Home defense: Rifle or shotgun in addition to pistol?

[plom]

if it's for home defense a good coach gun with external hammer, it's compact, plenty of ability to stop a BG, it's cheap easy to handle, if it say "click" you still have the other triger and no need to manipulate in a hurry while adrenaline is pumping AND in front of a jury it won't look like a "evil tactical riffle". Remember that survive the fight is one thing, after that you'll have to survive the court!
Try to explain to people who doesn't know sh**t about guns that you needed a AK to defend your home! They look at it as military evil weapon, a coach gun look more like "grand dad hunting tool".
Jeff Cooper who knew a great deal concerning gun fight said a fight involving shotgun almost never exceded 2 rounds, and if you should discharge your coach gun, then you have the 45 to back it up.

[Tomac]

Some good points have already been posted so I'll just add my $.02 worth. Handguns are very portable and easy to keep at hand (no pun intended) for when things first go bump in the night. However, handguns are far more difficult to shoot accurately under stress than a longarm and aren't as effective as, say, a 12ga w/a well-chosen load. Yes, longarms are more difficult to manuever indoors but if your strategy is to wait in place while covering the doorway after calling the cops then that point is moot. My own HD plans include an FN FiveseveN w/TLR-1 taclight doing nightstand duty with an inexpensive but reliable pump shotgun nearby (also w/taclight, I'm a big believer in ID'ing the target).
Why a inexpensive shotgun? Two primary reasons: 1) Expect it to be confiscated by the cops after a shoot, you may or may not get it back, and 2) The shotgun can shred an intruder yet that is far more acceptable to the media & public than using an "evil" EBR for SD.
Tomac

[Para Bellum]

A rifle, preferably a bullpub-design in .223 like a Steyr AUG or a FAMAS:







With adequate ammo a .223 has a much LOWER risk of overpenetration than even a 9x19mm or a shotgun with buckshot (or certainly slugs).

Here is a lot of very good information on .223 ammo an penetration:
1: http://www.ammo-oracle.com/
2: http://www.le.atk.com/Images/Catalog...leDataBook.jpg

Anyway: A good coachgun is pretty good as well...
Heres the cheap and reliable Baikal IZH-43KH:



Bottom Line: The rifle is more accurate, has more capacity and precision, is more versatile 1yd - 200yds no problem, and offers as much "stopping power" as a shotgun

[MTMilitiaman]

I think a pistol or a shotgun should be all you really need. There is certainly no reason not to have both however. If picking one or the other, a shotgun loaded with buckshot would be my first choice.

There are too many cons for me to consider a rifle a practical HD gun. This post sums it up nicely.

Never mind that two of the four listed cons exist equally with the shotgun, another is simply an issue of ammunition selection, and the other is a non-issue in most situations. A rifle carbine is no more difficult to maneuver around the house and no more likely to be snatched away from the user than a shotgun, over penetration is grossly exaggerated as a concern, namely because it can be largely eliminated with a little foresight given to ammunition selection, and rifles are good because they can engage at long distances if it is needed.

The point is that the rifle has the capability, which the others do not. In fact, the rifle has a lot of capabilities that the others do not--capacity, fire rate, the versatility afforded by changing penetrative capabilities with a simple mag swap, and lower recoil, to name a few.

Handguns are more compact and easier to maneuver. If I am just checking out a noise on the porch or a random sound in the driveway, I am probably just grabbing a handgun. But if I hear my door get bashed in or I hear strange voices in the living room, I am grabbing a rifle--probably my AK with a reflex sight. And truth be told, maneuvering with a carbine really isn't all that difficult, and neither is weapon retention. There is a position, which as I learned it is referred to as "Under Arm Assault," in which the butt of the rifle is pinched between the side and the elbow of the firing hand, with the axis of the bore parallel to the deck. In this position, the muzzle is naturally squared to the hips, which are squared on the target. The rifle can be held in this position almost indefinitely with little strain, and because the stock is tucked back, it serves to make the package shorter. In this position, one can use their support hand to open doors, turn on lights, operate a phone, handle a dog, guide a family member, grapple with an assailant, or whatever. Weapon retention is relatively simple as well, esp if the attacker is untrained and simply grabs the muzzle. A good sling doesn't hurt either. With the rifle slung, you can literally just let go of the rifle completely and let them play with the muzzle while you eye gouge them or punch them in the throat. It's a simple matter of training and common sense.

Of the handgun, the shotgun, and the rifle, the shotgun is the least useful and the most specialized. Compared to the capabilities offered by the other choices, its absence would be easiest to absorb. While both the shotgun and the rifle can handle the simple home break in scenarios, in a situation such as Katrina, the rifle's advantage in range, accuracy, capacity, and penetration could prove vital. Say a natural disaster strikes, power is out, and general lack of law and order ensues when authorities fail to bring basic services online fast enough. You have food, pure water, medical supplies, and batteries to keep you and yours safe, provided you can stay put and wait it out. It doesn't take all that much of a stretch of the imagination to have someone taking pot shots through your windows with a rifle from a couple hundred yards away. As noted, a rifle can easily penetrate several walls, and go most of the way through an entire house, if so loaded. With a shotgun, you are left no option other than to grab what you can carry and displace until the threat moves on of his own accord. With a rifle, you can at least return fire. If you're bugging out and someone engages you with a rifle, you can easily find yourself out gunned if you have only a shotgun or handgun. Not only in range, but in availability of cover. Neither the handgun nor the shotgun affords the ability to defeat barriers, if so loaded, to the degree of a rifle. And while these may not be concerns for the vast majority of home defense scenarios, in terms of usefulness and practicality, if only one can be chosen, the rifle wins, hands down.

Y'all are looking at it the wrong way. Rifles are not just long range affairs and when your life is on the line, there is no such things as "overkill." Rather, shotguns are simply close range affairs lacking the range, accuracy, and versatility of the rifle.

[FireMax]

I always carry a small revolver in my pocket when I'm home. Some might call me paranoid, but if I was this in guy shoes, paranoid would have just been prepared..

I conceal carry and I used to come home, get in my safe-at-home mode, and put my weapon away. Don't know why I changed, but I have been keeping my CCW weapon on me the last couple of months while at home. Could be that I too am paranoid, but just as well, I might be prepared one day when I need to be. Plus, if the weapon is on me, then I consider it secured.

[Para Bellum]

I conceal carry and I used to come home, get in my safe-at-home mode, and put my weapon away. Don't know why I changed, but I have been keeping my CCW weapon on me the last couple of months while at home. Could be that I too am paranoid, but just as well, I might be prepared one day when I need to be. Plus, if the weapon is on me, then I consider it secured.

Perfectly right. I carry 24/7. When I sleep, the gun ist holstered in a holster mounted to my right (strong hand) bed side. Where I live we have a lot of home-burgler-robberies taking place when the patrons are present. Makes it easier for the BGs to open the safes etc...

[MrClean]

Good reads from everyone!
Personally I like my Benelli M190 loaded up for the house. I, like many others, see no real practicality of a rifle. Even my shorty AR has too many drawbacks when compared to my shotgun or pistol in my opinion.

And I don't know if there is anything scarier than hearing a 12 gauge shell being shucked into the chamber in a dark house.

Here in MS, they now do not have to be IN your house to be considered a threat and ok to fire upon. Even with that said..... if the perp is outside I don't see me needing an AR to get to him.

[geterdun444]

I am a certified weapons and special tactics instructor. What is and what should always be the first line in home defense is the reliable 12 gauge pump action. OO buck is a very good place to start. I should mention that where I live you realy dont have to worry about neighbors.
We usualy do not have to worry about home invasions here although as of late the crime is starting to move north towards us.
We actualy had our first home invasion in town last saturday night. 2 people broke into a house where they thought no one was home. Boy were they surprised when the lone male was home.
12 gauge to the rescue one intruder will probably lose his leg and the other they are still saying is in critical condition.
The home owner shot them right threw the wall of the entry way. He figured they got past his dog so anyone comeing in his house was dangerous.
No charges have or will be filed by the local police against the home owner.
Anytime you can take down a threat without exposing yourself to danger it is a good thing and a pistol in this instance just would not have done the job