PDA

View Full Version : Rifle/Carbine vs Shotgun vs Handgun for HD POLL


Tucker 1371
April 13, 2009, 03:17 PM
Just want to know which of these yall think is best or prefer for a home defense weapon and weigh the pros and cons of each.

grymster2007
April 13, 2009, 03:26 PM
This will open up a can of worms!

I use 'em all.

Rifle/carbine:
Pros: power & precision
Cons: longer barrel can be an impediment in tight quarters & usually require two handed operation

Shotgun:
Pros: power and power
Cons: not quite so accurate, plus longer barrel and two handed operation

Handgun:
Pros: One handed operation, short barrel, easy to conceal
Cons: generally wimpier loads

kraigwy
April 13, 2009, 03:31 PM
Pistol:

I know I'm gonna bring a lot of flack with this post, but its just my opinion.

We were issued Remington 870s when I was in LE. I really like the 870, I use to have a 4 guns set (12, 20, 28, & 410) for skeet shooting.

But I seldum used them in police work. I rather have a pistol/revolver. The reasoning, being, the limited range of the shot gun. If I'm in shotgun range, my pistol works just fine. If I'm out of range, then my pistol is better.

As most cops we had a lot of building searches, I felt the shotgun was too unwildly. The pistol was more convienent and faster to get in action. In low light you need a flash light. Its easier to use a flashlight with a revolver then shotgun. Easier to sneak around corners. I used a little mechanic's mirror for peeking around corners, the shotgun was always in the way.

If you caught a bandit, and you were alone, (which we were often), what are you gonna do with the shot gun while you search and cuff the bandit.

I just felt more comfortable with the revolver. I felt more comfortable having to use the revolver in the short ranges limited by shotguns. And like I said, if the target is out of range of the shotgun, the pistol is better.

Same goes for SD now. I always have my pocket pistol, my shotguns are in the gun rack.

I dont mean to start a fuss though I know I'm gonna get flack, but this is my opinion. If for some wierd reason I was to go back into LE (highly unlikely), I'd stick to my Service Revolver and leave the shotguns for bird hunting or clay pigions.

JMHO

David Armstrong
April 13, 2009, 03:31 PM
There is no best, only different. Which difference would provide the greatest advantage and least disadvantage is very dependent on the individual and the situation.

KLRANGL
April 13, 2009, 03:31 PM
Handgun because it's what im most comfortable with.

Have a rifle and shotgun just in case ;)

David Armstrong
April 13, 2009, 03:41 PM
The reasoning, being, the limited range of the shot gun.
FWIW, a shotgun with the right ammo can easily bring accurate fire onto a subject at 100 yards with a little training, something few can do with a handgun.
The pistol was more convienent and faster to get in action.
I believe that is also more a matter of training than anything else. For most folks a shotgun can be brought into action just as fast or fastger than a handgun.
what are you gonna do with the shot gun while you search and cuff the bandit.
If you have equipped it properly, you are going to sling it and get it out of your way.
I dont mean to start a fuss though I know I'm gonna get flack, but this is my opinion.
Not trying to bust your chops either, as everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I hate to see so many of the old myths about the shotgun that are still tossed around today. The biggest problem with the shotgun, IMO, is that few people have been properly trained on it, and that includes LEOs.

Glenn E. Meyer
April 13, 2009, 03:56 PM
Own them all, train sufficiently on all of them to have some competence. Wait for the zombies.

And shoot three gun matches - that's lots of fun with all.

The problem with discussing shotguns is that we get all the cliches thrown up - racking, guaranteed kill, can't miss, etc.

Deet
April 13, 2009, 03:58 PM
Shotgun or pistol either will do just fine for me.

hogdogs
April 13, 2009, 04:17 PM
My training makes my short barrel shotgun most accurate at close range in minimal light in my hands. My other close reach is a pistol but at .22lr, it isn't a first choice 2 legger stopper but it works for the errant armadillo, rabbit or just to shut the yappin dogs up.
I would have to load the .30-30 lever gun before it could be called to action.

As for search and cuff of BG's... I will not only refrain from searching them or cuffing them but also will not get close enuff to render first aid. If they hit the deck in true felon fashion before they get shot they can lay out stretched with face firmly planted in the floor awaiting LEO's...
Brent

Bartholomew Roberts
April 13, 2009, 05:32 PM
I don't think there is a "best" weapon for home defense. Different needs will result in different tools. Just to give one example: If you need to go grab your baby/toddler from another room and bring them to your "safe" room, then a longgun isn't going to be ideal.

As a general rule though, a longgun is going to be more accurate and more powerful than a handgun. Something like an AK, 16" AR, or short lever gun isn't going to extend any more than a pistol in isoceles/weaver stance would. An 18" shotgun is only going to extend about 2" further. On top of that, you can add a light to just about any of those for less than $50 these days. Finally, a long gun provides better leverage in retaining the firearm in a close quarters situation.

The pistol is only there because it is convenient. If I can use a longgun, I am going to use one. I personally would use a carbine (AR15) because I have more experience with that; but I wouldn't feel uncomfortable with a shotgun either.

kraigwy
April 13, 2009, 06:18 PM
Quote:
what are you gonna do with the shot gun while you search and cuff the bandit.

If you have equipped it properly, you are going to sling it and get it out of your way.

Oh yeah, thats right on the top of my list of fun things to do, wrestling around in some alley with some joker while having a shotgun slung to me.

No Thanks.

OttoJara
April 13, 2009, 06:23 PM
I had to choose COMBO because my HD is a Taurus Judge with #6 and 00 buck loaded. So, Hand gun and shotgun mixed for me.:D

David Armstrong
April 13, 2009, 08:09 PM
Oh yeah, thats right on the top of my list of fun things to do, wrestling around in some alley with some joker while having a shotgun slung to me.
The orignal comment was "what are you gonna do with the shot gun while you search and cuff the bandit", and had nothing to do with wrestling. If you are needing to wrestle, don't sling the shotgun, use it to help you subdue the BG. Goes back to that training process again.

Carne Frio
April 13, 2009, 08:15 PM
I use a combo. It's related to timing. If you have any amount of warning, it
is the 12g. Little or no warning, large caliber revolver.

Maromero
April 13, 2009, 08:32 PM
Shotgun & sidearm.

butterboy
April 13, 2009, 08:56 PM
just throw a hand grenade:eek:

butterboy
April 13, 2009, 08:57 PM
sorry ,shot gun is my favorite...

srm970
April 13, 2009, 09:06 PM
shotgun my side the bed. .45 on hers and a 357 on mine as well. no rifle. ohh and the dumb but loud dog at the front door.



shawn

baypistolman
April 14, 2009, 12:56 AM
I have to agree with Kraigwy. It is not easy searching your house with a flash light on your shotgun because you are pointing at everything in your path.

A hand gun with a separate flash light is definitely much more effective especially if you need cover or need a tactical advantage when your doing a search in your own house. But I guess if you need to have a shotgun over your shoulder with a sling while your searching with a pistol would make any burglar quiver

Popa-45
April 14, 2009, 04:17 AM
I use a combination of the three. a 1911 under the pillow for rapid response, Rem 870 for down the hall, M1 carbine for the yard. It all boils down to situation. And the 4 legged alarm system.

GetYerShells
April 14, 2009, 07:47 AM
Mossberg Persuader on my side, sidearm on the dresser, and an AK under the bed.

ATW525
April 14, 2009, 08:00 AM
Combo

My "always" gun, a S&W 638 is in my pocket even when I'm at home, and my "away from home" gun, a S&W 4506, is next to the bed when I'm at home. Also next to the bed is a .357 Magnum lever action carbine with a 16" barrel (much handier than any non-NFA shotgun).

The Great Mahoo
April 14, 2009, 08:22 AM
I just use my handguns for HD weapons. I have some shotguns and carbines I could use, but prefer to keep them locked up and out of my way. If I had time to get something in particular (zombie invasion!) I would probably opt for a long-arm, but am more than confident with my handguns.

Flapjack23
April 14, 2009, 08:29 AM
My preferred setup would be short barrel carbine (.223) and hi-cap handgun. Works for my particular situation. Don't have the carbine so the Glock and a Surefire will have to do.

Bartholomew Roberts
April 14, 2009, 08:38 AM
I have to agree with Kraigwy. It is not easy searching your house with a flash light on your shotgun because you are pointing at everything in your path.

I've done enough Force-on-Force now that I know I am not going to try and clear any structure by myself unless there is no other option. I am going to fort up and wait for police in a home defense situation. If there is no other option, then the last thing I want to do is grab the least effective firearm I have to do a search.

The light I use on my rifle is a Surefire G2 with a Cree LED head. It has a bright spot and a secondary spot. The secondary spot will illuminate about a 15' circle on the wall from 10' away and is sufficient to search/illuminate without pointing the rifle directly at things - in fact, I can search without ever raising the muzzle higher than 45 degrees down with the large secondary area of illumination.

Since the light has a push button switch and is mounted conveniently on the forearm, I can also flip it on/off easily while using the same stance I normally use.

Now if you are talking about just investigating an odd noise at night, then yes, I'll probably bring the pistol and a flashlight for that because the chances it is actually an intruder are pretty low and convenience wins out over preparedness.

45Marlin carbine
April 14, 2009, 09:42 AM
the poll shows that 'combination' is leading by a wide margin.
for good reason IMO.
hard to beat a primary weapon of handgun with a shotty/carbine back up.
myself I have all 3 handy with the Camp carbine .45acp least 'handy'.

camogun
April 14, 2009, 09:48 AM
I've only owned revolvers and hunting rifles.I'm thinking of getting either a 9mm or a .45cal semiauto pistol for home and personal protection. I like the idea of the larger caliber to stop an attacker but wonder if using a smaller caliber will be more accurate,less muzzle jump. Also I'm planning on taking training to be an armed security guard and the school says most security companies use 9mm.

KLRANGL
April 14, 2009, 10:17 AM
the poll shows that 'combination' is leading by a wide margin.
for good reason IMO.
I find it a little misleading as to what the preferred choice of self defense weapon is. I have all three, but voted handgun because that is what I would use 99.9% of the time...
A better poll would maybe have had the options of:
Combo: handgun preferred
Combo: shotgun preferred
Combo: rifle preferred
Combo: no preference

in addition to just shotgun/rifle/handgun

I have a feeling people voted combo just because they have all three

KnightZero
April 14, 2009, 10:37 AM
I can see the use for all of the above in HD, but in my scenario, anything larger than a pistol is far too clumsy and cumbersome to use in my apartment. Spiral staircases and long guns do not mix. I'm thinking of picking up a shotgun, but for bedside HD I'll stick with my Springfield XD+TLR-2

Slopemeno
April 14, 2009, 12:51 PM
I think what is unmentioned here is the huge edge a long gun (doesn't matter if it''s a subgun, shotgun, whatever) has over a pistol when you have to CONNECT under pressure, regardless of range.

BikerRN
April 14, 2009, 02:05 PM
I will use the phone first if I have a choice followed by a combination of various weapons.

If I have to go looking for that "bump in the night" I will use a handgun. If I KNOW there is an unauthorized intruder in the home I will use a shotgun from a barricaded position.

If niether of those options work, I can always use a 9mm Carbine, but I prefer the shotgun. As far as using a rifle caliber, in a rifle, for my living situation and the population density I feel it would not be a wise choice at this time. Your situation, needs and requirements may be different.

Biker

45Marlin carbine
April 14, 2009, 02:43 PM
Quote:
the poll shows that 'combination' is leading by a wide margin.
for good reason IMO.

I find it a little misleading as to what the preferred choice of self defense weapon is. I have all three, but voted handgun because that is what I would use 99.9% of the time...
A better poll would maybe have had the options of:
Combo: handgun preferred
Combo: shotgun preferred
Combo: rifle preferred
Combo: no preference

in addition to just shotgun/rifle/handgun

I have a feeling people voted combo just because they have all three



you selected just a part of my post - as stated 'hard to beat a primary weapon of handgun with a shotty/carbine back up' - a handgun 'preference' if you will allow.

Willie Lowman
April 14, 2009, 02:47 PM
Our first choice is the G22 w/surefire light. It is super reliable, accurate, and easy to navigate the confines of the house with. She loves the Glock and so do I. It's nice to see eye to eye on something.

My first choice in generic HD is the shotgun. It comes out about 6 times a year. I have defended against raccoons, stray dogs, and an army of starlings.;) 90% success rate. (Some starlings flew away before I could train the gauge on them)

KLRANGL
April 14, 2009, 02:55 PM
you selected just a part of my post
Sorry I didn't mean to single you out. I was just commenting on the fact that the poll might not be completely thorough, and was in no way regarding your post directly...
In fact, your post is a good example as to why the poll isn't thorough enough...

45Marlin carbine
April 14, 2009, 03:13 PM
actually the post is directed to 'HD' (home defense) weapon.
for 'self defense' outside the home where close quarters is not a concern then definitely a long gun.
as this is written I have my Makarov about 6' away and my SXS 12 ga Mag about 15' away if needed.
if I need to go outside the SXS goes and my Mak stuck in waistband of trousers.

Popa-45
April 14, 2009, 09:37 PM
When I went through the D an G courses, Florida only authorizes the 9MM, and the .38 spl for armed security. The instructor was saying that the board was considering adding the .40 to the eligable weapons, but haven't heard anything futher on the subject.;)

Rifleman 173
April 15, 2009, 09:26 AM
It really depends on which firearm you train to use. I can use a variety of firearms in a home defense situation and feel comfortable with any of them. You come around my place and you can be met by any number of firearms in a fashion that is layered to allow me to have more options. For example, I might greet you with a shotgun backed up by a pistol which is backed up by a sheath knife. Then I could opt to use a carbine backed up by a pistol which is backed up by a sheath knife. The choice is mine and I train with all of them and I have contingency plans for a variety of different invasion situations. So I'm ready for day, night, low light, bright light and various other shooting/defensive situations.

Dwight55
April 15, 2009, 11:32 AM
I took the question to be in a "Purely" home defense situation, . . .

A) Unexpectedly, someone kicks in the front door and attempts to enter

B) Burglars, B&E specialists enter your dwelling at night while you're asleep

C) Enraged neighbor comes to your porch looking for trouble

Something along the lines of the above, . . . as my perception of HD follows the above as most likely HD situation based on observation of local HD scenarios.

In that case, . . . the handgun would be the most logical, . . . as more than likely, . . . I could get to it in a hurry, . . . and may not be able to get to the shotty or the rifle.

Thus my vote.

May God bless,
Dwight

Enoy21
April 15, 2009, 12:18 PM
I once read an article that mentioned a study of Prison inmates... it went something like this ...

" What is the one thing that would stop you dead in your tracks if you were doing something you shouldn't be doing ? "

The resounding answer was " The sound of a 12 Gauge pump action "

Most of what I've read has said that for "purely" home defense a Short barreled (18" ) tactical shotgun ( No stock but pistol grip for maneuverability ) with Buck shot or bird shot ( to avoid over penetration) is the best Home Defense weapon there is. The sound alone is enough to scare an attacker off. Also the fact that in a high stress situation and a moving Attacker , a shotgun gives a bit more room for error.


If I had wanted one for STRICTLY that , I would not have gotten my Glock. I would have bought a shortgun. But I wanted a CCW/Target Pistol as well to serve as both.

I have often though considered trading in my .22 Magnum for a Mossberg 500 ( interchangeable barrel lengths for home defense or Hunting ) and adding a tactical Pistol Grip to it.


http://world.guns.ru/shotgun/mossberg_500_cruiser.jpg

Mossberg 500 Cruiser

More review info:
http://www.firearmsfirst.com/?p=11

Sparks2112
April 15, 2009, 01:02 PM
I keep a pistol on me, but, if I knew someone was in my house I'd have to go for the shotgun. I've trained extensively with one, and feel I understand it's capabilities very well. Not to say I don't have a pistol or rifle around, it's just my first choice if I know if have unwanted visitors.

Tucker 1371
April 15, 2009, 01:40 PM
Right now my only viable option is an AK74 w/ a 16" bbl. As I am still in the early stages of building my gun collection; the other guns I have are ones I've had since I was a kid (a Mossberg 20ga pump and a Ruger 10/22).

For me the AK is fairly handy and I feel very comfortable shouldering and pointing it, much more so than some of my friends' ARs (this is just me personally). My only concern is overpenetration.

I think my next gun is going to be an 870 tactical though and that will most likely be my go-to HD gun.

I know I put combo in the choices and that most people like the idea of a backup weapon but my gripe with that is actually being able to effectively employ both. I don't sleep with a holster on and trying to handle both a long gun and a handgun while moving to engage an intruder just seems like it would be distracting and too time consuming, especially as I am trying to go from 0% alertness to 200% alertness.

ezenbrowntown
April 15, 2009, 02:10 PM
Maybe I'm a bit critical, but "combination of the above" is a bit optimistic in my opinion. Barring a long, drawn out gun fight, the ability to "swap" weapons doesn't seem all that feasible. If engaged, why in the world would you want to discard a shotty to unholster a pistol, or vice versa? Or if someone was advancing quickly, why waste time ascertaining a secondary firearm? Just my thoughts, and some of you may have experience that differs, which is fine. I'm always looking to learn.

I have pistols and a HD shotgun (Mossberg Maverick). I'm not under the delusion that shotgun will magically difuse any situation (one shot kill, bg pees his pants, etc.), but I do believe I'd trust it foremost. Sure it doesn't have the manueverability of a handgun, but I believe under duress I can be much more accurate and I believe the "hits" would have much effectiveness than a solitary handgun round. Just my $.02.

Tucker 1371
April 15, 2009, 02:20 PM
Maybe I'm a bit critical, but "combination of the above" is a bit optimistic in my opinion. Barring a long, drawn out gun fight, the ability to "swap" weapons doesn't seem all that feasible.

Thats kind of what I was getting at in my last post. I'm not saying you should only have one gun available for HD but when the SHtF I don't think trying to arrange multilple guns is the best idea. Grab you're favorite, check it quick and move to engage the threat.

EDIT: BTW I am curious to hear the person who voted for "Grab the phone and hope the police show up in time" defend their choice :D LMAO.

Bartholomew Roberts
April 15, 2009, 02:33 PM
Most of what I've read has said that for "purely" home defense a Short barreled (18" ) tactical shotgun ( No stock but pistol grip for maneuverability (http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=344524&highlight=Pistol+grip+shotguns) ) with Buck shot or bird shot (http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=320323&highlight=birdshot+penetration) ( to avoid over penetration (http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=302070&highlight=birdshot+penetration)) is the best Home Defense weapon there is. The sound alone is enough to scare an attacker off (http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=307401&highlight=sound+racking+shotgun+scare). Also the fact that in a high stress situation and a moving Attacker , a shotgun gives a bit more room for error (http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=300342&highlight=do+-need+to+aim+shotgun).

Congratulations on working an astounding number of popular shotgun myths into a single, succinct paragraph. Misinformation may not be much of talent; but condensing it in such an easy to read format surely must be ;)

In honor of your achievement, I have searched the TFL archives for threads discussing and debunking those particular myths and hotlinked them to the corresponding myths in your quote for ease of reading.

David Armstrong
April 15, 2009, 03:10 PM
Most of what I've read has said that for "purely" home defense a Short barreled (18" ) tactical shotgun ( No stock but pistol grip for maneuverability ) with Buck shot or bird shot ( to avoid over penetration) is the best Home Defense weapon there is. The sound alone is enough to scare an attacker off
Apparently most of what you have read is wrong. Shotguns need stocks, don't use bird shot for defense, and the sound might scare some but don't count on it.

Glenn E. Meyer
April 15, 2009, 03:52 PM
Didn't I say this early on:

The problem with discussing shotguns is that we get all the cliches thrown up - racking, guaranteed kill, can't miss, etc.


I win the Nostradamus prize.

Tucker 1371
April 15, 2009, 04:23 PM
Apparently most of what you have read is wrong. Shotguns need stocks, don't use bird shot for defense, and the sound might scare some but don't count on it.

Couldn't agree more David

I win the Nostradamus prize.

Hahahaha:D

David Armstrong
April 15, 2009, 04:25 PM
I win the Nostradamus prize.
Come on now, Glenn, that is sort of like predicting the sun will rise in the East on Tuesday. :D

hogdogs
April 15, 2009, 04:25 PM
Testing of the sound of a pump shotgun action as fear inducing...
Okay I couldn't stand the suspense further!!! All this hub-bub about the sound of a shot gun racking a shell will send a man running...
So I took all the shells out of mine, Checked it 2 more times and YELLED... FREEZE MUTHA F'ER And racked the action... Didn't scare me one bit... But my little pitbull mix female ran out of the room and momma's pomeranian/chihuahua cross bailed under the bed hitting her head on the way! So I shut off the lights (might work in the dark) tried it again and same result (NOTHING) I didn't run or poop my pants. Just stood there...
So I got the bright idea to include a second party. Called momma in the room and after explaining the hollerin' and why her dog was cowering and shaking under the bed I told her to just Cycle the action real hard and fast... DERN IT!!! Nothing again! Had her do the loud yell first (this was easy as she was still mad I scared her dog) and last result same as the rest... NO NEGATIVE REACTION OF FEAR! Don't believe it will work on more than a couple chicken dogs!
From this thread...
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3133205&highlight=momma%27s+dog#post3133205
Pardon the searching, it was hard to find the post...
Brent

Enoy21
April 16, 2009, 04:17 PM
Congratulations on working an astounding number of popular shotgun myths into a single, succinct paragraph. Misinformation may not be much of talent; but condensing it in such an easy to read format surely must be

In honor of your achievement, I have searched the TFL archives for threads discussing and debunking those particular myths and hotlinked them to the corresponding myths in your quote for ease of reading.



lol , Wow I'm glad I got an award for something AND i listed in there "what I've read" .


A couple things though ... The pistol grip while perhaps not as ideal as a stock , at the range I am thinking of ( especially in my very small home ) I believe that it would be a more maneuverable weapon in a panic. Obviously not as comfortable for recoil , but this is not my target shooting fun gun. I would be shooting it enough to feel comfortable at hitting a 5-6 foot man with it within 20 feet, then storing it and hope I never need it.


The link the you added had many many people also agreeing for bird shot .... so that seems like a pretty popular opinion piece that I believe could go both ways... So Bird or Buck , either/or would be a viable option depending on what you want out of it. Your post to the Over penetration issue is also riddled with people on both sides of the few point with some people having instructors say the same to them. So again ... either/or dependent on your views.

Obviously the sound alone is not a sure fire way to scare anyone off.... But there was a study of inmates who were asked .... and the Sound of the pump action shotgun would stop them in their tracks.... Obviously there are always various difference attacks and scenarios ... in a burglary , or a situation where someone is quietly , hunting YOU , the warning of the firearm and the sound of the pump action " may be enough" to scare them off. I often tell my GF when at home at night , if she ever feels the need to draw while in her Bedroom , To make sure as she announces the firearm to Rack the slide right after so they will know it's not just an idle threat and may cause them to think twice about coming through that door.

As for the room for error , I'm not saying you don't need to aim. With the shorter barrel , though , you had a little more room for error and wound infliction. At that close of range there is not going to be alot of expansion , but a 1-2" hole may mean the difference and catching him in a vital , and grazing his body....




So while I don't claim, to know all of the "facts" that you guys site to counter the "myths" I listed... It would certainly apear that they are very very common "myths" and there is a reason they have so often been repeated....

You know my GF tells me all the time that " Milk is good for you " is a Myth as well , and that pharmecutical companies and Vaccinations are the Corporate genocide leaders of the free world....

My point with this ? the post was a matter of preference question and why ... Perhaps my reasons are myths to you all , but I believe in them for the reasons I listed over a handgun or a rifle as MY "perfect" home defense weapon"



Thanks for my award btw :)

hogdogs
April 16, 2009, 04:30 PM
Twellons, My 18 inch barrel with regular stock is FAR MORE mobile! It can be carried with my right hand in a few positions and all of which have my finger in a ready position. Don't get me wrong, it won't fit crossways in all hallways but I doubt that is a battle ready position as the bad person will be to front or rear and not alongside.
I have the ability to carry barrel up or down just like your PGO, I have the ability to shoot from a low hip or midsection position just like the PGO, but I am able to tuck the stock under my arm and clamp down for defensibility which you cannot, I can go to a full shoulder mount position which you cannot. I can fire mine while looking down the barrel for best accuracy which you cannot. And if I run out of shells or suffer the rare jam I have a double ended club which the PGO does not...;) Food for thought...
To quantify my opinion I have un-countable thousands of rounds with a PGO as well as the regular stock design and a few thousand with the AR shaped stock.
Brent

Enoy21
April 16, 2009, 04:48 PM
Those are all very valid reasons Hotdogs , and Appreciate the listings of why you prefer the Stock. Perhaps some of those are good reasons for me to try and see how well I could do the same ( using my rifle ) to test and I may also prefer the stock.

I think many here forgot this was an opinion thread , and listing reasons why someone feels the way they do on their opinion may help others to form new opinions... the previous " YER DOIN IT WRONG" replies to my post were not very helpful. lol

Slopemeno
April 16, 2009, 04:48 PM
...more manueverable, and way, WAY more likely to miss.

Bartholomew Roberts
April 16, 2009, 04:57 PM
Twellons, the reason I linked to those posts is because they had really good information in them if you take the time to read them and critically think about them. Even better if you follow some of the suggested links.

If all you intend to do is tabulate how many people had a certain opinion and decide that >X number of people sharing your opinion validates your opinion, then you are in for a very interesting life. Particularly since some of the more informative posts in those threads show facts that directly contradict many of those opinions and those facts are never rebutted.

ETA: As for the "yer doin it wrong" posts, look at what hogdogs typed in response to a single sentence of yours regarding a fairly simple issue. Now look at the more complex issues you touched on - most people don't have the inclination to write a 5k word essay on why they think your opinion is wrong supported by their reasoning on each issue. Thus the links to past discussions - which apparently a waste of time also.

Enoy21
April 16, 2009, 06:27 PM
While I was at work , I was unable to read through all of the links you provided , but I did skim all of them and saw many views and arguments for both sides...

I guess my point was that popular opinions weather right or wrong , disagreed with or not , are just that.... opinions... Now perhaps I mistakenly saw your post as a denial of others opinions and stating your view and opinion as fast ...

The fact of the matter is that even the links you posted are still just " What I've read" information. And always something to take into consideration from the more experienced.
Instead of giving your personal reasons for your feelings simply linked off of OTHER peoples views opinions and reasons.... It's what you've read and studied and believed in . ( According to your response to me , although I'm sure tyou have more personal experience )

My opinions are not based strictly on X number of opinons > Y so therefore X must be true...

Although that plays a part in my views, I do in fact take both point of views and think about them and digest them and place them into my specific situation and make my own opinions and choices... ( The same goes for politics, food selection , cancer risks etc... ). Basically I don't believe everything I read on the net, in a book , or see on a movie ... but I take the various opinions and process them and accept those which I "feel" are true in my opinion and what is a "best case scenario" or me and my family. Is this always correct or the most knowledgeable ? No... Is it a true opinion based on my knowledge and experience ? Yes.


So perhaps it was a misunderstanding of what you were trying to get across , but the multitude of links trying to prove my views incorrect , did nothing more than come across to me as " Your ignorant and need to do more research" while at the same time displayed that MANY many other people share my view.


I can refer you back to the Milk and Vaccines argument . My GF can link me 25 sites and references to say they are terrible for you and dangerous and it's a massive lie that society believes.... I can also link just as many arguments that say Milk is good for you and Vaccines necessary ... So who's to say who is right and who is wrong ? Both reference studies of facts in given cases... It's a matter of opinion based on belief and other circumstances and scenarios that helped form those views.


Now , to say " I disagree with your opinion because...." Well now that's a healthy debate and something I look forward to in order to expand my view and understanding. " You're spreading myths and falsehoods as you can see here..." Is nothing more than touting your opinion as fact... based on other peoples opinions and views.

Hotdogs method of listing his personal experiences and views of WHY he has his opinion was in no way negative and was simple a good method of listing why he, as a person, disagrees...


So again , perhaps a misunderstanding .... but back to the subject at hand , A shotgun , short barrel ( perhaps with PGO or stock ) and Birdshot is my current opinion in answer to the question. I'm not really sure how so many of these replies came back to my single post.... I'm feeling the love though ;)

David Armstrong
April 16, 2009, 06:51 PM
So while I don't claim, to know all of the "facts" that you guys site to counter the "myths" I listed... It would certainly apear that they are very very common "myths" and there is a reason they have so often been repeated....
Myths that are commonly repeated are still myths. You will find no quality shotgun instructor, AFAIK, that will subscribe to any of those myths.

Deaf Smith
April 16, 2009, 07:04 PM
No can of worms for me.

I prefer them all.

Each has good points and bad.

I keep the handgun the most cause I carry it daily. But I'd be quite happy with my M1 Carbine/AR/AK or Mossburg 590 any day. There is no conflict to me between them.

Enoy21
April 16, 2009, 07:06 PM
Quality of instructor is objectionable. One of the links about Bird shot mentioned someone who had an instructor teach them to use Bird Shot for home defense....


Again... It's all objectionable to what one is taught and by whom. Back to the Milk argument.... Herbal Doctors teach on thing ( My GF is studying to be a natural Herbalistic Doctor) ... Modern Medicine Doctors teach another... Both offer studies to show why the other is a myth and wrong.... Who you YOU believe and rely on ?

Herbal Docs that claim against Milk and Vaccines and medicines of most kinds ?

Or Medicinal docs that have guided you your entire life ?

Both offer compelling arguments based on studies and viewpoints.

Anti's offer studies and view points , us Pros offer studies and viewpoints... I Offer "my" view based on my beliefs and views of both sides of the arguments ... and I am PRO.

I don't claim that my view if fact or best for everyone. Based on my views, education, experience thus far and situation ... They will work best for me until my view changes based on my own understanding and belief through education and open minded acceptance of other's views. .

TacticalDefense1911
April 16, 2009, 08:29 PM
This is my new HD weapon of choice...

http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u13/6t9mach1/Guns/DSCF1861.jpg

mrray13
April 16, 2009, 09:14 PM
handgun preferred, backed up with a 20g mossberg 500.

David Armstrong
April 17, 2009, 12:46 AM
Quality of instructor is objectionable.
Not really. The shotgun is one of the few weapons out there where there is such a consensus on some of these issues that an instructor that promulgates the myths almost by definition does not know what he is talking about.
One of the links about Bird shot mentioned someone who had an instructor teach them to use Bird Shot for home defense....
I've taught it also. But I do not teach it as a good choice. In fact, a really good instructor will teach you how to modify your birdshot shell to make it more effective.
Who you YOU believe and rely on ?
With all due respect to your GF, natural Herbalistic Doctors usually have little or no actual training in sciece and medicine, so I know who I will rely on.
Both offer compelling arguments based on studies and viewpoints.
But not all studies are of the same rigor and quality. No matter how compelling the argument, the universe was not created 4000 years ago, even though there are those who present that viewpoint and will show you studies to support it.

freakintoguns
April 17, 2009, 01:59 AM
i went with the shotgun. although i would have my XD close by, but that might change when i get my AR and work it out.

BikerRN
April 17, 2009, 02:10 AM
EDIT: BTW I am curious to hear the person who voted for "Grab the phone and hope the police show up in time" defend their choice LMAO.

GSUeagle1029,

That was my vote. :)

Read my entire post. I don't need to go looking for trouble, as it has a way of finding me. Just because I will call the Police does not mean that I won't use a gun to defend myself or my family either.

It's really no fun being under investigation following a "Use of Force", BTDT. The gun, for me, and any sane rational person is an "option of last resort". If you think you will be given the key to the city if you "smoke a badguy" you are delusional at best, and living in a fantasy world.

I have used a gun three times in my life, twice a handgun and once a shotgun. My attitude is, if someone else can be the "cannon fodder" great. If not, and I have no other choice, I will do what I have to do. I will survive, period. I may not, but I don't tell myself that. I come to the dance with the attitude that I am going to win the encounter. If I don't have to have the encounter, so much the better.

I don't live in a fantasy world. For me, out to 100 Yards the shotgun will work, but I don't realistically see a 100 Yard shot as being defensible in court. Also, using your hunting rifle is fine, but by God Muffy, good people don't use those evil "assault weapons". That's what the yuppie on the jury would say, and the most dangerous situation he's ever faced is not having his Starbuck's coffee one morning.

Bear in mind, I use an M4 at work, in certain situations, as well as a shotgun and handgun, but that's not relevant to this thread. The question was about "Home Defense". I may, or may not, be able to justify a 100 Yard shot at work. I don't think any of us could justify a shot longer than our longest hallway or room in a home defense scenario.

I don't know about you, but my home is small enough that a handgun works just fine, but I prefer the stopping power of the shotgun with appropriate loads. I actually prefer that I not be placed in the situation, hence the call to the Police. They may, or may not get there in time. If they don't, I'm prepared to defend myself and my loved ones.

Biker

ChCx91
April 17, 2009, 06:09 AM
My PERSONAL OPTION for home defense is a carbine variant rifle, but I still think that your pistol should be your primary means of defense in your home.

1) Deploy handgun and engage threat
2) Under your own cover fire or if opportunity presents itself, use your handgun to maneuver yourself to wherever your bigger guns, more ammo, vest(s), phone(s), etc are located
3) Once properly armed or if opportunity does not present itself, either fight or retreat
4) If you decide to continue to fight, follow steps in my signature line

:)

Enoy21
April 17, 2009, 07:37 AM
David .... No disrespect taken ... as I pretty much call her the crazy Milk lady as I sip on my tall glass of 2% Milk... Although she is very educated , it's more of a belief system than a science per say. I just don't personally believe alot of it. lol

And I agree with the differences in studies and quality of studies and how often certain studies are aimed at trying to change a point of view... That's kind of what I Was getting at. Seeing the studies of both , and making a personal decision is needed. Not just following a study or two that's been seen.

I'm just saying that this was not a " this is gospel best solution". This was my personal opinion of my best scenario. Which is still open for a change of mind, but I believe you will often find many people with differing opinions as it applies to them.

If you prefer to hear my reasonings here it is ....


I live in a home with VERY thin walls ( thinner than Drywall ).... Extremely thin walls , My bedroom is on the opposite end of my children's... Any attacker, burglar etc , that enters the home will be between me and my kids... Any shots I have will be very carefully angled to a point that any overshot will NOT hit a wall ( My son sleeps in the room adjacent to the Living room and front door entry) My daughter in a room at the end of a hallway leading off from the front door. ANY overshot at all poses a very high risk in these situations. The only advantage I feel with a pistol is that I can move to get better angles easier.... Hence , I have personal reasons for my choices. I feel less comfortable with the Pistol and a miss , but more comfortable that I can get better angles and safer shots. ( Maneuverability )

This particular link backs my view ... sort of. http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs10.htm

While not completely optimal , it is accepted as a potentially safer option in some situations. I prefer to not kill anyone if I Can avoid it , if it takes 3 shots of bird to take him down , well that's 3 shots I'll take versus the one with higher risks to my kids. 4" penetration to a midsection may not kill the guy but it's going to hurt like hell and make him pause (I would hope) while allowing me time for a follow-up shot if needed.

Interesting information though and perhaps I will spend my work day doing more research. :D:D:D

Bartholomew Roberts
April 17, 2009, 09:08 AM
I guess my point was that popular opinions weather right or wrong , disagreed with or not , are just that.... opinions... Now perhaps I mistakenly saw your post as a denial of others opinions and stating your view and opinion as fast ...

"Birdshot is a bad choice for self-defense" is an opinion. "#6 birdshot penetrates only X" in unclothed ballistic gel" is a fact, not an opinion. The location of human organs inside the body - fact. Radiographs showing birdshot injuries and penetration in human bodies - fact. The way the human body works and what has to be done physiologically to stop it - again, fact. The posts I gave you were chock full of good facts mixed in with opinion - that is why I am a little stunned to hear you discount the links as "just opinions."

Let me give you an example from those threads (I'll summarize to save time instead of giving actual quotes).

Post #1: "Somebody who gets shot in the face or neck with birdshot from household distances WILL stop what they are doing. I GUARANTEE it."

Post #2: List of links to news stories where people were shot in the face/neck with birdshot from household distances and did not stop what they are doing - including one case where the bad guy killed his victim after losing one eye to a faceful of birdshot and then drove 2 hours to a hospital and another case where a 12yr old girl was hit in the head with birdshot from less than 5yds and survived by fleeing her attacker.

Now, one of those posts is purely opinion - and the other one is purely fact; both make express or implied arguments about the suitability of birdshot though. Which one do you think deserves more weight when you evaluate them?

Instead of giving your personal reasons for your feelings simply linked off of OTHER peoples views opinions and reasons.... It's what you've read and studied and believed in . ( According to your response to me , although I'm sure tyou have more personal experience )

No, I linked to those opinions because I believed that it wasn't worth my personal time to write a point by point rebuttal based on my personal experience of each statement of yours I believed to be a fallacy. I already knew that TFL had covered these subjects many times before (since I had pariticpated in previous discussions), so I linked to those discussions to save time.

You see a lot of times, I can tell somebody something that I have learned through personal experience; but those people, often having different or even no experience, tend to discount those stories. Over time, I've just stopped taking the time to respond or keeping my responses brief. You've been the exception to this for the most part - and frankly, an exception I regret making about now; but having started a futile attempt to share that experience, I feel a need to finish it.

So perhaps it was a misunderstanding of what you were trying to get across , but the multitude of links trying to prove my views incorrect , did nothing more than come across to me as " Your ignorant and need to do more research" while at the same time displayed that MANY many other people share my view.

If you have a median level of knowledge, then approximately 3 billion people are more ignorant than you are. That is MANY people who may share or discount your opinion on any given subject; but it doesn't make them any less ignorant. The trick is to develop a reliable process to figure out whether you are talking to the upper half or the lower half of that population. Personally, I've found that my own personal ego and pride have been the biggest impediments to my learning more. That is the nice thing about TFL, since it has been around for over a decade now and I have been here since 2000, you can find lots of examples in my older posts of me proudly sharing my ignorance as more experienced members futilely attempt to explain their reasoning (and P.S. that would be "You're ignorant and need to do more research" - "your" is possessive, "you're" is the contraction of "You are")

You're spreading myths and falsehoods as you can see here..." Is nothing more than touting your opinion as fact... based on other peoples opinions and views.

twellons, the most disturbing theme I find in your repeated statements is that all of these are simply opinions. They aren't. There was plenty of factual information in there if you take the time to read it. If you don't take the time to separate opinion from fact, then all the reading in the world isn't going to advance your knowledge much.

Hotdogs method of listing his personal experiences and views of WHY he has his opinion was in no way negative and was simple a good method of listing why he, as a person, disagrees...

And kudos to Hotdogs for taking the time to do that... but I don't want to take that time. If I did that every time I saw a misleading statement on the Internet, it would consume my entire life and lead to very little personal satisfaction. Your post alone would have wasted half a day. Furthermore, your very response to my posts reinforces my belief that it is better to let ignorant people wallow in their ignorance rather than spend a lot of my time gently correcting them in a way that both soothes their wounded pride and educates them. I don't say that to be mean or disrespectful to you; but rather to frankly describe why I don't take more time to give a better reply.

So again , perhaps a misunderstanding .... but back to the subject at hand , A shotgun , short barrel ( perhaps with PGO or stock ) and Birdshot is my current opinion in answer to the question.

You know, Jeff Cooper famously said (and again I summarize to save time) that possession of a firearm doesn't make you qualified to use it any more than possession of a piano makes you a concert pianist. Much more important than anybody's opinion here is that you get out and train and use your firearms. Go hunt some 100-200lb mammals with shotgun loaded with birdshot. If you do this, you will soon be able to sort through those various opinions a lot better and you won't need my input whether it is fact or opinion. You'll know through your own experience. You'll also better understand whether despite that a PGO meets whatever unique needs you might have.

There is a saying: "Wise people learn from the experience of others. Smart people learn through their own experiences. Monkeys learn through repetition."

The thing with firearms is that unless you get out there and shoot them, you won't even be able to learn much from the experience of others since you can't sort the experienced shooters from the 15yr old Counterstrike/Airsoft crowd.

I'm not really sure how so many of these replies came back to my single post.... I'm feeling the love though

Hmmmm, have any of your other posts here drawn that kind of response? What do you think the difference is in this case?

Enoy21
April 17, 2009, 09:37 AM
" While trying to keep this short because this is no longer on topic, but rather a disagreement about posts....


I have not refuted your reasons or statistics of Ballistics , penetration levels or the science of it ... I do not claim to have all of the knowledge or to even remotely believe that I know all there is to know... Again , this was an opinion based poll.... and one that I would be much more willing to open my views based on the presentation of a counter view. I was actually looking forward to see others opinions and WHY ( through ballistics tests, personal experience , etc ) they feel that way to help me to learn more. So perhaps it was the presentation of your post ... Which seems to show more Ego and elitism than I can imagine your older posts do.

Sharing the knowledge is one thing, I am here to learn from other peoples experiences... That's why I'm here reading so often and seeing other peoples experiences and opinions and reading up on the facts that lead them to that. This is ALSO why I don't claim ANYTHING I say here or in any subject is fact... I will link studies , and ballistic information , but without that first hand knowledge and seeing it for myself , It is just a semi educated view.

I have been mentioning repeatedly that my situation , and my selection is what drew me to my conclusions... As well as my limited experience and education. At no time did I ever say "Bird shot penetrates more than Buckshot in Balistics gels etc..." or "Bird shot will kill someone just as fast etc. "

As you can link articles to people living through the birdshot , I can find others where people have died from it.

I'm thinking perhaps you had not yet read my last post in this... Perhaps you have and want to continue down the vein of why your selection is better than mine... I'm choosing not to. ( I do wish they had a shotgun defensive course in my area, pretty sure the local range doesn't offer that one )

Based on that link in my previous post ... I have come to the idea and conclusion that perhaps 1-2 loads of Bird followed by a stronger load of Buck might be a better selection than just straight Bird for my specific situation.

But alas ... I prefer that we discontinue the arguing, and let the topic get back on track.


And as for the correction of "You're" over "your" I'm well aware of the difference and I swear I thought I fixed that before posting it. Perhaps that was another thread though. lol

Kmar40
April 17, 2009, 10:53 AM
Wow. This thread went to crap.

Thanks for trying BR, but I think you are wasting your breath with Corky.

Sparks2112
April 17, 2009, 10:57 AM
Wow. This thread went to crap.

Sure did. I vote to close, but, that's just me.

David Armstrong
April 17, 2009, 11:02 AM
ANY overshot at all poses a very high risk in these situations.
If that is your primary concern, and I think it certainly can be a big concern, I would suggest you do a search for a recent thread on things to do that can "harden" your home environment. But I would also be concerned with the fact that birdshot is notorious for not stopping birds, much less people.
This particular link backs my view ... sort of.
That link concludes "Do not expect birdshot to have any decisive effect."

Bartholomew Roberts
April 17, 2009, 12:01 PM
Lethal force HD presents a dilemma. On the one hand, you have somebody in your home who presents an immediate threat of death or serious injury (otherwise we probably would not be using lethal force). In order to stop that threat physiologically you need to penetrate deeply enough to reach vital organs (i.e. stop blood from reaching the brain) or the central nervous system. If you don't do this, then your attacker is still physically capable of continuing the assault.

The problem is that any projectile that will do this reliably in a variety of scenarios will also sail through multiple interior walls with ease if you miss. I mean a sheet of drywall won't stop your fist - if it stops the round you are using, chances are good that round isn't very effective.

I think we would all agree that the attacker probably represents a greater threat, otherwise we wouldn't shoot at all. So now the question is how much are you willing to sacrifice not stopping the threat as fast as possible in order to limit the damage you can do if you miss?

My answer to that is I want at least 10" penetration in ballistic gel. That is 2" under the FBI minimum; but looking at my average human male torso cross section, organ placement, and the lack of laminated safety glass in my house, that should give me the penetration I need in most scenarios. At the same time, as long as I hit my target, I have no overpenetration concerns.

To bring this full circle, this is why I prefer longguns - better accuracy and generally speaking, better terminal performance. This is also why I dislike PGO shotguns with birdshot - I have traded accuracy and terminal performance both while simultaneously increasing the number of projectiles and the chance that some will miss entirely and hit things I didn't want to hit.

Of course, I also train a lot to make sure I can do my part of that demanding equation - including Force on Force classes with Simunitions and regular formal instruction. My solution might not work as well for someone without that training; but in watching novices shoot for accuracy under time pressure they almost always do best with longguns.

Ian0351
April 17, 2009, 01:10 PM
In my case a Mossberg 500. What am I gonna do with it while I cuff/search the bandit? Hit him with the back end if he gives me anymore trouble.

hogdogs
April 17, 2009, 01:27 PM
Well I am worried about overpenetration killing a family member... For that I suggest a well placed COM shot to soak off much of the energy of the load!

Close only counts in horse shoes and hand grenades... NOT SHOTGUNS!

As for cuffing the badguy.. If I chose to cuff him I would hold a gun barrel to his noodle bowl while Junior slaps the Smith and Wessons on him...
One wrong move and the mess momma has to sop up will increase by a bunch! Resisting is to still pose a threat, isn't it?

Brent

pax
April 17, 2009, 01:31 PM
Closed.

pax