar. But then what you gain in handling, you loose in ammo capacity. If all you have time to grab is the gun, what would you prefer, 4-5 rounds of buck, or 30 rounds of 9mm or 5.56?

I know, silly question. :)

Firepower!
February 11, 2009, 08:24 AM
I would rather pick mp5 sd or M4 with a suppressor. I just dont like to ruin my walls with shotgun shells and lets say the battle moves to outdoors i am at disadvantage with every yard of growing distance.

fatboy02
February 11, 2009, 08:26 AM
I wonder what your home owners insurance agent would say as you are turning in your claim for all the bullet holes starting in the bedroom and exiting out of the sideing of the house, through walls. windows, refrigerator, kitchen sink, the microwave and coffee pot and for that matter just about everthing else in the path of your spray.

There may be some damage to the house with a shotgun but I have to imagine a heck of a lot less with well a placed shot verses a full auto spray. Just my 2 cents.

DieHard06
February 11, 2009, 08:47 AM
The original poster Specifically Stated that "Cost and the Law"]were not considerations.
Why do so many posters chose to ignore the actual question or circumstance as stated in a thread and therefore lose entirely what the questions original author intended.


Thank you. If they weren't a consideration than you shouldn't have to worry about the courts in this alternative world. Also, as far as excessive force goes, are you sure that that applies to home invaders in your own home? In my state when I am in my home or place of business I do not have to retreat, but can defend myself with deadly force when in imminent danger.

Spray and pray is what i do when I aim a shotgun in the general direction of the bad guy and hope it takes him down. I agree with the poster who said that shotguns are harder to handle. I am not saying shotguns aren't the way to go, but I just don't feel as comfortable with one, which is my opinion. When shooting a FA weapon you only fire in short bursts or take the three-round burst option. I would love to have this option.

AK103K
February 11, 2009, 09:37 AM
Spray and pray has nothing to do with the gun, thats a user issue and lack of training. With any of them, you shoot the target, not at it.

If your worried about holes in the wall or your appliances, or what someone else might think, your heads in the wrong place and not in the game.

4V50 Gary
February 11, 2009, 11:03 AM
Being in California, we're not trusted by Sacramento with selective fire so this is strictly academic. I'm inclined not to use one if I had one. Remember, your gun will be seized as evidence until you are cleared of an unlawful homicide. In the meantime, it'll sit uncleaned in the evidence room. I'd rather not lose an expensive weapon when a semi can do the same job.

Recon7
February 11, 2009, 01:16 PM
No, if there is somebody standing outside my bedroom door, the kid's room is the backstop.

Maybe if I ****** off the mob or something. . .

Slopemeno
February 11, 2009, 01:46 PM
An MP-5 is incredibly easy to control, so I suppose if cost and the law were no object, why not? You've got all the advantages of any long gun, and it's compact and controllable.

That being said, my $150 870 is no slouch.

B. Lahey
February 11, 2009, 03:04 PM
Shotguns loaded with buck or slugs are not easy for "most" people to shoot well,

Sure they kick more, but that's not the whole story. Just about everyone I know has not only fired a shotgun, they have some experience hitting moving targets with a shotgun. Only a very small minority or people I know have any experience at all with automatic rifles.

They kick more but just about everyone knows how to use one in rural America. If I tossed a full-auto AK to a random person in my area, chances are slim that they would be able to hit anything with it.

I've been shooting shotguns since I was big enough to pick one up, but I could count my full-auto experiences on my fingers and toes without running out of digits. I sure know which one I would be more comfortable handling in a stressful situation.

AK103K
February 11, 2009, 04:10 PM
I understand where your coming from, and your also making my point about not having the experience with the automatics to know the difference. The majority of shooters dont have the exposure, experience or training with one, and that is an unfortunate thing. Its a simple skill to learn, and most get the basics down in just a mag or two.

I've taught a lot of people to shoot full auto over the years, and its actually a lot easier than you might think. Women and kids are usually the easiest and fastest learners. They are also the ones most likely to shy away from the shotgun. The technique works for all of them, and once learned, its very easy to do.

Believe it or dont, but the people I've had the most trouble with, have been ex military. Amazingly enough, most knew very little, or seemed to have "forgoten" anything they did know. My kids did better at 6 than most of them did. Men seem to have more of the ego thing going too, and its to their detriment. I've come to the conclusion that more have learned from the movies than the military. :)

Give me about 15 minutes and a couple of mags, and you wont want to look that that shotgun again, except for hunting. :)

Slopemeno
February 11, 2009, 06:55 PM
I think the key with the shotgun is to get away from the full-power buckshot, and substitute reduced-recoil buckshot, such as the Federal with the Flight-control wad. It patterns a lot better too.

armsmaster270
February 11, 2009, 07:26 PM
In my time I have used m-16's full amd semi-auto, Thompsons, M-60's, Grenade launchers, Pistols, Revolvers and hunting rifles. In our urban areas unless you have to make 200yard shots, rifles of any kind are crazy. If you can't handle a situation with a hand gun and or a shotgun you are better served having a safe room in the basement with a cellphone speeddialed to 911.

Erik
February 11, 2009, 10:47 PM
Really? So if I follow you correctly, deploying a carbine under 200 yards is crazy, but OK after that? At what point is deploying a shotgun or pistol crazy? I'd say well under 200 yards. Should there be no intermediate distance option? I say "yes" and advance the carbine as the viable solution; the "from across the room to as far as you'd be reasonably expected to ever use it" option.

JohnH1963
February 11, 2009, 11:55 PM
Many readers of this thread think of an automatic weapon as one that sprays bullets about carelessly hitting innocent bystanders such as the Ingram MAC-10. They think of Rambo with the M-60.

In my experience, the MP5 completely broke that stereotype. When I first fired the MP5, I found that it was very tame and controllable on fully automatic. This was indeed a surgical weapon that is not designed to miss. The NAVY seals trust it, the FBI trusts it...This weapon has no felt recoil and could accurately lay down fire.

The goal in the home defense scenario is not to lay down cover or sustained fire, but to utilize short bursts of 3-5 bullets into the target.

When I was at the range with the MP5, I found that I could easily get all of my bursts into the target's chest without any misses. It was an easy weapon to handle and I cant imagine anyone being able to survive a short burst from that weapon. 3-5 high speed 9mms will slow that burglar down.

The MP-5 would be a great home defense weapon and I wish the police would carry this as a substitute for their duty weapon. I would be very comfortable using this weapon for home defense.

You need to fire the MP5 or another similiar sub-gun to know what I mean.

Firepower!
February 12, 2009, 06:26 AM
"Remember, your gun will be seized as evidence until you are cleared of an unlawful homicide."

Again, why does everyone comfortably ignores the assumptions made in the initial post like cost is not a factor. Gun being siezed is a cost. What does it take for some of you to answer a simple question based on simple assumptions. If you cant answer that, I am doubtful if you are even qualified to own a weapon let alone talk about its use.

Sorry but myself and a few others have been consistantly stating to follow the assumptions.

DVC9
February 12, 2009, 07:13 AM
Firepower summed it up nicely.

If you can't or won't understand the importance of answering his question as stated then it is quite likely that your understanding of the two weapons systems are marginal at best.

The shotgun is certainly a prolific weapon, probably second only to the ubiquitous .22LR Rifle in its numbers around the country.
However for defensive use, there has never been a less understood weapon.
(Volumes can and have been written addressing this).

On the other hand, the Appropriate use of Full Auto is also little understood.

Both systems require more than dusting clay pigeons or making rapid fire perforations in a static paper target to give the individual the ability to wring out the performance that make each system unique.

The question that Firepower has posed should not be interpreted as one of "Which do you like/feel most comfortable with" rather to get us to think out the strengths and weaknesses of these two powerful defensive/offensive systems.

And when comparing, the only way to put them on a level playing field is to remove the extraneous constraints put on either or both by outside forces Ie NFA, Cost, and any other rules or foolishness.

SwampYankee
February 12, 2009, 08:48 AM
When I was at the range with the MP5, I found that I could easily get all of my bursts into the target's chest without any misses.

My uncle once told me about the use of M-16's during Vietnam. At the time, there was no such thing as a 3 or 5 round burst selector. He pointed out that full-auto was useless unless you were putting cover fire down over a rice-paddy. Alternatively, full auto could be used to scare the enemy into retreat temporarily, but don't expect to hit much. If you really wanted to shoot the enemy, you needed to aim at them and control your shots. This meant fewer than 3 bullets leaving the muzzle at a time. His opinion was past 3 rounds, you were no longer on target. Apparently the soldiers of that era used a technique of quick trigger squeezes to let off 3-4 rounds at a time. He said that most guys that saw much combat got VERY good at it. I assume he saw plenty of combat because he is still a train-wreck today, but he has never talked about that.

I wasn't there and I don't know much about what the modern Army does or what the selector on a modern M-16 looks like, but that was what he told me. The MP-5, however, does have a burst selector. I suspect that is the way that the SEALS use it.

So my point is, perhaps from a technical standpoint, an automatic rifle firing controlled bursts is certainly effective. However, it is a weapon made for war. It is not made for neighborhoods, unless you live in the Gaza Strip. Yes, police do carry AR-15's and MP-5's, but in my neck of the woods, they are all semiautomatic. And that seems to be more than sufficient enough for most folks who are not defending a hill in Korea circa 1951.

Firepower!
February 12, 2009, 08:55 AM
+1
Thank you DVC9

B. Lahey
February 12, 2009, 08:59 AM
The question that Firepower has posed should not be interpreted as one of "Which do you like/feel most comfortable with"

Wrong. The question is "Would you choose an automatic weapon for HD?". Any reasoning that the responding individual wants to use seems fair game to explain why or why not that individual would choose FA or not, including discussions of which arm they are most comfortable with.

It's a better response than just spouting some random generic statements without actually saying anything or answering the question.

DavidZ
February 12, 2009, 09:20 AM
I would go with the full auto AK 47 with a 75 round drum and folding stock. If I was in Firepower's situation then that would be a nice blend of maximum capacity of a larger caliber. And for myself, the AK is a small enough weapon that I would be comfortable moving through a house with.

Firepower!, what are the walls of your home constructed of? I'm guessing they are not sheetrock and pine 2x4's...

AK103K
February 12, 2009, 09:27 AM
If you really wanted to shoot the enemy, you needed to aim at them and control your shots.
This is the basic premise with any weapon. You have to shoot the target, not at it. Some just require a little more discipline on the shooters part.

Apparently the soldiers of that era used a technique of quick trigger squeezes to let off 3-4 rounds at a time.
This is part of the basic technique for quick, controllable fire.

The best part about select fire guns is, you get to "select" the use. You use whats necessary when you need it. Its knowing what is needed and when its needed thats the part many seem to have trouble with or understand.


The MP-5, however, does have a burst selector.
Some do and some dont. Depends on how they are set up. The true burst selector is your trigger finger routed through your brain.

Personally, I dont like burst devices and feel they are unnecessary, especially with the MP5. Its trigger will allow one shot bursts once your used to it. Two and three shot bursts are very easy and natural. I dont need or want the gun to tell me how many rounds will go with the pull of the trigger. Who knows, I may want all of them off at once for some strange reason. (mostly thats just to prove to nay sayers that it "can" be done, and done controllably. Its not something I'd normally do.) Once you have the technique down, you can easily dump a whole mag into COM with little effort.

BuckHammer
February 12, 2009, 06:11 PM
If I tossed a full-auto AK to a random person in my area, chances are slim that they would be able to hit anything with it.
Anyone who knows AKs will know that you can put them on semi :D. Then again, most people I know (also in rural Indiana) wouldn't even know how to take the selector off of safety on an AK. BTW, I know that you are saying that they couldn't hit anything meaning that they couldn't hit anything while utilizing the F/A function.

Also, maybe it is an Indiana thing, but shotguns are very easy to shoot and shoot well. Almost everyone I know that is even slightly into guns can shoot a shotgun at least fairly well.

I would use a F/A weapon, but probably not as my primary. I really like shotguns and they are hard to beat for home defense.

Firepower!
February 13, 2009, 03:27 PM
I think a properly used MP5 SD is most suited for in doors. Automatic weapon gives you the option to use burst if needed. It does not mean that you can only spary and pray. There is a reason why we train to use them and control rate of fire with finger.

Webleymkv
February 13, 2009, 05:31 PM
Most of the people posting here seem to forget that Firepower! lives outside the U.S. in a part of the world with very different circumstances than most of us posting here. I can see a use for full-auto in certain situations, a Katrina-like situation where you do actually have roving gangs of thugs and virtually no law enforcement is one as suppressing fire and area-denial may actually be useful tactics in such an environment. Remember, such situations are not so uncommon in other parts of the world. Where I disagree with Firepower! is his choice of full-auto weapons. Something in an intermediate rifle caliber such as 5.56x45 NATO or 5.45x39 Soviet (eg. AKS74U, Sig 552, or Colt M4) would be a better choice IMHO, as with the right ammunition (i.e. light JHP) it will not penetrate walls significantly more than a 9mm subgun but does offer significantly better terminal performance and range.

Firepower!
February 14, 2009, 03:26 AM
Webley
The krinkov has a muzzle flash and noise that will make you deaf when fired in doors. M4 can be used with suppressor on but I would not be comfortable in shootting 5.56 in doors. 9mm to me is a better choice. However, if the battle moves outdoors then the rifles you mentioned are better choice.

Webleymkv
February 14, 2009, 02:52 PM
Firepower, XM193 5.56x45, 9mm JHP, and .45 ACP JHP will all, according to the Box O' Truth website, penetrate 12 boards of sheetrock which is equivalent to 6 interior walls. The 5.56 rounds, however, began to tumble with the handgun rounds did not. Using ammunition like a 40grn JHP in a 5.56 would likely induce more tumbling and/or expansion and further limit penetration.

Firepower!
February 14, 2009, 03:32 PM
Webley, who is E Fudd? Also plz respond to my new post in nfa.

back to thread... I aslo would like to add that a double tap with auto weapon is just too much for any intruder to resist

AK103K
February 14, 2009, 03:58 PM
Elmer Fudd. :)

http://www.baconstripranch.com/images/20_Elmer_Fudd2.jpg

Webleymkv
February 14, 2009, 05:22 PM
As AK103K has already graphically pointed out, E. Fudd is Elmer Fudd. Elmer Fudd is a popular Looney Tunes character (a series of short cartoons produced by Warner Brothers since the late 1930's or early 1940's) and is the classic nemesis to Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck and others. If you've never seen a Looney Tunes cartoon, I encourage you to watch them as they can be downright hysterical.

Webleymkv
February 14, 2009, 05:50 PM
I responded to one of your threads in NFA, but you have several close to the top so I'm not entirely sure which one you meant.

Firepower!
February 14, 2009, 08:43 PM
yes i do remember fudd now.

JohnH1963
February 15, 2009, 01:45 PM
Firing an AK on full auto is very different then firing a sub-gun(like the mp5) on full auto.

An AK jumps and it takes a while to get used to. The MP5 is one where you are quite able to squeeze off short controlled bursts with surgical precision.

Many SWAT teams are now using the M4 as their main weapon, but the MP5 is what they should have stuck with. The M4 jumps around more on full auto and the accuracy is questionable.

The NAVY SEALS could choose whatever weapon they want and they chose the MP5.

teeroux
February 15, 2009, 01:51 PM
I voted yes my thought on it is if FA is good enough for someone to assault a home (AKA swat or your choice of 3 letter acronym here) it should be a viable option to defend one. IMO

AK103K
February 15, 2009, 02:12 PM
The M4 jumps around more on full auto and the accuracy is questionable.
While its to be expected the larger calibers will have a stronger recoil impulse, the technique is still the same regardless, and the results will be similar.

If you try to "hold" the gun on target, your results will not be very good, regardless of caliber, but they will only get worse as the caliber goes up. If you relax, and dont try to control the gun, but instead, go with it and ride it, the results will be very similar. The trick is not to try to physically hold the gun on target, but to just keep moving it back towards center, like you would a strong hose. Its a lot easier to show than it is to type.

When some tells you that the gun continues up and to the left or right, depending on their strong hand, and off the target, thats a good indication they dont understand how to shoot the gun. At a reasonable range, you should be able to dump the mag pretty much COM with one pull of the trigger.

BoulderTroll
February 15, 2009, 03:09 PM
Firepower, first you wrote this:
I would rather pick mp5 sd or M4 with a suppressor. I just dont like to ruin my walls with shotgun shells and lets say the battle moves to outdoors i am at disadvantage with every yard of growing distance.

Then you wrote this:

"Remember, your gun will be seized as evidence until you are cleared of an unlawful homicide."

Again, why does everyone comfortably ignores the assumptions made in the initial post like cost is not a factor. Gun being siezed is a cost. What does it take for some of you to answer a simple question based on simple assumptions. If you cant answer that, I am doubtful if you are even qualified to own a weapon let alone talk about its use.

What the heck??? I'd submit that having holes in your walls from using a shotgun is a "cost" that you shouldn't be factoring in, if you were to follow your own advice.

Call me crazy, but if I have multiple attackers inside my house and need to use a shotgun, subgun, etc. to defend my home...I don't give a rat's behind what my walls will look like afterwards. In fact I'd go so far as to say that if multiple bad guys are breaking into my home then I really must live in a ****hole, third-world of not, as you objected to.

As for the original question, I voted "no". I've carried and trained with an MP5 at work for about 5 years before switching to an M4. The MP5 certainly has great attributes but I don't think of it as the wonder-gun that some of you do. I admit it is far easier for most people to use than a shotgun (IME). From what I've seen an MP5 is probably the easiest weapon to teach a new shooter to use. They do have shortcomings, however. It doesn't penetrate body armor (which is becoming increasingly common), and 9mm, even multiple 9mm's, are not the best round in the world as far as instant incapacitation.

Also, an MP5 SD is not a small weapon IMHO. I'm sure your house is bigger than mine but in my apartment, with narrow walls and stairwells, a pistol would be a much handier option. Besides, I come from the mind-set that I'm accountable for every round I put downrange. Forget about legal consequences and property damage...I have a family and every shot that misses the bad guy has a chance of hitting a loved one.

That said, my personally owned home defense gun is my Colt lower with a Noveske N4 14.5" upper. It is semi-auto only but even if it were FA I'd only use it on semi. It has less over-penetration than a pistol or shotgun, although, like I said, in my size apartment there would be a strong argument to use a pistol instead.

In closing I'd just add that I hope you were joking. If you really are concerned about the condition of your walls after the gunfight, then I am doubtful if you are even qualified to own a weapon let alone talk about its use.
;)

Firepower!
February 15, 2009, 03:17 PM
no b troll i am not qualified to own one. Why dont you come and try taking them away...it would really be funny.


The posts you quoted were from different context.

BoulderTroll
February 15, 2009, 03:18 PM
Many SWAT teams are now using the M4 as their main weapon, but the MP5 is what they should have stuck with. The M4 jumps around more on full auto and the accuracy is questionable.

The NAVY SEALS could choose whatever weapon they want and they chose the MP5.

John, I'm not a Navy SEAL, and I don't play one on TV either, but from what I've heard they "chose" the P226, MP5, M4, M2HB, M60E3, Benelli, S&W 340PD, etc. In other words I think that you may be misleading by making it sound like they "chose" the MP5 over the M4, which they did not.

As for SWAT, I don't play a SWAT cop on TV either but in real life I have been one for a few years.:D I'd strongly disagree that SWAT teams should have "stuck with" the MP5. The move to the AR15 type weapons came about as a result of lessons learned (primarily from places like the North Hollywood BofA). Some people may think of it as a kneejerk reaction to an isolated and widely publicized incident, but I disagree. As I said in my previous post, body armor is unfortunately becoming an increasingly common item in the hands of bad guys. As for the M4's accuracy being questionable, I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about...

BoulderTroll
February 15, 2009, 03:23 PM
no b troll i am not qualified to own one. Why dont you come and try taking them away...it would really be funny.


The posts you quoted were from different context.

Your profile says you're an attorney. You may be but it certainly doesn't sound like it. Your replies to people's comments are immature and inflamatory. I'm new to this forum but I'll be sure to avoid your posts from here on out.

bigrebnc1861
February 15, 2009, 03:25 PM
I like that new military shotgun. I doubt that it will ever be made for the civiliam market.

Firepower!
February 15, 2009, 03:40 PM
Are you talking about AA12? It is an awesome contraption and recoil is not bad at all.

...b troll, yes please avoid my posts if their inflamatory nature upset you. It is needless to comment on whose post was inflamatory and a direct insult.

Hkmp5sd
February 15, 2009, 03:42 PM
Also, an MP5 SD is not a small weapon IMHO.

That said, my personally owned home defense gun is my Colt lower with a Noveske N4 14.5" upper.

TOP: Colt M16A1 w/ Bushmaster 14.5" Upper

BOTTOM: MP5SD

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v495/Hkmp5sd/M4vsMP5SD.jpg?t=1234730433

BoulderTroll
February 15, 2009, 03:55 PM
HK, I'll give you that the M4 is a longer weapon, but that's not an entirely fair comparison. For CQB type stuff I personally use the M4 with the stock completely collapsed. The MP5's I've used did not have collapsing stocks and even if they did, I wouldn't use an MP5 with the stock collapsed.

The MP5SD I trained with also had a flashlight, dual clamped magazines and an EOTech on a claw mount, so that may have added to my opinion of it's size. lol :D

I agree that the M4 is a bit on the large size for inside the home use, but the good balistic qualities and lack of overpenetration outweigh the disadvantages for me. The MP5 lacks in both those areas IMHO.

As a side note, I attended a course a few months back where the staff for the most part were huge fans of the MP5, not to mention the fact that my department armorers drink the HK cool-aid. If all this hasn't convinced me that the MP5 is better than the M4 I probably am a hopeless case. :D

Hkmp5sd
February 15, 2009, 04:58 PM
Ok, I'll give you that. :) I use both with a Blackhawk Chalker single-point sling and the stock collapsed. If not for over-penetration concerns, I would prefer the M4. I just don't think my neighbors would appreciate it. I have lots of very large glass windows, so any misses will be entering my neighbors houses.

Hondo11
February 15, 2009, 04:58 PM
Many SWAT teams are now using the M4 as their main weapon, but the MP5 is what they should have stuck with. The M4 jumps around more on full auto and the accuracy is questionable.

The NAVY SEALS could choose whatever weapon they want and they chose the MP5.

Do you have any first hand experience, or are you just forming your opinion based on the internet and a 1990 movie starring Michael Biehn and Charlie Sheen?

M4 accuracy questionable? Maybe in your hands. Jumps around more on full-auto? The MP5 was made for the specific application for which it is most often used. Not too many weapons systems stack up well against it for that specific application. Lots of them out perform it at everything else though. It's a sexy weapon, for sure, but it's not good for much of anything other than the very narrow application that it is most often used by professionals for.

JohnH1963
February 15, 2009, 05:34 PM
I think the MP5 is a great close quarters weapon which would do the trick for self-defense in the home. I have found rifle calibers to kick more and there is a certain bulkiness associated with each rifle that slows me down from aquiring a good site.

I also think the MP5 is a more reliable weapon then the M16/M4 family. I have seen MP5 rental weapons that were about 30 years old and still fired somewhat accurately. There was this one rental MP5 I saw at a range in Vegas that looked very beaten up, but its accuracy and reliability seemed to hold its own. Could you take an M16 from the 70s, a beaten up well used M16 from the 70s, and still be as accurate or reliable?

If I was defending myself from a distance, then of course, I would want the G36. (Nope, I am not a fan of either the M4 or the M16 as I have revealed in other threads.) I do have experience with the M16 and thats why I dont own one. I dont want to own one. Plenty of other alternatives out there that are far superior.

One day law enforcement will figure out that the AR15 style weapons cant hold a candle to the G36 family.

Para Bellum
February 16, 2009, 04:02 PM
I can shoot more accurately faster with semi-auto.

AK103K
February 16, 2009, 05:06 PM
Who's fault is that? :)


Seriously though, I'd be willing to bet you cant, once you know how.

JohnH1963
February 16, 2009, 09:14 PM
Police all over Europe routinely patrol the streets with sub-guns and rifles. Conversely, crime in Europe is not at the same high levels as here in the United States.

Why do European societies embrace police with automatic weapons while US police shy away?

I would feel more comfortable seeing city cops patrolling the streets with an MP5 or similiar automatic weapon. I want to feel as if the common officer has the weapons to take on a wide variety of threats. I dont feel thats possible with officers who are armed with just a bunch of Glocks.

There is no question in my mind. Airport and city police should have some patrols that mainly carry an automatic assault rifle.

Here are photos of two police officers. Which one looks more prepared to deal with a threat?

http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2006/08/13/heathrow14806_narrowweb__300x369,0.jpg

http://buddydon.blogspot.com/nypd_in_times_square.jpg

The two NYPD officers would be quickly outmatched by a man armed with an assault rifle.

The British officer would at least be able to return fire more accurately and greater volume over a distance.

AK103K
February 16, 2009, 09:27 PM
I would feel more comfortable seeing city cops patrolling the streets with an MP5 or similiar automatic weapon.
I dont know. After seeing how some cops shoot, that might be a scary thing.

I'd also make the cops and the department have to get a tax stamp for the gun and go through the background check for each one, just like the rest of us. :)

devildog66
February 16, 2009, 09:35 PM
The OP mentioned that cost and law are not considerations. That said, a full auto is about the most intimidating (individual) weapon one could ever face. :eek: Note the fair fight reference.

Firepower!
February 17, 2009, 01:28 AM
Sorry but the thread is not about what kind of weapons cops should have or have weapons at all or how they should train. For that we can have a bew thread.

Please stay focused on op. Thank you.

Hondo11
February 17, 2009, 01:32 AM
Nevermind.

Hkmp5sd
February 17, 2009, 05:05 PM
Why do European societies embrace police with automatic weapons while US police shy away?


Because Europe didn't have prohibition and the gangster era. 100 years of movie and media influence.

They also use suppressors as hearing protection instead of "assassin's weapons."

Skans
February 17, 2009, 05:07 PM
I voted "no" for the following reasons:

1. It's not necessary
2. I have one and it's too large to keep in my nightstand ready for action
3. It's worth too much to get confiscated in the event I actually kill someone with it.

4. I'm better with a handgun than I am with my AC556.

publius
February 17, 2009, 08:33 PM
My fantasy- I can see it now, an electric cannon mounted on the widow's walk of my antebellum home. pity on the zombies. I have neither an antebellum home or minigun, but I can dream

bvillars
February 17, 2009, 08:47 PM
full auto, most people have never been trained on these. they are great weapons and tri-burst are awesome. once again we are afraid of defending ourselves to the absolute power. we give kids a four thousand pound rocket for their first vehicle with very little training, but cannot defend ourselves or our actions even in this forum most disagree with the firepower.

Tennessee Gentleman
February 17, 2009, 10:22 PM
Because Europe didn't have prohibition and the gangster era. 100 years of movie and media influence.

My experience in Germany was that the police carried them because they weren't as concerned with collateral damage as are our police in lawsuit-happy America. Keep in mind that the rights we enjoy in this country others in Europe do not.

For instance, when the German cops pull you over and want to test your blood for too much alcohol you will give it up voluntary or otherwise:eek:

Firepower!
February 18, 2009, 05:08 AM
Automatic MP5s give you the edge of fire successive rounds on the target in good accuracy at close ranges. In the US there has been always craze about what bigger etc rather than smaller and quicker- just like cars.