Shotgun vs. Revolver (was "newbie")
This is a response to Nononsense in the "Newbie" thread, which was locked: http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=394363
quote:nononsense:
beantownshootah, You are full of beans. (I couldn't get the darn smilies to work...)
Flawed arguments and bad assumptions about things you have no knowledge of. You're trying to reason your way through something that you just don't understand.
With due respect, and as you well know, the issue of shotgun vs. pistol for home defense is one of those perpetual gun-related questions/arguments that comes up frequently. Each weapon has its own set of advantages and disadvantages.
Contrary to your implication, I didn't just make all this stuff up. I've read and heard a great deal on the issue of home defense by the various "experts" (wasn't that your suggestion?). Please don't take my word for it.
Ever hear of Massad Ayoob?
quote:http://www.backwoodshome.com/articles/ayoob54.html
If I was going to have only one firearm in the home for family protection, it would be a handgun. Despite the greater power and other advantages of a rifle or shotgun, it's seldom practical to take one outside when trouble is expected. You can't answer a late-night knock at the door with a long gun in your hand without the risk of terrifying an innocent visitor.
How about Chuck Hawks?
quote:http://www.chuckhawks.com/guns_home_defense.htm
A shotgun would seem to be an excellent choice for sweeping rioters from the front porch steps during a civil insurrection, but for defense inside the home a handgun is probably a better choice. However, a riot gun is a fine back-up weapon if the situation gets out of control.
Further, I'm experienced with shotguns, and I'm experienced with revolvers (shot them both yesterday in fact, and my shoulder is still bruised from the former). I've given the issue a great deal of thought, and I've even done the "drill" walking around my home at night with both a pistol and a long gun. (In at least one case it wasn't a "drill").
You may disagree with my opinions (or Ayoob's or Hawks'), and that's your right, but I don't think its fair or appropriate to characterize them as based on "no knowledge". If you believe these arguments are flawed, I think it would be more constructive for you to refute them specifically instead of this dismissive ad hominem response.
Incidentally, I've shot the same number of intruders in my home as the vast majority of the opining armchair experts here. . . .ZERO.
quote: The shotgun is the perfect choice for interior protection because of the pattern and the coverage ESPECIALLY when you take into account stress and inexperience of the homeowner. These are the two biggest problems to overcome and usually no amount of cursory training or practice will eliminate them from the problem set. Although I disagree with your opinion in the first part (that the shotgun is "perfect", etc) I do agree with the second bit, that training and experience are paramount and in fact actually more important than which exact weapon.
Its not just the ability to shoot the gun well that matters, but also the knowledge of when to shoot (and when not to), how to sweep a room, how to use/get to cover, etc, that count. So long as its reliable and powerful enough to do the job, proficiency with your weapon is more important than which exact model or type.
In terms of which gun is best for interior protection, the original question wasn't asking that. The questioner asked specifically about revolvers indicating that he was experienced with them. I think your advice to CONSIDER a shotgun is good. . .but I don't think he should just dismiss the idea of a revolver. Even if you don't think that revolvers are the "best" choice for home defense, I think you would concede that they are at least an "adequate" choice.
In my opinion, which exact gun is best is going to be highly dependent on both the individual in question and the exact nature of the environment. In some cases, a shotgun is better, but in some a handgun could be better. That depends on many factors, including the skill, experience, and physical condition of the user, the layout of the house, the presence of neighbors or others in the house, local law, etc.
quote:The potential for shooting and hitting an intruder while shooting a revolver in the dark and under stress are minimal at best. Besides not hitting, the recoil, sight alignment and recovery will be daunting.
To the extent that they are factors, in my opinion recoil and recovery are far more of an issue with a shotgun compared to a revolver. (My bruised right shoulder, in particular, is still telling me that recoil is more of an issue with a shotgun [;)]). Recoil with .38+P rounds in a full sized steel revolver, for example, is minimal. Also in my opinion, if you need to get off multiple shots, its probably easier to do it faster shooting a revolver double-action than a pump shotgun.
As to accuracy, I'd agree that in general, its easier to connect with a longarm, though again, its absolutely possible to miss with a shotgun too if you don't actually aim it. In terms of pure marksmanship, hitting a human sized target at typical indoor distances of 15 feet with a handgun isn't all that demanding for anyone with practice. The only "trick" is not completely panicking and firing wildly.
As a consideration, an experienced shooter can consistently hit a human-sized target with a revolver at that distance by pure point-shooting (ie not using sights at all). Extend the arm, point the index (trigger) finger at the center of the target, pull. . .repeat as necessary. You won't get pinpoint accuracy, but in terms of pure "caveman" behavior under stress, it pretty much doesn't get any simpler than that.
Alternatively, putting a laser on the revolver can let you hit accurately at close distances without any sight use either.
As a next issue, and more important, in my opinion you probably shouldn't be shooting at *ANYTHING* you can't see clearly (ie in total darkness).
That's a recipe for disaster, and that's why its a good idea to have a light in your non-shooting hand and/or mounted on your gun. (Or so I've heard. . .wouldn't know since I don't understand anything about self defense, Jeff Cooper's fourth rule of gun safety, etc[;)]).
quote:The shotgun is the most recommended firearm of choice for home protection.
Stipulating that this is true, again, that doesn't necessarily make it the best choice for everyone under all circumstances.
I actually do agree that it likely *IS* the best choice for at least some individuals, particularly if they are physically fit and in a big house. If you shoot shotguns a lot and are accustomed to using them, that would add a lot of weight to choosing one for this purpose. But I don't think this is always true for everyone.
Personally speaking, I could easily use any gun I like for home defense (revolver in various calibers, semi-auto handgun in various calibers, rifle, pump or semi-auto shotgun, etc). But given this choice, I still choose to use a 38/357 revolver.
Its for a number of reasons, but heading the list are absolute reliability, commonality in operation and ammo with my CCW (and the S/O's), potential one-handed operation, easy storage and portability. I don't feel under-armed with one, and trust me, you wouldn't want to be caught inappropriately in my home at night by me with "only" my wheelgun, thinking I'm going to miss five times in a row, be overwhelmed by recoil, etc.
If anyone is going to be blinded, by the way, its probably going to be the poor sap into whose eyes I shine the super-bright flashlight I keep right next to the revolver!
quote:nononsense:
beantownshootah, You are full of beans. (I couldn't get the darn smilies to work...)
Flawed arguments and bad assumptions about things you have no knowledge of. You're trying to reason your way through something that you just don't understand.
With due respect, and as you well know, the issue of shotgun vs. pistol for home defense is one of those perpetual gun-related questions/arguments that comes up frequently. Each weapon has its own set of advantages and disadvantages.
Contrary to your implication, I didn't just make all this stuff up. I've read and heard a great deal on the issue of home defense by the various "experts" (wasn't that your suggestion?). Please don't take my word for it.
Ever hear of Massad Ayoob?
quote:http://www.backwoodshome.com/articles/ayoob54.html
If I was going to have only one firearm in the home for family protection, it would be a handgun. Despite the greater power and other advantages of a rifle or shotgun, it's seldom practical to take one outside when trouble is expected. You can't answer a late-night knock at the door with a long gun in your hand without the risk of terrifying an innocent visitor.
How about Chuck Hawks?
quote:http://www.chuckhawks.com/guns_home_defense.htm
A shotgun would seem to be an excellent choice for sweeping rioters from the front porch steps during a civil insurrection, but for defense inside the home a handgun is probably a better choice. However, a riot gun is a fine back-up weapon if the situation gets out of control.
Further, I'm experienced with shotguns, and I'm experienced with revolvers (shot them both yesterday in fact, and my shoulder is still bruised from the former). I've given the issue a great deal of thought, and I've even done the "drill" walking around my home at night with both a pistol and a long gun. (In at least one case it wasn't a "drill").
You may disagree with my opinions (or Ayoob's or Hawks'), and that's your right, but I don't think its fair or appropriate to characterize them as based on "no knowledge". If you believe these arguments are flawed, I think it would be more constructive for you to refute them specifically instead of this dismissive ad hominem response.
Incidentally, I've shot the same number of intruders in my home as the vast majority of the opining armchair experts here. . . .ZERO.
quote: The shotgun is the perfect choice for interior protection because of the pattern and the coverage ESPECIALLY when you take into account stress and inexperience of the homeowner. These are the two biggest problems to overcome and usually no amount of cursory training or practice will eliminate them from the problem set. Although I disagree with your opinion in the first part (that the shotgun is "perfect", etc) I do agree with the second bit, that training and experience are paramount and in fact actually more important than which exact weapon.
Its not just the ability to shoot the gun well that matters, but also the knowledge of when to shoot (and when not to), how to sweep a room, how to use/get to cover, etc, that count. So long as its reliable and powerful enough to do the job, proficiency with your weapon is more important than which exact model or type.
In terms of which gun is best for interior protection, the original question wasn't asking that. The questioner asked specifically about revolvers indicating that he was experienced with them. I think your advice to CONSIDER a shotgun is good. . .but I don't think he should just dismiss the idea of a revolver. Even if you don't think that revolvers are the "best" choice for home defense, I think you would concede that they are at least an "adequate" choice.
In my opinion, which exact gun is best is going to be highly dependent on both the individual in question and the exact nature of the environment. In some cases, a shotgun is better, but in some a handgun could be better. That depends on many factors, including the skill, experience, and physical condition of the user, the layout of the house, the presence of neighbors or others in the house, local law, etc.
quote:The potential for shooting and hitting an intruder while shooting a revolver in the dark and under stress are minimal at best. Besides not hitting, the recoil, sight alignment and recovery will be daunting.
To the extent that they are factors, in my opinion recoil and recovery are far more of an issue with a shotgun compared to a revolver. (My bruised right shoulder, in particular, is still telling me that recoil is more of an issue with a shotgun [;)]). Recoil with .38+P rounds in a full sized steel revolver, for example, is minimal. Also in my opinion, if you need to get off multiple shots, its probably easier to do it faster shooting a revolver double-action than a pump shotgun.
As to accuracy, I'd agree that in general, its easier to connect with a longarm, though again, its absolutely possible to miss with a shotgun too if you don't actually aim it. In terms of pure marksmanship, hitting a human sized target at typical indoor distances of 15 feet with a handgun isn't all that demanding for anyone with practice. The only "trick" is not completely panicking and firing wildly.
As a consideration, an experienced shooter can consistently hit a human-sized target with a revolver at that distance by pure point-shooting (ie not using sights at all). Extend the arm, point the index (trigger) finger at the center of the target, pull. . .repeat as necessary. You won't get pinpoint accuracy, but in terms of pure "caveman" behavior under stress, it pretty much doesn't get any simpler than that.
Alternatively, putting a laser on the revolver can let you hit accurately at close distances without any sight use either.
As a next issue, and more important, in my opinion you probably shouldn't be shooting at *ANYTHING* you can't see clearly (ie in total darkness).
That's a recipe for disaster, and that's why its a good idea to have a light in your non-shooting hand and/or mounted on your gun. (Or so I've heard. . .wouldn't know since I don't understand anything about self defense, Jeff Cooper's fourth rule of gun safety, etc[;)]).
quote:The shotgun is the most recommended firearm of choice for home protection.
Stipulating that this is true, again, that doesn't necessarily make it the best choice for everyone under all circumstances.
I actually do agree that it likely *IS* the best choice for at least some individuals, particularly if they are physically fit and in a big house. If you shoot shotguns a lot and are accustomed to using them, that would add a lot of weight to choosing one for this purpose. But I don't think this is always true for everyone.
Personally speaking, I could easily use any gun I like for home defense (revolver in various calibers, semi-auto handgun in various calibers, rifle, pump or semi-auto shotgun, etc). But given this choice, I still choose to use a 38/357 revolver.
Its for a number of reasons, but heading the list are absolute reliability, commonality in operation and ammo with my CCW (and the S/O's), potential one-handed operation, easy storage and portability. I don't feel under-armed with one, and trust me, you wouldn't want to be caught inappropriately in my home at night by me with "only" my wheelgun, thinking I'm going to miss five times in a row, be overwhelmed by recoil, etc.
If anyone is going to be blinded, by the way, its probably going to be the poor sap into whose eyes I shine the super-bright flashlight I keep right next to the revolver!
0
-
This seems to be one of those "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin" questions. Lots of good points made in the posts. While I have many firearms, and a concealed carry permit, but the only gun loaded and readily accessible in the house is an 870 pump. Two reasons; 1) while my wife has shot handguns, she's not really competent with one, and shoots them infrequently. She doesn't use a shotgun much either, but in a pinch she'll be able to hit what she's pointing at. And 2) my three year old grandson, if he found the shotgun, can't operate it. As the grand kids get older I may need to rethink the shotgun too. . .in which case I'll probably go to a baseball bat. If I were living alone, there would be a four inch 357 under my pillow. There's probably no one answer that fits every situation and thanks to the posters, all of them, who made very good points about the positives and negatives of the options available. 0 -
Put me down as another guy full of (Baustonshootah)beans, with flawed arguments and bad assumptions about things of which I have no knowledge. (But at least I don't leave my participles dangling.)
I too opt for a handgun, a revolver in fact.
What is perfect for one, is probably not for another. Shotgun is not perfect for me.0 -
I am more diverse...guess I will figure it out when the crisis coems, which ever one I grab first...the 930 spx, the 1911 with ranger stx or the AR15 with 62 gr powerpoints....
but then again, I live in the country...I can shoot through my walls...wife will be pissed, but nothin a lil spackle and new cedar siding can't fix....
I think the Bostonian's comments are well thought out and thorough...I have noticed that there are some folks here that no matter what is said they ALWAYS find a reason to degrade your opinion or treat you as an idiot....I refer to these folks as gunsnobs...
the number of stars by your handle doesn't necessarily indicate your knowledge or expertise....I think rather than telling someone they are wrong, people should express their thoughts and move on...
its kind of like the health care debate.....the message that many do not want this gov't plan is being drowned out by the anger...it was great to see at first, but now its damaging the cause.
bravo Bostonian0 -
I think you're ALL full of beans.
wc4r admits he's a newbie. Other than once having owned a gun, he doesn't tell us of any hunting experience, or military/police training. He may have a house full of kids, but he didn't say anything about owning a safe or steel lock box with which to secure a gun. I need a lot more convincing before I can even recommend that he buy one.
At this point, my recommendation is that wc4r have a monitored perimeter alarm system installed; that will protect him, & he won't have to worry about an accident that will haunt him for the rest of his life.
Neal0 -
Neal it is no fun when you act all intelligent and display sound reasoning. 0 -
It isn't a hardware issue. The real issues are: (1) "What is going to be conveniently available to you should you need it quickly?," and (2)"Are you going to be so familiar with it that you can operate it in total darkness simply by feel and muscle memory?" In my opinion, the guys who have it all wrong are the Rambo wannabes that have a shotgun in one place, an AR in another, a DAO auto pistol in a drawer, a 1911 somewhere else, and a revolver in their pajamas. 0 -
Ref: prior posts. Perhaps the need to defend yourself at night, in your own home, may come to pass. Dunno. It's certainly better to have experience..but the need to defend yourself may occur whether or not the experience level is there. Get a good watchdog.
..and after reading the posts, I'm led to envision the stand-alone house, with the cute white picket fence around it type scenario. That, in and of itself, is flawed. Best, Joe0 -
Well everything else aside.
The best shoulder weapones for house clearing are ones as compact as possible. a 14" BDL auto shotgun, a 10" bdl 6.8 carbine would be two good choices, but to get them you have do the uncle sam song and dance and pay the tax stamp.
One way tho get around the red tape is a bullpup configured gun like the STG-556, or a shortened and customized bushmaster M-17.
if someone made a high quality bullpup stock kit for the siaga 12, it might be useful as well, but no one does, and it would have to be well made indeed before I would invest in one.
None of them would make you better if you dont know how to use them.
Sometimes a pistol, regardless of caliber and powder charge, as long as it will do the intended job, is better. But usually a shoulder mounted gun will yeild the best outcome.
That is my experience from shooting drills and such.0 -
beantownshootah and He Dog,
"I think it would be more constructive for you to refute them specifically instead of this dismissive ad hominem response. "
In the interest of fairness and NOT wanting to be accused of being dismissive even though you granted me the right to an opinion, I submit the following treatises and short video clips in the hope of proving once and for all that there is NO RIGHT ANSWER to these types of questions.
The statement about the noise signature of a pump shotgun comes from a survey of criminals in prison. It was done several years ago and I don't have time to try to search my documents to satisfactorily disprove your condemnation of this idea.
You will find, over the years, that the pendulum swings back and forth depending on who reads what and decides to respond. The supporters of the shotgun for home defense have been in the majority before and this time it's the folks who support the revolver or handguns in general. Next time, who knows?
Please forgive the use of other folks opinions and reasoning but my time constraints with work are heavy these days and I, unfortunately, don't have nearly the time of others to write these lengthy discourses.
(But at least I don't leave my participles dangling.)
If I left something dangling, it wasn't intentional. I try to write carefully but sometimes in my haste, I make some errors. I didn't have much time last night or this morning let alone now. I have to hurry back to the work load.
Shotguns vs. Revolvers or other handguns
Just so you can?_Tt say I?_Tm not taking this fairly, a representative video for all those that need visual aids for any discussion to be pertinent:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1UauxacnFA4
And one more visual aid that shows a compromise idea from Taurus:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PO0YMPVqw-o&feature=player_embedded
Selecting a Home Defense Gun
v1.2 David S. Markowitz
Since I am "into guns," I have been asked a number of times what would be a good choice for someone looking to buy a gun to use for home defense. This is not as simple a question to answer as it may sound. Rather, there are a number of factors which need to be considered before making your final choice. These include:
A? The laws in your jurisdiction regarding firearms ownership. Some of the best guns you can use for home defense are illegal in many jurisdictions.
A? The "social environment" in which you live. I.e., urban, suburban, or rural? House or apartment building?
A? Your level of experience with firearms in general, and the particular gun you're considering, in particular.
A? Whether or not someone else in your household may have to use the gun selected.
A? Whether or not you have children in the home.
A? After taking these factors into account, we can then turn to the gun itself, and worry about things like rifle vs. pistol vs. shotgun, caliber choice, etc.
Let's look at these in turn.
First, the laws regulating firearms ownership in your jurisdiction. It does you no good to select your ideal firearm, only to find that it's possession by ordinary citizens is forbidden by law in your place of residence. For example, Morton Grove, Illinois has a ban on the possession of handguns by ordinary citizens. Other places make the ownership of certain weapons extremely difficult, e.g., New Jersey and New York City. While the net effect of these laws is to increase crime, rather than decrease it, the person who wants to stay out of trouble must at least be aware of them. Moreover, even if you choose to disregard these oppressive laws on moral grounds, you must periodically practice with your defense gun for it to be an effective means of defense. This is made difficult where you have to constantly worry about being caught with an "illegal" firearm.
The next item in my list of things to consider before choosing a home defense gun is what I've chosen to call "social environment." Where you live will influence what an appropriate choice will be. For example, suppose you live in an apartment building. One concern you'll have is overpenetration. You absolutely don't want a load which will go through a criminal, then through the wall behind him, and then strike an innocent bystander. In this situation, a short-barreled shotgun loaded loaded with one of the larger sizes of birdshot is an ideal choice, in my opinion. It offers excellent "stopping power," but the pellets won't blow through several walls to possibly hit someone else, like a pistol or rifle bullet will.
Likewise, whether you live in an urban, suburban, or rural environment should be considered before selecting a home defense gun. In the vast majority of defensive encounters in any of these locales the range is apt to be short -- inside your home. However, if you live out in the country, there is the possibility that you may have to engage an adversary at longer range. Or, wild animals may be a concern. This is where the rifle comes into its own. However, just because you live in the city doesn't necessarily rule out longer range encounters. Remember the sight of the Korean shopkeepers in L.A. during the riots following the acquittal of the policemen accused of beating Rodney King. In the event of a similar social breakdown, a rifle with which you can engage targets at ranges over 100 yards could come in very handy.
How much experience do you have with firearms in general, and the specific kind of gun you are considering, in particular? Handguns are the most difficult firearms to shoot well. For this reason, a short-barreled shotgun is often an excellent alternative to a pistol for home defense. At the close ranges you'd encounter inside a house, the shot hasn't had the time to spread out yet, but the longer weapon is still much easier to achieve solid hits with. The shotgun possesses other advantages, which I'll discuss below.
If you do not have a great deal of experience with guns, you would be wise to choose a home defense gun with a minimum of controls so that it is easy to use under stress. Double-action revolvers, while not very "hot" in today's gun market, offer ease of use combined with dependability. Further, there is currently a glut of police-surplus double-action revolvers on the market, which has made prices very reasonable. Likewise, a pump-action shotgun can be kept with the magazine loaded, but the chamber unloaded for safety. When needed, all that is required to make it ready for use is to work the action -- a simple back and forth motion which doesn't require the kind of fine motor skills which deteriorate under stress.
If someone else in your household may also need to use the gun you choose you must take this into account. For example, if you get a semiautomatic pistol, and your wife cannot retract the slide because she has weak hands, it may be impossible for her to use it when needed. Or, if you keep a 12 gauge shotgun, the recoil may be too much for her to handle.
The presence of children in the home is not a reason to avoid having a home defense gun. However, it does mean that you need to take them into account when securing the firearm, not only from them, but also from any friends they bring over.
I cannot stress enough that one of the worst things you can do is to hide the presence of guns in your home from your kids. Prohibition breeds fascination, especially in children. As gun guru Massad Ayoob says (approximately), "You cannot gun proof your home, but you can gun proof your kids." As soon as your kids are able to understand, you should instruct them in gun safety rules. If they ever ask to see your gun, treat that as an opportunity to reinforce safety rules. If you let them see the gun under your supervision, they are a lot less likely to go looking for it while you aren't around. The National Rifle Association has a good program to teach gun safety to kids called the "Eddie Eagle" program. (Also check out "Gun Play", by David Kopel, to see the potential disaster that can happen when a "sheltered" child gets exposed to firearms for the first time in the absence of adult supervision.) Even if you choose not to have firearms in your home (unlikely if you're reading anything on my website<g>) you should still make sure your kids know about gun safety. They may go to a friend's house where there are guns, and be exposed to them that way.
Since we've gone over the preliminary factors, you're probably wondering by now what, specifically, good choices are for home defense guns. I'll answer this by describing my choices.
I own many firearms, since shooting is my hobby. Thus, when I chose a defense gun I had a number of choices available to me. You should also know that I live in a house with three other people, but no children. Also, here in Pennsylvania, we don't have any repressive laws as to what kinds of guns I can own as Joe Citizen.
I actually have two guns which I keep for especially for home defense. My primary piece is a Winchester 1300 Defender, 20 gauge pump-action shotgun. This has a 20" barrel and holds four shells in the magazine. Five extra rounds are kept in a carrier made for that purpose, which fits on the buttstock. I keep the magazine loaded with birdshot, while the chamber is kept empty.
One reason that my primary weapon is a shotgun is because pistols are inherently underpowered. While handguns possess the advantages of portability and concealability, no handgun is what you can call sufficiently powerful for self defense. There are only degrees of being underpowered. To get real power, the kind reliably sufficient to halt an aggressor, you need to use a shotgun or rifle. This is especially true of the criminal has been drinking, is on drugs, or is the kind of endorphin junkie that gets excited by pain. (Yes, the latter does exist, and if you run into him you have a real problem on your hands.)
The shotgun also possesses the aforementioned advantage that with birdshot loads, the projectiles won't whiz through a criminal, the wall behind him, and go on to strike one of my family members. Another advantage, which is not to be discounted, is that the sound of the slide being worked on a pump-action shotgun is very intimidating. The .62 caliber bore of a 20 gauge is pretty scary if it's pointed at you, too. When you consider that according to the research of Professor Gary Kleck, of the million or more defensive gun usages which occur in the U.S. every year, the vast majority never see a shot fired because the threat of being shot is usually enough to stop the crime in progress, an intimidating appearance or sound is very valuable. In my opinion, a short-barreled 20 or 12 gauge shotgun is the top choice as a home defense gun for most people.
Other good choices in pump-action shotguns include the Remington 870 and Mossberg 500 and 590. Another type of shotgun that can work well in a home defense situation is a short-barreled double shotgun. I'd venture to say most people in American society have watched enough old Bugs Bunny/Elmer Fudd cartoons to instantly recognize a double-barreled shotgun. Remember the intimidation factor. And a double gun offers two quick shots, which will be enough to handle most drawing room confrontations.
My secondary home defense gun is a Smith and Wesson Model 15 Combat Masterpiece, a .38 Special revolver. I keep this loaded with the "FBI load" -- a +P 158 grain lead semiwadcutter hollowpoint load. This gives me a simple to use, extremely reliable, and reasonably powerful (for a handgun) weapon to serve as a backup to the shotgun.
Other good choices when it comes to revolvers are pretty much any medium or large frame Smith and Wesson, Colt, or Ruger double-action revolver in .38 Special, .357 Magnum, .44 Special, .45 Colt, or .45 ACP. For home defense, I would avoid anything with a barrel shorter than four inches. Such guns, while good for concealment, are more difficult to shoot well, have increased muzzle blast and flash, and less ballistic efficiency. For a house gun, a barrel four to six inches in length is ideal. Unless your jurisdiction (like New Jersey) prohibits them, load your revolver with hollowpoint (HP) ammunition. This will decrease the likelihood of overpenetration, and increase the likelihood that an assailant with be stopped with as few shots as possible. I'd recommend bullet weights as follows:
A? .38 Special: 158 grain lead semiwadcutter HP (LSWCHP) +P (the "FBI Load").
A? .357 Magnum: Either a 110 grain jacketed HP (JHP) or a medium velocity 125 JHP. These loads will give less blast and flash, and be more controllable than the full-blown 125 grain jacketed HPs.
A? .44 Special: 200 grain LSWCHP. This can also be used as a defense load in .44 Magnum revolvers.
A? .45 Colt: 225 grain LSWCHP, or a JHP from Cor-Bon.
A? .45 ACP: The best loads are the heavy (200+ grain) JHPs.
Semiautomatic handguns can also be good choices for home defense. They are generally easier to shoot than double-action revolvers, but do require more training. Generally speaking, I would stick with one of the major manufacturers and a caliber of 9mm Parabellum (aka 9mm Luger) or better. Examples include pistols made by Glock, SIG, Browning, Colt, Springfield Armory, Beretta, and Smith and Wesson. It is critical that you test a semiauto with the same loads you intend to use for defense. It must reliably feed and extract the rounds from at least two boxes of ammunition (100 rounds) before you can consider it reliable enough for defensive use. Further, semiautos require a break-in period before they should be considered reliable -- shoot about 400 to 500 rounds through it before depending on it to save your life. As far as I know, the only manufacturer that advises its customer of this fact is Kahr. However, it applies to all semiauto pistols. Recommended loads include:
A? 9mm Parabellum: 115 grain or 124 grain JHP. The 147 grain is likely to really overpenetrate and may not expand due to low velocity -- especially in subsonic loads. The 147 grain JHP was originally developed to give 50 meter head shot accuracy from Heckler & Koch submachine guns for use by Navy SEALs. The 124 grain bullet is what the 9mmP was originally loaded with, and most guns probably function best with it.
A? .40 S&W: 155, 165, or 180 grain JHP.
A? .45 ACP: As in revolvers, the best loads are the heavy JHPs.
If you are on a tight budget and want a semiauto handgun, then your best bet is a Makarov. This has been the standard service pistol of the old Eastern Bloc for several decades, and is a thoroughly proven, reliable design. It's also surprisingly accurate. It's only drawback, in my opinion, is the cartridge it chambers -- 9mm Makarov. This is less powerful than a .38 Special or 9mm Parabellum; it's a little bit more powerful than the .380 ACP. Also, the 9mm Mak is less easily available than these other rounds, though this isn't as much of a problem as it would have been 20 years ago, since you can mail order the ammunition. Hornady loads the 9mm Mak with its excellent XTP hollowpoint; this would be my choice for self defense with a Makarov. The Mak is also small and light enough for concealed carry. One change I recommend that you make if you get a Mak is to put aftermarket grips on it. The stock grips are very uncomfortable for most people. The Pierce Grip makes it a really sweet little gun, though. You can get more information on the Mak at Makarov.com.
In the unlikely event my locality is ever struck by some man-made or natural disaster which causes a breakdown of the social order, I also have rifles to choose from with which to defend my home. Right now, my number one choice if this were to happen is my No.4 Mk.I Lee-Enfield. This is a bolt-action ex-British military rifle in caliber .303 British. It is currently the rifle that I am most proficient with. It is extremely reliable and rugged, as you would expect of an arm originally designed for military use, and it's accurate out to several hundred yards. The No.4 has better sights than the older No.1 Mk.III SMLE. The Lee-Enfields also possess some advantages compared to other military surplus bolt actions: bigger magazine capacity (10 vs. 5 for Mausers) and a smoother, faster action. You can load the magazine with single rounds, 5-round stripper clips, or get spare magazines and swap for a loaded one when you run dry.
If you can find it at a gun show or through mail order, there is some surplus 1980s vintage .303 ball ammo made by Winchester which is really good stuff. Also, newly-manufactured Sellier & Bellot ball, from the Czech Republic, is good -- and cheap. I've had good results with some Greek military surplus .303, which is headstamped "HXP" and the year of manufacture. These are all noncorrosive and the brass is Boxer-primed, and good for reloading. If you can find it, German-made "MEN" .303 is also high-quality, noncorrosive ammunition. Unfortunately, it's Berdan-primed, so it's not feasible to reload it. Avoid old military surplus ammo that's loaded with corrosive primers and Cordite.
Besides the Lee-Enfield, I also have an SKS semiautomatic carbine, and an M1 Garand semiautomatic rifle. The SKS is significantly less powerful and less accurate than the Lee-Enfield or Garand, but it is almost perfectly reliable. While I like my M1 a lot, I am just more comfortable with the No.4, and that's why it's my first choice in rifles. Either one would make a good choice, however.
Other good choices in rifles would include the Springfield Armory M1A, US M1 Carbine, the Colt AR-15 or a good quality clone, Ruger Mini 14, and the various AK types.
Don't underestimate the value of the good old Winchester or Marlin lever actions, either. These were developed from designs which were intended to serve both as hunting and defensive arms. In .30-30 or .35 Remington, they also offer a lot more power than any of the 5.56mm rifles like the AR-15, or pistol caliber carbines. One of the Winchester or Marlin lever guns in .444 Marlin or .45-70 also make outstanding weapons for defense against large, thin-skinned wild animals (read: "bears"). They are reliable, rugged, and accurate enough for the task. Additionally, they are less regulated in many jurisdictions than "assault weapons."
That being said, some of the pistol caliber carbines offer light recoil, large magazine capacity and better accuracy than handguns. Both Winchester and Marlin make lever guns chambered for such rounds as .357 Magnum, .44 Magnum and .45 Colt. Ruger makes a semiauto carbine in 9mm Parabellum and .40 Smith and Wesson. Marlin's Camp Carbine in 9mm or .45 is also available. Any of these would work well for home defense in the right situation. If I were to choose one of these carbines, I'd lean towards one of the larger calibers, e.g., .44 Magnum. In my opinion, if I'm going to be using a rifle, I want rifle-like ballistics.
Before closing this piece, I want to state that your choice of what gun to use for home defense is really only a very small part of the equation. Before you can be truly well protected, you must have more than a good gun. You need training in how to use it, and just as importantly, when to use it. You need to make yourself familiar with your jurisdiction's laws regarding the use of deadly force. What do you know about tactics? If your knowledge of tactics comes from watching reruns of "NYPD Blue," you need to get training. Moreover, you should have a plan in place on what you'll do if your home is invaded. E.g., do you have a "safe-room" to retreat to if your home is invaded, where you and your family can wait until the police arrive? Do you have a cellular phone to call the police if the crooks are smart enough to cut your telephone lines before they break in? Do you have a good flashlight at hand?
In conclusion, don't approach choosing a home defense gun lightly. It is a serious choice to make, and carefully evaluating the factors I've outlined above will help ensure that you've made the right choice, if you ever are faced with defending your home and loved ones.
Carbine vs. Shotgun vs. Pistol for home defense
by Larry Correia
This treatise is in response to a request from ____________. She is an excellent firearms instructor out of Washington State. She knew that I was a big proponent of shoulder fired long guns, either carbines or shotguns for home defense, whereas she primarily favors the pistol. She asked me to write up a little bit about my opinions for her. So here goes.
All three types of weapon have their pros and cons.
Now when I teach CCW (actually it is a CFP, Concealed Firearms Permit, in Utah) when I get to the portion of the class about wound ballistics I always tell the class that I?_Tm about to tell them a profound truth, and the sooner they realize it, the better off they?_Tre going to be. Then I write the following:
ALL HANDGUNS SUCK!
General nervous laughter from the class?_?
Now let me explain. I love handguns. I teach people to shoot handguns. I carry a handgun on my person constantly. I just spent a fat chunk of money on a fancy new STI 9mm so I could have a better hoser gun for 3gun. Even with that information, every time I say handguns suck, it manages to offend the heck out of somebody on the internet, because the internet exists primarily to let random strangers get offended. So let me rephrase, handguns suck relative to long guns.
Let me break it down for you. There is only one reason we use handguns, and that is because they are convenient. They?_Tre small, light, and you can conceal them on a person. I would look a little goofy with an AK47 under my shirt.
But in comparison to a long gun, they lack power, and they are much more difficult to learn to shoot well. Anything you can mount on your shoulder is going to be a far easier platform to get fast, accurate hits with.
To put this in perspective, when you shoot somebody in self defense, the goal isn?_Tt necessarily to kill them, it is to stop them. You want the bad guy to stop doing whatever it is they are doing that caused you go pull a gun in the first place. Live or die is really irrelevant. You want them to leave you alone. Sadly, the best way to make somebody leave you alone is to shoot them in their vital organs, and that often results in the bad guy?_Ts death. But that?_Ts his problem, not yours.
So to stop somebody, there are two main ways to do it, psychologically or physiologically. Now when I say psychologically, that means the bad guy quits because he decides to, as in ?_oOH CRAP! He?_Ts got a gun! Run!?__ Or if you shoot them with a non-fatal wound, and they say ?_oDamn, that hurt. I?_Tm done.?__
But you don?_Tt control the brain waves of the critter attacking you. You might get lucky and get a bad guy that will just quit, the kind of guy that if he wanted to work hard for a living, would get a job. Victim with gun = work. On the other hand, you might get some really crazy, evil, whackadoo, who ain?_Tt gonna stop, no matter what. And that guy, you?_Tre going to have to shoot. A lot.
So that brings us to the physical stoppage of another person. Now when you are legally justified in shooting somebody, it is normally in a situation where you want them to stop RIGHT NOW. So you want to hit them with something that will do as much damage to them as possible. If the guy bleeds to death in 30 minutes, that doesn?_Tt do you much good, because in that time he killed you and raped your family to death. You want to inflict enough trauma on their body that they have no choice but to quit immediately.
The problem with this is that most of America?_Ts knowledge about guns comes from watching movies. Where if I shoot somebody with a .45, they fly backwards out the window, do a flip, roll fifty feet, and burst into flames. Now as much as I like Bruce Willis in Last Man Standing, that doesn?_Tt actually happen in real life.
So what do bullets do to you? Now Internet Wound Ballisticians, whether you?_Tre a morgue monster or a jello junkie, don?_Tt jump my case. I?_Tm no scientist. I?_Tm a guy that has to take a very complex topic and break it down into a manner that a person whose entire firearms experience is based on shooting a .22 at scout camp once, can understand in about a 15 minute block of instruction in a 5 hour CFP class.
Handguns poke a hole in you. That is basically what they do. If you?_Tre using good hollow point ammo, the bullet may expand, and you will make a bigger hole. That hole is going to go through stuff that pumps blood. The bigger and deeper hole you make, through the more important stuff, the more blood is going to go outside, and not to its destination, which tends to be very bad for the guy getting shot.
The body is an amazing creation. Your body will automatically adjust for trauma as much as possible. The more holes you put, the more trauma you inflict, the more the body has to adjust for, the greater the chance that the body is going to say ?_oScrew this. I?_Tm done.?__ And shut down.
Now you can shoot somebody once with a feeble handgun round, and instantly incapacitate them. Great. You won. But on the same token, we?_Tve got people that have been shot a dozen times with duty ammo who walk under their own power into the ambulance. Humans are amazing.
So if people can be so amazing, and I want to stop them right now, then I want to maximize the amount of trauma I inflict on them. This is where rifle caliber carbines and shotguns rule.
Not only can I hit the guy more accurately and faster, I can do a lot more trauma. Plus we?_Tre talking about home defense in this post, not carrying in public, so I?_Tm not worried about concealment.
On shotguns, if poking one hole is good, poking a dozen at one time, is a whole lot better. And at the range that shotguns are used defensively, there really isn?_Tt that much spread. At across room distance, your pattern is usually about the size of a soft ball, and if you?_Tve got a big house, a basketball. So you still have to aim. (Man, I hate that myth that shotguns throw this boulder of death that can?_Tt miss, usually perpetuated by some dude on the internet that doesn?_Tt ever actually shoot anything). You can still miss, but man when you hit, it does make a mess on the carpet.
Rifle bullets are going a whole lot faster and do a lot more damage than a pistol, (and keep in mind I?_Tm keeping this simple, and not going into ten pages of argument about AP and SS109 and other esoteric information that will make a newbie?_Ts head explode). When you shoot something with most rifles, you aren?_Tt just poking a hole, but you are actually causing trauma in the tissue surrounding the hole, and most defensive bullets are designed to fragment or tumble and make even bigger, nastier holes in people.
Here in Utah, where a very large portion of our population has been deer hunting, everybody is at least familiar with the following kind of story. Most of my students have either shot a deer, or know somebody who has shot a deer.
So you shoot a deer with a 30-06 (or some other decently powerful rifle bullet). The wound is fatal, damaging the heart or lungs, and the 150-200 pound deer still manages to take off in a full sprint for 100 meters before it falls over dead. Pretty common right? Sometimes the shot isn?_Tt as perfect, and the deer will make it even further.
So why then do I expect to take a human that is bigger than that deer, and possibly high on goofballs and horse tranquilizer, and shoot them with a handgun that has a fraction of the power of that deer rifle, and expect them to stop immediately?
Ahh?_? The light bulb clicks on.
So if you?_Tre going to get into a gunfight, bring a rifle. Heck, bring friends with rifles.
Now another concern that always pops up is over penetration. People are worried that the more powerful guns are going to poke through more walls of their house, and potentially endanger their neighborhoods.
Here?_Ts the thing. Remember good old Safety Rule #4. Be aware of your target and its environment? It still applies. You are responsible for where your bullets go, even in a gunfight.
And since you?_Tre trying to stop somebody, any round powerful enough to poke a deep enough hole to reliably damage a person, is powerful enough to penetrate a bunch of building materials. TANSTAAFL. There ain?_Tt no such thing as a free lunch.
But this is one benefit of using a rifle for home defense. Loaded with PROPER ammunition, the more powerful rifle bullet will often penetrate less than a pistol bullet. A proper defensive rifle bullet is going really fast, and is designed to fragment, which causes more damage to people, but also tends to cause the bullet to break in drywall and 2A-4s faster than a slow moving, solidly-constructed pistol bullet. Either one will still penetrate, but with the correct ammo, the rifle bullet can give you the best of both worlds.
The other concern about long guns usually some how deals with maneuverability, and how if they have to clear their house, the long gun will be awkward.
First off, clearing your house by yourself is usually a bad idea. Don?_Tt do it unless you have to. To illustrate, play this game with your kids or your spouse. Have them be the bad guy somewhere in your house. Now, you go find them. Who sees who first? Right, usually they see you coming.
So if possible, take up a defensive position that covers the entrance to your room and your kid?_Ts rooms and call 911. In this scenario long gun totally wins.
But if you have to move through your house (kids on a different floor, something of that nature) you can still move with the more effective weapon, it just takes practice and training. And if you don?_Tt have the patience to get effective moving with a long gun, I doubt you?_Tve got the patience to become an effective pistol shot under stress.
As for maneuverability, look at somebody pointing a carbine or an 18?__ barreled home defense shotgun, side by side with somebody pointing a pistol in a Weaver or Isosceles shooting stance. Interestingly enough, the long guns don?_Tt poke out that much further in real life.
So my personal opinion? Rule number one of a gunfight is to have a gun. A .25 Lorcin beats a pointy stick. If your personal situation only allows you to have a handgun at home, great. Learn to use it. Learn its limitations (in the case of the Lorcin, that is when it inevitably breaks into three pieces when you look at it funny), and go practice under stress.
If possible, get yourself a long gun.
Now on shotgun vs. carbine, that is all personal preference. Which one do you shoot better?
If you?_Tve got a billion rounds through a 30?__ 870 Wingmaster dusting clays and are a veritable pheasant holocaust, then if you want to keep an 18?__ barreled shotgun stoked with buckshot next to the bed, I?_Tm not going to fault you one bit, and I?_Tm not going to try to invade your home at 3:00 in the morning either.
If you shoot your AK or AR better, do a little reading about what ammo is available, pick a good load, and you?_Tre good to go.
If you are new to both types, the carbine is a little bit easier to learn to shoot and has less recoil. Plus when the zombies come, (oh mark my words, it is just a matter of time) it does have more ammunition capacity, and far greater effective range.
Really, they?_Tve all got their pros and cons. I don?_Tt care what you learn to use, just learn to use something, and then go practice. A lot.
These are just two of the many I have files on from a project I was directing a couple of years ago. Agree or disagree, it's up to you and of course, opinions vary!
Best.0 -
Another benefit of a DA revolver for home defense is the long trigger pull required of to fire the gun. In the middle of the night when one doesn't have all their senses that little extra effort could be good thing to someone that is untrained.
A DA revolver is relatively easy for the inexperienced to check if it's loaded. It can also be left loaded forever.
Revolvers are usually recommended for women who don't have the hand strength to operate the slide on a semi auto pistol or men who don't have the knowledge - practice to understand the workings of a semi auto pistol or shotgun.
Another benefit of the revolver is it can used one handed at close quarters.
In the case of the previous thread, I would also recommend the new shooter buy a new or used Smith & Wesson or Ruger 357 magnum with a 4 inch barrel. The 4 inch barrel will lend itself to better accuracy on the practice range vs a shorter barreled revolver.
I shoot 1911's and that is what my father kept for HD and what I keep for home defense while I'm home. For my partner (who's less experienced) I have a Ruger 357 loaded in the night stand.
My shotguns stays in the safe as they are too big to leave next to the bed and I don't like leaving guns out in plain view.
Also it's alot easier for me to answer the door in the middle of the night with a handgun concealed behind the door in my hand then a 12ga shotgun concealed behind the door in my hand.
On my recent camping trip I brought a 1911 and a 12 ga shotgun. The handgun went pretty much everywhere with me the shotgun stayed in the truck. Too big and unwieldy to be carrying between the campsite and the truck.0 -
Any argument about a handgun can be carried anywhere in a vehicle or on a camping trip, compared to a shotgun is of little consequence in this argument. The original poster was enquiring for HOME DEFENSE.
As stated above, that is for this instance...things can change, and thank God we live here in the good old USA where we have the freedom to change our minds too, when the condition warrants.
For the conditions the original poster warrants, I too will take the 12 gauge shotgun loaded with #4 shot and a CB or IC choke, and 18 1/2 inch barrel with rifle sights. Beany, you should do some actual pattern testing under the previous said conditions, instead of running your calculator and loud speaker. I will tell you at 7-10 yards which is a long distance for being inside a house to start with, it will cover a piece of legal paper...which you will be needing if you shoot someone past the 21 foot mark and say it is self defense.
At best gentlemen this has been an extremely good argument between sides with many of great points. Isn't it great that we have out 2nd ammendment to help protect our 1st?
Nononsense...care to make this a sticky?
Also, those as usual, are awesome new pictures added in your signature line...any description to go with them?
Best to all0 -
quote:Originally posted by tsr1965
Any argument about a handgun can be carried anywhere in a vehicle or on a camping trip, compared to a shotgun is of little consequence in this argument. The original poster was enquiring for HOME DEFENSE.
As stated above, that is for this instance...things can change, and thank God we live here in the good old USA where we have the freedom to change our minds too, when the condition warrants.
For the conditions the original poster warrants, I too will take the 12 gauge shotgun loaded with #4 shot and a CB or IC choke, and 18 1/2 inch barrel with rifle sights. Beany, you should do some actual pattern testing under the previous said conditions, instead of running your calculator and loud speaker. I will tell you at 7-10 yards which is a long distance for being inside a house to start with, it will cover a piece of legal paper...which you will be needing if you shoot someone past the 21 foot mark and say it is self defense.
At best gentlemen this has been an extremely good argument between sides with many of great points. Isn't it great that we have out 2nd ammendment to help protect our 1st?
Nononsense...care to make this a sticky?
Also, those as usual, are awesome new pictures added in your signature line...any description to go with them?
Best to all
The purpose of my camping story was to re-iterate the fact that a handgun is more concealable than a shotgun. With a handgun I can go outside my HOME to see what's going on where walking outside my house with a shotgun in the middle of suburbia is going to cause trouble.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
12 comments