Rifle just not working for home defense - Page 2

General » General Discussion

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Rifle just not working for home defense (Page 2 of 4)

Posted: 2/13/2006 7:58:07 AM EDT

[#1]

Quoted:
Again, in fairness, most of them have access to shorter OAL weapons than most of us.

While this is certainly true for the high-end teams that we all see in the news (Military Special Operations, FBI HRT & SWAT, LAPD SWAT, ETC), it is not the case for your average military G.I. or local PD SWAT Team. They are most likely equipped just like you, with a 14.5-20" AR. Hell, many SWAT teams are still excited about getting used Colt 20” AR’s from DRMO. The vast majority of SWAT teams do not have the funding for the high speed 10.5”-11.5” AR’s so they make due with what they have.

Posted: 2/13/2006 8:01:11 AM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:
If you think your M4 might not hug close enough to you're body and it might be grabbed
by the badguy as you are making a corner mount your bayonet on it.
If you stab and shoot the bad guy would that be seen as excessive

And a pistol might be grabbed too.

There are very simple and, very effective weapons retention drills for long arms in situations
like you mention.

Try a front of side grab on somone who has an M4gery and, has been trained in
retaining that weapon properly.

I suggest you wear very good gloves and, a very thick pad on your chest

I suggest this drill with the weapon unloaded as well

Posted: 2/13/2006 8:04:47 AM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:
Quoted:

As Clint Smith says, "The only use for a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle that you should have never laid down."

I'd love to see the kind of reactions you and Clint get when you go to the supermarket, the gas station, the movies, church, the gym, the mall, the bank and the post office.

I'd also like to watch you try and eat that steak you were offered one handed.

I think the thread has "home" in the title.

Posted: 2/13/2006 8:07:54 AM EDT

[#4]

You know, before it gets lost in all the ensuing debate, I have to tip my hat to Sandman67 for posting this. Whether you think a pistol, rifle, or shotgun is better, you have to hand it to the guy for:

a) Actually practicing room clearing, instead of just buying an expensive rifle and telling himself he's a badass because he has the gun now. How many guys think they are ready for home defense just because they bought an expensive "tactical" type rifle, but never actually try to take a corner with it?

b) Posting up his actual results regardless of what others might say or what the conventional wisdom is. Again, it takes balls to come here and say "I tried this with an HK submachinegun and an M4 carbine, but I feel more comfortable with a Glock 19, what do you guys think?"

Props to the man. I think this thread needs some pics of people and their various techniques for room clearing with long guns. That would make this thread DAMN informative. Lets try to help out Sandman67 (and others) here.

Posted: 2/13/2006 8:12:11 AM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:
You know, before it gets lost in all the ensuing debate, I have to tip my hat to Sandman67 for posting this. Whether you think a pistol, rifle, or shotgun is better, you have to hand it to the guy for:

a) Actually practicing room clearing, instead of just buying an expensive rifle and telling himself he's a badass because he has the gun now. How many guys think they are ready for home defense just because they bought an expensive "tactical" type rifle, but never actually try to take a corner with it?

b) Posting up his actual results regardless of what others might say or what the conventional wisdom is. Again, it takes balls to come here and say "I tried this with an HK submachinegun and an M4 carbine, but I feel more comfortable with a Glock 19, what do you guys think?"

Props to the man. I think this thread needs some pics of people and their various techniques for room clearing with long guns. That would make this thread DAMN informative. Lets try to help out Sandman67 (and others) here.

If ya look closely, this thread is winding up the same as all the other ones like it, not to mention the "which gun is better for_______" threads.

Use what you are comfortable with.

Train as you fight.

Fight with what you have.

If you can afford a weapon and ammo, you can afford professional training.

Train on the most plausible scenerios hardest and most often.

Posted: 2/13/2006 8:18:35 AM EDT

[#6]

I tried using my PS90 for room clearing and while it is VERY compact, the barrel still somewhat gets in the way. I'd say my Glock is best for room clearing / VERY Close quarter combat. And the PS90 is about as short as you can get in MI w/o getting a C&R SBR.

Posted: 2/13/2006 8:19:30 AM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:
I still say pistol ,for legal reasons.

Sometimes ,even if it's automatically declared self defense,
the cops can take your weapon for a period of time.

I'd rather they took my 9mm pistol(Ihave more ) than
one of my prized rifles I like to shoot once a week.

I don't have an M4 or shorty carbine however,so my rifles would
not be as easily used in close quarters as yours.

If I had more than one M4 ,I would probably use one of them
instead.

Then what the hell is the point of owning a good rifle?
Use the best tool for the job.

Posted: 2/13/2006 8:21:14 AM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:
a) How many guys think they are ready for home defense just because they bought an expensive "tactical" type rifle, but never actually try to take a corner with it?

.

- You probably just described over half the people that post here. You can look at people's comments about training and tell they either actually train, don't train, or are simply trolling. In most of these threads the majority of the posters tend to be the latter two.

Posted: 2/13/2006 8:33:35 AM EDT

[#9]

I have to tip my hat to Sandman67 for posting this.

Thanks Duke

I knew as soon as I posted it I was gonna be short a few internet friends though

Pics of different house clearing techniques using a rifle would be great. Even just "how to" rifle holding techniques would be nice.

Any takers?

Posted: 2/13/2006 8:44:18 AM EDT

[#10]

Shotgun is best home protection

Posted: 2/13/2006 9:03:01 AM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
Quoted:

As Clint Smith says, "The only use for a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle that you should have never laid down."

I'd love to see the kind of reactions you and Clint get when you go to the supermarket, the gas station, the movies, church, the gym, the mall, the bank and the post office.

I'd also like to watch you try and eat that steak you were offered one handed.

Well motown_steve, I believe we've plowed this ground before, but I'll try again.

Clint will freely admit that if he ever gets in a self-defense gunfight, he will probably use his 1911.

Why? Because that's what's always on his hip.

Same for most of us who are not in actual combat situations.

But Sandman asked, "about handguns versus rifles for home defense". He wasn't asking about "supermarket, the gas station, the movies, church, the gym, the mall, the bank and the post office". In those situations, we will most likely have a handgun concealed on our person. But we understand that a handgun is a "compromise". It is "the best available, concealable" weapon that can always be carried on our person.

But, when clearing a home, we might have access to a rifle, preferably an AR platform. If that is the case, then why use a less powerful and less effective weapon?

Like most of you, I have a handgun close to me and the bed. So happens to be a Glock 34 with a Streamlight mounted on it. It would be the first thing, and the quickest thing I could grab. But if I heard someone in my house and had time to get a better weapon, I would prefer my AR.

That's all I'm saying.

Posted: 2/13/2006 9:03:10 AM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
Quoted:
You know, before it gets lost in all the ensuing debate, I have to tip my hat to Sandman67 for posting this. Whether you think a pistol, rifle, or shotgun is better, you have to hand it to the guy for:

a) Actually practicing room clearing, instead of just buying an expensive rifle and telling himself he's a badass because he has the gun now. How many guys think they are ready for home defense just because they bought an expensive "tactical" type rifle, but never actually try to take a corner with it?

b) Posting up his actual results regardless of what others might say or what the conventional wisdom is. Again, it takes balls to come here and say "I tried this with an HK submachinegun and an M4 carbine, but I feel more comfortable with a Glock 19, what do you guys think?"

Props to the man. I think this thread needs some pics of people and their various techniques for room clearing with long guns. That would make this thread DAMN informative. Lets try to help out Sandman67 (and others) here.

If ya look closely, this thread is winding up the same as all the other ones like it, not to mention the "which gun is better for_______" threads.

Use what you are comfortable with.

Train as you fight.

Fight with what you have.

If you can afford a weapon and ammo, you can afford professional training.

Train on the most plausible scenerios hardest and most often.

Perfectly said. I agree with all of the above. Buying a whiz-bang rifle and throwing a VFG with light on it and then shooting it once every 3 months is not going to make you ready for anything except roving bands of bullseyes breaking into your house and standing still at known distance.

Posted: 2/13/2006 9:03:29 AM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
Quoted:
HOW DARE YOU BESMIRCH RIFLES IN SUCH A WAY!

Don't you realize that unless you are using a rifle your are automatically dead in any lethal engagement? Don't you realize that the pistol is only to be used to club yourself with for putting down the rifle that you wish you had? If a badguy breaks into your house and all you go for the pistol then you might as well shoot yourself with it. Pistols are incapable of halting attacks. Especially 9mm pistols.

A pistol can certainly stop an attack.

But the reason we carry pistols is because it is impractical to carry rifles.

Inside the confines of your own home, why not boost the firepower advantage significantly in your favor? Some 3rd strike looser with a .38 isn't going to have an easy time killing you in your own home when you can push 28 rifle rounds in his direction and in the direction of any of his friends in a hurry.

And any one of those 28 rounds is more likely to put him down and out of the fight than any 9mm round is.

Not if you can't bring the weapon to bear and score good hits quickly. I've been into guns for about 10 years and I've heard most of the one liners:

"the handgun is what you use to fight your way to the rifle you should have never put down"

"carry the biggest caliber that you can handle"

"handguns are only effective if their caliber starts with a 4"

and so on.

There is only one of these lines that I find to be of any value at all:

"a hit with a 9mm is better than a miss with a X (.45, .223, whatever)"

What makes a weapon "effective" in stopping an attack has more to with the user than anything else. Sure penetration, fragmentation, permenant cavity, temporary cavity, etc. are all relevant. But if you can't score hits in the dark on the shadowy figure standing 2 feet away and moving towards you with a knife then all that ballistic information doesn't amount to doodley squat. If the man can move about in his house and clear rooms effectively with a 9mm handgun and score hits when he has to then he should use a 9mm handgun. And not everyone can take a week off of work, travel across the country and shell out $1,500 so someone can show them how to move around their house with an M4. Use what you're comfortable with and practice with what you've chosen.

Posted: 2/13/2006 9:07:06 AM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

As Clint Smith says, "The only use for a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle that you should have never laid down."

I'd love to see the kind of reactions you and Clint get when you go to the supermarket, the gas station, the movies, church, the gym, the mall, the bank and the post office.

I'd also like to watch you try and eat that steak you were offered one handed.

Well motown_steve, I believe we've plowed this ground before, but I'll try again.

Clint will freely admit that if he ever gets in a self-defense gunfight, he will probably use his 1911.

Why? Because that's what's always on his hip.

Same for most of us who are not in actual combat situations.

But Sandman asked, "about handguns versus rifles for home defense". He wasn't asking about "supermarket, the gas station, the movies, church, the gym, the mall, the bank and the post office". In those situations, we will most likely have a handgun concealed on our person. But we understand that a handgun is a "compromise". It is "the best available, concealable" weapon that can always be carried on our person.

But, when clearing a home, we might have access to a rifle, preferably an AR platform. If that is the case, then why use a less powerful and less effective weapon?

Like most of you, I have a handgun close to me and the bed. So happens to be a Glock 34 with a Streamlight mounted on it. It would be the first thing, and the quickest thing I could grab. But if I heard someone in my house and had time to get a better weapon, I would prefer my AR.

That's all I'm saying.

Anybody without wax in their ears (or an axe to grind) understood that's what you meant the first time too. It's deliberately obtuse to start talking about why you or Clint are not walking around with a STG-58 slug over your shoulder at the movies.

Posted: 2/13/2006 9:10:19 AM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:
If the man can move about in his house and clear rooms effectively with a 9mm handgun and score hits when he has to then he should use a 9mm handgun. And not everyone can take a week off of work, travel across the country and shell out $1,500 so someone can show them how to move around their house with an M4. Use what you're comfortable with and practice with what you've chosen.

I don't think anyone disagrees that he should use what he is able to operate effectively. It was simply stated that his general premise that it isn't practical is only correct because he hasn't been shown how to do it effectively. Maybe he still won't like it, but that doesn't mean it "just doesn't work".

Posted: 2/13/2006 9:11:29 AM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

As Clint Smith says, "The only use for a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle that you should have never laid down."

I'd love to see the kind of reactions you and Clint get when you go to the supermarket, the gas station, the movies, church, the gym, the mall, the bank and the post office.

I'd also like to watch you try and eat that steak you were offered one handed.

Well motown_steve, I believe we've plowed this ground before, but I'll try again.

Clint will freely admit that if he ever gets in a self-defense gunfight, he will probably use his 1911.

Why? Because that's what's always on his hip.

Same for most of us who are not in actual combat situations.

But Sandman asked, "about handguns versus rifles for home defense". He wasn't asking about "supermarket, the gas station, the movies, church, the gym, the mall, the bank and the post office". In those situations, we will most likely have a handgun concealed on our person. But we understand that a handgun is a "compromise". It is "the best available, concealable" weapon that can always be carried on our person.

But, when clearing a home, we might have access to a rifle, preferably an AR platform. If that is the case, then why use a less powerful and less effective weapon?

Like most of you, I have a handgun close to me and the bed. So happens to be a Glock 34 with a Streamlight mounted on it. It would be the first thing, and the quickest thing I could grab. But if I heard someone in my house and had time to get a better weapon, I would prefer my AR.

That's all I'm saying.

I know what you're saying...and I don't disagree. A rifle is obviously a more powerful weapon than a handgun.

I'm just pointing out that a rifle is not always practicle, sometimes even in your own home. My philosophy is that the effectiveness of a weapon is determined by how well the user can deploy it. If you can effectively clear rooms and score hits with a 9mm, but you cannot effectivly clear rooms and score hits with an M4 then in that case the 9mm is deadlier than the M4.

My $.02

Posted: 2/13/2006 9:12:01 AM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:
I have to tip my hat to Sandman67 for posting this.

Thanks Duke

I knew as soon as I posted it I was gonna be short a few internet friends though

Pics of different house clearing techniques using a rifle would be great. Even just "how to" rifle holding techniques would be nice.

Any takers?

Just a picture to help answer those that are concerned with the myth, "You can't use a rifle because the bad guy will grab the barrel too easily".

You give up very little in overall legnth when using a SBR.

Look at this pic:

I took it when I attended the Urban Rifle Course. Clint and another Instructor both have their backs to the wall. The rifle extends about 5 or 6 inches further than the pistol.

With proper training, this is a moot point. There are effective weapons retention skills that will solve this problem for you.

And, when the SHTF, rifles are rifles and pistols are pistols.

As was said, "I never met a man that was in a gunfight and wished that he had a smaller weapon. Ever."

Posted: 2/13/2006 9:13:19 AM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:
Quoted:
I've never taken any of the rifle/carbine courses, although I plan on it in the near future. But if you live in a small house, filled with furniture, and your rifle is pointed at the floor, and you enter a room and a BG is standing rigiht around the corner (in other words, almost nose to nose with you), how do you raise the rifle in order to engage him? Seems to me like he'd be inside the muzzle or they're be a wrestling match for the rifle.

I was taught wth the handgun to keep it right next to your hip pointing forward. That way you can easily move it forward for an aimed shot, or engage someone who's face to face with you without them being inside the muzzle or being able to easily grab the gun.

Also, if you have to walk outside to check on a noise, do you carry the rifle with you? I can easily holster the handgun and carry it with me as I move around the house, whether there's a perceived problem or not, it's always there and always ready. But I can't imagine moving around the house at night, to go to the bathroom, to the fridge or out to check on the dogs, carrying a rifle with me all the time. Or maybe you use a pistol for that and keep the rifle for real problems?

One thing I took away from the transcripts of the BTK killer interview, if it's not with you at all times you probably won't have time to get to it. BG's like that are in your house and confronting you before you know it. No time to go get the rifle, it's the handgun on your person or it's bare knuckles.

Shouldn't be if you are at a high enough state of alert that you're on red and pokeing around the house.
At worst, low ready. If the BG pops up within arm's reach the drill with pistol is little different than rifle.

I've never actually taken any pistol only courses, always ones that integrated long gun and pistol.
with techniques for both and transition.

You're right. I meant to say something more like a 45 degree angle (which would be forced by stock over shoulder), going for safety with someone new at any type of technique. I would not recommend someone go around with the muzzle almost pointed straight until he had some experience. But, the scenario you describe leaves little time for any movement.

BTW, I use a pistol (BHP), and because of my family situation - just my wife and myself, and house layout, I have the luxury of letting the bad guy come to me. Then I have a very narrow field of fire, and have thought about aim (somewhat low)if he's wearing body armor. Then, I'm not important enough for anyone to wear body armor to come into my house. And, meanwhile, the Sheriff is on the way.

Posted: 2/13/2006 9:22:14 AM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:

Not if you can't bring the weapon to bear and score good hits quickly. I've been into guns for about 10 years and I've heard most of the one liners:

"the handgun is what you use to fight your way to the rifle you should have never put down"

"carry the biggest caliber that you can handle"

"handguns are only effective if their caliber starts with a 4"

and so on.

There is only one of these lines that I find to be of any value at all:

"a hit with a 9mm is better than a miss with a X (.45, .223, whatever)"

The dabates about the differences in handgun caliber are largely overblown. I personally prefer the .45, but I pack 9mms and .38s without fear. Careful ammo selection will yield an effective handgun in .38, 9mm, .40 and .45 calibers.

That being said, there IS a vast difference between the stopping ability of a handgun and a rifle. A hit with a .223 is FAR more likely to put a threat down instantly than a hit from a 9mm.

And I have yet to meet the person who cannot make close range hits more accurately and faster with an AR than with a pistol.

What makes a weapon "effective" in stopping an attack has more to with the user than anything else. Sure penetration, fragmentation, permenant cavity, temporary cavity, etc. are all relevant. But if you can't score hits in the dark on the shadowy figure standing 2 feet away and moving towards you with a knife then all that ballistic information doesn't amount to doodley squat.

That is true. But even with my eyes closed, I can still hit COM of man-sized targets with little trouble out to several yards away just by orienting my body towards the target. I cannot do the same with a pistol at ranges of over a few feet.

If the man can move about in his house and clear rooms effectively with a 9mm handgun and score hits when he has to then he should use a 9mm handgun.

Not if the man can move about in his house and clear rooms effectively with a .223 carbine, which he probably can with the proper instruction.

And not everyone can take a week off of work, travel across the country and shell out $1,500 so someone can show them how to move around their house with an M4. Use what you're comfortable with and practice with what you've chosen.

1,500 bucks and a week off of work is cheap compared to the cost of getting shot.

Having a weapon is great.

Learning how to use it under combat type situations a pretty good idea.

Posted: 2/13/2006 9:24:05 AM EDT

[#20]

but that doesn't mean it "just doesn't work"

Actually that is exactly what I meant. It does'nt work for me. For whatever the reason -lack of training, lack of eyes behind my head, whatever, it does not work for me. Maybe it works or you, Old Painless and Clint. Fine, have at it....all I was asking was if there is anyone like me that finds this doesn't work for them -again -for whatever reason. I am not generalizing

Posted: 2/13/2006 9:26:16 AM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:
And not everyone can take a week off of work, travel across the country and shell out $1,500 so someone can show them how to move around their house with an M4.

Quality training does not have to cost $1500, take a week, or involve long distance travel. Some of the best instructors in the world teach three day classes priced in the $400-$450 range. Depending on where you live some classes might be very close. Training like this is priceless. It’s allot better than listening to guys on the Internet, most of whom have no idea what they are talking about in the first place but can TYPE a good game.

Posted: 2/13/2006 9:37:50 AM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:
but that doesn't mean it "just doesn't work"

Actually that is exactly what I meant. It does'nt work for me. For whatever the reason -lack of training, lack of eyes behind my head, whatever, it does not work for me. Maybe it works or you, Old Painless and Clint. Fine, have at it....all I was asking was if there is anyone like me that finds this doesn't work for them -again -for whatever reason. I am not generalizing

Well, I think I already said.... that's fine. It doesn't work for you. How could I argue otherwise? I am saying that it doesn't work for you because you are not effectively trained to use it, not because it's just rifle lovers force fitting their love into a defensive situation. That was kind of what you seemed to be hinting at. Maybe I read it wrong.

You would be ill advised to force yourself to use something you are not confident in. You would be well advised to take some training and see if that changes things for you or not. That's all.

Posted: 2/13/2006 9:43:54 AM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:
but that doesn't mean it "just doesn't work"

Actually that is exactly what I meant. It does'nt work for me. For whatever the reason -lack of training, lack of eyes behind my head, whatever, it does not work for me. Maybe it works or you, Old Painless and Clint. Fine, have at it....all I was asking was if there is anyone like me that finds this doesn't work for them -again -for whatever reason. I am not generalizing

Lack of training & experience does not equate to "This doesn't work for me".

Since you have zero training, how do you even know what "Works for you”? Without training you are not in a postion to disagree with time tested & gunfight/combat proven tactics.

What you should be saying is: "This is all I'm equipped and trained to handle at the moment".

Big difference.

Posted: 2/13/2006 9:44:19 AM EDT

[#24]

Trust me -I wasn't hinting at that at all.

Posted: 2/13/2006 9:46:43 AM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:
Quoted:
And not everyone can take a week off of work, travel across the country and shell out $1,500 so someone can show them how to move around their house with an M4.

Quality training does not have to cost $1500, take a week, or involve long distance travel. Some of the best instructors in the world teach three day classes priced in the $400-$450 range. Depending on where you live some classes might be very close. Training like this is priceless. It’s allot better than listening to guys on the Internet, most of whom have no idea what they are talking about in the first place but can TYPE a good game.

Yup. Closest I ever spent to 1500 bucks was 680.00 at TFTT's Overseas Operator course that was 5 days long. 1500 is my yearly training budget now...Classes and ammo.

Most training flavors of the "Rifle/Pistol I, II, III, etc are on-two day courses and cost between 200-400 bucks. If you live in TX, Tiger Valley is an outstanding value. Most of the best trainers have a home range but run traveling road classes throughout the year.

James Yeager lets people that come to his Camden facility sleep in the team room on the first floor of his home.

A favorite quote of his, though, I havn't trained with him yet is-"You're running out of excuses." when it comes to training.

Posted: 2/13/2006 9:50:28 AM EDT

[#26]

Lack of training & experience does not equate to "This doesn't work for me".

Since you have zero training, how do you even know what "Works for you”?

What you should be saying is: "This is all I'm equipped and trained to handle at the moment".

Big difference.

Uh....wrong. Yes it does. Are you saying that anyone who buys a gun needs to be trained first before they can be equiped? Because if that's so then we are going to lose a lot of people to the "other side."

How do I know it doesn't work for me? Well...because I tried it on multiple weekends...or did you miss that part? I tried it and it does not work in my house. Period. I walk out my bedroom, I have a door directly in front of me and 2 doors to the right of me, about 1 foot over and across from each other. Tell me how to defend that?

Look, I don't have time nor money to go and find training right now. Are you saying I shoud not have a gun for protection them? It certainly sounds like that. Since I am not equipped or trained to handle the situation at the moment?

Posted: 2/13/2006 9:50:48 AM EDT

[#27]

Can anyone recommend anything near Kansas City in the way of rifle training geared towords rifle home defense? I've had some pointers from guys I met but nothing more. Even the pointers when practiced upped my confidence with the M4.

Posted: 2/13/2006 9:53:39 AM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:
Uh....wrong. Yes it does. Are you saying that anyone who buys a gun needs to be trained first before they can be equiped? Because if that's so then we are going to lose a lot of people to the "other side."

There is a difference between having a gun and knowing how to use said weapon effectively to stop the agressive actions of another.

How do I know it doesn't work for me? Well...because I tried it on multiple weekends...or did you miss that part? I tried it and it does not work in my house. Period. I walk out my bedroom, I have a door directly in front of me and 2 doors to the right of me, about 1 foot over and across from each other. Tell me how to defend that?

Look, I don't have time nor money to go and find training right now. Are you saying I shoud not have a gun for protection them? It certainly sounds like that. Since I am not equipped or trained to handle the situation at the moment?

No one is saying that.

People ARE saying that a rifle most likely WILL work for home defense IF you go get training with said weapon. Nobody is threatening to take your rifle if you aren't on a plane bound for Thunder Ranch in 20 minutes.

There is a reason some of us talk about training a lot. It is because said training is CRUCIAL to understanding what is really involved in defending yourself from an agressive attack.

I have never met a man who, after surviving a gunfight, wishes he had less training and preperation going in.

Posted: 2/13/2006 9:55:09 AM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:
1500 is my yearly training budget now...Classes and ammo.

Mine is about the same.

Posted: 2/13/2006 9:56:33 AM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:
Can anyone recommend anything near Kansas City in the way of rifle training geared towords rifle home defense? I've had some pointers from guys I met but nothing more. Even the pointers when practiced upped my confidence with the M4.

Ten minutes with someone who knows what they are doing can make a world of difference in someone's skill level.

Good instructors know that.

I dunno about what is around KC....I would see if Pat Rogers or somebody like him is running a training course near you. There are several big name instructors who are darn good and who come near you rather than having you come to their facility.

Some of the names you hear suck. (Ayoob, Suarez, etc...) Some (Pat Rogers, etc..) are great.

Personally, I prefer going to facilities because it is like a little vacation for me.

Posted: 2/13/2006 9:57:13 AM EDT

[#31]

Quoted:
I still say pistol ,for legal reasons.

Sometimes ,even if it's automatically declared self defense,
the cops can take your weapon for a period of time.

I'd rather they took my 9mm pistol(Ihave more ) than
one of my prized rifles I like to shoot once a week.

I don't have an M4 or shorty carbine however,so my rifles would
not be as easily used in close quarters as yours.

If I had more than one M4 ,I would probably use one of them
instead.

With all due respect, that is the worst reasoning I have ever read regarding the selection of a defensive weapon.

Posted: 2/13/2006 9:57:14 AM EDT

[#32]

I totally agree also. Rifles or longguns require storage under a bed or out of sight too which means its less accessible. My XD40 is just right in my nightstand

Posted: 2/13/2006 9:57:36 AM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:
Quoted:
1500 is my yearly training budget now...Classes and ammo.

Mine is about the same.

And with that you should be able to attend at least one good 40 hour class a year at a remote facility. That's about what I spend for a trip to Blackwater.

Posted: 2/13/2006 9:59:47 AM EDT

[#34]

A $1000 rifle is a really cheap hedge on your life if you feel that it would serve you better to defend it.

Quoted:
I still say pistol ,for legal reasons.

Sometimes ,even if it's automatically declared self defense,
the cops can take your weapon for a period of time.

I'd rather they took my 9mm pistol(Ihave more ) than
one of my prized rifles I like to shoot once a week.

I don't have an M4 or shorty carbine however,so my rifles would
not be as easily used in close quarters as yours.

If I had more than one M4 ,I would probably use one of them
instead.

Posted: 2/13/2006 10:05:34 AM EDT

[#35]

Yea, but come on guys. Not everyone can afford (either time, money or both) to pick up and go to training for a week -let alone do it every year. I'm no wanna be commando, nor do I want to be. I would love a little training on how to use a rifle better in my home, but so far I see no one trying to tackle the scenario I gave of my house setup.

To be prepared is one thing, but it sounds like with training budgets and such that maybe AR15 was not the place to ask this question. My bad -sorry.

Posted: 2/13/2006 10:06:04 AM EDT

[#36]

I think the real question is, where the HELL did you get a UMP? Those didn't even exist before '86!

Posted: 2/13/2006 10:11:38 AM EDT

[#37]

Quoted:
I totally agree also. Rifles or longguns require storage under a bed or out of sight too which means its less accessible. My XD40 is just right in my nightstand

The hell they do. When I get home for the night I pull the SBR out of the safe and put it right next to the bed with a spare mag, turn the aimpoint on and the M6 on and it's good to go when shit goes bump bang crash in the night.

Posted: 2/13/2006 10:16:07 AM EDT

[#38]

Quoted:
... Does anyone else find that even though they agree a rifle is the best choice on paper, in reality, a handgun just allows so much more movement?

Not my experience, but I can certainly understand how it could be for some (maybe most?).

As someone who equipped/trained for HD with shotguns for years, the transition to rifle was much easier (and understandably so). If my transition had been from handgun to long-gun instead, I expect it would have been more difficult.

Posted: 2/13/2006 10:16:19 AM EDT

[#39]

I think the real question is, where the HELL did you get a UMP? Those didn't even exist before '86!

Sorry, I should elaborate. It is a HK USC that underwent the conversion/transformation into a UMP. Very nice gun indeed.

Posted: 2/13/2006 10:16:44 AM EDT

[#40]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
1500 is my yearly training budget now...Classes and ammo.

Mine is about the same.

And with that you should be able to attend at least one good 40 hour class a year at a remote facility. That's about what I spend for a trip to Blackwater.

At least one. Probably two.

Posted: 2/13/2006 10:17:40 AM EDT

[#41]

Quoted:
I totally agree also. Rifles or longguns require storage under a bed or out of sight too which means its less accessible. My XD40 is just right in my nightstand

Right next to the bed...

Posted: 2/13/2006 10:18:26 AM EDT

[#42]

Quoted:
Quoted:
I totally agree also. Rifles or longguns require storage under a bed or out of sight too which means its less accessible. My XD40 is just right in my nightstand

The hell they do. When I get home for the night I pull the SBR out of the safe and put it right next to the bed with a spare mag, turn the aimpoint on and the M6 on and it's good to go when shit goes bump bang crash in the night.

Mine's 3/4 of an arm's length away.

Posted: 2/13/2006 10:19:52 AM EDT

[#43]

Quoted:
Yea, but come on guys. Not everyone can afford (either time, money or both) to pick up and go to training for a week -let alone do it every year.

Okay, fine with me.

But you asked the question, "Does anyone else find that even though they agree a rifle is the best choice on paper, in reality, a handgun just allows so much more movement?"

We have answered your question, but you don't like the answer.

The answer is: If you get proper training, you would find that a rifle is usually best.

I'm no wanna be commando, nor do I want to be.

What makes you think that I'm a "wanna be commando"?

I'm just a guy that wants to know more about how to use the best weapons for personal defense.

I am 57 years old. I attended my first class at around 50 years old. I had been shooting all kinds of weapons for all my life. Hundreds of thousands of rounds fired.

I thought I knew a lot about guns and how to use them. Maybe I did. But after a week of training, I was simply amazed at how much I had learned and how little I really "knew" before the training.

Most folks will tell you the same thing. Training is essential.

I would love a little training on how to use a rifle better in my home, but so far I see no one trying to tackle the scenario I gave of my house setup.

Yes we did. See above.

To be prepared is one thing, but it sounds like with training budgets and such that maybe AR15 was not the place to ask this question. My bad -sorry.

Now don't get all offended and puffed up, old buddy.

One thing about this site, if you ask a question, you will get some good advice (along with some BS

)

That advice might not be what you want to hear, but that doesn't mean it isn't correct.

If you can't afford some training for now, then use the weapon that you feel most comfortable with.

But after you finally get some training, use the best weapon available.

You saved up the money to buy your weapons. Save up some to learn how to use them best.

Posted: 2/13/2006 10:22:04 AM EDT

[#44]

In my house, the only place I'd feel comfortable with a rifle or shotgun would be in the living room or bunkered up in the bedroom aiming at the door. Just too bulky for the tight hallways and rooms in my house, especially if I have to take a hand off the gun to open a door. I'd go with a handgun with a light attached for checking things out and a carbine/SBR/SBS for clearly identified threats.

Posted: 2/13/2006 10:22:05 AM EDT

[#45]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Yea, but come on guys. Not everyone can afford (either time, money or both) to pick up and go to training for a week -let alone do it every year.

Okay, fine with me.

But you asked the question, "Does anyone else find that even though they agree a rifle is the best choice on paper, in reality, a handgun just allows so much more movement?"

We have answered your question, but you don't like the answer.

The answer is: If you get proper training, you would find that a rifle is usually best.

I'm no wanna be commando, nor do I want to be.

What makes you think that I'm a "wanna be commando"?

I'm just a guy that wants to know more about how to use the best weapons for personal defense.

I am 57 years old. I attended my first class at around 50 years old. I had been shooting all kinds of weapons for all my life. Hundreds of thousands of rounds fired.

I thought I knew a lot about guns and how to use them. Maybe I did. But after a week of training, I was simply amazed at how much I had learned and how little I really "knew" before the training.

Most folks will tell you the same thing. Training is essential.

I would love a little training on how to use a rifle better in my home, but so far I see no one trying to tackle the scenario I gave of my house setup.

Yes we did. See above.

To be prepared is one thing, but it sounds like with training budgets and such that maybe AR15 was not the place to ask this question. My bad -sorry.

Now don't get all offended and puffed up, old buddy.

One thing about this site, if you ask a question, you will get some good advice (along with some BS)

That advice might not be what you want to hear, but that doesn't mean it isn't correct.

If you can't afford some training for now, then use the weapon that you feel most comfortable with.

But after you finally get some training, use the best weapon available.

You saved up the money to buy your weapons. Save up some to learn how to use them best.

Outstanding post and 100% correct.

Posted: 2/13/2006 10:23:50 AM EDT

[#46]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
1500 is my yearly training budget now...Classes and ammo.

Mine is about the same.

And with that you should be able to attend at least one good 40 hour class a year at a remote facility. That's about what I spend for a trip to Blackwater.

At least one. Probably two.

Wow! That shows that you're really serious about defending yourself.

Attention everyone else: Unless you are spending $1,500 a year at Blackwater or Thunder Ranch and using an M4 type rifle for home defense then you shouldn't be keeping any guns in your house. Some criminal is just going to take it from you and shoot you with it. You're not prepared to defend yourself and to even try would be suicide.

Posted: 2/13/2006 10:24:47 AM EDT

[#47]

Quoted:
Well Sandman, with all due respect, we could base our opinions on "feelings", or we could get some professional training and base them on facts.

If properly trained, a person will not find a short rifle to be a negative in home defense.

I once was a "pistol only" guy. Then I went to Thunder Ranch and took the Urban Rifle course. I now know better.

There is no reason to use a less effective and less powerful weapon if you have a choice.

As Clint Smith says, "The only use for a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle that you should have never laid down."

+1 Somehow I manage with these...

Posted: 2/13/2006 10:28:26 AM EDT

[#48]

Quoted:

Wow! That shows that you're really serious about defending yourself.

Attention everyone else: Unless you are spending $1,500 a year at Blackwater or Thunder Ranch and using an M4 type rifle for home defense then you shouldn't be keeping any guns in your house. Some criminal is just going to take it from you and shoot you with it. You're not prepared to defend yourself and to even try would be suicide.

You know Steve, you are sometimes a little over-the-top.

Nobody said, "Unless you are spending $1,500 a year at Blackwater or Thunder Ranch and using an M4 type rifle for home defense then you shouldn't be keeping any guns in your house."

Nobody.

And you know it.

Anyone is totally free to use whatever they have to the best of their ability to defend themselves or their family.

We simply said that if you want to use your weapons most effectively, get some professional training.

You saved up the money to buy the guns. Save some for some training.

Is that really unreasonable?

Posted: 2/13/2006 10:30:34 AM EDT

[#49]

Yea, I could manage with those two Steyr as well. Those are SBR correct? For all those that say the couple of inches difference between a SBR and a 16" doesn't matter...you all are welcome to my house to try it out.

Posted: 2/13/2006 10:31:24 AM EDT

[#50]

Quoted:
Wow! That shows that you're really serious about defending yourself.

Yes. It does.

Weapons are TOOLS. And while it is possible to build a liveable structure without knowing how to use a hammer or a saw well, you can learn enough through trial and failure to eventually succeed.

Trial and error don't work so good when you are in a gunfight.

Attention everyone else: Unless you are spending $1,500 a year at Blackwater or Thunder Ranch and using an M4 type rifle for home defense then you shouldn't be keeping any guns in your house. Some criminal is just going to take it from you and shoot you with it. You're not prepared to defend yourself and to even try would be suicide.

You need to get a grip.

It never ceases to amaze me how people show up in these threads and make all sorts of claims that are NOT true, and then when trained people come along and point out the simple reality of an issue, those people are immediately dressed down for having gone out and tried to better their skills and share the benefits of their knowledge.

If there are some here who honestly believe that there is nothing Clint Smith could possibly teach you that is of any value, why don't you just ignore these threads???

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Rifle just not working for home defense (Page 2 of 4)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us