PDA

View Full Version : Quick shotgun ?


CivyBlue
April 28, 2015, 23:48
So I love the look of a Rem 870 tactical but the 12 ga has a bit much kick for me.

Asking if anyone out there thinks a 20 ga would be acceptable for a practically identical setup with less recoil. (Home defense )

SPEEDGUNNER
April 29, 2015, 05:57
Buy a semi, reduces the kick to more manageable levels.

kotengu
April 29, 2015, 06:02
A 20ga would be fine for home defense, but I didn't notice much difference in felt recoil when shooting one side by side with my 12ga.

Try it and see though -

flopshot
April 29, 2015, 06:40
since you're not toting it around add some weight. mag extension, shoot me light, buttstock shell holder. you can add some lead to the buttstock cavity as well.

c0wb0y84
April 29, 2015, 09:02
I think that a 20 ga is a better option than the 12 for home defense. With slugs and buckshot I don't think a 12 has any significant advantage that isn't overcome by less recoil and faster recovery. Yes this can be overcome with practice on a 12 ga but if that time were spent practicing with the 20 instead I think it still holds a slight advantage. YMMV. Depending on how much you want to spend AI and P tactical has some nice setups.

SAFN49
April 29, 2015, 09:19
The 12ga has so many more load choices and is much more versatile than the 20ga. If recoil is your only concern you can use reduced recoil defense loads or put a dead mule or similar recoil reducer in the stock.

http://www.brownells.com/shooting-accessories/recoil-parts/recoil-reducers/index.htm


<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Woi1VeJ8FHQ?feature=player_detailpage" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

J. Armstrong
April 29, 2015, 09:27
If you already have a 12, you could always opt for some low recoil loads - no experience with them myself but I know various sources make them. I sure stay away from 3" and longer 12s, but have no problem with the shorter, "old fashioned" rounds.

No offense intended, but are you sure you are shouldering the shotty properly ? The reason I say this is many years ago I, too, was complaining about 12 ga recoil, even though I had no problem with .308 and .30-06, even in P17s and 03A3s . Good friend who was into shotties got me to start pulling the butt into my shoulder much more firmly than I was used to or thought necessary - big difference.

My M1S90 will remind me if I get loosey-goosey, otherwise I find it to be no problem.

justashooter
April 29, 2015, 09:59
if you don't already have one, you can get a 20 gauge 870 express at Wal Mart for about $300. #3 or #4 buckshot is a decent choice for HD, and can be had for less than a buck a round. birdshot can be used for training and also small game hunting in same gun.

there is a lot of difference between a 7.5 pound gun and an 8.5 pound gun in a panic situation. 1 ounce of buck is about 16-20 pellets of 23-25 caliber in #3 and #4 size. 2-4 pellets simultaneously in the body cavity is incapacitation at close range.

c0wb0y84
April 29, 2015, 10:41
The 12ga has so many more load choices and is much more versatile than the 20ga. If recoil is your only concern you can use reduced recoil defense loads or put a dead mule or similar recoil reducer in the stock.

http://www.brownells.com/shooting-accessories/recoil-parts/recoil-reducers/index.htm



The 12 ga has more load choices as well as accessories but his stated purpose was home defense so versatility wasn't stated as a requirement. How many load choices do you need for home defense? For a dedicated HD shotty IMO a 20 ga is better in most cases. Also I've yet to encounter something that a 12a could do that a 20 can't. Sure a 12 may do some things better but it can still be done so I'm not sure a "more versatile" statement is universally accepted.

SAFN49
April 29, 2015, 11:13
The 12 ga has more load choices as well as accessories but his stated purpose was home defense so versatility wasn't stated as a requirement. How many load choices do you need for home defense? For a dedicated HD shotty IMO a 20 ga is better in most cases. Also I've yet to encounter something that a 12a could do that a 20 can't. Sure a 12 may do some things better but it can still be done so I'm not sure a "more versatile" statement is universally accepted.

It's all about the loads for self defense.

http://www.theboxotruth.com/the-box-o-truth-22-20-gauge-shotgun/

c0wb0y84
April 29, 2015, 11:26
Interesting article. Take aways: Don't use birdshot for defense, or Remington Sluggers. I think if he used the federal power shok in the 20 the results would've been similar to the 12.

ETA: actually even with the reduced penetration of water jugs the sluggers, while not the best, would still be acceptable.

nyalaman
April 29, 2015, 14:16
Try a semi, like Speedgunner says. An 1100 has mild/manageable recoil.

chet
April 29, 2015, 14:46
One the one hand, the 20 doesn't give up a whole lot to the 12 for home defense. You also get a little less blast and a less recoil.

I wouldn't suggest "low recoil" anything as far as ammo. We've had this discussion numerous times, but small pellets moving slow suck less than smaller pellets moving slower.

None of the gauge and load discussions are going to change the fact that a shotgun is relatively heavy, relatively long, slow to reload, and has a capacity similar to a 19th century revolver.

A 9mm carbine, SBR, or semi MP-clone pistol is going to give you triple the capacity, inconsequential recoil, and much less blast. It's a far better CQB tool than a shotgun.

Start looking at capacity as "chances to win" rather than payload.

c0wb0y84
April 29, 2015, 21:54
A 9mm carbine, SBR, or semi MP-clone pistol is going to give you triple the capacity, inconsequential recoil, and much less blast. It's a far better CQB tool than a shotgun.

Start looking at capacity as "chances to win" rather than payload.

CQB and Home Defense are two separate concepts with different purposes and tactics. Generally speaking I think of CQB as intentionally going into an urban environment where the possibility of encountering a threat are high and you are pre-staged with weapon and ammo on your person and on your "A" game. Home defense in my view is sitting on your couch watching tv or asleep in your bed and an intruder interrupts at time when you are caught off guard, groggy, and barely awake. Different tools for different jobs.

SAFN49
April 29, 2015, 23:10
Different tools for different jobs.

Exactly! The 20ga limits you to #3 buck. The 12ga has many more possibilities. That is why I think it is more versatile.

SPEEDGUNNER
April 30, 2015, 07:49
Here is the answer to your question, at a great price too:

http://www.falfiles.com/forums/showthread.php?t=386004

Get yourself some No. 4 Buck and you will have all you need.

gunplumber
April 30, 2015, 08:02
I have to fix some of the image links, but I wrote about the 870 20g as a HD shotgun.

In summary, if you are going to handicap yourself by taking an inferior shotgun of any type, over a carbine like an AR or AK, and you are going to limit yourself to room-size distances to justify the choice, then there is absolutely no need for a 12g. The 20 does everything you could possibly need a home defense shotgun to do, with lighter weight and easier manipulation.

Shotguns are for hunting rabbits and little birdies. But if you're going to get one anyway, in this application, the 20 is superior to the 12 in every way.

http://falfiles.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3688813#post3688813

W.E.G.
April 30, 2015, 08:04
If you feel a long gun is the correct choice for "home defense," explain why your choice is not an AR15.

The guns are cheap.

The ammo is cheap, and abundant.

Or, if you are just dead-set on a shot gun... Remember: Fire two blasts...

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/cIdKIM2btoA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

c0wb0y84
April 30, 2015, 08:45
Exactly! The 20ga limits you to #3 buck. The 12ga has many more possibilities. That is why I think it is more versatile.

Admittedly #3 buck is by far the most common and readily available but its not all there is. You can get any size shot that you can get in 12 ga, if you're going to limit yourself to buckshot. Because people are realizing the advantages that the 20ga offer more variety is now available.
http://wolfhillammo.com/20-gauge-specialty.aspx

c0wb0y84
April 30, 2015, 08:56
...and you are going to limit yourself to room-size distances to justify the choice,


That's the only size distances in my house. :rofl: Even if you extend out into my yard the distance of possible shots is still less than 20yds. I wish I lived somewhere that I could take 100+yd shots from my porch.


...if you are going to handicap yourself by taking an inferior shotgun of any type, over a carbine like an AR or AK,

There's some statistic floating around about most civilian encounters with guns occur in less than 3-5 shots (if memory serves me, if not then I apologize for passing misinformation). One aimed shot from a shotgun with #3 shot puts 20 .25 projectiles on target vs one aimed shot from an AR putting one .223 projectile on target. So after 5 shots you can have 100 projectiles on target or 5.

If you're planning for home defense then the limitations of your firearm should also be planned for (i.e. what happens after 5 shots)

SAFN49
April 30, 2015, 09:29
Admittedly #3 buck is by far the most common and readily available but its not all there is. You can get any size shot that you can get in 12 ga, if you're going to limit yourself to buckshot. Because people are realizing the advantages that the 20ga offer more variety is now available.
http://wolfhillammo.com/20-gauge-specialty.aspx

They have 5 choices of 20ga, and 22 choices for 12ga loads.

I would vote for this one :biggrin:

http://wolfhillammo.com/50bmgm17tracer-12gauge2-34sabot.aspx

c0wb0y84
April 30, 2015, 09:51
They have 5 choices of 20ga, and 22 choices for 12ga loads.

I would vote for this one :biggrin:

http://wolfhillammo.com/50bmgm17tracer-12gauge2-34sabot.aspx

Yes, more options because there's more room to shove stuff into. The point was that you aren't limited to just #3 buck.

I kinda want to get this
http://wolfhillammo.com/dragons-breath-ammo.aspx.

You know for starting campfires and stuff.

gunplumber
April 30, 2015, 09:56
One aimed shot from a shotgun with #3 shot puts 20 .25 projectiles on target vs one aimed shot from an AR putting one .223 projectile on target.

Do you think that a center-mass hit from a 5.56, or a 5.45, or a 7.62x39. or 12g, or 20g, is going to make a difference in the adversary's ability to continue the fight?

I suspect, at living room distances, any hit with any of the choices, is entirely adequate.

Change the distance and the evaluation changes.

c0wb0y84
April 30, 2015, 10:15
Do you think that a center-mass hit from a 5.56, or a 5.45, or a 7.62x39. or 12g, or 20g, is going to make a difference in the adversary's ability to continue the fight?

I suspect, at living room distances, any hit with any of the choices, is entirely adequate.

Change the distance and the evaluation changes.

No, I agree with you about a center mass hit. But what if due to being startled, suddenly awoken, or because of an adrenaline dump you wing the intruder? Strictly considering buckshot, if the center of the point of impact is anywhere above the waist, there's a good chance that a portion of the shot is hitting near center mass. Obviously this varies at range, leading to the need to practice regardless of what your choice is. Also there are many other variables that can affect which option is "best". Either way I hope to never have to find out first hand.

gunplumber
April 30, 2015, 10:31
No, I agree with you about a center mass hit. But what if due to being startled, suddenly awoken, or because of an adrenaline dump you wing the intruder? Strictly considering buckshot, if the center of the point of impact is anywhere above the waist, there's a good chance that a portion of the shot is hitting near center mass. Obviously this varies at range, leading to the need to practice regardless of what your choice is. Also there are many other variables that can affect which option is "best". Either way I hope to never have to find out first hand.

If the range is living-room distance, then it is unlikely the shot cup will have opened up yet. Hollywood depictions notwithstanding, shot placement with a rifle and a shotgun at close range are the same. At 25 meters, perhaps the larger spread of a shotgun will allow for hit that would have been a miss with a rifle. At 100 meters, then even good aim with a shotgun may result in a miss due to excessive dispersion.

Don't get me wrong - I like shotguns - I have a number of 870s, an 1100, and a couple Beretta O/Us - all in 20g. I sold my Noble 20g SxS. But I struggle to justify it as anything more than an entry-level (comparatively inexpensive) home defense weapon (20g 870 Youth with 21" barrel @ $300) with additional recreational and small game utility.

c0wb0y84
April 30, 2015, 10:56
Center mass was probably the wrong choice of words. But still, once again not scientific and different rounds will disperse differently, here's a generalized reference that I was basing comments on.

http://www.theboxotruth.com/the-box-o-truth-42-precision-shooting-with-buckshot/

And I'm not saying the shotgun is the end all be all, just shouldn't be discounted too much, and rabbit taste good.

Blackmore
May 01, 2015, 06:00
if you don't already have one, you can get a 20 gauge 870 express at Wal Mart for about $300. #3 or #4 buckshot is a decent choice for HD, and can be had for less than a buck a round. birdshot can be used for training and also small game hunting in same gun.

This is the best deal I've found for HD ammo for my Saiga 20. A little over 50’ a round plus shipping:

http://www.sgammo.com/product/20-gauge/25-rd-box-20-gauge-rio-9-pellet-buck-shot-ammo

9 pellets of #1 buckshot.

chet
May 01, 2015, 15:33
CQB and Home Defense are two separate concepts with different purposes and tactics. Generally speaking I think of CQB as intentionally going into an urban environment where the possibility of encountering a threat are high and you are pre-staged with weapon and ammo on your person and on your "A" game. Home defense in my view is sitting on your couch watching tv or asleep in your bed and an intruder interrupts at time when you are caught off guard, groggy, and barely awake. Different tools for different jobs.

Ok, for the sake of argument, let's grant your point that CQB and HD require different tools.

If the homeowner is condition white, how is a heavier, longer, slower to reload, limited capacity weapon with significantly more blast and recoil going to be "better" than a 6 lb carbine with a 30 round mag?

For all of this talk about payload, the single greatest inarguable advantage to be gained is very slightly increased probability of a hit. Even 15 pellet 00 3" Remmy's won't spread more than a couple inches at room distances. My Federal LE Flite Control 00 just makes one ragged hole.

Personally, I am not limited to one weapon, so discussion on ammo versatility for my HD weapon is just that: happy talk. Capacity is far more important once the gunfight starts (which, for someone, might be all the time they have left on this earth).

I have been down this path and have a beautiful 870 that is properly set up (Surefire, Knoxx, Trijicon, etc) to show for it. Hair will spontaneously sprout from your chest when you hold it. That's probably why my wife doesn't like it. Well, that and it's probably over 9 lbs loaded and it will wear you out after just a few drills. I'd love to swap it for another carbine or AR pistol, preferably a 9mm.

jeffrey
May 02, 2015, 10:40
Never experienced a life 'n death shooting "opportunity", thank God.
But adrenaline is a powerful drug, and from all I've heard, in that kind of stressful situation, you won't even feel the recoil.

The ultimate home defense weapon is between your ears, and #2 is whatever is close at hand.

c0wb0y84
May 02, 2015, 15:14
Ok, for the sake of argument, let's grant your point that CQB and HD require different tools.

If the homeowner is condition white, how is a heavier, longer, slower to reload, limited capacity weapon with significantly more blast and recoil going to be "better" than a 6 lb carbine with a 30 round mag?

For all of this talk about payload, the single greatest inarguable advantage to be gained is very slightly increased probability of a hit. Even 15 pellet 00 3" Remmy's won't spread more than a couple inches at room distances. My Federal LE Flite Control 00 just makes one ragged hole.

Personally, I am not limited to one weapon, so discussion on ammo versatility for my HD weapon is just that: happy talk. Capacity is far more important once the gunfight starts (which, for someone, might be all the time they have left on this earth).

I have been down this path and have a beautiful 870 that is properly set up (Surefire, Knoxx, Trijicon, etc) to show for it. Hair will spontaneously sprout from your chest when you hold it. That's probably why my wife doesn't like it. Well, that and it's probably over 9 lbs loaded and it will wear you out after just a few drills. I'd love to swap it for another carbine or AR pistol, preferably a 9mm.

1) Your shotgun is 3lbs too heavy in my opinion

2) Your carbine is 6lbs with a LOADED 30 rd mag?

3) Comparing to a carbine, the shotty may be 2-3" longer if that (due to barrel length and all else equal)

4) Capacity has been conceded and impact area has already been discussed above

5) Unless you're sleeping in a bandolier or a tac vest with mag pouches or wearing these around your house I think reloads can be disregarded.

6) The question was if the shotty was acceptable, not the best.

7) All you have to do is rack the shotty and the intruder will pee himself and run away. No shooting necessary. (joking of course)

From Gunssavelives.net (source and accuracy unknown)
http://gunssavelives.net/self-defense/analysis-of-five-years-of-armed-encounters-with-data-tables/

Number of Shots Fired
Average 2.2
Median 2
Mode 1
Max 20

Practice and be confident with what you have and you're ahead of the game. The best home defense gun is the quad .50. http://gallery.photo.net/photo/13451812-md.jpg

chet
May 02, 2015, 20:38
1) Your shotgun is 3lbs too heavy in my opinion


Mine is an 870 12g mag with 18" rifle sighted barrel, Knoxx, Surefire fore end, tube extension and side saddle. Capacity is 7 with 6 more in the side saddle. It's loaded with Remmy 3" 15 pellet 00 buck and slugs in the side saddle. Just put it on the scale and it came in just shy of 10 lbs. The only way to get an 870 close to 7 lbs is to completely unload it and drop the Surefire, which kinda defeats the purpose of an HD gun. You might cut down a 410 pump to 14" and end up with a loaded 6 lb shotgun though.


2) Your carbine is 6 lbs with a LOADED 30 rd mag?

Yep. Actually, just a shade under. 14" pencil middy AR with perm phantom, Aimpoint, Rock River entry stock and Surefire on a Magpul fore end.


3) Comparing to a carbine, the shotty may be 2-3" longer if that (due to barrel length and all else equal)

The two weapons I just described have almost 9" of difference in OAL. That's with the Knoxx collapsed.


4) Capacity has been conceded and impact area has already been discussed above

It άber relevant to your fifth point though.


5) Unless you're sleeping in a bandolier or a tac vest with mag pouches or wearing these around your house I think reloads can be disregarded.

Which is exactly why the shotgun simply falls off the scale in terms of viability. Even if you have the reloads nearby, the time necessary to conduct that procedure is a luxury that no one can bank on. (At least I won't.) In terms of number of chances to win the fight, the J frame snubbie is equivalent to the 870 in capacity.


6) The question was if the shotty was acceptable, not the best.


The OP asked if the 20 was an acceptable replacement for the 12 for HD. It presupposes the 12 is acceptable and if payload were the only metric, that might be a useful discussion.

It's like asking if a Honda Civic is better than a Nissan Maxima for Formula 1 racing.

As Mark and I have both discovered, there are half a dozen metrics that are exponentially more important in a gunfight than the payload in a shot cup. When folks ask questions like this, handing them the next few logical conclusions in this process actually helps them way more than it does us. Although I know you disagree with the premise, you can poll any of the 1000's of agencies that train to fight indoors for a living and see how many are using shotguns as primary weapons. It's not a lot these days. The only people who are really advocating the tactical shotgun anymore are the people who sell them. YMMV.



From Gunssavelives.net (source and accuracy unknown)
http://gunssavelives.net/self-defense/analysis-of-five-years-of-armed-encounters-with-data-tables/

Number of Shots Fired
Average 2.2
Median 2
Mode 1
Max 20


Heres to hoping anyone on this board that has to use a gun to defend themselves ends up in a below average gunfight against a below average opponent. :beer: According to every study I've ever read, the mode number of shots fired in self defense situations with a firearm is zero. But, if I used that data to select a firearm, then a loaded flintlock pistol appears to be overkill. That's the trouble with these statistics. The confirmation bias goes off the scale.

However, if you make everything subordinate to one metric, winning, and make the logical assumption that your opponent has too, the carbine is simple the best option by orders of magnitude.

SAFN49
May 02, 2015, 22:10
The average number of shots in a gun fight = 4

The only 2 guns I would take to a gunfight

Remington 870 12ga

Glock 17 with a +2 mag extension (Might need all 20 rounds.)

These are the only 2 guns that I have fired 10's of thousands of rounds through and never had a failure of any kind.

First choice

Remington 870 12ga, 9 .33" pellets @ 1325fps or a 1oz slug

There is no substitution for mass X velocity X diameter.

You get a center mass hit with 1oz, .73" diameter, @ > 1200fps you are going to feel the pain.

Reliability is more important than capacity.

c0wb0y84
May 03, 2015, 01:03
A Remington 870 express w/ synthetic stock and a 21" barrel in 20ga = 6lbs. Swap for a 18" barrel and you'll be around 6lbs loaded, SBS it and you're under 6.

Comparing your SBR to your shotgun I would choose the SBR as well, but I subscribe to the less is more approach when it comes to accessories and think you have way too much on the shotty.

As previously stated the capacity/reload argument is irrelevant in my situation.

We clearly value two different things in a HD weapon, and that's fine. What you refer to as payload IMO is the most important, not capacity. Extended engagements usually don't go well for defenders so end it quickly.

Outside of military organizations, carbines aren't the primary weapons being used indoors either.

I'm with SAFN49. Anything less than 50 yds I want a shotgun as I've concluded it will give me the greatest chance of "winning".

Invictus77
May 03, 2015, 06:19
Reliability is more important than capacity.

Truer words were never spoken :bow:

chet
May 03, 2015, 07:21
Comparing your SBR to your shotgun I would choose the SBR as well, but I subscribe to the less is more approach when it comes to accessories and think you have way too much on the shotty.

A flashlight? Kinda a given for an HD weapon, dontcha think? BTW, a 14" AR with a 2" perm flash isn't an SBR.:)


Outside of military organizations, carbines aren't the primary weapons being used indoors either.

Uh, wat?


I don't see the value in intentionally going to a gunfight at night, indoors with 4 or 5 shots and no flashlight. Conversely, if I had to pick an armed opponent, a guy armed like that would be one of my top choices, right behind Mr. Flintlock. :)

Like I said, I used to see the shotty as viable. Read some of my posts here. But, you run enough drills and scenarios and that value dissipates. Devotees generally can't back themselves out of the payload thing because that is really all the shotgun offers. Of course, you have to bet your life that you will land 50% of your shots if you happen to get 2 opponents. I don't think it is wise to operate under that assumption. The earth has rotated some since the advent of the pump shotgun. YMMV.


http://www.abc15.com/news/region-phoenix-metro/west-phoenix/pd-man-shot-in-w-phoenix-neighborhood


http://abc30.com/news/3-shot-1-killed-in-orosi-home-invasion-attempt/79635/





Best wishes for a successful outcome. Sincerely.

SAFN49
May 03, 2015, 08:17
Rifle vs Shotty The key points in bold. Hard to argue with real life shootings.
Shotty comes out on top. Accuracy and % actually incapacitated.

The centerfire rifles included ALL calibers that were used in shootings.
Rifle (all Centerfire)
# of people shot – 126
# of hits – 176
% of hits that were fatal – 68%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation – 1.4
% of people who were not incapacitated – 9%
One-shot-stop % – 58%
Accuracy (head and torso hits) – 81%
% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit) – 80%

Shotgun (All, but 90% of results were 12 gauge)
# of people shot – 146
# of hits – 178
% of hits that were fatal – 65%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation – 1.22
% of people who were not incapacitated – 12%
One-shot-stop % – 58%
Accuracy (head and torso hits) – 84%
% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit) – 86%

gunplumber
May 03, 2015, 08:25
Rifle vs Shotty The key points in bold. Hard to argue with real life shootings.
Shotty comes out on top. Accuracy and % actually incapacitated.

The centerfire rifles included ALL calibers that were used in shootings.
Rifle (all Centerfire)
# of people shot – 126
# of hits – 176
% of hits that were fatal – 68%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation – 1.4
% of people who were not incapacitated – 9%
One-shot-stop % – 58%
Accuracy (head and torso hits) – 81%
% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit) – 80%

Shotgun (All, but 90% of results were 12 gauge)
# of people shot – 146
# of hits – 178
% of hits that were fatal – 65%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation – 1.22
% of people who were not incapacitated – 12%
One-shot-stop % – 58%
Accuracy (head and torso hits) – 84%
% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit) – 86%

You sure have a funny way of interpreting data.

What your data shows is that a hit with a rifle is 3% more likely to incapacitate a person than a shotgun. And 3% more likely to kill than a shotgun.

Of course, your sampling is too small to make any real conclusions.

Really though, if you have some kind of emotional attachment to a shotgun, have at it. Just know you have to get really creative to rationalize it as a modern combat implement.

SAFN49
May 03, 2015, 08:51
You sure have a funny way of interpreting data.

What your data shows is that a hit with a rifle is 3% more likely to incapacitate a person than a shotgun. And 3% more likely to kill than a shotgun.

Of course, your sampling is too small to make any real conclusions.

Really though, if you have some kind of emotional attachment to a shotgun, have at it. Just know you have to get really creative to rationalize it as a modern combat implement.

I'll take the 86% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit) for the shotgun VS 80% for the centerfire rifle.

SAFN49
May 03, 2015, 09:28
Ballistic gel tests :uhoh:

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/rhZf_x8Esms?feature=player_detailpage" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Dr7dpEDNNC4?feature=player_detailpage" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

CivyBlue
May 03, 2015, 12:34
Wow....opened up a bees nest didn't I?

Anyway, for further debate I'm a rather slim fellow. 5'6 130 lbs.
That being said, I think 20 gauge would be better for length of pull.

As for capacity, I'm eyeing a Rem 870 20 gauge with mag extension for 7-8 rounds

Anyone approximately my height or weight wanna chime in?

chet
May 03, 2015, 15:10
Hard to argue with real life shootings.

Not really. It's called confirmation bias and it causes exactly the sort of tunnel vision we see in this thread. People will swing a purse like grandmother on PCP to defend their choices to others.

"Smart people believe weird things because they are skilled at defending beliefs they arrived at for non-smart reasons." - Michael Shermer, Skeptic Magazine EIC

Only the internet could tell someone with a straight face that a longer, heavier, slower gun with much less ammo is better than a shorter, lighter gun with exponentially more ammo, less recoil, and ease of operation.

Maybe someone will be along shortly to tell everyone that a purse is actually better than a 20 gauge based on internet argument performance. :rolleyes:

SAFN49
May 03, 2015, 17:45
Only the internet could tell someone with a straight face that a longer, heavier, slower gun with much less ammo is better than a shorter, lighter gun with exponentially more ammo, less recoil, and ease of operation.

:rolleyes:

When it comes to one shot stops, or stopping power, absolutely!!

There is a reason they carry 12 ga loaded with slugs in bear country, and not a poodle popper with a 30 rounds mag.

If someone is in your house, or trying to get in your house, you are not going to be clearing rooms and doing CQB by yourself. You will barricade yourself and wait for them to come to you. I've got all the time in the world, they don't.
If I only have 8 rounds, I will make them count.

chet
May 03, 2015, 19:08
When it comes to one shot stops, or stopping power, absolutely!!

There is a reason they carry 12 ga loaded with slugs in bear country, and not a poodle popper with a 30 rounds mag.

Are home invasions by bears a problem in your area? Because moving the goal posts is only half as silly as turning down a free lunch in a gunfight.




If someone is in your house, or trying to get in your house, you are not going to be clearing rooms and doing CQB by yourself. You will barricade yourself and wait for them to come to you. I've got all the time in the world, they don't.
If I only have 8 rounds, I will make them count.

I have children. I live in an area where response could take 20-30 minutes. I'm not waiting it out the master bedroom on the phone and letting them fend for themselves.

Why not poll some gun fight survivors that were packing single digit capacity weapons (who actually had rounds going both ways) and ask, "How many of you were glad you had less than 10 rounds when the fight started?" Maybe question 2 could be: "How many of you switched to a higher capacity weapon after your first gunfight?"

Nevermind, the folks who died with empty weapons or while conserving ammo won't be able to answer so the numbers are gonna be skewed.:D

c0wb0y84
May 03, 2015, 19:42
What the data posted by SAFN49 tells me is that the two options are close enough that the difference is insignificant. Length and weight of either guns can be manipulated to be equivalent with a 26" min w/o tax or shorter if you wanna pay. No I don't need a flashlight on a gun in my house. Yes I have trained with them and appreciate the use of them but find that they ruin night vision and stealth and give opponents a target and yes I have had a super eye burner flashlight in my face in a low/no light shoot house with simunitions and put rounds on target with the other guys hitting everything but me. Guess I was just lucky or whatever. While combat and Home defense are different things I'll still point out that every LE and Military organization that I know of have shotguns so apparently its not that hard to rationalize the usefulness of them. My bias is the result of my training and experience which is not infinite but still fairly considerable with all three weapon choices typically considered. Nothing has been presented here that I view as being relevant enough to justify claiming one choice being exponentially better by orders of magnitude or any other descriptor that sounds impressive to insert.


Civy, I'm taller than you but think that's a good choice. One other upgrade I would suggest is putting a tritium front bead on an 18in Remington factory barrel.

gunplumber
May 03, 2015, 19:57
When it comes to one shot stops, or stopping power, absolutely!!

Then shouldn't you choose a centerfire rifle?

centerfire rifle - % of people who were not incapacitated – 9%
shotgun - % of people who were not incapacitated – 12%

Isn't the lower number better?

c0wb0y84
May 03, 2015, 20:07
Then shouldn't you choose a centerfire rifle?

centerfire rifle - % of people who were not incapacitated – 9%
shotgun - % of people who were not incapacitated – 12%

Isn't the lower number better?

Mark,

This data is somewhat confusing as it also states "% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit) – rifle-80%: shotgun-86%" That's the thing with statistics. My dad worked with numbers his whole career and always said that when it came to statistics to tell someone what you wanted them to say and they could put the numbers together to support it.

gunplumber
May 03, 2015, 20:32
Yeah - that's my point. The data isn't useful. Too many variables. Too small a statistical sampling. Not enough data for SD. If I recall from my graduate school statistics class, standard deviation (sigma) of a probability distribution is the square root of its variance . But we're already slicing the data into multiple separate analytics. What was the age, health, and body-mass of your samples? Is an abdominal hit still center-mass? Is a 9 mm MP5 a centerfire rifle and is it compared as equivalent to a .308? What is the distance of the shotgun hits, the dispersion, and within that context, what is the cumulative Ek of the impact? In other words, is birdshot at 100 yards the same as a slug from 10 feet?

I'm not a math wizard, but until the sampling reaches 1000 of otherwise identical events, I'm not going to pay much attention to the conclusions.

SAFN49
May 03, 2015, 21:01
Then I would suggest using a Sierra match king .308 168gr round with a 98% one shot stop %. (The statistics on that round take into account sniper kills.)

So buy your standards everyone should be defending their home with a .308. Not long or heavy.

Of course the statistics take into account ALL the shootings with that particular round.

Using limited data you can extrapolate future performance. It is only the naysayers that use the excuse that there isn't enough data.

When hunting dangerous game, humans being the most dangerous, you want a .223 or something .50 or larger?

The centerfire rifle rounds also included 300 Win Mags.

You can get SD from 20 or less samples.

c0wb0y84
May 03, 2015, 21:16
Yeah - that's my point. The data isn't useful. Too many variables. Too small a statistical sampling. Not enough data for SD. If I recall from my graduate school statistics class, standard deviation (sigma) of a probability distribution is the square root of its variance . But we're already slicing the data into multiple separate analytics. What was the age, health, and body-mass of your samples? Is an abdominal hit still center-mass? Is a 9 mm MP5 a centerfire rifle and is it compared as equivalent to a .308? What is the distance of the shotgun hits, the dispersion, and within that context, what is the cumulative Ek of the impact? In other words, is birdshot at 100 yards the same as a slug from 10 feet?

I'm not a math wizard, but until the sampling reaches 1000 of otherwise identical events, I'm not going to pay much attention to the conclusions.

Yep. Although while the numbers themselves don't mean much, the similarities to the two tell be that there's not a significant difference between them. This makes since as if you can shoot accurately with a rifle then you can probably shoot accurately with a shotty and vice versa, also if you get incapacitated with a rifle then you likewise will also probably be incapacitated by the shotty. The speed, weight, length argument doesn't hold water to me as guns are so customizable that they can be equalized in those respects. Which then brings the discussion back to range and capacity. If someone considers this and determines that, for a specialized niche of the weapon, range will be restricted to the shorter end of the spectrum, then its back to capacity which has been discussed ad nauseam. Oh, that and price. I don't mention reliability here as its a requirement before the conversation begins. Either decision is useless without practice and both are good choices to me.

c0wb0y84
May 03, 2015, 21:20
Before an adequate sample size can be determined to infer statistical significance you have define the population size as well as % acceptable error. Typically the accepted min is around 100 or 10% of the pop size but this can vary.

I already said the best HD gun was the quad fifty. 83% of the time it gets the job done every time. (BTW 67% of all statistics are made up on the spot.)

SAFN49
May 03, 2015, 21:27
Now if you want to use probability tables, 2% will always be injured during any event and 2% won't be injured during the same event. It leaves 2% to 98%. If during known events 86% are incapacitated out of 98% probable. I will bet on that every time. I will further increase my odds by using a 12ga, to about 90% incapacitated, 10% not incapacitated, for a head or torso shot.

I will always stack the deck in my favor. I like to win.

gunplumber
May 04, 2015, 07:38
I like to win.

Sorry it hasn't been happening for you.

chet
May 04, 2015, 09:47
No I don't need a flashlight on a gun in my house.

My bad. I assumed we were talking about HD below the arctic circle. I kept dismissing all these posts about bears and lack of darkness but I got it now. Yogi is after my picnic basket in the land of the midnight sun. Check.

:whistling:



For the rest of us in the lower 48, here's one scenario that doesn't take mental gymnastics to consider:

* You and your family are at home asleep (last time you saw them).
* You hear a lot of noise and deduce there are multiple intruders in the home.
* You thought you saw an intruder, fired twice, and evidently missed.
* One of the intruders fired a shot.

There you go. That scenario has played out with minor variations hundreds of times in this country. I've already posted a few similar events and google is full of more of them. There is no component there that is far-fetched as a home defense scenario.

Me personally, I'd like to have a WML and more than 3 or 4 rounds to win that fight. If you can't see the need for more chances to win or the need to positively ID your targets before firing, then this thread is pointless.

People go to Vegas all the time and pick games with very low odds of winning. Some of them just pull up a stool so they can be comfortable while they lose. "This is my game. I love it. I am good at it." Lose. Lose. Lose. Win. "See! I told you." The ideas in this thread reflect that mentality.

c0wb0y84
May 04, 2015, 11:09
My bad. I assumed we were talking about HD below the arctic circle. I kept dismissing all these posts about bears and lack of darkness but I got it now. Yogi is after my picnic basket in the land of the midnight sun. Check.

:whistling:



For the rest of us in the lower 48, here's one scenario that doesn't take mental gymnastics to consider:

* You and your family are at home asleep (last time you saw them).
* You hear a lot of noise and deduce there are multiple intruders in the home.
* You thought you saw an intruder, fired twice, and evidently missed.
* One of the intruders fired a shot.

There you go. That scenario has played out with minor variations hundreds of times in this country. I've already posted a few similar events and google is full of more of them. There is no component there that is far-fetched as a home defense scenario.

Me personally, I'd like to have a WML and more than 3 or 4 rounds to win that fight. If you can't see the need for more chances to win or the need to positively ID your targets before firing, then this thread is pointless.

People go to Vegas all the time and pick games with very low odds of winning. Some of them just pull up a stool so they can be comfortable while they lose. "This is my game. I love it. I am good at it." Lose. Lose. Lose. Win. "See! I told you." The ideas in this thread reflect that mentality.

I don't understand why you keep pointing out possible situations. If it wasn't possible then this conversation would be pointless. It comes down to knowing your environment. Having been in these type situations (dark) in training for my job and being aware of what friendlies look like and where they are, IDing targets in the dark is easier than you think. Also living in the city even in the middle of the night my house is bright enough to make a flashlight unnecessary. If I lived in the woods where it actually got dark things would be different. If you notice I've continually been advocating that everyone find what is appropriate and what works for them. Not just assuming that what you like fits the bill in every situation for every person. Also preparing to come out on top is more than just getting the right gun and having lots of capacity (maybe 30rds isn't enough a 100rd drum might do it). I have dogs and an alarm system that says very loudly where the point of entry or exit from my house was made, among other things. The ideas in this thread reflect that this is a dynamic topic and there are many options. If it helps you feel better to make little jibes at those who disagree then fine but it does little to advance the conversation.

gunplumber
May 04, 2015, 11:17
If it helps you feel better to make little jibes at those who disagree then fine but it does little to advance the conversation.

Actually, he's been pretty methodical in debunking your assertions. It is difficult not to be amused by those who cling so desperately to their sacred cows.

If you hold the opinion that light is not a combat multiplier, and you can see in the dark just fine - well you can cling to that. But don't expect those who know better to refrain from chuckling at your folly.

While everyone is entitled to their opinion, all opinions are not equally valid.

SAFN49
May 04, 2015, 11:24
* You and your family are at home asleep (last time you saw them).
* You hear a lot of noise and deduce there are multiple intruders in the home.
* You thought you saw an intruder, fired twice, and evidently missed.
* One of the intruders fired a shot.

There you go. That scenario has played out with minor variations hundreds of times in this country. I've already posted a few similar events and google is full of more of them. There is no component there that is far-fetched as a home defense scenario.

Me personally, I'd like to have a WML and more than 3 or 4 rounds to win that fight. If you can't see the need for more chances to win or the need to positively ID your targets before firing, then this thread is pointless.

People go to Vegas all the time and pick games with very low odds of winning. Some of them just pull up a stool so they can be comfortable while they lose. "This is my game. I love it. I am good at it." Lose. Lose. Lose. Win. "See! I told you." The ideas in this thread reflect that mentality.

7 rounds of military 00 buck in the 870 = 9 .33" pellets moving at 1325 fps
Weight of 870 unloaded 6.98 pounds

AR15 20 rounds 55gr .223
Weight unloaded 6.75 pounds

Length within a couple inches of each other. Weight within 4 ounces of each other.

The reason you don't know if you hit the intruder is the .223" rounds zipped right through him and you didn't hit anything vital.

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/01/robert-farago/marine-223-may-not-be-lethal-enough-for-civilians/

http://i148.photobucket.com/albums/s30/djm540idjm540i/AR%20870_zpsgu4qit63.jpg (http://s148.photobucket.com/user/djm540idjm540i/media/AR%20870_zpsgu4qit63.jpg.html)

c0wb0y84
May 04, 2015, 14:37
Actually, he's been pretty methodical in debunking your assertions. It is difficult not to be amused by those who cling so desperately to their sacred cows.

If you hold the opinion that light is not a combat multiplier, and you can see in the dark just fine - well you can cling to that. But don't expect those who know better to refrain from chuckling at your folly.

While everyone is entitled to their opinion, all opinions are not equally valid.

What assertion have I made that has been debunked? Must've missed that. Also it seems that some ideas are being projected on me that I never made (re-read what I said about flashlights and perhaps you'll understand what I mean) and some assertions that I have made are being ignored. The most important one being that each environment and situation is different so find what works best for you, which is what I have done. For those "who know better and are chuckling at my folly" don't tell me which foot to step out with until you've walked in my shoes.

If you don't think my opinion is valid then what do you think of your own?

The 20 does everything you could possibly need a home defense shotgun to do, with lighter weight and easier manipulation.

gunplumber
May 04, 2015, 15:15
re-read what I said about flashlights and perhaps you'll understand what I mean

I did. "Also living in the city even in the middle of the night my house is bright enough to make a flashlight unnecessary. If I lived in the woods where it actually got dark things would be different."

We obviously experience different realities. Heck, I keep a flashlight on me for something as simple as finding a part under a workbench in a well-lit shop. I keep a flashlight in every room of the house, and with almost every rifle (on a QD mount, so I can take it off and use it separately).

To pretend there is any degree of outside light (even when the power goes out) that will make eschewing something as simple as a flashlight for night-time, that's just silly. It shows a complete lack of understanding of even the most rudimentary process for "clearing" a building in which there might be an intruder.

Here's a tip. HAVE a flashlight. You won't need it until you do.

each environment and situation is different so find what works best for you, which is what I have done

No, what you have done is to deliberately handicap yourself for whatever reason, and then desperately tried to rationalize your foolish choices. Personally, I don't give a rats ass what you do. I'm just using you as a sounding board to discuss principles for those who may benefit from it. And one of those principles is that on-demand illumination is a force-multiplier.

For those "who know better and are chuckling at my folly" don't tell me which foot to step out with until you've walked in my shoes.

I don't need to drive a pencil into my eye, to determine it is a bad idea. I won't walk in your shoes because I'm not a fool.

If you don't think my opinion is valid then what do you think of your own?

I differentiate between my opinion and fact. The FACT is that on-demand illumination is a decisive, proven, combat multiplier. My opinion is, that I should have that advantage available to me.

As to my quote, you really need a 4th grader to help you with that comprehension thing . .. .

Originally Posted by gunplumber
The 20 does everything you could possibly need a home defense shotgun to do, with lighter weight and easier manipulation (than a 12 gauge).

See - it's the context. Within the context of one choosing to handicap themselves with a shotgun instead of a rifle, the 20g meets the artificially-limited criteria, and is easier to handle than a 12.

http://falfiles.com/forums/showthread.php?t=359119

c0wb0y84
May 04, 2015, 15:40
Mark,

In this thread there has been only one instance where I claimed that I didn't need a flashlight. I never claimed that they weren't useful, or good to have, or needed in combat, just that I didn't need one, on a gun, in my house. If you read my statements then you already know this. Yes I own flashlights and keep them various places and use them. But I don't need one to walk through my house at night to identify someone who isn't supposed to be there. Now if I wanted to see what color their shirt was I would need one, not to see their silhouette. In my situation a home defense gun is for someone attacking me or my family. If they enter the house and run hide somewhere I'm not going to "clear" my house. I'm gathering the family and getting in an easily defensible location (which I want to do as stealthily as possible, no lights) and call the police (once again something that is specific to my current situation and not something that I universally apply) because at any point in time there is a cop within 2 miles of my house and as long as my family and I are away from said intruder and safe they can do whatever they want. There is only one other person in my house capable of getting up and walking around at night, and she sleeps right beside me. If she's not beside me and I hear something in the house I'm not grabbing my gun to go clear the rooms, I'm fussing at her for being so loud.

gunplumber
May 04, 2015, 16:07
In this thread there has been only one instance where I claimed that I didn't need a flashlight.

Actually, twice - posts 45 and 55. How many times must you make the assertion before I can counter it?

Nobody ever needs a flashlight . . . until they do.

Heck, I'll argue that that a flashlight is more important than a firearm at night. Adding a firearm doesn't remove the flashlight from the equation.

Now I will agree that a permanently mounted flashlight on a weapon has some drawbacks at some times. And having a separate flashlight has some drawbacks at some times. So I use QD mounts.

c0wb0y84
May 04, 2015, 16:19
Actually, twice - posts 45 and 55. How many times must you make the assertion before I can counter it?

Nobody ever needs a flashlight . . . until they do.

Heck, I'll argue that that a flashlight is more important than a firearm at night. Adding a firearm doesn't remove the flashlight from the equation.

Now I will agree that a permanently mounted flashlight on a weapon has some drawbacks at some times. And having a separate flashlight has some drawbacks at some times. So I use QD mounts.

Poor wording on my part. I have only made two posts in this thread making the same claim that in one specific situation i can accomplish what I intend to do without a flashlight. I didn't realize that you were countering my assertion about what I can do.

I would argue that a flashlight is more useful than a gun at night unless you are defending yourself. Then I'll take the gun.

gunplumber
May 04, 2015, 16:30
I would argue that a flashlight is more useful than a gun at night unless you are defending yourself. Then I'll take the gun.

They are not, as Chet and I have been saying, mutually exclusive.

c0wb0y84
May 04, 2015, 18:22
They are not, as Chet and I have been saying, mutually exclusive.

Obviously they are or every gun would be sold with a built in flashlight.

gunplumber
May 04, 2015, 18:58
Obviously they are or every gun would be sold with a built in flashlight.

You're obviously not doing so well at the grownup table. Do you want to try again, or is that the best you can do?

c0wb0y84
May 04, 2015, 19:14
You're obviously not doing so well at the grownup table. Do you want to try again, or is that the best you can do?

Why does this have to be reduced to personal jibes? I'll stick with what I said. Your comment about mutual exclusivity is incorrect as evidenced.

SAFN49
May 04, 2015, 23:25
I opt for no flashlight. I may not want to give away my position or make myself a target.

However certain opinions would make such a thought lunacy, because only the opinions expressed by that poster are acceptable and valid.
Any other opinion is sure death in a gun fight. Just like using a shotgun for self defense.

gunplumber
May 05, 2015, 07:37
Why does this have to be reduced to personal jibes?

Because your last comment was so stupid as to demand mocking and ridicule

I'll stick with what I said. Your comment about mutual exclusivity is incorrect as evidenced.

Ok then. But the fact that I have both a flashlight and a firearm, proves them not mutually (both together) exclusive (cannot have both together). Your continued insistence that they are, demonstrates you are a f-cking moron.

So if I have a flashlight, and then I pickup a firearm, the flashlight does not go "poof" into some other dimension. It's still there. And I can even turn it off and slip in the pocket of my robe.

c0wb0y84
May 05, 2015, 09:37
So instead of being mature and just stating that you think what I said was wrong and why, you resort to the juvenile actions of mocking and ridicule. Why, to prove a point? Self entertainment? Yet somehow I'm the one "not doing so well at the grown-up table."

And yes, I know realize that my comment about mutually exclusivity was incorrect. I had a moment of confusion due to the circularity of the argument and now realize that I objected to the wrong part of your statement.


Ok, I'll leave you gents to it then.

chet
May 05, 2015, 09:52
I don't understand why you keep pointing out possible situations.

I have been pointing to actual conditions in various gunfights. "Remember when" is a decidedly different way of coming to a conclusion than "what if".

If it helps you feel better to make little jibes

So far in this thread, I have heard about humans with owl-like night vision and bears. I've been told that ballistic minutia is paramount but capacity is irrelevant. I've listened to guys just blithely overlook the reality of recoil management, flash, and the physical requirements of fighting indoors. Humor isn't exactly alien to this thread.

It comes down to knowing your environment.

No, it doesn't. That is not enough. It's never enough. It's one advantage that can easily be overcome by any number of factors. Heck, I got over the home defense shotgun theory with one simple condition: multiple attackers and two misses on my part. Knowing my environment doesn't change the number of potential chances to win the fight left in my shotgun after two simple misses.

.223" rounds zipped right through him and you didn't hit anything vital

And yet, you also posted some data earlier that says rifles and shotguns have nearly identical rates of incapacitation. So, this is where Mark and I both probably move from chuckle to full blown guffaw. You guys are so busy dismissing simple information, you haven't realized when you start disputing your own information. It's like refusing to realize you have a weight problem. The numbers are what they are.

Length within a couple inches of each other. Weight within 4 ounces of each other.

Heck, both of you guys keep making this assertion and even if I dismiss what I can read on my own measuring tape, scales AND the manufacturers published information and just grant your point………..why in the heck would I pick up the weapon with 7 shots instead of the weapon with 30? Oh yeah, payload! No, wait, I have data from SAFN that says EITHER weapon will take less than 2 rounds to stop the threat on average. Assuming no misses, the shotgun gives me, on average, 3 chances to stop 3 attackers. The rifle gives me 15 chances. No brainer.

Obviously they are or every gun would be sold with a built in flashlight.

You can't expect a serious response to this, can you?

I'm not going to "clear" my house

But then in the very next sentence, you refute yourself:

I'm gathering the family and getting in an easily defensible location

That "gathering process" is going to require you to clear the area between your bedroom, the kids bedroom, and wherever you decide to hole up, which also needs to be cleared. And, I dunno about you, but I have run this drill. My wife and kids didn't silently stack up like ducklings behind me. I quickly figured out that moving them simply exposes them to more danger. Run this scenario with a helpful friend and some airsoft guns. Even with a single intruder, I found myself unable to engage him and secure cover for my family at the same time. I had to move through areas multiple times (I have multiple kids). Every time I tried to pie off a door, my kids were at my feet preventing me from moving back to cover if I needed to. It sucks. It sucks. It sucks. Dont take my word for it. Set up some scenarios in your house and try it. Make a promise to be brutally honest with yourself and give it a whirl.


My lessons?

After a lot of drills, scenarios, and just "air guitar" role playing, ironically, my findings were very similar to a lot of post-Columbine police tactics and good ol' CQB:


Every intruder is assumed to have lethal intentions and the means to accomplish it.
The intruder is relying on maintaining the initiative and violence of action to accomplish his purpose.
"Sheltering in place" is no different than setting up a perimeter for an active shooter. It gives him a free fire zone, concealment to maneuver and the ability to engage you from concealment (if you live in a stickbuilt house).
By the same token, the "average police response time" simply grants him/them a minimum amount of time to accomplish their objective unhindered.
If there is any family at home with you, it is highly possible they become aware of the attacker before you do and have to move or are moved by the attacker BEFORE YOU ARE EVEN IN THE GAME. (What a revelation that was!)
Darkness simply reduces a fighting man's effectiveness. I dont care who you are or how many carrots you eat, darkness diminishes performance. Flashlights ameliorate that. Darkness still sucks, though not as much. So, flashlights. Do it.
Without argument, the number of rounds in the weapon represents the immediate number of chances to win the fight. The odds of every game, every contest, every struggle is predicated on that one numeric: how many chances do you have to win?


I came to more conclusions about calling 911 (no one ever does unless they know there is an actual threat) and how to make that determination (nigh impossible from under the covers). Getting up and moving towards the bump in the night is natural, expected, and necessary. Doing it with a gun that allows you to ID the threat and have lots of chances to win is just…….logical.

gunplumber
May 05, 2015, 10:18
So instead of being mature and just stating that you think what I said was wrong and why, you resort to the juvenile actions of mocking and ridicule. Why, to prove a point? Self entertainment? Yet somehow I'm the one "not doing so well at the grown-up table."

I used to teach 6th grade. One of the subjects was pre-algebra. It is difficult for students who had yet to master their multiplication tables (a 4th grade task), to handle algebra. That's why the basics are taught first.

At some point, I had to just pull the kid from the class and have him in concentrated remedial training. You're not a kid. There is a certain level of logical thought that I expect from an adult male. Without it, further discussion is useless - leaving nothing but entertainment value. You're like Larry, Moe, and Curly carrying a long plank. We KNOW what's going to happen next . . .

And yes, I know realize that my comment about mutually exclusivity was incorrect.

Not just incorrect, but so incredibly stupid, that I figured you'd had a reading comprehension failure. So I gave you an out - to rephrase. But no, you doubled down. (sigh!)

In the real world, people who say stupid things are mocked and ridiculed. They are not given special exemptions as "equally valid alternate opinions." That may have been the indoctrination of your youth, but you were supposed to have disavailed yourself of those notions upon issuance of your man-card.

gunplumber
May 05, 2015, 10:25
Without argument, the number of rounds in the weapon represents the immediate number of chances to win the fight. The odds of every game, every contest, every struggle is predicated on that one numeric: how many chances do you have to win?

"I wish I didn't have all this ammo," said nobody in a gunfight, ever.

chet
May 05, 2015, 11:04
And while we are tossing sacred cows on the altar, let me share something I am still "evolving" on:

I think there is a lot to be said for pistol caliber carbines and machine pistol semi clones. Firing BOTH intermediate cartridge carbines and shotgun loads indoors just sucks. It's hard to relate how bad it sucks and how different shots from different positions can do bad stuff to you. I know it sounds weird, but I have taken the same shot from the same position on different days and had dissimilar experiences. I don't know how to explain that. I don't know how to plan for that (other than active hearing protection).

A pistol caliber carbine eliminates a good bit of that problem. A pistol caliber carbine arguably works better in that regard than a suppressed SBR in 5.56. I doesn't give up much of anything in terms of acceptable ballistics (it only takes about 7" of barrel to max out a 9mm) ………until you introduce an opponent wearing a vest. Unfortunately, vests are only going to get more prevalent. We have seen two events, nationally, just this week (and yes, I understand that is over-representing the issue statistically):

If this kid had a cheap rifle instead of a .22 pistol, this story would have turned out lots differently:

http://www.wyff4.com/news/Police-chief-Teen-was-prepared-to-ambush-Cornelius-officer/32806150

So, does choosing a pistol caliber carbine (or a shotgun) just forego the reality that I may face an opponent with a $100 surplus vest? Is it worth the upside in terms of a more manageable weapon? I don't know. I haven't run the idea all the way out. If you take the vest possibility out of the equation, I think a pistol caliber carbine/ MP clone is near top of the list though.

chet
May 05, 2015, 11:24
"I wish I didn't have all this ammo," said nobody in a gunfight, ever.


:D (check the 9:00 minute mark. I tried to embed starting at 9minutes and failed. )

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/qzMx3Z5EbQQ?feature=player_detailpage" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>