Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 6/25/2003 11:45:55 AM EDT
I am interested in both the legal and ammunition aspects of this question, as well as the tactical advantages & disadvantages, so I ended up at the General AR section.

In a home invasion scenerio, which do you use for justified self-defense: the AR (for argument's sake, let's say with a 30 round mag) or a pistol (and for that same sake let's say a .45 with 9 rounds)?

Some of my thoughts: With good, heavy ammo (i.e., 77 grain), the AR is very well suited for cqb. And it has the benefit of high capacity (30 rounds). Other benefits include optional sight systems (i.e., Aimpoint) and lights.

Drawbacks of the AR: Is the 5.56, even at 77 grains, more desireable than, say, .45 caliber? (I know this is probably in the ammo faq somewhere, but let me continue...) The AR is bigger than a pistol, so for inside your home this may be a bad thing. From a legal standpoint, you may have a tougher time defending your position on the use of deadly force with an evil black rifle than a pistol.

All said and done, I would personally opt for the AR, but am curious as to your opinions.

(I would rather be judged by 12 than carried by six, so no need for those comments; more interested in some informative arguments - thanks.)
Link Posted: 6/25/2003 12:13:57 PM EDT
Personally, I'd use 55gr instead of 77gr for cqb. The heavier bullet is intended to give you an extended fragmentation range, which isn't a concern in the home. With regards to the jury, if you can reasonably state your reasons for using the evil black rifle instead of the handgun in a manner they will understand, I don't think the risk is more than neglible. Here are the arguments I would use. 1. My objective is to protect my family. The 5.56mm has more power than the .45 and is therefore more likely to incapacitate my opponent faster, thus putting an end to his attack. 2. Greater ammo capacity provides increased safety for my family in the event of multiple attackers. 3. A shoulder fired weapon will be more accurate than the handgun, thus reducing the chance of a miss that could harm my family or some other innocent. 4. If I miss, studies have shown that the 5.56mm 55gr bullet is more likely to break up when going through interior walls than any handgun round, especially a .45. Therefore, it poses less of a risk to my family and virtually no risk at all to anyone outside the home as it will not penetrate exterior walls. 5. In the event I am close enough to use it as an impact weapon, the AR will be more effective and may allow me to resolve the situation without lethal force. 6. The AR is highly visible, much more so than a handgun. Therefore, it may intimidate an attacker into surrendering or fleeing without the need to shoot.
Link Posted: 6/25/2003 12:22:36 PM EDT
I use the 75gr myself - the 55gr has a 20% chance or so of NOT fragmenting - even then its wounds are less impressive than the heavier rounds. Advantages of the 5.56 1) MUCH LARGER wound channel than the .45 2) Safer to use indoors & in a populated areas should you miss (damage potential of rounds that pass through the walls is less than that of the handgun rounds). 3) Higher capacity - less likely you will need to reload 5) Ability to defeat soft body armor. There are also some psycological advantages: 1) Much more scary looking to the attachers. 2) Muzzle Blast of the 5.56 is most impressive in confined spaces. The disadvantages are of coures include the same muzzle blast (use hearing protection!). If your justified in using your handgun your justified in using your AR. Though there is always the chance of an anti-gun prosecuter wanting to make an example of you.
Link Posted: 6/25/2003 12:23:17 PM EDT
Neither weapon is my top choice. I prefer the 12 gauge Rem 870 I have, loaded with #4 buckshot. #2 would be the 45 pistol, although I have a Beretta 92FS (w/M3 light & CTC LaserGrip) in the night stand) I would choose the(any) rifle last, due to overpenetration and deafening report (fired indoors)
Link Posted: 6/25/2003 12:30:20 PM EDT
I agree with RUSSB, but mine is Mossberg 500 18" barrel with #4 00 Just racking the slide gets attention. [heavy] IMHO
Link Posted: 6/25/2003 12:35:36 PM EDT
Originally Posted By RussB: Neither weapon is my top choice. I prefer the 12 gauge Rem 870 I have, loaded with #4 buckshot.
View Quote
And you've selected a round that doesn't meet minimum penetration required....
I would choose the(any) rifle last, due to overpenetration and deafening report (fired indoors)
View Quote
Oh do I get tired of this newbie B.S. Both the 12 gauge & .45 will be deafening anyway so no gain there. If the 5.56 rifle has an 'overpenetration' problem why are the LEO entry teams moving to them (instead of shotguns and pistol caliber sub-guns)? Have you ever ready any of the myriad of articles on the subject written by the peopel who've used these weapons indoors & run tests? Have you bothered to read the [url] http://www.ammo-oracle.com[/url] before making such a statement? [i]Ok its time I lay off the caffine....[/i]
Link Posted: 6/25/2003 12:37:33 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/25/2003 12:38:32 PM EDT by SULACO2]
would have to go the 12Ga.,but that's in NY where one might see the inside of a trial room for defense,believe it or not. Aside from the tactical advantages of a 12ga. It appears less "menacing" to a jury, it appears as one of those "good ol' boy, wooden stock hunting guns", nota "polymer/hi-tec/black rifle". Note use whatever weapon you don't mind having seized and vouchered, for a while, should the case go to trial. Also, I would not use just any weapon,just to appease the anti-jury, that's just a side benefit ofthe 12Ga. Also more willing to part w/ a replaceable 12Ga. than a pre-AR.
Link Posted: 6/25/2003 12:48:42 PM EDT
Link Posted: 6/25/2003 12:59:00 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/25/2003 1:00:42 PM EDT by Feedingcannibal]
Originally Posted By Troy: While the AR is a great defensive rifle from a technical standpoint, it wouldn't be the best choice when you look at the bigger picture. Obviously, if there was a crowd of rioters threatening to burn down your house or something, then an AR is MUCH more appropriate in the eyes of the legal system, compared to a simple home defense situation.
View Quote
Ah, very good point. This is the type of stuff I was looking for.
Originally posted by Forest: If the 5.56 rifle has an 'overpenetration' problem why are the LEO entry teams moving to them (instead of shotguns and pistol caliber sub-guns)? Have you ever ready any of the myriad of articles on the subject written by the peopel who've used these weapons indoors & run tests? Have you bothered to read the http://www.ammo-oracle.com before making such a statement?
View Quote
This is a very good point. I have read up on the penetration and would capabilites of both rounds, and realized that the 5.56 is the better of the two; I did mention the question, however, to spur discussion [i]in regards to this particular scenerio[/i], which includes the legal issues. I also appreciate Forest's call on the shotgun; the facts behind its use just don't seem to justify it over the AR in regards to the caliber; Troy makes a good argument for its use in regards to legal issues, however.
Link Posted: 6/25/2003 1:23:18 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/25/2003 1:25:16 PM EDT by Nate1]
Ok, here's my take on this... My AR would be in the safe unless I had prior knowlege of a home invasion. All weapons are normally secured in the safe aside from our CCWs. I don't want to have to be pulling the AR in and out of the safe all the time. I would feel really stupid if I left it out and someone broke in (majority of break ins are when you aren't at home). It is a lot easier to hide a pistol in nightstand, dresser, etc. Have to get creative to hide an AR and a theif not be able to find it, if it isn't secured. My dainty wife can handle her little 9mm far better than my long guns or any of my handguns. The weapon left out for defensive use has to be one that she is capable of effectively using. I can use any of them, but this has to be taken into consideration, for I may not be home or may not be able to respond for whatever reason. Short of thugs in kevlar, 15 (30 with mag change) 9mm hollowpoints should be quite capable of getting the job done. Lastly and sadly, you have to consider what will happen after the shooting. The police are GOING to confiscate whatever weapon you use. I would much rather them take my wife's Ruger P95 ($289) than any of my rifles. I had a family member involved in a self defense shooting. They used a nice .308 lever action that also had a nice scope on it. It was "lost" by the police... Sadly, using a black rifle is not going to help your case for self defense. I know it shouldn't matter in the least, but do any of you really believe that brainwashed soccer moms in the jury are going to sympathize with someone using an "evil high powered assault weapon baby killing machine"? Remember, the majority of Americans today recieve all their firearms instruction from movies, tv shows, and other firearm knowlegable sources such as cnn...
Link Posted: 6/25/2003 2:03:36 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Troy: But it is common these days for families to wait until the criminal case is resolved to sue the shooter in civil court.
View Quote
This is a good point. However that is largly dependant on state law. Many states prohibit such lawsuits if the perp was killed in the commision of a crime (which is the case).
Also, consider that whatever gun you use is GOING to be confiscated from you and held until all legal issues are resolved.
View Quote
So what? That is the least of my worries. I want to make sure I [b]survive[/b] to the point where the LEOs can take the gun. If the home invasion was one of those where the perps wore body armor - your chances just went down with a shotgun or handgun. There are two other counter points 1) Have another weapon (how many of us own more than 1 AR...). 2) Many states will require the LEOs to take ALL the firearms you own after such an incident(not just the one you used). So why use a lesser weapon when the better one will be confiscated for the trials duration anyway?
And history shows that the longer the police have your gun, the higher the likelyhood of that gun being "lost" or "accidentally destroyed" (euphumisms for "we gave it to one of our officers"). Others have had their pristine guns returned to them in beat-to-S condition.
View Quote
Yes that sucks and IMHO is criminal in itself. However, as long as my family and I survived isn't the cost worth it?
While the AR is a great defensive rifle from a technical standpoint, it wouldn't be the best choice when you look at the bigger picture.
View Quote
Troy, this is one time we are different channels. Here is my big picture. I shoot my AR more than any of my other firearms. I've been trained on my AR (military & civilian). Its a technically more competant gun in those circumstances (as you indicated). I'm far more confident with my rifle than anything else. Why would I use a weapon I don't train with nor have the confidence with? (how many of those guys using shotguns have taken tactical shotgun classes? - same with handguns) With my rifle I KNOW I can make that headshot at 25 feet in 1.5 seconds; give me the same shot with my Glock and allow me all the time I want and I'd have a 50/50 shot of making it. My 'bigger picture' says my odds of survival are much better with the weapon I train with and am comfortable using. Now if I were a skeet shooter maybe I'd be more comfortable with a shotgun. But then again I'd still be stuck with its limitations.
Link Posted: 6/25/2003 2:11:41 PM EDT
I currently have #4 buckshot in my shotgun but would like to know what shotgun round other than a slug will meet this minimum depth of 12".
Link Posted: 6/25/2003 2:31:27 PM EDT
Prosecuting Lawyer--Mr ******** ,Why did you have a AR type weapon as a home defense weapon? Me--Because after 20 years in the military its a weapon I'm very familier with and confident in. Prosecuting Lawyer--Mr ******** ,Being in the military and consistently qualifing expert with such weapon, why didn't you shoot to wound? Me--Because my training is to instinctivly shoot center mass of my target sir. Prosecuting Lawyer--Mr ******** ,How did you feel after shooting the alleged attacker? Me--Could you rephrase the question sir? Prosecuting Lawyer--Mr ********,What did you feel immeadiatly following the shooting?? Me--RECOIL SIR!!
Link Posted: 6/25/2003 2:37:31 PM EDT
If you are justified in using deadly force, then you are justifed in using whatever means you have at your disposal. I would choose the pistol for several reasons. First, it is the gun that I will most likely have available. Second, weapon retention is much easier, especially in close quarters, with a pistol than with any long arm. Third would have to be muzzle blast. I hear people complaining about how loud the AR is when they're shooting at an outdoor range; just imagine shooting that weapon in a hallway or closet/bathroom. I'm currently using a SIG P226R with an M3 tac-light for bedside duty, and couldn't feel safer
Link Posted: 6/25/2003 2:40:08 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/25/2003 2:44:37 PM EDT by Forest]
Originally Posted By 00_buckshot: I currently have #4 buckshot in my shotgun but would like to know what shotgun round other than a slug will meet this minimum depth of 12".
View Quote
#1 Buck, #00 Buck, and #000 will meet the minium of 12". #1 has the least chance of 'overpenetrating' the attacker. There is a good article on the selction of defensive shotgun ammo here [url]http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs10.htm[/url]. I disagree with is the author's recommendation for birdshot for the first couple of rounds (in the conclusion) - especially as the author specifically points out birdshot will not penetrate enough to reach the vital organs.
Link Posted: 6/25/2003 2:43:58 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Rabbit9: Second, weapon retention is much easier, especially in close quarters, with a pistol than with any long arm.
View Quote
I'll call you on that one. Try to grab the barrel of my rifle and see how quickly you get a round in you. Weapon retention with any arm requires training - you'll find the rifle is even easier to retain than the handgun (because you have a better two handed grip on it).
Third would have to be muzzle blast.
View Quote
It would really be bad for sure - but do think a unsupressed 9mm or .45 would be easier on your ears? Ever take your hearing protection off on an indoor range?
Link Posted: 6/25/2003 3:14:31 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Forest:
Originally Posted By Rabbit9: Second, weapon retention is much easier, especially in close quarters, with a pistol than with any long arm.
View Quote
I'll call you on that one. Try to grab the barrel of my rifle and see how quickly you get a round in you. Weapon retention with any arm requires training - you'll find the rifle is even easier to retain than the handgun (because you have a better two handed grip on it).
Third would have to be muzzle blast.
View Quote
It would really be bad for sure - but do think a unsupressed 9mm or .45 would be easier on your ears? Ever take your hearing protection off on an indoor range?
View Quote
Forest if your house is one big empty room and your just going to sit in the middle and wait on the intruder, I'll agree with you. Otherwise, given that you might have to open a door, turn on a light, pick up your child, or other manipulation, I'd like to see you keep both hands on your rifle. And, if I do get a hand on the barrel of your long gun, your ass is mine because I can direct your fire. If you reach for my pistol, I can lay hands(hand) on you just before I shoot you. Yes, I have fired a pistol from inside a building sans hearing protection, and it is LOUD, but it cannot be compared to the overpressure created by a highpower rifle cartridge.
Link Posted: 6/25/2003 3:14:51 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Rabbit9: If you are justified in using deadly force, then you are justifed in using whatever means you have at your disposal. I would choose the pistol for several reasons. First, it is the gun that I will most likely have available. Second, weapon retention is much easier, especially in close quarters, with a pistol than with any long arm. Third would have to be muzzle blast. I hear people complaining about how loud the AR is when they're shooting at an outdoor range; just imagine shooting that weapon in a hallway or closet/bathroom. I'm currently using a SIG P226R with an M3 tac-light for bedside duty, and couldn't feel safer
View Quote
Well its about time somebody made sense. 70%of home defenders are gonna be right handed, most are not going to take the time to learn to shoot effectively with their left hand. Suppose an intruder hears the home owner and waits in ambush for him. I don't care if he's got a 14.5" M4 or not, I'd love to see him try to get that sucker cover a right corner before the perp gets the drop on him. Then the weapon retention issues are used against him. Yeah, Yeah, the cops use M4's for CQB, but they also have half a dozen buddies and ten pounds of body armor with them. Handguns are the perfect tool for home D.
Link Posted: 6/25/2003 3:42:48 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Rabbit9: And, if I do get a hand on the barrel of your long gun, your ass is mine because I can direct your fire.
View Quote
Think so? Ever try it? Unless I'm stupid enough to go to 'high ready' (which I'm not). I have the ultimate control of the barrel. Grab the barrel - think you got control? All I have to do is lean back (and at my mass you will go where I want you to) and the barrel automattically will align to your COM (think tug-of-war with a rifle) We did this demo several times at PFDC's rifle course. Even with me pulling on the barrel (and I outweighted the 'shooter' by at least 50%) the shooter could get the muzzle on my COM ASAP.
Link Posted: 6/25/2003 3:47:57 PM EDT
Originally Posted By sk1911: I'd love to see him try to get that sucker cover a right corner before the perp gets the drop on him. ... Then the weapon retention issues are used against him.
View Quote
Try taking some Tactical Rifle training - and you'll learn how to deal with those issues. Its a real eye-opener. [url]http://groups.msn.com/TheMarylandAR15ShootersSite/carbine1p1.msnw[/url] BTW 99.9% of people who use handguns will put their gun in a weaver or isocolese hold out in front of them. Compare that to someoone using a carbine. You'll find the 'length' issue goes away. Try it sometime with your buddies - you don't give up anyting with a carbine - but you get alot!
Link Posted: 6/25/2003 3:58:03 PM EDT
I have a .357 loaded with HP's by my bedside, and two M4's about 6 feet away. What I will grab the pistol first but only so I can get to my M4 with Surefire 500A and Aimpoint loaded with 30 rnds of 55 gr Lake City. I won't be going "hunting" in a home invasion situation, so weapon retention shouldn't be an issue. I will barracade inside my bedroom with the wife (the 2nd M4 is hers), call the police with my cell phone and sit tight. I will wait for the police to arrive reguardless of what the perp is doing in the meantime, UNLESS he/she enters the room I am in. In that case the last thing he/she will see is a butt-naked white man with one very capable weapon. I know that some (most) of you would be much more aggressive in this situation, but if/when the case goes to court, I will be able to look the jury in the eye and tell them that I only took the life to preserve my own. Just my 02 DILBERT_556
Link Posted: 6/25/2003 4:07:56 PM EDT
Troy, that's why my "house gun" is a Mini-14.
Link Posted: 6/25/2003 4:32:49 PM EDT
Actually a handgun is faster to aquire close range multiple targets than a shoulder fired weapon is. It's the difference between pointing and turning your head compared to turining and repositioning your entire upper torso to take the site picture. Right now I have a silenced 9mm as my home indoorsy type weapon so I don't have to be concerned with the noise in close quarters.
Link Posted: 6/25/2003 4:41:22 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/25/2003 4:49:57 PM EDT by PaDanby]
45 and 870. Like it or not I'm far more familiar with them and have had significantly more training in them. The 45 is far handier to use in the layout of my house. The 870 is available if I have a little more time but the 45 is the immediate go to. OO in the tube, butt shell holder has 2 bird shot and 3 slugs so I can put 2 in as circumstances warrant. (lets just say this is based on a neighborhood happening that deteriorated to the point where the 870 was immediately available in the driveway and a warning discharge into the air or a demonstration into a car door to get attention was contemplated. (You had to be there an AR would have caused way too much excitement) Like an AR the hands on release by pulling back and discharging is likely to be even more impressive and convincing, unless you were lucky to get a bump fire and empty the magazine. As noted if it is a good shoot, the choice of weapons has no bearing in the criminal trial. Civil trial everything is open to examination Another reason is that the 870 is not as secured /burglarproof as the AR. I can replace the 870 immediately. If the AR goes, here in CA it's not replaceable. As to which is scarier? I dunno, there are Airsoft ARs around, a few stores here in town have them, they may not be as scary as the big hole and sound of 870.
Link Posted: 6/25/2003 4:58:37 PM EDT
I don't care how many posts someone has on a message board... You're crazy if you think a pistol is even COMPARABLE to an AR when you're talking about muzzle blast indoors. Having 400 posts doesn't make you smarter.
Link Posted: 6/25/2003 4:58:46 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Forest:
Originally Posted By Rabbit9: And, if I do get a hand on the barrel of your long gun, your ass is mine because I can direct your fire.
View Quote
Think so? Ever try it? Unless I'm stupid enough to go to 'high ready' (which I'm not). I have the ultimate control of the barrel. Grab the barrel - think you got control? All I have to do is lean back (and at my mass you will go where I want you to) and the barrel automattically will align to your COM (think tug-of-war with a rifle) We did this demo several times at PFDC's rifle course. Even with me pulling on the barrel (and I outweighted the 'shooter' by at least 50%) the shooter could get the muzzle on my COM ASAP.
View Quote
Forest, your ASSUMING that, as a home invader, I want your rifle, when what I really want is YOU. The snap to COM only works when the assailant is pulling the gun or maintaining his position. If he directs the muzzle away WHILE ADVANCING, your done. A pistol can be held at close guard, and the assailant will have to deal with you at arms length, while your pistol is dealing with him. Dilbert, you've got the right idea. For some of us, staying put is not a viable option; my children sleep in other bedrooms, and they are my first priority. It doesn't matter how skilled you are, or what firearm you are using, going "hunting" is ill advised; action beats reaction everytime. Have a plan to take care of yours, and leave the macho stuff to the boys in blue.
Link Posted: 6/25/2003 5:52:44 PM EDT
Lots of informed opinions here, so heres my 2 cents. I am awaiting the good ole fed tax stamp to take posession of my shiny new AOW. 7.5 inch barrel, single point sling around my shoulder (ala MP5), forward grip. 45gr jhps (20 of em) and a 30 in the night stand. Aint nobody taking it from me. It drops to my side if I have to drop it for h to h. I am kinda hard of hearing anyways, and have a 2" flash supressor, so I hope that helps. Trijicon night sights and maybe a laser or light, not sure yet. Also have a .380 for the wife in the kitchen (with the glasses), as that is where she feels comfortable to get to it in a pinch. She shoots the rental AR SBR at the range pretty good, and wouldnt mind if she had to use the AOW, but I recommend the pistol to her if given the choice. She can get away with more than I can down here in LA, like shooting through the door! If youre uninvited, on my property, and my wife is home with the three kids...well, shes kinda jumpy after all that serial killer mess!
Link Posted: 6/25/2003 6:07:38 PM EDT
Some may not like this, but here I go anyway. I would grab my hi-point 9mm carbine. It will stop an intruder, and if they took it away I would be out 150 dollars, give or take. Also, It's the size of an M4 with the stock fully colapsed, so it is easy to get around.
Link Posted: 6/25/2003 6:19:22 PM EDT
Link Posted: 6/25/2003 9:31:08 PM EDT
Revisiting slightly with a comment -- Nate1 Prior knowledge - What the hell are you doing staying??? Single intruder - pistol/shotgun is very viable. Multiple intruders - The AR makes sense if you have multiple intruders you need to go after quickly. Your recovery time is better than the shotgun. Although with the adrenalin level you probably aren't noticing recoil.
Link Posted: 6/25/2003 10:19:28 PM EDT
Revisiting slightly with a comment -- Nate1 Prior knowledge - What the hell are you doing staying???
View Quote
I mean that there are signs of trouble and sufficient time to get long guns from safe. Running is not always feasible, nor am I inclinded to do so unless there is no choice. I keep all the long arms and other handguns in the safe. Reaching for a longarm if available makes more sense than using a handgun. Yes, I would much rather use a rifle or a shotgun for defense, but it is hard to put my AR or a 12ga in the drawer of the nightstand...
Link Posted: 6/26/2003 2:43:51 AM EDT
There really is no right or wrong answers here. Ultimately, the best gun for the situation comes down to the gun YOU feel is most appropriate for your particular situation. I have a Remington 870 12 Gauge with a Sure-Fire light and forend that's kept nearby at all times in my home. It's loaded with Federal Tactical low recoil 00 buckshot. I am confident with this gun, light and ammo and would have no reservation in using it to defend my home. I also have a 16" Bushmaster HBAR carbine that I keep loaded with a US GI 20 rd mag full of Black Hills 68 gr OTM, with 2 other loaded 20 rounders within quick reach. This gun also has a Sure Fire 660 light mounted on it along with an EO Tech holo sight and back-up iron sights. I feel equally well armed with this gun. The political climate around here as well as the nature of the people that live out here in the "country" are such that I wouldn't be concerned with any criminal or civil liabilities. If the shooting was justified and you took out some criminal scumbag breaking into your home, you'd be more likely to receive an award than a court appearance. But other areas may not be this way, so act accordingly. And on the nightstand beside my bed (and usually on my hip when out and about) is a Sig-Sauer P229 .40 caliber loaded with Winchester Ranger 180 gr JHP with 2 spare mags for it. I am very proficient with it and shoot it better than any pistol I have had to date. So I feel quite confident in it and the ammo as well. I can't say which of the 3 that I would go to in an emergency. It really depends on the situation and I like the fact that I have an option. Likely, at the sign of trouble I would grab the handgun in it's paddle holster and put it on, while grabbing one of the long guns. Again, it would depend on the situation and how time I had. If I were to remain inside, it would likely be the shotgun. But should I have to take it outside (hey, anything can happen...what if they set your home on fire to flush you outta your safe room?) then the AR carbine is coming with me. No ifs, ands or butts. And the AR will always be my choice for a trunk gun if I wanna take a long arm with me. If I were in certain states though, I'd probably reconsider that choice. The shotgun has limited range and in an outdoor situation, you don't know what range a potential threat may be from you. Body armor is another concern. Certainly, all of the weapons have a place in personal defense. Look at all of the classes that are being taught right now. Whether it's Thunder Ranch, Gunsite, The Crucible, etc, they all generally offer classes in handguns, shotguns and tactical carbines. Many civilians attend these courses as well as law enforcement. So while I can't say the carbine is always the perfect choice, I will say that I prefer a long gun (if it's short....hehe) over any handgun so long as I have the slightest amount of room needed to effectively maneuver it. And it's catching on nationwide as is evident in the top shooting schools. One other thing I will mention before shutting up is that a "tactical" carbine or "urban" carbine doesn't necessarily have to be an AR or an AK with 30 round mags. The Marlin carbines chambered in such rounds as the 44 magnum, 45 Colt (custom made models), 45-70 and a few other rounds can also be used to great effect in such roles. And there are some great rounds available for them at this time. So if you are worried about having a PC looking gun, what could be more innocent appearing than a gun design dating back to the 1800's? One of these would appear even less menacing than any "riot" type shotgun you could name. These can also have ghost ring sights added to make them even more effective and the rate of fire would be at least equal to a heavy recoiling 12 gauge pump. Again, just food for thought. There is no right or wrong choice, just variations to get to the same outcome. Use what you are most comfortable with. Just make sure the gun works, the ammo works and most importantly....that the shooter works! Good day all. -Charging Handle
Link Posted: 6/26/2003 5:13:21 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/26/2003 5:15:52 AM EDT by Forest]
Originally Posted By catch223: You're crazy if you think a pistol is even COMPARABLE to an AR when you're talking about muzzle blast indoors.
View Quote
Why? Both blasts will permanently damage your hearing. So what if one is louder than the other - both will damage your ears and you need hearing protection no matter which firearm you use. No the 4K+ posts don't make me smarter - its the knowledge, training and experience that does [;)].
Forest, your ASSUMING that, as a home invader, I want your rifle, when what I really want is YOU
View Quote
That is fully understood. Hey I thought the same and tried the same trick with our instructor (push the barrel away & advance). He just leaned back and tried to sit down - it pulled me forward enought so it went COM and he had the shot. Really impressive demonstration. However If I'm doing it (clearing my path to get to my kids) correctly the intruders won't have a chance to grab the barrel. Again this is where Technique and Training really help out.
It doesn't matter how skilled you are, or what firearm you are using, going "hunting" is ill advised
View Quote
ABSO-FREAKING-LUTLEY! Clearing a building is tough enough with a team - alone its dangerous and scary. If I'm leaving my room its to get to my kids. Unfortunetly due to the layout of the house I have to cross about 50% of the home - the good news is its mostly a large room so that makes it a bit easier.
Link Posted: 6/26/2003 5:25:19 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Charging_Handle: One other thing I will mention before shutting up is that a "tactical" carbine or "urban" carbine doesn't necessarily have to be an AR or an AK with 30 round mags. The Marlin carbines chambered in such rounds as the 44 magnum, 45 Colt (custom made models), 45-70 and a few other rounds can also be used to great effect in such roles.
View Quote
C.H. that is a GREAT point. Randy Cain teaches a good course on the use of these 'Practical' rifles (lever & bolt action rifles) for the defensive role. Think 'Urban Rifle' tactics with your 'hunting' rifle. Any of you on the East Coast interested in learning how to use your .44mag lever action or .308 bolt action in a tactical manner Randy will be holding a Practical Rifle course in Pittsburg PA 09 Aug through 11 Aug. Its being sponsored by the PFDC (Pennsylvania Firearms Devlopment Corp). If interested e-mail Pete at pfdc@city-net.com.
Link Posted: 6/26/2003 5:27:55 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Forest: Why? Both blasts will permanently damage your hearing. So what if one is louder than the other - both will damage your ears and you need hearing protection no matter which firearm you use. No the 4K+ posts don't make me smarter - its the knowledge, training and experience that does [;)].
View Quote
The only reason I made my post was that you made some condescending comment about "newbie BS" to the guy who said he'd rather listen to a pistol than an AR. Well I agree with him, and I think anybody would. If they have the choice between listening to a pistol without hearing protection or listening to an AR with a muzzle brake without hearing protection, my guess is they'd take the pistol.
Link Posted: 6/26/2003 5:31:34 AM EDT
Originally Posted By catch223: [The only reason I made my post was that you made some condescending comment about "newbie BS"
View Quote
You better go back and read WHY I said 'Newbie BS'. Every time this topic comes up - some uninformed person (always a Newbie) complains about 'overpenetration with the 5.56'. This comes up every time and is complete B.S. and is more than adequately covered in the ammo-oracle among other places. The sound issue is a there - and I disagree with its importance (as noted in another post) - but that is not why I posted about newbies 'BS'.
Link Posted: 6/26/2003 5:38:43 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Forest:
Originally Posted By catch223: [The only reason I made my post was that you made some condescending comment about "newbie BS"
View Quote
You better go back and read WHY I said 'Newbie BS'. Every time this topic comes up - some uninformed person (always a Newbie) complains about 'overpenetration with the 5.56'. This comes up every time and is complete B.S. and is more than adequately covered in the ammo-oracle among other places. The sound issue is a there - and I disagree with its importance (as noted in another post) - but that is not why I posted about newbies 'BS'.
View Quote
I saw this in the ammo-oracle. Can someone point to a reference on this? There is no reference in the ammo-oracle. It is certainly contrary to what a lot of so-called instructors teach.
Link Posted: 6/26/2003 6:08:15 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Koke: I saw this in the ammo-oracle. Can someone point to a reference on this? There is no reference in the ammo-oracle.
View Quote
References: R.K. Taubert, ".223 for CQB", Florida SWAT Association News, Fall 1997 (also presented in Guns & Weapons for Law Enforcement, Jan 1997). (an edited version of this article can be found online at [url]http://www.olyarms.com/usa.html[/url] - follow the links from the [b]Tech Data[/b] to [b]Penetration Aritcles[/b]) "Law Enforcement General Purpose Shoulder Fired Weapons, The Wounding Effects of 5.56mm/.223 Carbines Compared With 12 ga. Shotguns and Pistol Caliber Weapons Using 10% Ordnance Gelatin as a Tissue Simulant", Gary K. Roberts, The Police Marksman, pp. 38-45, July/August 1998. "Comparison of the Wound Ballistic Potential of 9mm vs. 5.56 (.223) Cartridges for Law Enforcement Entry Applications", Gary K. Roberts and Michael E. Bullian, AFTE Journal, 25 (2):142-147, April 1993. This article is not as 'scientific' but its a decent test: Gunsite Training Center Staff, "The Call-Out Bag: A Comparison of .223 Penetration Versus Handgun Calibers", The Tactical Edge, pp. 63-64, Summer 1994. You can find a copy of it online at [url]http://groups.msn.com/TheMarylandAR15ShootersSite/223penetrationtest.msnw[/url]
Link Posted: 6/26/2003 6:51:27 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Forest: The sound issue is a there - and I disagree with its importance (as noted in another post) - but that is not why I posted about newbies 'BS'.
View Quote
I guess I mistook what you posted then. I agree with you about the 'overpenetration'.
Link Posted: 6/26/2003 6:59:34 AM EDT
Guys, not to be choosing sides here, but I agree with Forest on this "sound" issue. If you have to fire a gun in an enclosed space, it's gonna have the potential to damage your hearing, be it a pistol, a shotgun or a rifle. I think what Forest is trying to say is that when sound reaches a certain decibel level, then the damage is gonna be done. It's safe to say that any of the weapons discussed in this thread will reach this dangerous level. Think of a glass of water. If it holds 8 ozs of water, it doesn't matter if you try to pour a gallon into it. It's only gonna hold 8 ozs. Same with this noise level. Once you reach a sound level where damage is done, it's done. A .45 ACP can do this. A .357 magnum can do this. A 12 gauge can do this. And a .223 can do this. If one is a bit louder than the other, what difference does it make if they all are capable of doing the same damage to your hearing? They can all wreck your hearing without protection. That's why having some form of protection beside your go to gun is important if you are worried about sound. But, with the angle some people here are taking, would it not be better to ditch that 9mm or .45 and instead pick up a .22 pistol or carbine, being that it isn't as noisy? Not me. I'm not going to choose a "less noisy" round, sacrificing wounding potential in a trade off. Same with long guns vs. a pistol. Not even the renowned .45 ACP is going to have the terminal performance to compete with a good performing rifle round or a load of 12 gauge 00 buckshot. And anyone who thinks it's as effective is only kidding themselves. So why choose an inferior weapon? A pistol is only a tool to get me to a long gun. If I am in a static position, chances are good I have no need for a pistol. The long gun is arty. The handgun is infantry. Arty is more destructive, infantry is more mobile. Therefore the only way I can think of in which a pistol might be superior is when on the move in a narrow space or on your person when you are on the go in daily life outside the home and can't carry a rifle or shotgun. So if you need to travel throughout your home to retrieve family members and you feel the pistol is better, then take it with you. But once you get back to the safe room, put the pistol down and get out your arty! Home defense, where you have a safe room, is well suited to compact long guns. Again, the advantages of a long gun is much more lethality (something important when all that seperates you from death is a few feet) and a longer sight radius which improves hit probability and overall accuracy. Whether a pistol will be less likely to cause hearing damage than a shotty or rifle inside a home (and that's debatable) is not as much an issue to me as the best tool to stop the threat. Even the best pistols are pretty puny when compared to a .223 or 12 gauge. I figure I can live with permanent hearing damage easier than I could live with bullet holes in my brain, heart or liver. And a weapon that is a better fight stopper takes away some of the risk of that happening. So I'll only be caught depending on a pistol only as a last resort when I can't pick up something better. -Charging Handle
Link Posted: 6/26/2003 7:18:00 AM EDT
I dont own an SBR, but I feel it would be a great choice for home defense. Maybe a 10 inch barrel and stubby stock, flat top upper with a red dot, and some heavy grain ammo. With this setup I feel you would be in business.
Link Posted: 6/26/2003 7:20:11 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Charging_Handle: Guys, not to be choosing sides here, but I agree with Forest on this "sound" issue. If you have to fire a gun in an enclosed space, it's gonna have the potential to damage your hearing, be it a pistol, a shotgun or a rifle. I think what Forest is trying to say is that when sound reaches a certain decibel level, then the damage is gonna be done. It's safe to say that any of the weapons discussed in this thread will reach this dangerous level. Think of a glass of water. If it holds 8 ozs of water, it doesn't matter if you try to pour a gallon into it. It's only gonna hold 8 ozs. Same with this noise level. Once you reach a sound level where damage is done, it's done. A .45 ACP can do this. A .357 magnum can do this. A 12 gauge can do this. And a .223 can do this. If one is a bit louder than the other, what difference does it make if they all are capable of doing the same damage to your hearing? -Charging Handle
View Quote
There is a wide range of potential permanent hearing loss, with the obvious worst case being total hearing loss. I don't think that it is unwise to consider the secondary effects of the weapon choice if the trade-off in effectiveness (if real, which I doubt it is universally), is minimal. Just my 0.02...Forest is obviously well-trained on this particular weapon for CQB. That by no means maks it the best choice for all people in all situations. (I know this is not directly what you were adressing in your post).
Link Posted: 6/26/2003 9:25:43 AM EDT
I would have to say that the .223 carbine, and the AR carbines in particular, are the best choice out there for home defense. If you got the money, they cover the widest possible array of contingancies. Inside/outside, kevlar, hostage situations. Are there situations where something else might work better, sure. As with everything, the AR15 is a compromise. In the majority of the country retalitory lawsuits over the cosmetic apperance of the weapon simply are not going to occur. What might happen in New York, California, or Illinois should not be used to generalize the attatude of prosecutors or courts nation wide.
Link Posted: 6/26/2003 11:09:33 AM EDT
I dont know if the person who said 77 grain was for extended reange of fragmentationwas corrected yet or not but it produces MUCH more dramatic wound channels at ALL ranges than M193 so its not just for long range fragmentaion. My $.02
Link Posted: 6/26/2003 11:17:58 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/26/2003 11:19:02 AM EDT by Feedingcannibal]
DevL - that was my understanding, and why I suggested using the heavy stuff in my opening post. When the 100 grain becomes available, its on. [heavy]
Link Posted: 6/26/2003 12:28:50 PM EDT
ArmdLbrl wrote: "In the majority of the country retalitory lawsuits over the cosmetic apperance of the weapon simply are not going to occur. What might happen in New York, California, or Illinois should not be used to generalize the attatude of prosecutors or courts nation wide." I think that many people are confused about the difference of the "Grand Jury" and a "Jury" in this situation. The poster was concerned about any legal ramifications of using an "Assault Weapon" in a "Home Defense" situation. If you are going to end up in criminal court for a home defense fatality it will only be after a Grand Jury decides that there are sufficient prosecutorial grounds for it. How do they decide? They assemble a Jury of regular citizens to hear testimony, review facts, and ask questions of both the shooter and the prosecutor. So, if you end up in front of the Grand Jury what do you think is an easier sell to people that could be your neighbor or your child’s 2nd grade school teacher? Pistol or Assault Weapon? Remember, these people aren’t going to be thinking like a Jury that is possibly sentencing you to death; they are only sending you to trial. So What? Trial, no big deal right? Wrong. You are going to spend at least $50,000 on a capable defense attorney. You will loose your job. You will loose your friends and social standing…get the point. Why? Because on that day, with that particular Grand Jury, they thought you were a freak because you put three COM shots in a bad guy with your military weapon. Bottom line is no matter what the circumstances are that lead up to you pulling the trigger at another person be prepared to face the Grand Jury knowing that you will face loosing all that you have over nothing more than some other peoples perception of you and what went on. BTW Don’t ever carry or keep in your home defense weapon hand loads. Only carry or use ammo available for sale to the public by a known manufacturer. Try and use what the police are using for ammo; the rationale is police must be concerned about public safety and over penetration so if you are using what they are using you must also be. If you face the Grand Jury after having killed a person with had loads they will peg use as an extra evil bastard that not only kills people with military weapons but also develops “special” super deadly hand loads just for the purpose. Anyway, just my .02 and I don’t even have 4000 post yet…
Link Posted: 6/26/2003 12:46:51 PM EDT
Originally Posted By snice: BTW Don’t ever carry or keep in your home defense weapon hand loads. Only carry or use ammo available for sale to the public by a known manufacturer. Try and use what the police are using for ammo; the rationale is police must be concerned about public safety and over penetration so if you are using what they are using you must also be. If you face the Grand Jury after having killed a person with had loads they will peg use as an extra evil bastard that not only kills people with military weapons but also develops “special” super deadly hand loads just for the purpose. Anyway, just my .02 and I don’t even have 4000 post yet…
View Quote
While this may be a consideration, where is the "line"? If I polish my fire controls or change out to lighter springs, have I created a "hair trigger"? If I have optics or a laser on my rig, have I made it more "deadly accurate"? If I have a light mounted, am I "waiting in ambush"?
Link Posted: 6/26/2003 1:59:05 PM EDT
My point is there is no line. There is only what common sense dictates to those people at that time. No, I don’t think that by using optics and a light you are likely to be adding detriment to your chances in front of a grand jury. The police routinely use both of these tools in high-pressure situations to aid in positive acquisition and identification of a threat. However, to those of you who want to imply that I am saying it is a good idea to use a weapon, technique, ammo or tactic because the police use it; don’t. I am saying before making a decision think about what the grand jury could think and in doing so consider how and when a weapon, technique, ammo or tactic are used by the police as a benchmark for what could be considered as normality.
Link Posted: 6/26/2003 4:43:08 PM EDT
Ok, here is my opinion based on my experience. I have had two incidents of home invasion. First one, I wasn't home and the sob's stole my VCR.[pissed] They just kicked in the front door went in and took the easiest thing to sell for quick cash. The second incident I was home. It was at an apartment I was living in at the time. At aproximately 5am I woke up to a loud banging on my front door. I grabed my robe and my 1911 and went to investigate. Without turning on any lights (very important as I could still see out and they could not see in.)I peeked through the peep hole in my door and standing there in front of me is 20 something thug with no shirt and covered with tatoos. I obviously don't know this person, so I call out "What do you want?" The guy says he is one of my niehbors and his apartment got broken into. He needs to borrow a flash light. I tell him to wait and I will go get one. I have not opened my front door. I go to my phone and promptly dial 911. I tell the operator that there has been a break in and to come to MY apartment. I will show the police what apartment to go to when they get here. I change quickly into jeans and a t-shirt and I get my mag lite out and return to my front door. I ask the thug to step back from the door. My 1911 is in my back pocket and my right hand is on it. My left hand is on the door to control it's motion against a charge if the thug tries to push his way in. Luckily he does not and when I open the door he is about three feet away. Right away he notices that my right hand is behind my back and I think he knows it's not flowers I am hiding. He thanks me for the flash light. As I hand it to him I tell him that I have called the police for him and they are on thier way. He of course says that it wasn't necisary as he does not think anything was stolen. He points to the building next door and says he will go to his apartment and check things out and be right back. Not two minutes goes by when he pulls up in a car and tosses me my flashlight and says thanks, he has to go pick up his cousin and bye bye! I take down his license plate and wait for the cops. (No offense to you LEO's out there but...) 30 minutes later the police show up and I tell them what was going on. By now I had gone back inside and secured my pistol. I told the police what apartment the thug told me he lived in. Needless to say, when they knocked on the door and the people who lived there answered, they knew nothing about a break in. I gave the police a discription and the license number. The car war stolen of course. It turns out that thier had been a few break ins at apartments in the area and they suspected that this was thier man. Now, some of you might be saying, "Why did you open the door in the first place?" Well, thats easy. I am a christian do-gooder. I don't care what anybody looks like, if you ask for help, I am going to help. That is just the way I was raised. Also, I try not to judge people by the way they look. I know a lot of nice people with tatoos and I know some thugs that look like stock brokers. But at the same time, I am not stupid, I went to the door armed and ready to defend myself, my family and my home. I know from experiance that a typical home invasion goes something like this: Version 1: Knock Knock Knock. Nobody's home. Kick the front door in and grab something to pawn. Run like hell. Version 2: Knock Knock OOPS! Someone IS home make a lame excuse and leave. Version 3: Knock Knock Knock Someone is home, but I can take you, so I am comming in. You see it on the news everyday. Home invasion robberies are against old people and single women. When was the last time you say a 35 year old man on the news saying "they just came right on in!"? Any other version usually involves people who know each other IE: drug dealers and gang members or crazy family members. Then you might see a home invasion where they just kick open the door and start spraying bullets. Fact is, criminals are lazy. That is why they do not have jobs like the rest of us. They take the path of least resistance which is a home no one is in. If you are going to come face to face with an assailant, it is more likly to be in a convienance store or at an ATM. In my case, I really believe that just being home and being obviously armed WITHOUT brandishing a weapon stoped my apartment from being robbed. I also belive that because I was nice, the thug acctually returned my flash light! It was obvious to anyone that I was armed, but I was not threatening. It is my opinion that a good handgun is the best defensive weapon out there. I also believe that a good carbine is the best offensive weapon out there.
Link Posted: 6/26/2003 6:53:42 PM EDT
Okay gentlemen, I'm going to make a final comment and then leave you to your own devices. 1) There are degrees of "LOUD". You have the "Man, that was loud", the ringing ears loud, and the bleeding from the ears and don't immediately know where you are loud. If you fire a high powered rifle in an enclosed space, you will experience that third degree of loud. If you have doubts, go find an indoor range that allows high powered rifles and slip off your hearing protection, and then realize that the range is much bigger than a hallway. Be aware that anything that impairs your function can cost you your life. There is NOTHING that beats a pistol when it comes to up close and personal. I would consider myself highly proficient with a carbine/SMG, but that carbine is SLOW at CQB distances. If you don't believe me, shoot an IDPA or IPSC match and ask yourself if you could duplicate your times with a long gun. Since I run or help organize most of the tactical rifle matches in my area, I would certainly be willing to let you try should you ever be in the neighborhood and be so inclined. You might also contact the English range at Ft. Benning Georgia. They were holding a pistol/CQB rifle match regularly with the same COF. I haven't attended since their new security protocol was implemented (gun registration), but it was a really good match.
Link Posted: 6/26/2003 10:13:28 PM EDT
Since CA has come up a few times, let me reiterate that in a good shoot you will not have a criminal trial. And if they are in the home it will be a good shoot unless your really foul up and get the Brownie selling cookies. From Penal Code 197. Homicide is also justifiable when committed by any person in any of the following cases: 1. When resisting any attempt to murder any person, or to commit a felony, or to do some great bodily injury upon any person; or, 2. When committed in defense of habitation, property, or person, against one who manifestly intends or endeavors, by violence or surprise, to commit a felony, or against one who manifestly intends and endeavors, in a violent, riotous or tumultuous manner, to enter the habitation of another for the purpose of offering violence to any person therein; or,... 198.5. Any person using force intended or likely to cause death or great bodily injury within his or her residence shall be presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily injury to self, family, or a member of the household when that force is used against another person, not a member of the family or household, who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and forcibly entered the residence and the person using the force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry occurred. As used in this section, great bodily injury means a significant or substantial physical injury. 199. The homicide appearing to be justifiable or excusable, the person indicted must, upon his trial, be fully acquitted and discharged. The Civil Trial is where all the colorful aggravations might take place. This is where the perps family tries to paint you as the nasty aggressor.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top