Great Shotgun vs AR talk...

[GearFondler]

I really enjoy Rhett's take on these things... A lot of logical arguments in favor of the 12g for personal defense.

https://youtu.be/Vwi_EBPbwI8

[Phaedrus]

Thanks for the link! I subscribe and have notifications turned on but often I don't notified anyway.

[GJM]

Rhett has created a specific scenario, where his incredible skill with his specialized method, delivers persuasive results. Take 100 homeowners, have them run the same drill trying to neutralize three bad guys with the stock-less pump, and then a conventional stocked AR, and I suspect we would come to a different conclusion. Add in some target movement, and some target missing, and even with a stocked pump, I suspect the result would skew even more to the conventional magazine fed carbine.

Now, if the question is whether a conventionally stocked semi auto shotgun like the 1301, loaded with good buck, is a better home defense choice than an AR, we can have a lively debate where reasonable people disagree.

[Phaedrus]

I know he's involved in medicine in some capacity so he likely has good knowledge of wounding, BUT I take great issue with assessment of the various rounds. Never have I heard a credible source indicate that it takes on the average three to five rounds of modern, duty-type ammo from an AR to incapacitate a person! I can't imagine anyone absorbing that many 115gr HP/SP .300 Blackout rounds nor Mk262 5.56 rounds before being out of the fight. Plus, he's a strong advocate of .22LR for CCW so I don't even understand where he's coming from when he discusses gunfighting. Love the guy, though! He's obviously immensely skilled and a real innovator from a technique perspective.

[4RNR]

I can't imagine anyone absorbing that many 115gr HP/SP .300 Blackout rounds nor Mk262 5.56 rounds before being out of the fight.

There was a police shooting in NY where the NYPD pumped 20+ rounds into the guy and he was still alive afterwards. This was late 2000s maybe 2009?!?!?

There was a SF guy that took like a dozen rifle hits. He was talking about it on a podcast a few years ago.

I personally know a guy who in the early 90s took six 7.62x39 rounds to the chest and the guy who shot those didn't walk away from the fight.

And there was a man who survived both atomic bombs!

Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk

[Borderland]

I'm tired of the shotgun/carbine/pistol home defense debate.

I've never see anyone at the range running their stockless shotguns. On the other hand I see plenty of people running drills with pistols. We don't have a range that accommodates carbine drills but plenty of people are on the firing line lighting up the 200 yd plates. We also have trap and something that resembles SC but no stockless shotguns allowed there.

So where do these people with stockless shotguns go to drill? Or do they?

[YVK]

I am on call and don't have 24 min. TLDR version?

[YVK]

There was a SF guy that took like a dozen rifle hits...

I personally know a guy who in the early 90s took six 7.62x39 rounds to the chest and the guy who shot those didn't walk away from the fight.



If the first guy is the same I am thinking about, he took 16. But his body armor stopped 11. Was the guy who took six AK hits armored up?

[4RNR]

If the first guy is the same I am thinking about, he took 16. But his body armor stopped 11. Was the guy who took six AK hits armored up?No. Balkans, house to house fighting.

The NY guy was a club scene if I remember correctly.

EDIT. here it is. Granted it's a mess of a shooting. Every side got something.

https://www.smh.com.au/world/man-survives-after-being-shot-21-times-in-gunfight-20100810-11ukw.html

Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk

[WobblyPossum]

I know he's involved in medicine in some capacity so he likely has good knowledge of wounding, BUT I take great issue with assessment of the various rounds. Never have I heard a credible source indicate that it takes on the average three to five rounds of modern, duty-type ammo from an AR to incapacitate a person! I can't imagine anyone absorbing that many 115gr HP/SP .300 Blackout rounds nor Mk262 5.56 rounds before being out of the fight. Plus, he's a strong advocate of .22LR for CCW so I don't even understand where he's coming from when he discusses gunfighting. Love the guy, though! He's obviously immensely skilled and a real innovator from a technique perspective.

I don’t think it’s possible to scientifically determine how many rounds of a certain type of ammunition it takes to physiologically stop someone since most stops are psychological. I can say the training I’ve received in the military, law enforcement, and the private sector generally leans towards the idea of three to six rounds per threat. Unless you’re hitting the brain or the spine with your rounds, what you’re doing is causing bleeding. You’re letting air in and letting blood out. If some determined adversary isn’t going to be a psychological stop, and you fail to hit the spine or brain, then they’re going to fight you until their blood pressure drops to the point that they fall over. It doesn’t much matter what small arm you shot them with, you’re going to have to keep shooting until they stop. If you’re counting on your chosen 5.56 defensive load to reliably physiologically incapacitate determined adversaries in one or two shots, I highly recommend you research terminal ballistics a little more.

I believe the Navy SEAL some folks have mentioned is Michael Day. He entered a room and immediately took fire from three different hostiles using AK-47s. He soaked up a lot of bullets. Then he killed those guys.

ETA: back when Tom Givens was still based in Memphis, he would hear from ER staff about some of the gunshot victims that were brought in to the local level 1 trauma centers. I can’t remember if this is something he wrote or something that he stated during the class I took with him about five years ago, but at the time the highest number of handgun rounds the doctors removed from the heart of someone who ended up surviving was 6. Human beings are pretty damn resilient.

[Phaedrus]

Just so everyone understands, the Japanese guy didn't survive two direct hits by the nukes.:eek: He was something like a mile from the blast IIRC. Of course, no point wasting buckshot at a guy that's nuke-proof! Aside from the interesting non-specific anecdotes being entertaining I'm not sure what they tell. Guys in the American Civil War survived amputations by cannonball, one stewardess survived a fall from 35,000 feet when her plane broke up and one claims to have been hit by lightning seven times. Great stories all!

[Phaedrus]

EDIT. here it is. Granted it's a mess of a shooting. Every side got something.

https://www.smh.com.au/world/man-survives-after-being-shot-21-times-in-gunfight-20100810-11ukw.html

Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk

No mention of any of the hits being rifle rounds, or any mention of specifics at all (eg where he was hit, with what, if he was still fighting back, etc). It's just kind of a "cool story, bro" story.

[Phaedrus]

If you’re counting on your chosen 5.56 defensive load to reliably physiologically incapacitate determined adversaries in one or two shots, I highly recommend you research terminal ballistics a little more.

I don't load my carbine with just one round. If you load your 12ga with just one round maybe you need to research terminal ballistics a little more as well.

Since we seem to drifting well off topic, let me remind everyone that when defensive gun use is discusses it's irrelevant if the adversary survives, only that they stop what they're doing.

[JCN]

When I was hatching my self defense plan a few years back I came up with a suppressed 5.56 bullpup as my secondary (Glock 19 bedside as primary).

I discounted shotguns because they couldn’t be suppressed.

Fast forward a couple years to today…

I just ordered a shotgun suppressor….

[4RNR]

No mention of any of the hits being rifle rounds, or any mention of specifics at all (eg where he was hit, with what, if he was still fighting back, etc). It's just kind of a "cool story, bro" story.Well being it was cops I'm going to go out on a limb and say it was handguns, most likely 9mm. Most likely from Sig 226 or Glock.

How many news stories do you know that list specifics like caliber, where shot, .....etc...

Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk

[GJM]

A 12 gauge Brenneke shotgun slug is about .68 caliber and 500 grains. I haven’t tried to figure how buckshot compares, but it is also a massive payload compared to each round of 5.56. I don’t think the discussion is whether buck and slugs are equivalent to a round of 5.56, because an informed person understands they are not, and round for round, the shotgun is significantly more decisive. The question is what tool is best for your environment, anticipated scenario and skill set.

[WobblyPossum]

I don't load my carbine with just one round. If you load your 12ga with just one round maybe you need to research terminal ballistics a little more as well.

Who mentioned anything about loading any gun with only a single round? No one is debating whether a single-shot rifle or single shot-shotgun is better.


Since we seem to drifting well off topic, let me remind everyone that when defensive gun use is discusses it's irrelevant if the adversary survives, only that they stop what they're doing.

I don’t see this discussion as off topic at all. The premise of the video was how to efficiently stop a hostile. Discussions on whether you can actually stop someone with your chosen weapon are totally on topic.

Reread the first paragraph of my initial reply. I was specifically addressing the ways you stop a hostile. There are only two ways: psychologically or physiologically. We aren’t generally worried about psychological stops because it generally doesn’t matter where you shot someone or with what you shot them with if they’re going to be a psychological stop. It’s the physiological stops we’re worried about. There’s central nervous system stops (brain or spine shots that cause immediate cessation of hostilities), circulatory system stops (cause enough bleeding that their brain can’t get oxygen and they pass out), or skeletal stops (mobility kills like shattering the pelvis won’t stop someone from pulling a trigger but it’ll stop them from getting any closer to you which might be enough depending on their weapon and your ability to find cover).

[Phaedrus]

We very rarely get great details from the news. So mostly we hear from your uncle that was in Nam, the guy who's brother's cousin's best friend was dating an ER doc, etc. It's pretty tough to find a lot of specifics sometimes. The best resource I've found has been the great meta-study by Greg Ellifritz. Shotguns have the best "stopping power" (the phrase is meaningless but the best term we have) but by a more slender margin than many would suppose. It's not wise to expect an adversary to be instantly incapacitated by any man-portable arms system with a single shot, and I don't train as though it's expected. No matter if I'm using a 12ga or a 5.56 carbine I will expect that more than a round will be needed.

Naturally the needs of individual users will vary. The 12ga is a great option, and indeed I have a pretty nice shotgun myself. I also have carbines, rifles and handguns. Each has applications where they excel.

[Navin Johnson]

It's the singer not the song......

[GJM]

We very rarely get great details from the news. So mostly we hear from your uncle that was in Nam, the guy who's brother's cousin's best friend was dating an ER doc, etc. It's pretty tough to find a lot of specifics sometimes. The best resource I've found has been the great meta-study by Greg Ellifritz. Shotguns have the best "stopping power" (the phrase is meaningless but the best term we have) but by a more slender margin than many would suppose. It's not wise to expect an adversary to be instantly incapacitated by any man-portable arms system with a single shot, and I don't train as though it's expected. No matter if I'm using a 12ga or a 5.56 carbine I will expect that more than a round will be needed.

Naturally the needs of individual users will vary. The 12ga is a great option, and indeed I have a pretty nice shotgun myself. I also have carbines, rifles and handguns. Each has applications where they excel.

To help understand your perspective, do you have much hunting experience?

[Phaedrus]

Who mentioned anything about loading any gun with only a single round?

In point of fact, you did:


If you’re counting on your chosen 5.56 defensive load to reliably physiologically incapacitate determined adversaries in one or two shots, I highly recommend you research terminal ballistics a little more.

Combing through my posts I see nothing that indicates I ever claimed that one round of 5.56 ammo would always do the job. Presumably you were just creating a straw man or maybe you simply misunderstood me? My research of wound ballistics is pretty extensive although I'm not an expert in the field, just an amateur. I've probably read the same things you have (although you may have professional connections that I don't, affording access to material that's not been published). Nothing I've seen published nor anything I've seen in the field back when I hunted regularly would ever lead me to expect a one-shot incapacitation. This includes big bore dangerous game rifles, shotguns with buckshot and heavy shotgun slugs.

If we're still trying to discuss the OP, I wonder if it's the only video you've watched by Rhett? I have long followed him. He's a wizard with many kinds of guns and very innovative, and I'd love to take a class from him. He also has a habit of staking out positions in one video only to advocate the exact opposite in another. It's sometimes hard to know what he believes and how much stuff he says just to draw views.

[Phaedrus]

To help understand your perspective, do you have much hunting experience?

Quite extensive, but all dated. I hunted for 30 years buthaven't fired a shot at an animal in many years. I grew up in the sticks and everyone hunted, so I started about the time I could walk. However, my dad passed ten summers back, and after he did I lost all interest in hunting. It just won't be the same without him. Although my buddy has been trying to get me to get bear tags with him, and I have never drawn an Elk tag so if anything was to get me back out there it might be that.

[Phaedrus]

GRRR! Having trouble with lags in the forum software, sorry! It's uncertain just what I'll be able to shoot pending resolution of my surgery. My right shoulder was wrecked in a fall and surgically repaired in early April. The surgeon and my PT guy doesn't think it's safe to start back with the shotgun just yet, and I am getting the sense that my use of the arm is going to be more limited than I had hoped. Down the road the shoulder may need replacement and then I might have more mobility and strength. My PT team thinks I will probably be able to shoot my Beretta before the end of the year. The problem is that my arm was dislocated out the back, taking about 30% of the bone out as it went. So certain things (bench press, pushups, heavy recoil, etc) run the risk of dislocating the shoulder again. The docs are encouraging me to get back out hiking again (one of my main passions outside of shooting) and it's safe to use trekking poles, etc. But it's unclear what my physical limitations will be. That's one thing that has me intrigues about Rhett's technique. It might be that putting a bird's-head grip on the 1301 might move the shock out of the shoulder and into the springs/arms in a way that will let me do a bit more.

[WobblyPossum]

In point of fact, you did:

Combing through my posts I see nothing that indicates I ever claimed that one round of 5.56 ammo would always do the job. Presumably you were just creating a straw man or maybe you simply misunderstood me?

I didn’t create any straw men here. I was specifically referring to this statement from your initial post:


Never have I heard a credible source indicate that it takes on the average three to five rounds of modern, duty-type ammo from an AR to incapacitate a person! I can't imagine anyone absorbing that many 115gr HP/SP .300 Blackout rounds nor Mk262 5.56 rounds before being out of the fight.

If you can’t imagine someone taking that many (3-5) rounds before they’re out of the fight, then you’re expecting the fight to end in 1-2 rounds per person, right? That’s the logical inference from the context of that statement.


My research of wound ballistics is pretty extensive although I'm not an expert in the field, just an amateur. I've probably read the same things you have (although you may have professional connections that I don't, affording access to material that's not been published). Nothing I've seen published nor anything I've seen in the field back when I hunted regularly would ever lead me to expect a one-shot incapacitation. This includes big bore dangerous game rifles, shotguns with buckshot and heavy shotgun slugs.

With the knowledge and experience you’re coming into the discussion with, why is it so hard to imagine someone still being in the fight after taking 3-5 modern rifle rounds?


If we're still trying to discuss the OP, I wonder if it's the only video you've watched by Rhett? I have long followed him. He's a wizard with many kinds of guns and very innovative, and I'd love to take a class from him. He also has a habit of staking out positions in one video only to advocate the exact opposite in another. It's sometimes hard to know what he believes and how much stuff he says just to draw views.

I’ve watched most of the videos on Rhett’s YouTube channel but wouldn’t say I’ve been following him for long. Personally I’m more interested in his work with the Phlster Enigma than the cheek pistol/shotgun stuff. I didn’t find anything he said in this video to be really out there, I just happen to have come to different conclusions in that I don’t think the cheek shotgun is an awesome defensive firearm for the average person. Then again, I’ve never messed around with a cheek shotgun or a cheek pistol.

[Phaedrus]

With the knowledge and experience you’re coming into the discussion with, why is it so hard to imagine someone still being in the fight after taking 3-5 modern rifle rounds?

Because it's vanishingly rare. It can happen, and if I stated it was "impossible" then clearly I misspoke. Certainly it's possible to take five rounds of 00 buckshot and still be in the fight, humans are resilient. Are we still arguing? I'm not sure what if any position you actually hold. What do you want me to say to make everything better for you? I'm not trying to upset you at all.

[WobblyPossum]

Because it's vanishingly rare. It can happen, and if I stated it was "impossible" then clearly I misspoke. Certainly it's possible to take five rounds of 00 buckshot and still be in the fight, humans are resilient. Are we still arguing? I'm not sure what if any position you actually hold. What do you want me to say to make everything better for you? I'm not trying to upset you at all.

I didn’t think we were arguing to begin with, I thought we were having a discussion. I thought my point was pretty clear from my first two posts on this topic. I seem to be frustrating you so I’ll just bow out of this thread.

[Phaedrus]

I guess it's kind of frustrating trying to figure out what you're trying to say. No need to bow out unless you don't really have a point to make. Circling back to actual subject of the video, a comparison can be made between a shotgun and an AR for a variety of purposes. A single round of 12ga 00 buck is more effective than a single round ____________, that's the point Rhett seems to be making and possibly your assertion? I don't want to put words in anyone's mouth. I agree that against a soft/unarmored target a single round of buckshot can be more effective at least at certain ranges and in some circumstances. Of course there's a lot more factors involved in choosing a weapon than just terminal ballistics. Presumably Rhett knows that and probably you do, too.

Thankfully I have never shot a human being! Hopefully it will stay that way. I've seen a single round just about everything not crew served fail, including 12ga buck, 12ga slugs, and various rounds from 6mm on up to .338 Win Mag so I never take it for granted that one round is enough. By fail I don't mean failing to kill, just failing to do it in a timely fashion.

[breakingtime91]

I love shot guns and what they bring to the table. With that said my background with carbines have swung me back that direction. I just know how to handle a carbine in combat and not enough time or money to get to that skill set with a shot gun. I still think within 30 yards a slug or flight control buckshot is quite persuasive

[03RN]

I know he's involved in medicine in some capacity so he likely has good knowledge of wounding, BUT I take great issue with assessment of the various rounds. Never have I heard a credible source indicate that it takes on the average three to five rounds of modern, duty-type ammo from an AR to incapacitate a person! I can't imagine anyone absorbing that many 115gr HP/SP .300 Blackout rounds nor Mk262 5.56 rounds before being out of the fight. Plus, he's a strong advocate of .22LR for CCW so I don't even understand where he's coming from when he discusses gunfighting. Love the guy, though! He's obviously immensely skilled and a real innovator from a technique perspective.

Just because you can't imagine something, doesn't mean we haven't seen it.
79596

[Phaedrus]

Just because you can't imagine something, doesn't mean we haven't seen it.
79596

Which one was he shot with, 77gr OTM or 110gr .300 Blackout?

[breakingtime91]

Which one was he shot with, 77gr OTM or 110gr .300 Blackout? I ask because you didn't mention which it was but since you quoted me specifically it must be one of those two.

You are looking for absolutes where there are none in terminal ballistics or someone's willingness to live. A SME who is no longer on this website because the people that have joined over the years noted how some people went down with one round (he even noted the round as 77gr otm) and how another combatant took several 77 grain otm, even one to the face, and still lived. He was an seal and has a lot of combat experience. My small experience compared to his, I have to conure. Some guys we took down took several rounds of 7.62 from a 240 to the chest and still needed another burst to get to stop. We also had a guy hit by a 25mm he round that blew off both his legs. He crawled, with his rifle in tow, for 500m before he bled out. Never stopped moving or have up his rifle. Some people die easy, Some people don't. Pistol, shotgun, or rifle, shoot them until they do not need to be shot anymore.

[03RN]

Which one was he shot with, 77gr OTM or 110gr .300 Blackout?

So you think otm bullets would make a difference? :rolleyes:

Fwiw he continued to fight after 7 rounds from an AK and a couple grenades. But I guess with your experience he would have stopped after 2 rounds from you .300 blackout.

Inside 50 yards where I was able to see the results of 855 I was pretty impressed but everyone still shot everyone to the ground and it usually took 3-5 rounds. Whereas my shotgun only needed a second round if I missed or was far enough away the shitty buckshot opened up to much. When I wasn't using my shotgun I was on my SAW and was pretty happy with what a burst could do.

[breakingtime91]

So you think otm bullets would make a difference? :rolleyes:

Fwiw he continued to fight after 7 rounds from an AK and a couple grenades. But I guess with your experience he would have stopped after 2 rounds from you .300 blackout.

Inside 50 yards where I was able to see the results of 855 I was pretty impressed but everyone still shot everyone to the ground and it usually took 3-5 rounds. Whereas my shotgun only needed a second round if I missed or was far enough away the shitty buckshot opened up to much. When I wasn't using my shotgun I was on my SAW and was pretty happy with what a burst could do.

Crazy what a burst from a saw can do. Never noticed much difference between a saw and a 240 for incapicafion. Was nice to use the 240 for longer range though :cool:

[Phaedrus]

You are looking for absolutes where there are none in terminal ballistics or someone's willingness to live. A SME who is no longer on this website because the people that have joined over the years noted how some people went down with one round (he even noted the round as 77gr otm) and how another combatant took several 77 grain otm, even one to the face, and still lived. He was an seal and has a lot of combat experience. My small experience compared to his, I have to conure. Some guys we took down took several rounds of 7.62 from a 240 to the chest and still needed another burst to get to stop. We also had a guy hit by a 25mm he round that blew off both his legs. He crawled, with his rifle in tow, for 500m before he bled out. Never stopped moving or have up his rifle. Some people die easy, Some people don't. Pistol, shotgun, or rifle, shoot them until they do not need to be shot anymore.

No, I'm really not looking for absolutes but I'm looking for some intellectual honesty and not finding it in the responses. Unless I misunderstand the purpose of this thread (and maybe I don't) we're talking about civilian defensive use of the shotgun vs the AR. If a guy can take a 25mm round that blew off both legs then why should I believe that 00 buckshot is a death ray or would work better? Partly it's because one thread was chopped up and moved to three different threads which makes it hard to figure out, I'll grant. But since no one reads them all (or even this entire thread) there's an insinuation that a home invader shot with 12ga 00 is DRT while you're lucky to stop him with a mag full of 5.56 which is demonstrably idiotic. I've seen deer run hundreds of yards with no heart and almost no lungs after taking 3 x .30 cal bullets so yeah, I'm aware there's no way to immobilize a mammal instantly that doesn't involve the CNS, I thought everyone here knew at least that much. If someone breaks down my door and I have to shoot him, the relevant issue is whether I can stop him or drive him out of my home. I've discussed the 5.56 with several dozens of guys that were SEALs, Delta, and Green Beret in the course of my employment, as well and quite a few Marines and some Army infantry. They don't all speak glowingly of the current military loadings in 5.56 but most of them felt it generally did a pretty good job. And of course, I am not limited to FMJ. Although there are some 6.8 rifles out there and maybe .300 Blackout I haven't heard anyone report of their usefulness in combat.

Again, civilian shootings don't seem to mirror the tales I hear from "over there." There are some tough and resourceful criminals but as a rule if they're still coming after folks after getting their legs blown off it's not showing up in the news. So let me understand if this is what you're flat out saying- a rifle is not sufficiently potent to serve as a home defense weapon?

[Phaedrus]

So you think otm bullets would make a difference? :rolleyes:

Fwiw he continued to fight after 7 rounds from an AK and a couple grenades. But I guess with your experience he would have stopped after 2 rounds from you .300 blackout.

Inside 50 yards where I was able to see the results of 855 I was pretty impressed but everyone still shot everyone to the ground and it usually took 3-5 rounds. Whereas my shotgun only needed a second round if I missed or was far enough away the shitty buckshot opened up to much. When I wasn't using my shotgun I was on my SAW and was pretty happy with what a burst could do.


I don't have a .300 Blackout but yeah, as a rule while hunting I've found OTM bullets to be pretty effective, especially compared to FMJ. Again, I haven't heard a lot of good reports of 855 but luckily I'm not required to use that in my personal carbine. Thanks for your service.

[breakingtime91]

No, I'm really not looking for absolutes but I'm looking for some intellectual honesty and not finding it in the responses. Unless I misunderstand the purpose of this thread (and maybe I don't) we're talking about civilian defensive use of the shotgun vs the AR. If a guy can take a 25mm round that blew off both legs then why should I believe that 00 buckshot is a death ray or would work better? Partly it's because one thread was chopped up and moved to three different threads which makes it hard to figure out, I'll grant. But since no one reads them all (or even this entire thread) there's an insinuation that a home invader shot with 12ga 00 is DRT while you're lucky to stop him with a mag full of 5.56 which is demonstrably idiotic. I've seen deer run hundreds of yards with no heart and almost no lungs after taking 3 x .30 cal bullets so yeah, I'm aware there's no way to immobilize a mammal instantly that doesn't involve the CNS, I thought everyone here knew at least that much. If someone breaks down my door and I have to shoot him, the relevant issue is whether I can stop him or drive him out of my home. I've discussed the 5.56 with several dozens of guys that were SEALs, Delta, and Green Beret in the course of my employment, as well and quite a few Marines and some Army infantry. They don't all speak glowingly of the current military loadings in 5.56 but most of them felt it generally did a pretty good job. And of course, I am not limited to FMJ. Although there are some 6.8 rifles out there and maybe .300 Blackout I haven't heard anyone report of their usefulness in combat.

Again, civilian shootings don't seem to mirror the tales I hear from "over there." There are some tough and resourceful criminals but as a rule if they're still coming after folks after getting their legs blown off it's not showing up in the news. So let me understand if this is what you're flat out saying- a rifle is not sufficiently potent to serve as a home defense weapon?

Nope, I'm saying a shotgun, on average is just as good. I use a rifle for other reasons. Both will work but 00 buck is gonna be more potent then any rifle round out of a carbine.

[Phaedrus]

Nope, I'm saying a shotgun, on average is just as good. I use a rifle for other reasons. Both will work but 00 buck is gonna be more potent then any rifle round out of a carbine.

It sounds like we're basically in agreement then. And your comment, the one I marked in red, is something nearly everyone is roundly ignoring. There are lots of reasons to choose a particular platform and terminal ballistics is just one of them. It would be interesting to hear your reasons for choosing a rifle.

[Phaedrus]

BTW, perhaps I shouldn't use the term "carbine". When I say say it I tend to be referring to a rifled auto long gun in a military caliber with a barrel of 16" or less. Maybe that's not the Jane's definition. In a more general sense I realize my definition leaves out a lot of guns that were historically referred to as carbines. A short .45/70 can also be a carbine and is much more potent than a 12ga. And no, I'm not advocating .45/70 for home defense although in Montana it ain't the craziest idea depending on where you live.

[GJM]

I guess it's kind of frustrating trying to figure out what you're trying to say. No need to bow out unless you don't really have a point to make. Circling back to actual subject of the video, a comparison can be made between a shotgun and an AR for a variety of purposes. A single round of 12ga 00 buck is more effective than a single round ____________, that's the point Rhett seems to be making and possibly your assertion? I don't want to put words in anyone's mouth. I agree that against a soft/unarmored target a single round of buckshot can be more effective at least at certain ranges and in some circumstances. Of course there's a lot more factors involved in choosing a weapon than just terminal ballistics. Presumably Rhett knows that and probably you do, too.

Thankfully I have never shot a human being! Hopefully it will stay that way. I've seen a single round just about everything not crew served fail, including 12ga buck, 12ga slugs, and various rounds from 6mm on up to .338 Win Mag so I never take it for granted that one round is enough. By fail I don't mean failing to kill, just failing to do it in a timely fashion.

Phaedrus, please consider this. PF benefits from having Rhett post here. Most of us want to hear his thoughts. If we drive him off, PF loses. I have seen this happen multiple times over the life of our forum.

I don't know enough about your background to understand the basis for your posts. I do know that Rhett is not going to stick around PF, if this is how it is going to go.

[Phaedrus]

I'm a big fan of Rhett's and a long time subscriber to his channel. I haven't said one negative word about him which you'll see if you read the posts. Likewise, I have no idea what you're playing at or what has you upset but don't confuse that with me having a problem with his content. While I don't know him personally my interactions with him at Youtube lead me to think he's fine with people occasionally disagreeing with some of his ideas. This thread is getting pretty weird to be honest. Maybe that's inevitable when two or three new threads are created by peeling posts out of context from the place they were actually posted. If he's following this thread for some reason, let me declare for maybe the 50th time here and elsewhere on his channel and the wider net that I think he's a bright guy with a lot of great, out of the box ideas. In fact, I'm strongly considering getting a bird's head grip for my Beretta and my next AR will probably be a "cheek pistol". I really have no idea what you're getting so wound up over but whatever it is I have no problem it doesn't seem to have much to do with me.

[Phaedrus]

Note, I still think he's off base with .22LR being a good CCW round but obviously if it works for him it works for him (alluding to one of his older videos). Of course, he's skilled enough to do things most of us can't so in his hands maybe it's not so bad.

[MickAK]

I wish he would quit making sense. If he doesn't stop I'm going to end up with a Trash Cannon.

[mmc45414]

A 12 gauge Brenneke shotgun slug is about .68 caliber and 500 grains. I haven’t tried to figure how buckshot compares, but it is also a massive payload compared to each round of 5.56.
I was recently doing some nerding on this, looking at load data for potentially reloading #1 for practice rounds (ETA: this would depend on actual availability of #1B as a component, and maybe a few more 209 primers on hand...). I think Qty15 #1B is about ~650gn, divided by 77gn is more than eight.

[OldManClemens]

I don’t think it’s possible to scientifically determine how many rounds of a certain type of ammunition it takes to physiologically stop someone since most stops are psychological. I can say the training I’ve received in the military, law enforcement, and the private sector generally leans towards the idea of three to six rounds per threat. Unless you’re hitting the brain or the spine with your rounds, what you’re doing is causing bleeding. You’re letting air in and letting blood out. If some determined adversary isn’t going to be a psychological stop, and you fail to hit the spine or brain, then they’re going to fight you until their blood pressure drops to the point that they fall over. It doesn’t much matter what small arm you shot them with, you’re going to have to keep shooting until they stop. If you’re counting on your chosen 5.56 defensive load to reliably physiologically incapacitate determined adversaries in one or two shots, I highly recommend you research terminal ballistics a little more.

I believe the Navy SEAL some folks have mentioned is Michael Day. He entered a room and immediately took fire from three different hostiles using AK-47s. He soaked up a lot of bullets. Then he killed those guys.

ETA: back when Tom Givens was still based in Memphis, he would hear from ER staff about some of the gunshot victims that were brought in to the local level 1 trauma centers. I can’t remember if this is something he wrote or something that he stated during the class I took with him about five years ago, but at the time the highest number of handgun rounds the doctors removed from the heart of someone who ended up surviving was 6. Human beings are pretty damn resilient.

You also have to keep in context WHERE those people were shot who survived who had those 6 rounds removed from them. For every story of people saying that this person survived after taking this many shots or that many shots, I have also seen plenty of people who had succumbed after taking only one shot. Heck, I've seen people die after being shot with a .22 and have seen people survive (although they most likely weren't the same person afterward). I once saw someone shot in the head who was standing and talking with brain matter visible, while another guy who was shot in the head from behind (9mm) had the bullet literally stuck in, and poking out the front of his forehead. I have also seen someone survive after purposefully/intentionally shooting themselves in the face with a shotgun (essentially blowing off the entire front of their face, but leaving their brain/brainstem intact).

There's obviously going to be outliers, and there has to be factors taken into consideration like what substances the person being shot had ingested previously, were they wearing body armor, and there's also a whole bunch of luck (or being unlucky) involved.

[WobblyPossum]

I think there might be some confusion as Rhett hasn’t posted in this thread at all. I would like to hear some more of his thoughts though. RustyCrusty

[GJM]

I think there might be some confusion as Rhett hasn’t posted in this thread at all. I would like to hear some more of his thoughts though. RustyCrusty

In that case, my bad. Let’s make sure, though, we keep Rhett around here, and participating!

[TCinVA]

Never have I heard a credible source indicate that it takes on the average three to five rounds of modern, duty-type ammo from an AR to incapacitate a person!

In the last Shotgun 360 we had a recently retired Army SF NCO who had spent all of his 20 years in the military fighting GWOT.

With everyone there I asked him how many rounds he fired from his weapon to ensure a threat could no longer prosecute an assault. He said seven.

This was not an aberration. The only groups I know of that didn't end up using at least 5 shots in CQB situations were those that started targeting the CNS. Even then, CNS shots weren't always available at which point it went back to 5 rounds.

Modern duty type ammo does pretty good. It holds together and it expands...but that just means the projectile holds together and expands reliably poking a slightly larger hole. It doesn't radically alter the TSC of the 5.56 round, doesn't magically alter how rapidly tissue recovers from the stretch of a single shot, or radically improve the rate at which someone loses blood pressure drops below the threshold necessary to power them. People don't drop dead from 62 grain Speer Gold Dot but soak up half a magazine of green tip because it's basically a fucking Nerf dart.

The simultaneous impact of multiple projectiles will yield superior results because of how it damages tissue.

Every bit of quality training out there for 5.56 caliber rifles involves shooting a series of rapid, accurate shots at typical defensive ranges because 20+ years of recent combat experience with such weapons has proven conclusively that's what it takes.

[Phaedrus]

Good info, TCinVA. As a civilian I won't likely find myself in the kinds of situations the military deals with but certainly I see the need to expect to shoot until the threat has been stopped. I wonder if the US military will switch to a heavier round? It looks like the new 6.8 round is supposed to have DMR and SAW use, haven't really heard much about it. But I know lots of folks have lobbied for something bigger. The 6mm ARC has been adopted I think, either for DMR or for some special purpose. Possibly something like it might be an option. The guys that have discussed the 5.56 with me had good things to say about the Mk262 but as a civilian I'm just going on what they're telling me.

[Norville]

Every bit of quality training out there for 5.56 caliber rifles involves shooting a series of rapid, accurate shots at typical defensive ranges because 20+ years of recent combat experience with such weapons has proven conclusively that's what it takes.


I hesitate to spend the time on this, but the above has been modern doctrine for some time. Tom Givens has been using the concept of “servings “ for years and treats an AR as a 4 serving weapon and the shotgun as 5-7 servings in home defense applications.

[OldManClemens]

In the last Shotgun 360 we had a recently retired Army SF NCO who had spent all of his 20 years in the military fighting GWOT.

With everyone there I asked him how many rounds he fired from his weapon to ensure a threat could no longer prosecute an assault. He said seven.

This was not an aberration. The only groups I know of that didn't end up using at least 5 shots in CQB situations were those that started targeting the CNS. Even then, CNS shots weren't always available at which point it went back to 5 rounds.

Modern duty type ammo does pretty good. It holds together and it expands...but that just means the projectile holds together and expands reliably poking a slightly larger hole. It doesn't radically alter the TSC of the 5.56 round, doesn't magically alter how rapidly tissue recovers from the stretch of a single shot, or radically improve the rate at which someone loses blood pressure drops below the threshold necessary to power them. People don't drop dead from 62 grain Speer Gold Dot but soak up half a magazine of green tip because it's basically a fucking Nerf dart.

The simultaneous impact of multiple projectiles will yield superior results because of how it damages tissue.

Every bit of quality training out there for 5.56 caliber rifles involves shooting a series of rapid, accurate shots at typical defensive ranges because 20+ years of recent combat experience with such weapons has proven conclusively that's what it takes.

Are we talking about it taking that many rounds in warfare where everyone is covered in body armor, or that's what it takes to take out your average criminal, maybe hopped up on something, no body armor, or any other number of scenarios we can concoct and come up with? Or maybe it took that many rounds because the person shooting kept shooting the target in the same spot over and over despite seeing that it wasn't getting the result they wanted, or several of those shots completely missed the intended target? If you keep shooting someone in the center mass and they're not going down and you keep shooting them center mass and expect a different result but your not getting it, then the fact that it's taking that many shots to stop the threat is most likely the shooter's fault for not changing course and shooting them in the head and hotting their off button completely. Easier said than done obviously, but why keep doing something repeatedly when it's not working instead of changing course ad trying something else? Isn't that what we're taught in failure to stop drills? If your shots to the thoracic cavity don't get the result you're looking for transition to head shots. Doesn't matter what body armor they're wearing other torso or what drugs they are hopped up on, a properly placed head shot is going to stop that threat immediately.

[Paul D]

Are we talking about it taking that many rounds in warfare where everyone is covered in body armor, or that's what it takes to take out your average criminal, maybe hopped up on something, no body armor, or any other number of scenarios we can concoct and come up with? Or maybe it took that many rounds because the person shooting kept shooting the target in the same spot over and over despite seeing that it wasn't getting the result they wanted, or several of those shots completely missed the intended target? If you keep shooting someone in the center mass and they're not going down and you keep shooting them center mass and expect a different result but your not getting it, then the fact that it's taking that many shots to stop the threat is most likely the shooter's fault for not changing course and shooting them in the head and hotting their off button completely. Easier said than done obviously, but why keep doing something repeatedly when it's not working instead of changing course ad trying something else? Isn't that what we're taught in failure to stop drills? If your shots to the thoracic cavity don't get the result you're looking for transition to head shots. Doesn't matter what body armor they're wearing other torso or what drugs they are hopped up on, a properly placed head shot is going to stop that threat immediately.

I can pull an AR trigger 5-7 times in 1.5 seconds. I have seen patients' heart stop beating for 5-7 seconds (ie no blood pumping to the brain) and they look okay. I think it would take some time to make a assessment and decision. Of course, having experience shooting people will make that decision process faster. The older me is so much faster than the younger me in dealing with people dying of a heart attack. I would complain about the younger me: "Why doesn't that jerk see this is not working and move on to another tactic faster?"

[WobblyPossum]

Are we talking about it taking that many rounds in warfare where everyone is covered in body armor, or that's what it takes to take out your average criminal, maybe hopped up on something, no body armor, or any other number of scenarios we can concoct and come up with? Or maybe it took that many rounds because the person shooting kept shooting the target in the same spot over and over despite seeing that it wasn't getting the result they wanted, or several of those shots completely missed the intended target? If you keep shooting someone in the center mass and they're not going down and you keep shooting them center mass and expect a different result but your not getting it, then the fact that it's taking that many shots to stop the threat is most likely the shooter's fault for not changing course and shooting them in the head and hotting their off button completely. Easier said than done obviously, but why keep doing something repeatedly when it's not working instead of changing course ad trying something else? Isn't that what we're taught in failure to stop drills? If your shots to the thoracic cavity don't get the result you're looking for transition to head shots. Doesn't matter what body armor they're wearing other torso or what drugs they are hopped up on, a properly placed head shot is going to stop that threat immediately.

I don’t know how familiar you are with combat operations and training during the GWOT, but the vast majority of enemy combatants didn’t have body armor of any kind. Our SOF folks are also pretty competent with their carbines. Those 5-7 rounds likely hit their adversaries in anywhere from 1-2 seconds from the commencement of hostilities. With everyone moving and shooting at each other, I can guarantee you that those 5-7 rounds did not “hit the target in the same spot over and over.” It’s not like stacking X-Ring hits on a B8 repair center. If the enemy falls over and stops shooting after those 5-7 rounds, there’s no need to transition to the head because the body response worked.

How long do you think it takes to assess that your standard ballistic response isn’t working and you need to transition to a head shot? The way a failure to stop scenario is generally trained, you fire your standard response in the upper center chest and immediately transition to the head. If the head is still there, that’s your indicator of failure so you fire at the head. The standard response was two rounds regardless of whether that was realistic to stop the threat. As the GWOT went on, and people realized it generally took 5-7 rounds before an enemy fell over, that became the standard response to high center chest.

[TCinVA]

Are we talking about it taking that many rounds in warfare where everyone is covered in body armor, or that's what it takes to take out your average criminal, maybe hopped up on something, no body armor, or any other number of scenarios we can concoct and come up with?


"Hopped up on something" is often cited as a problem, but over and over again when you look at people who have killed police officers or soaked up lethal damage without breaking stride in the middle of the fight, what they were "hopped up on" was determination.

Your commitment to the fight may be severely damaged by taking bullets.

There are, however, a whole bunch of people on this planet who have figured out that being shot is not the same thing as being dead and have resolved that if they are going to die, they will spend their last moments wrecking your shit until they can't function anymore.

To paraphrase Jared Reston, if they die they won't know it because they're going to be too busy fighting until the lights go out.

Some people will fold when you even produce a gun. Some people will fight until they physically unable to continue. You have no way of knowing which you face until the shooting has commenced. And by then it's too late to have a different plan.

Our military forces found out the hard way...meaning through dead and wounded teammates...that two rounds and assess left the option to the other guy and that often the other guy was perfectly committed to spending every last heartbeat he had trying to kill them. They found out the hard way that it takes about 1/3 of the blood pressure and volume to power consciousness if someone is on the ground that it takes to do the same when they are on their feet, meaning they shot people, those people dropped, those people rebooted on the ground and then proceeded to start shooting again except now our guys have moved beyond them and get hit from behind.

The kind of criminal you are going to be forced to shoot is not the kind of criminal who is going to piss himself and run at the sight of a gun. It may be your first time pointing a gun at another human being but you can bet it's not his first time staring down the wrong end of one. He's not scared of your gun.

Violent criminals aren't like straight people. Their formative years are full of violence. Not from the TV, the real shit that happens right in front of them. They've been committing violent acts themselves since they were like 11. Their expectation of life is that they will be in and out of jail for most of their life, and they will probably die before they're 40. They aren't interested in living to be at their grandaughter's wedding. They don't look forward to retirement. Today is about pussy, money, and getting high. Tomorrow will be about pussy, money, and getting drugs.

They've already been through the system a bunch of times and they aren't scared of being locked up, of police, or of prosecutors. They've been beaten. They've been cut. They've been stabbed. They've been shot at. They've probably even been shot before....and they've figured out that a bit of blood and pain ain't anything to be afraid of.

And now there's your lily-white ass standing there with a gun thinking that the gun is going to protect you from them.



Or maybe it took that many rounds because the person shooting kept shooting the target in the same spot over and over despite seeing that it wasn't getting the result they wanted


There are two spots on a human being that are worth a fuck. The CNS and the aortic arch. That little 3 or 4" section of the body where the elastic tissue of the heart gives way to the inelastic tissue of the largest and highest pressure blood vessel in the body. Immediately behind that area is the spine. It's a good spot to put bullets. Short of the brain stem, there is no more useful place on the body you can put those bullets.

If that spot is missed then you end up hitting other things that are useful, but not as immediately useful as that little spot.

But here's the bottom line: Even if you rip the aorta clean off the top ventricle of the heart, it will still take time to depressurize the system. It's not a long time in any other situation...but it is enough time in a fight for them to damage or even kill you or someone you care about.

The human body has one off switch. It has multiple timers. The only timer that isn't utter shit for the purposes of stopping this person before he can cause serious damage is that one little 3-4" section of anatomy.



If you keep shooting someone in the center mass and they're not going down and you keep shooting them center mass and expect a different result but your not getting it, then the fact that it's taking that many shots to stop the threat is most likely the shooter's fault for not changing course and shooting them in the head and hotting their off button completely.


I want you to think really, really hard about that statement in the context it was made.

I reported that a guy who retired from SF after spending his entire career in GWOT made a practice of shooting 7 times by the end of his career because that's what it takes. Do you really think he adopted that practice because his marksmanship and tactics are poor?

Do you really think that with 20 years of tip-of-the-spear combat experience where he was the guy performing direct action missions that guaranteed close quarters combat, that he and his teammates adopted that practice because they were just too fucking stupid or stubborn to figure shit out?

Look, I know a fair bit about shooting guns quickly and accurately. I'm all about helping people do that. I regularly train normal joes, police, and even military personnel on how to become more effective with the tools they will need to use. What I don't do is tell guys who have far more experience killing bad guys than me what their SOP's should be.

You're coming at this as if they are shooting people that many times in the upper thoracic because they haven't figured out how to shoot people with 5.56 rifles. I assure you that they have shot lots of people with 5.56 rifles in the last 20 years under a wide variety of circumstances, and that the rule he expressed is a statement of reality.

He's not shooting someone with a 5.56 seven times because he hasn't figured out how bullets work yet. He's doing that, again, because that's what it takes to ensure the recipient is unable to continue hostilities.

In this very thread you have a combat vet who had need to use multiple weapons on bad guys himself and certainly witnessed many other weapons being used on bad guys tell you that reliably putting somebody down immediately took a burst from a belt-fed machinegun.

...or one well placed pattern of buckshot.

[WobblyPossum]

I wish I was half as articulate as you Tim. I really need to take one of your shotgun classes at some point. I think from now on, instead of addressing posts like OldManClemens’ myself, I’ll just @tag you like it’s the bat signal because your response was so much better than mine I might as well not have posted.

[HCM]

Good info, TCinVA. As a civilian I won't likely find myself in the kinds of situations the military deals with but certainly I see the need to expect to shoot until the threat has been stopped. I wonder if the US military will switch to a heavier round? It looks like the new 6.8 round is supposed to have DMR and SAW use, haven't really heard much about it. But I know lots of folks have lobbied for something bigger. The 6mm ARC has been adopted I think, either for DMR or for some special purpose. Possibly something like it might be an option. The guys that have discussed the 5.56 with me had good things to say about the Mk262 but as a civilian I'm just going on what they're telling me.

The military is looking at a 5.56 replacement due to the increasing prevalence of body armor on the battlefield not because 5.56 doesn’t kill people.

6 ARC is a specialty round adopted for long range precision in a small, light platform. Without getting into the weeds it’s not a practical choice for a general issue round.

There is a disconnect in the shooting community between shooting and fighting.

Not all of this is relevant but pay particular attention to the discussions of hitting vs missing an actual opponent.


https://youtu.be/BUha3UAZMM4


https://youtu.be/3Sh1gNW4yeI

[WobblyPossum]

I guess you can rationalize firing off however many shots you want, in whatever made up situations tc. I get out than many here do this for a living, but the average Joe just trying to protect themselves, their loved ones or their home it is entertaining when they think they are an operator. Basically it's just them LARP'ing for the most part and it would better suit them jsut to know and have a solid foundation of the basics, yet they skip all that and immediately just to trying to be an operator.

You know those hard core violent criminals we in law enforcement occasionally encounter? The reason they got on our radar is because they victimized an Average Joe like yourself. Why do you assume we deal with a different class of the criminal element than you do? They’re all the same criminals. The burglars, robbers, rapists, murderers and home invaders that the police have to shoot it out with are the same guys you might find kicking your front door in one day.

Also, I saw your original “TLDR. Thanks” post before you edited it. That kind of classless bullshit is exactly why most of the subject matter experts who used to interact with the membership regularly are gone.

[blues]

TCinVA Thanks for that most recent reply. Instant classic, imho.

[TCinVA]

Let's talk some sanity, here.

What we are looking to accomplish in self defense is to render the other guy physically unable to prosecute an assault immediately.

We are trying to achieve this because the other guy's current activities are quite literally trying to kill us. He is currently engaged in the effort of shooting us, stabbing us, or beating us to death. Or he is doing these things to someone we care about or have a duty to protect.

Killing him isn't the goal.

If someone dies of sepsis from the wound you gave him two weeks after he bashed you over the head with a baseball bat, your goal of self defense has not been accomplished. We are trying to prevent serious or lethal damage to ourselves or others.

What stops someone in short order is our primary concern.

The bad news is that there is little we can hold in our hands that guarantees the other guy will stop immediately. There are documented occasions where somebody got hit with .50 BMG round and kept going. Nothing we can hold in our hands is a guarantee of instantly taking the other guy out of the fight.

With practically any projectile weapon we can hold in our hands, we are not going to get that instant physiological incapacitation that is ideal for our purpose. Repeated application is most likely to be necessary to achieve the goal of stopping someone (or something) that is committed to doing us harm.

We're not really very worried about someone who is willing to disengage to prevent suffering serious or lethal damage. Every now and then, though, we run into someone who is so committed to the moment that they are not concerned about even lethal levels of damage.


https://youtu.be/l0i4mA20c8U

The person committed to the fight...and that can be anyone who sets their mind to it...is going to be tough to stop.

That video doesn't mean that the Glock pistol that deputy was shooting was a bad weapon. It's a perfectly fine handgun, but the simple reality is that unless you put one of those projectiles into the brain stem, the other guy can maintain the ability to continue for a much greater period of time than we'd like to see.

One of the best things we can do for defense minded citizens, police officers, and military personnel is to get everybody to understand the power and danger of human will. A human being who no longer gives a shit about the rules and doesn't care about pain or even death is the most dangerous creature you can encounter on this planet.

If one has been targeted by such an individual, we should expect a hell of a fight. We should EXPECT that it's definitely going to take more than one wound to force that person to stop.

The 5.56 is not a bad weapon anymore than a Glock 17 is a bad weapon. They're excellent weapons. They do the job they are meant to do very well. But they will never be a death ray. You can bet on it taking a series of shots that must be delivered accurately to get the job done. That means under life or death stress you have to repeatedly execute a proper shot process to intelligently direct a series of projectiles into the most vital areas of a person who is trying really hard to kill you. This will take some time during which the other guy is still doing whatever it was that made you shoot him to start with.

A shotgun isn't a death ray either. In a certain envelope, it has an advantage over those weapons because it creates more physiological damage per press of the trigger than those other weapons do. Properly loaded, that series of projectiles is delivered as one package. Because they all arrive at the same time, the multiple points of pressure turn elastic tissue inelastic, and inelastic tissue is pulverized. As the pellets spread inside the body multiple wound channels form. If the shot has been well directed those multiple wound channels are cut into the most vital bits of human anatomy.

With one press of the trigger in a fraction of the time it takes to repeatedly apply the power of other weapons, we have achieved the results we hope for with the series of shots from them. Given that time is the essential factor that bounds every life threatening emergency and that in the real world we are likely to be facing multiple opponents, the ability to press the trigger once per bad guy with a high likelihood of knocking them completely out of the fight is useful.

That ability, I would argue, is most important for someone who is outnumbered and fighting alone. Which happens to be what most citizens and police officers will be doing in the real world.

[TGS]

That ability, I would argue, is most important for someone who is outnumbered and fighting alone. Which happens to be what most citizens and police officers will be doing in the real world.

Excellent post, however I disagree with this part in relation to police officers; the carbine offers numerous advantages to LE use where you could be making shots under drastically different conditions within a matter of seconds. I think Rhett made this distinction in his video; at least it came off that way, as he was framing his argument from the position of what a citizen's home defense scenario will most likely be (extremely close range, fairly static, unobstructed shots). Getting back to my point, that situation isn't analogous to a LEOs duties. Carbines took over the LE world for many good reasons, even if we still maintain 870P entry guns specifically for no other role than that niche which it fills well.

[GJM]

Excellent post, however I disagree with this part in relation to police officers; the carbine offers numerous advantages to LE use where you could be making shots under drastically different conditions within a matter of seconds. I think Rhett made this distinction in his video; at least it came off that way, as he was framing his argument from the position of what a citizen's home defense scenario will most likely be (extremely close range, fairly static, unobstructed shots). Getting back to my point, that situation isn't analogous to a LEOs duties. Carbines took over the LE world for many good reasons, even if we still maintain 870P entry guns specifically for no other role than that niche which it fills well.

And this brings up full circle to where I started. Rhett has an incredibly high level of skill and makes his stock-less shotgun into an instrument of fury. However, if looking at outcomes between the average homeowner with a no stock pump gun versus an AR, I will bet on the AR. If it is an AR versus a stocked 1301 with good buck, I will bet on the 1301 inside and an AR outside.

[BehindBlueI's]

Small sample size, but I saw no difference in outcomes for homeowners using an AR vs a shotgun WHEN FIRED.

AR users prevailed more often, but I think that's because the AR users tended to be better prepared mentally. Nobody had an AR wrestled away from them, for example.

[YVK]

And this brings up full circle to where I started. Rhett has an incredibly high level of skill and makes his stock-less shotgun into an instrument of fury. However, if looking at outcomes between the average homeowner with a no stock pump gun versus an AR, I will bet on the AR. If it is an AR versus a stocked 1301 with good buck, I will bet on the 1301 inside and an AR outside.

What do you think about this?

https://www.charlesdaly.com/product.php?id=388

Seems like this will be the most reliable mechanically and against user error. Light and optic ready.

[GJM]

What do you think about this?

https://www.charlesdaly.com/product.php?id=388

Seems like this will be the most reliable mechanically and against user error. Light and optic ready.

I think you may have been into the Merlot tonight, as at two grand, this thing’s target market is the kind of household that buys a SQ5 as a “runner vehicle.”

The standard PF advice would be to buy a 1301 and a two day shotgun class instead, although these days I would say to just buy a 1301 and one share of Tesla, for the same money.

[mmc45414]

Small sample size, but I saw no difference in outcomes for homeowners using an AR vs a shotgun WHEN FIRED.
AR users prevailed more often, but I think that's because the AR users tended to be better prepared mentally. Nobody had an AR wrestled away from them, for example.
I would speculate the shotgun people were less mentally prepared because they bought into all of the myths about shit like the racking sounds will make people run. And shooting from the hip because they can't miss.


With one press of the trigger in a fraction of the time it takes to repeatedly apply the power of other weapons, we have achieved the results we hope for with the series of shots from them. Given that time is the essential factor that bounds every life threatening emergency and that in the real world we are likely to be facing multiple opponents, the ability to press the trigger once per bad guy with a high likelihood of knocking them completely out of the fight is useful.

I am just a schumk that a few years ago decided I didn't really like pump guns and didn't need a defensive shotgun because I have an (well, not just one...) AR. Then about a year and a half ago I started playing three gun and started enjoying the shotgun stages a little more. Then I thought just maybe there could be a stop on the bus route between suburban Mayberry and TEOTWAWKI. In the last three weeks I bought a 590 and a 1301 (1301 gets here tomorrow).

One of our favorite Pat quotes has always been Mission Drives The Gear Train. The more I think about my mission (trying to insure that me, my wife and my dog all die of natural causes) the more I thought a defensive shotgun might be a handy thing to have. If I am in a civilian situation and am legitimately defensive, adversaries are almost certainly going to be within 30yds. We are not kicking doors and clearing houses, we are going through life in the pursuit of groceries.

Maybe someday our happy little community becomes less so. If I am shooting outside (ETA: or inside, for that matter...) there is high probability one of my neighbor's houses will be behind an adversary. Having something that dissipates energy sooner might be better than later.

Maybe we get an RV and travel more, a shotgun is going to be more legal and acceptable than an AR. If a show of force is made without shooting I am going to be the one reporting it, hard to imaging that a shotgun would be more "innocuous", but it would be.

Maybe the coyotes in the conservancy behind our house get more aggressive. It is legal to shoot in our township but if I shoot at night it will be a disturbance. If I turn a coyote inside out with one shot of #4B (https://pistol-forum.com/usertag.php?do=list&action=hash&hash=4B) my neighbors will probably thank me and bring me a beer. If I am blasting away with 5.56 scaring the shit out of everybody maybe I will just be that crazy asshole instead of the guy protecting the neighborhood pets.


If it is an AR versus a stocked 1301 with good buck, I will bet on the 1301 inside and an AR outside.
If things were really pear shaped, I probably want my AR. But I think the SHTFantacy reality probably involves 1-3 dirtbags inside 20-30 yards.

Anyway, I will continue to keep one of the ARs in a ready condition (full mag under an empty chamber but cocked so the safety can be on, optic switched on, light mounted, sling attached) but soon there will probably be a shotgun parked next to it (ghost loaded, light mounted, sling attached).

[MickAK]

And this brings up full circle to where I started. Rhett has an incredibly high level of skill and makes his stock-less shotgun into an instrument of fury. However, if looking at outcomes between the average homeowner with a no stock pump gun versus an AR, I will bet on the AR. If it is an AR versus a stocked 1301 with good buck, I will bet on the 1301 inside and an AR outside.

I think the point of the forum is to not be average (aside from selling chainsaws). Most of us have to balance what we can focus on not being average with. I won't touch a long gun until I can perform at a certain high standard with a pistol, because that's where the balance lies. The time I have after meeting that standard has gone to the AR platform with shotgun as an afterthought.

Rhett is making me reconsider that. My mission is different than LEO/.mil and what originally looked like a highly skilled gimmick is starting to make a lot of sense. I'm still not sure if putting in the work will be worth the results re:stockless but I'm getting interested in finding out.

[Coyotesfan97]

No, I'm really not looking for absolutes but I'm looking for some intellectual honesty and not finding it in the responses. Unless I misunderstand the purpose of this thread (and maybe I don't) we're talking about civilian defensive use of the shotgun vs the AR. If a guy can take a 25mm round that blew off both legs then why should I believe that 00 buckshot is a death ray or would work better? Partly it's because one thread was chopped up and moved to three different threads which makes it hard to figure out, I'll grant. But since no one reads them all (or even this entire thread) there's an insinuation that a home invader shot with 12ga 00 is DRT while you're lucky to stop him with a mag full of 5.56 which is demonstrably idiotic. I've seen deer run hundreds of yards with no heart and almost no lungs after taking 3 x .30 cal bullets so yeah, I'm aware there's no way to immobilize a mammal instantly that doesn't involve the CNS, I thought everyone here knew at least that much. If someone breaks down my door and I have to shoot him, the relevant issue is whether I can stop him or drive him out of my home. I've discussed the 5.56 with several dozens of guys that were SEALs, Delta, and Green Beret in the course of my employment, as well and quite a few Marines and some Army infantry. They don't all speak glowingly of the current military loadings in 5.56 but most of them felt it generally did a pretty good job. And of course, I am not limited to FMJ. Although there are some 6.8 rifles out there and maybe .300 Blackout I haven't heard anyone report of their usefulness in combat.

Again, civilian shootings don't seem to mirror the tales I hear from "over there." There are some tough and resourceful criminals but as a rule if they're still coming after folks after getting their legs blown off it's not showing up in the news. So let me understand if this is what you're flat out saying- a rifle is not sufficiently potent to serve as a home defense weapon?

War on Wise Street (https://www.policemag.com/339077/war-on-wise-street)

February 24th 2003 Alexandria LA SWAT on a drug search warrant

“Cooper characterizes Molette as “pure evil” during the firefight. “When he came out, he must have thought he was untouchable. Either that or he just didn’t care. I can remember everything about him when he came out. I can actually watch him being hit.”

It’s estimated that Molette was hit 40 times, including three center mass shots with 12-gauge slugs before he fell. Consequently, some of the officers involved in the shootout believe he was on PCP or other mind-altering substances. Unfortunately, their suspicions can never be confirmed because of a medical examiner’s error”

[Joe in PNG]

Consider also Platt & Matrix in the Miami shootout- they kept on fighting despite some serious wounds, and yet neither was on drugs.

One consideration that stuck out to me from Agent Mireles' book is the possibility of suddenly having to run a long gun with only one operable arm. To me at least, it would seem that a good semi like a 1301 would trump a pump, and an AR would would have an advantage over the shotgun.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

About racking, I've mentioned this before but I don't know if it was here. I used to drive from San Antonio to Austin and back quite a bit. So I would stop at the Cabela's to look around at the guns and gear. I note the staff would not be too sharp.

So, there is a guy at the counter with his female companion. He is looking at a pump gun and tells the clerk, he wants the pump gun so he can rack it and scare the bad guy away. He then tells the clerk that he also wants some blank 12 gauge to fire off if the rack doesn't scare him. The clerk say why then you need some rubber buckshot.

Hearing this, I in my wisdom pipe up to give the standard 'tactical' analysis of the plan. Did I get a look from the guy and his companion such that I thought I might have to rack a gun to deter them. LOL. Convinced me to keep my mouth shut.

I appreciate the expert take on the shotguns, the points are valid. For me, if I go to the long arm, I'm better with the carbine for its ergonomics. I'm in the bad shoulder squad also. While I could rack quite well in class, that was before my major accident that screwed up the racking shoulder and arm.

While we have foxes, coyotes and a black bear shows up a few miles away periodically, I don't think I'm having a fire fight with major critters. I do hike with the good ol' 9mm. Haven't run into giant hogs like we did on a TX trail- they just ran by.

[nalesq]

And this brings up full circle to where I started. Rhett has an incredibly high level of skill and makes his stock-less shotgun into an instrument of fury. However, if looking at outcomes between the average homeowner with a no stock pump gun versus an AR, I will bet on the AR. If it is an AR versus a stocked 1301 with good buck, I will bet on the 1301 inside and an AR outside.

I agree wholeheartedly with this. I have been experimenting with the stockless shotgun thing with an 870 based on what I have been able to glean from Rhett’s videos (including some additional content accessible through his Patreon page). My experience so far, after about 200 rounds, is that running a stockless shotgun accurately at speed requires a commitment to continuing to refine technique and make subtle corrections even after getting punched in the face a few times here and there. The recoil is simply unforgiving of mistakes.

I think I am finally getting the hang of it, and once mastered (at least to the point where I can more or less match my stocked shotgun shooting performance), the advantages of greater maneuverability and decreased bulk with the stockless shotgun are well worthwhile.

But it’s hard for me to see most muggles going through the trouble it takes to develop that mastery. In fact, had I not been reasonably convinced that it was even possible to do what Rhett does by his explanations and demonstrations, not to mention testimonies from other respected luminaries on this forum who vouched for his skill and abilities, I don’t think I would have endured the minimal amount of face punches it took for me to eventually learn proper technique.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[RustyCrusty]

There’s a lot of good stuff here.

I don’t take offense to any of it.

Tim? Great points.

Lots of focus on ‘how much wounding’

I’m more concerned about CNS/shock induced spinal knockout hit probability and sympathetic stretch tear wounding than counting wound paths etc. Even if counting… each trigger press having 8-15x the chances at scoring a CNS hit is something. Even buck that strikes in the same fine sized hole RAPIDLY spreads inside.

Slugs (the good slugs) and buck are great because they aren’t JUST relying on projectile temp stretch wounding and cutting. Buck and slug degrade into multiple large projectiles with temp stretch paths close enough to amplify each other.

Lots of talk about how normal people couldn’t. Y’all are not a normal group. Don’t sell yourselves short. Most of you are deep training nerds (compliment). You can do it. As for those who don’t train (average)? They can’t do it. And they can’t do it with any of the favored tools… this is why I also advocate for 22lr. Who gives a shit about wounding if know-nothings can’t hit with it.

Some talk about me being special. I’m not. Also, irrelevant even if I was. What matters is that I invest equal effort into running multiple platforms and my Ups Splits and Transitions with 12ga/7.62x39/300blk/556 are essentially identical. .14 splits, .25 transitions, .7 ups across the board. Add 20% when I don’t got the juice. Subtract 20% or so when I eat my Wheaties. (We’re don’t pick those days).

This is as fast as I could manage this with single shots from my gamer AR.


https://youtube.com/shorts/mOcBW6ORLBM?feature=share

[1slow]

Pat Rogers in every 3 day carbine class I took (7 ) taught 5-7 rounds to the body as a response to threat.

Mechanically I prefer rifles/carbines ( AR15, AK 47, Para FAL 5-.63) they tend to be more robust under military hard use. They also have greater range.
I also have done hugely more training with them.


Shotguns with 00B or 1B make a whole lot of holes per shot.
My 14" 870 12 Ga at 7 yards puts Federal 1B (15 pellet) into 3" circle and Fiochi 00B 9 pellet into 4-5" That into face or high chest is probably final.
1301 with Federal Flight Control strikes me as very fast , light etc.... that or a Benelli can wreak havoc with buck or slugs.

I live out in the sticks, I keep a carbine and a shotgun with buck beside the bed.

Inside 30 yards or so I think shotgun rules. 8-15 holes per shot.

If I have to go outside carbine may be better. more range and precision.

If I have to shoot past friendlies I want a carbine.

If I have to engage a car I want FAL with appropriate ammo or Brennekes in a 12 guage.

[MK11]

I've replaced shotgun with carbine for one reason--i no longer have access to any range that allows shotgun beyond trap shooting.For those of us in the burbs, that's not uncommon.

[rob_s]

I hesitate to spend the time on this, but the above has been modern doctrine for some time. Tom Givens has been using the concept of “servings “ for years and treats an AR as a 4 serving weapon and the shotgun as 5-7 servings in home defense applications.

I recall various numbers of rounds from Pat Rogers courses, although for the life of me I can’t recall the details. Maybe after more coffee.

When I was teaching and running drills, not that I have any sort of pedigree other than being a training nerd, I was fond of calling for “some number of rounds”. For one thing it requires people to make a decision about when to stop firing other than counting.

For another, it appeases both the “we’re wasting ammo” group and the “we don’t shoot enough” group. :cool:

[BehindBlueI's]

I would speculate the shotgun people were less mentally prepared because they bought into all of the myths about shit like the racking sounds will make people run. And shooting from the hip because they can't miss.


No, neither "tactic" was used without success.

I think it's just that AR users were often younger males with exposure to violence who selected the weapon based on familiarity. Shotgun users tended to be the general population who just happened to own a gun. People with the mindset to win, or people with GWOT experience, just selected the AR more often. People who pressed a hunting weapon into service, who had pappy's hand-me-down, and/or who had thought about a home invasion in only the most hypothetical of terms were very unlikely to have an AR.

[mmc45414]

I've replaced shotgun with carbine for one reason--i no longer have access to any range that allows shotgun beyond trap shooting.For those of us in the burbs, that's not uncommon.
One of the local clubs I am a member of just went the opposite direction and specified one range bay as Tactical Shotgun, with both steel plates and target stands, probably motivated by one of the volunteer club officers being a shotgun nerd/trainer. When they did it I didn't care, now I am looking forward to using it.

[Elwin]

One of the local clubs I am a member of just went the opposite direction and specified one range bay as Tactical Shotgun, with both steel plates and target stands, probably motivated by one of the volunteer club officers being a shotgun nerd/trainer. When they did it I didn't care, now I am looking forward to using it.

This is actually one reason I'm thinking of gravitating towards shotgun. I have not quite this situation but still the opposite of MK11's problem. My outdoor range has seven pistol bays and one rifle range. Shooting at closer that 25yd on the rifle range isn't feasible due to a number of rules/safety issues. Rifles, buck, and slugs aren't allowed in the pistol bays, but birdshot is. So my best opportunity for regular practice with a long gun at home defense distances is a shotgun in the same bay I'm doing my pistol practice in anyway. Simple, safe, convenient.

To say something a little more on topic, I think which one you have the opportunity to practice with is absolutely a consideration, maybe one that trumps most of the others.

[mmc45414]

So my best opportunity for regular practice with a long gun at home defense distances is a shotgun in the same bay I'm doing my pistol practice in anyway.
This has also been a huge benefit to my 9mmAR, run the same string on the same plates at the same (or maybe longer) ranges.


I think which one you have the opportunity to practice with is absolutely a consideration, maybe one that trumps most of the others.
I have also thought that the PCC is the middle ground here, and this is one of the reasons. Add in that 9mm in a 16" barrel is both a little more powerful and a lot more mellow blast, with range farther than 12g but shorter than 5.56. But throwing this out there is way off topic in this thread! :cool:

[TGS]

Of interest to this thread. Video of a security guard in India scripting aimbot during an attack. Looks like a SxS lupara to me. Take note to the amount of blood spray that lands in front of the door in the second before it closes.

https://funker530.com/video/nsfw-security-guard-point-blanks-armed-robber-with-shotgun/

[mmc45414]

Take note to the amount of blood spray that lands in front of the door in the second before it closes.
Toes Up...
79682

[DDTSGM]

Regarding different trainers advocating differing numbers of rounds per deployment/serving/volley -

Maybe I've been asked the why don't you train them (police officers) to shoot people in the arm/shoulder/leg, etc. question too often at inquests and by citizens groups, but I'd be hesitant to be advocating 4 to 7 rounds - with no assessment - as a matter of course with folks that I train.

Firing until you see the subject falling to the ground or otherwise indicating they are ceasing their efforts to do you or someone else great bodily harm is a more defensible way to train as it includes an assessment as to continuing threat.

Granted, semantics, but more understandable/palatable to the average guy or gal you may be talking to in court.

JMO

[Coyotesfan97]

Of interest to this thread. Video of a security guard in India scripting aimbot during an attack. Looks like a SxS lupara to me. Take note to the amount of blood spray that lands in front of the door in the second before it closes.

https://funker530.com/video/nsfw-security-guard-point-blanks-armed-robber-with-shotgun/

Lights out night night!

[Nephrology]

I really don't feel there is a whole lot worth overthinking here. Both are going to fuck you up.

[Rex G]

My wife worked as a death scene investigator for the Harris County Medical Examiner, in Texas, for 21 years. 1995 to 2015. The major city is Houston, and Harris County is quite large, geographically, so, that is plenty of death scenes, in those 2+ decades. Blood spatter evidence is a science, which tells an investigator such things as how far, and how fast, the decedent moved, after being shot. To make a long story short, my wife prefers 12 gauge, above all other weapons, for home defense. When bad guys take a full charge of pellets, they tend to stay right there.

[Navin Johnson]

Can somebody post the live stream video of the guy turning hid head into a canoe with a gage also......that would answer all our questions......right?

[gato naranja]

I have also thought that the PCC is the middle ground here, and this is one of the reasons. Add in that 9mm in a 16" barrel is both a little more powerful and a lot more mellow blast, with range farther than 12g but shorter than 5.56. But throwing this out there is way off topic in this thread! :cool:

If the PCC in question was selective fire, I might agree. I can not fire a semiauto PCC fast/accurate enough to make it germane to this topic despite having tried doing so on and off for years. I found a trapper-length .357 levergun to be a better tool for nearly any purpose other than SD/HD, and if one round was all I needed, it would be better for that as well.

(I think.)

As little as I like AR's in general, a short, K.I.S.S. without a bunch of useless crap on it suits me well enough for what is coming my way, but I have a possibly irrational confidence in the 12 gauge shotty when the chips are down. It's probably a generational thing. Both the great unwashed masses and old cats (like myself) with three paws on banana peels and one paw in the burn pile, a RELIABLE semiauto 12 gauge is going to ace out a pump 12 for HD/SD. I am too slow and deliberate any more to make truly fast follow-up shots with my 870P, though I do reasonably well with a rental 1301.

[mmc45414]

Both the great unwashed masses and old cats (like myself) with three paws on banana peels and one paw in the burn pile, a RELIABLE semiauto 12 gauge is going to ace out a pump 12 for HD/SD. I am too slow and deliberate any more to make truly fast follow-up shots with my 870P, though I do reasonably well with a rental 1301.
Yeah, I agree. I just bought a 590 and to just break it in and familiarize myself with it I took it out for a round of skeet, and reminded myself that (especially with rather short arms) the manipulation is not all that natural, or swift. On one set of doubles at station one, I was twisted around a bit and didn't manage to get to slide just quite closed and missed the target. While skeet is just a game it did represent a bit of a twisted condition.

OTOH my 391 (shown in this post (https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?10177-Beretta-1301-Tactical&p=1266375&viewfull=1#post1266375)) has broken that same target tons of times (before it got the peep sights). I also am confident in the Beretta gas system reliability, I have fired thousands of 7/8oz reloads through the 3-1/2" 391 with minimal Maintenace. And today I pick up my 1301T at lunchtime :cool:

[TCinVA]

Can somebody post the live stream video of the guy turning hid head into a canoe with a gage also......that would answer all our questions......right?

Contact wounds are always far more destructive than wounds from outside contact distance. The rapidly expanding gas and ejecta coming out of the end of the barrel are capable of ripping flesh right down to the bone without the projectiles of the shot touching anything. Even birdshot at contact distance will be immensely destructive just because that's what shotgun contact wounds do.


https://youtu.be/P2Bkk7pmFdU

Results from further away will be less...I'm struggling for the right word...spectacular?

But the intended result is apparent.


https://youtu.be/QwTDxr9St-0

No...for lack of a better term...fireworks, but rendered immediately physically unable to continue pressing hostilities.

[Navin Johnson]

Contact wounds are always far more destructive than wounds from outside contact distance. The rapidly expanding gas and ejecta coming out of the end of the barrel are capable of ripping flesh right down to the bone without the projectiles of the shot touching anything. Even birdshot at contact distance will be immensely destructive just because that's what shotgun contact wounds do.


https://youtu.be/P2Bkk7pmFdU

Results from further away will be less...I'm struggling for the right word...spectacular?

But the intended result is apparent.


https://youtu.be/QwTDxr9St-0

No...for lack of a better term...fireworks, but rendered immediately physically unable to continue pressing hostilities.

My response about "boat head" was sarcastic in nature as people are debating the wounding capabilities of an AR to a gage. With proper loads obviously the shotgun wins round for round.

But not every shot lands and not every fight goes as planned. I believe an AR is more flexible and bullets are opportunities.

That being said my first long gun to engage indoors is a 1301.

[mmc45414]

Looks like a SxS lupara to me.
https://funker530.com/video/nsfw-security-guard-point-blanks-armed-robber-with-shotgun/
I was peeking at this again and am pretty sure it was a pistol grip shotgun:

79761

Only mentioning it relating to all of the discussion going on about them in other threads.

Seems like it was maybe handy when he was kinda jammed up behind the railing:

79763

[BehindBlueI's]

I was peeking at this again and am pretty sure it was a pistol grip shotgun:


Pistol grip double barrel in India...sounds like a howdah pistol with longer barrels.

(sort of joking, sort of not)

[awp_101]

I was peeking at this again and am pretty sure it was a pistol grip shotgun:

79761

Only mentioning it relating to all of the discussion going on about them in other threads.

Seems like it was maybe handy when he was kinda jammed up behind the railing:

79763

Nice catch, I was thinking he had just tucked it under his arm and let fly.

[awp_101]

Toes Up...
79682

Toe up from the flo’ up.

[mmc45414]

A 12 gauge Brenneke shotgun slug is about .68 caliber and 500 grains. I haven’t tried to figure how buckshot compares, but it is also a massive payload compared to each round of 5.56. I don’t think the discussion is whether buck and slugs are equivalent to a round of 5.56, because an informed person understands they are not, and round for round, the shotgun is significantly more decisive.

I was recently doing some nerding on this, looking at load data for potentially reloading #1 for practice rounds.
While was continuing to be a nerd I came across a nice graphic on Lucky Gunner and put a few numbers with it:

79804

[mmc45414]

Added Cross Section:
79811

[Unobtanium]

I am 35. I got into shooting when I was a kid. Around age 8-9, I was running a colt 1911. Slowly, methodically, 1 round in the chamber, place on safe, I picked it up, unsafed, fired it. My Dad taught me the best he could, and the burgeoning internet put a young teen in touch with others, later on. I first shot an ar15 as a swat officer let me fire his, at a local range, when I was 13. Still other officers at the time, were using mini14s because of reliability, budget, and other issues. The 5.56 carbine was a cool thing, but every cruiser had a gauge in the rack. Hunting a deer with a 5.56 was bullshit and irresponsible. The light bullets either ice picked, or blew up early. Varmint hunters loved the relatively long barrel life and rapid fire afforded, though. Jim over at Clark's Custom Guns made that 2 chamber "tank" break famous. The guns barely moved. Olympic Arms had an honest 1/4 to 1/2moa barrel. Life was really good. The guns were heavy, accurate, or light carbines. Magazines were usgi metal.

Then I was in highschool, and about 2/3 through, "Some people did a thing..." and America went to war. Barrels got shorter, bonded ammo and heavy OTM became a thing, Dr. Roberts put out recommendation to use the 77SMK, powerpoints were made, pictures shared, and testomonies testified. Rails began to float, Acogs started popping melons, and a whole generation or two of boys became men. When they were 9 they saw m4s on CNN, when they were 19, they took M4s overseas and were on CNN.

I stayed home. Went into the world of medical things. College, hospitals, etc. One by one my friends came home, luckily, and they went and bought ARs. Not heavy barrels. Not 3-9x. 16.1" barrels with Aimpoints and Acogs. Light. Fast. Stuff they killed people with. Stuff that worked---to whatever degree it had to, to get them home.

I took note, and bought ARs, myself. Mk18s, M4s, that type of stuff. I trained. Took courses from Kyle Lamb, Craig Douglas, Frank Proctor, etc. Got to play with the latest and greatest. Mk6 scopes, surefire suppressors on 10.3" guns. The works. The AR had come of age, and it was popular, blooded, and you can find an aiming solution and ergonomic controls solution to suite you, whether you have 1 arm, are in a wheelchair, or want to run your light at any number on the clockface. Why? Because an entire generation of men and women now are adults, and have used it, and moved to engineering and advising and all manner of roles. The ar15 is ubiquitous. "America's Rifle".

I think this has as much to do with people's preference for it than anything, and maybe has the most to do with it. Ive killed numerous deer with mine, now, using proper ammunition. Dr Roberts no longer pushes the 77gr OTM, but rather much better projectiles. Non-free-float barrels are now "KISS" or "Retro". People have killed people with, and trust this platform.

Behind it all, though, sits the 12 gauge. Recently enjoying a mild renaissance, of sort, with better ammo, but still largely less popular with "those who know". But we arent shooting up mud huts and then stepping into a 400m alley urban or even rural America. We are engaging limited numbers of highly dangerous actors in close quarters. They typically are also unarmored. We have a litigious society which has no understanding of violence, save movies and CNN (and really...thats war...cant have that on our streets...not war. That's...over there.). They don't like seeing 5-7 shell casings with little numbers next to them. What we need is overwhelming trauma...fast...close...personal.

Nothing does this like a 12 gauge loaded with the correct ammunition and employed at the correct distance. Nothing has the mathematical odds of hitting the CNS as quickly as one trigger pull from a gauge loaded as such. Nothing is going to literally remove parts of your target like a 12 gauge. I feel like experience, and exposure, are a big reason that the AR has replaced the 12 gauge in so many homes and police cars, where maybe...just maybe...the 12 gauge might be the better tool for the iob.



Other key points:

-Nothing is a guarantee
-My Benelli M4s have been more reliable than any other weapon Ive owned, save my Ruger VT bolt gun.
-The Benelli M4 was shown to last 20,000 rounds of full power buck/slug prior to any need for parts replacement or breakage. It is extremely robust. Other guns, like the 1301, 1187, etc are wonderful guns, but they are hunting guns adapted to combat. They do not have this level of robustness, although with proper PM a d replacement schedules of things like trigger bars on 1301s, they do fine.
-short barrel 14" shotguns don't give up much velocity at all to 18.5s using low recoil buck/slug.


It is my opinion, that a properly loaded 12 gauge shotgun offers a superior solution to the niche problem most people will actually need a firearm for ("I need to stop someone's actions immediately, within my immediate vicinity!"), and that the main reason the AR15 has been touted as superior, is because of familiarity and experience.

I back this by saying that some excellent rounds for the .30 carbine turned cheap m1s into near identical performers to modern 300BLK carbines. A few people caught on. Lost in the noise. Popularity and image are what drive things, Ive learned. Not necessarily "best for the job". However, being the best guarantees staying power, and the shotgun has remained in/near its modern form, longer than most any other firearm used by our military and police, and many civilians. That the Germans tried to have it banned for its brutality from the battlefield trenches speaks loudly, as well. It will work brutally in the trench of my hallway, as well, if called to do so.

[OlongJohnson]

Nicely written post.


Other guns, like the 1301, 1187, etc are wonderful guns, but they are hunting guns adapted to combat. They do not have this level of robustness, although with proper PM a d replacement schedules of things like trigger bars on 1301s, they do fine.

That the Germans tried to have it banned for its brutality from the battlefield trenches speaks loudly, as well. It will work brutally in the trench of my hallway, as well, if called to do so.

One question and one comment(ary).

I haven't previously read about 1301 trigger bar replacement intervals. Do you have any links?

------------------------

In WWI, there was a lot of accusing the other side of unfair weapon use. It's reported that the French were summarily executing any German as a war criminal if he was captured in possession of truncated cone flat point 124gr 9mm ammo. It was the original bullet design for the cartridge, but was observed to be significantly more effective on meat than a round nose and therefore was argued to violate the Hague treaty.

I've also read that shotguns are considered in Europe, to this day, to be inhumane when used by against human criminals, even ones who need to be shot. The cultural reason for that is that shotguns escaped the near-universal, stringent gun control of Europe so that people could hunt ducks and farmers would have the ability to deal with predatory varmints and put down large farm animals when necessary. Thus, there is more than a century of shotguns being associated with "execution" of livestock. So today, and for generations past, if a shotgun is used against a human, it is perceived as them being treated like livestock. It's possible that when some corn-fed* midwesterners dropped into a trench and started laying down hate with the gauge, they perceived it as being morally like an animal slaughterhouse. Kind of complaining about the rope one is hung with.

I don't know to what extent that was a factor in objecting to the use of shotguns in the trenches, but I'm open to it being at least a part of it.

*Similarly, I've been told that when German prisoners were brought to the U.S. midwest and fed well with corn, they felt they were being treated inhumanely. The reason is that in Germany and Austria, corn is regarded as pig feed, not food for humans. So the POWs thought they were being intentionally treated as pigs would be treated. Which was obviously not the case.

Culture is a weird and interesting thing.

[DocGKR]

Unobtanium: Well said indeed.

[mmc45414]

They do not have this level of robustness, although with proper PM a d replacement schedules of things like trigger bars on 1301s, they do fine.

I haven't previously read about 1301 trigger bar replacement intervals. Do you have any links?
Am interested also. My 391 has been shot pretty extensively with very little care and feeding and has been one of the most reliable things I have ever owned, and this is part of what attracted me to my brand spanking new 1301.

[Unobtanium]

Am interested also. My 391 has been shot pretty extensively with very little care and feeding and has been one of the most reliable things I have ever owned, and this is part of what attracted me to my brand spanking new 1301.

Hammer strut, sorry, I mistyped.

https://www.practical-shotgun.com/beretta-1301-hammer-removal-and-hammer-strut-failure
https://www.practical-shotgun.com/beretta-1301-trigger-group-reassembly-hammer-strut-replacement

Mag tube wear over time in high round count guns:

https://www.practical-shotgun.com/beretta-1301-mag-tube-wear


The 1301 is a good shotgun, but a Benelli M4, it is not. Different lineages and purposes.

[mmc45414]

Hammer strut, sorry, I mistyped.

https://www.practical-shotgun.com/beretta-1301-hammer-removal-and-hammer-strut-failureThanks for the info, and "thanks" for referral to another forum to take up my time, haha.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

[OlongJohnson]

Hammer strut, sorry, I mistyped.

https://www.practical-shotgun.com/beretta-1301-hammer-removal-and-hammer-strut-failure
https://www.practical-shotgun.com/beretta-1301-trigger-group-reassembly-hammer-strut-replacement

Mag tube wear over time in high round count guns:

https://www.practical-shotgun.com/beretta-1301-mag-tube-wear


The 1301 is a good shotgun, but a Benelli M4, it is not. Different lineages and purposes.

Anyone know where that guy is located? Sounds like somewhere in Britain. I noticed he cut away a big chunk of the serial number when opening his loading port.

Given where that hammer strut failed, I suspect that there may be production variation in the bend that could be inspected and failure predicted to be more or less likely between several parts. Possibly some tuneup of the surface tooling marks to reduce the likelihood of failure, but the struts are cheap enough that part selection might be a worthwhile strategy.

I saw the mag tube wear issue discussed on the net years ago; it may have been that video. On my Gen 1 gun, the inside of the gas piston felt quite rough, and you'd expect it to wear the tube. I smoothed it until the edges no longer felt rough or sharp, hoping to reduce the wear. I can't say I've put enough rounds through it to judge whether it was successful, but I feel better having done it. Variation in machining on the ID of the piston as tools wear would be an expected reason for variation in the rate of mag tube wear between guns. One gun showing it in a few thousand rounds and another going past ten thousand without a problem doesn't mean one owner is doing something wrong or reporting fakenews. I speculate that management of mag tube wear may be a reason for the coating on the Gen 2 piston. Any Gen 1 piston should be able to be cleaned up to be as non-aggressive to the tube as another.

Midwest Gun Works has 1301 parts at reasonable prices. Hammer struts are cheap, mag tubes aren't bad. This is a new development in the past few years, which I suspect e_stern may have had a role in.

https://www.midwestgunworks.com/beretta-1301/parts.html

[rob_s]

But we arent shooting up mud huts and then stepping into a 400m alley urban or even rural America.

I would say that, by and large, “we” aren’t doing any of those things. We may be taking about them. We may be simulating them in matches, range days, and classes. But “we” aren’t really DOING any of them.

Which is also one of many reasons I’ll continue right along owning and shooting ARs. Because what I’m actually doing with them (or, I suppose, used to) is exactly the kinds of things you’re describing, albeit on paper, cardboard, and steel, not people.

Although, I suppose, in fairness, the only shooting I really do at all these days is with shotguns. Which, along with the resultant passing interest on the part of my wife towards using “her” shotgun as a security blanket, is why I’ll ultimately choose the 1301 over the Benelli, and the only reason I keep clicking on these threads to begin with.

For every guy that thinks he’s choosing a shotgun over the AR because:reasons, there’s ten anachronistic gun owners that want to buck the trend simply because they think doing so makes them look innovative or smart.

Like the guys that keep insisting on re-writing the 4 Rules.

[blues]

I would say that, by and large, “we” aren’t doing any of those things. We may be taking about them. We may be simulating them in matches, range days, and classes. But “we” aren’t really DOING any of them.

Which is also one of many reasons I’ll continue right along owning and shooting ARs. Because what I’m actually doing with them (or, I suppose, used to) is exactly the kinds of things you’re describing, albeit on paper, cardboard, and steel, not people.

Although, I suppose, in fairness, the only shooting I really do at all these days is with shotguns. Which, along with the resultant passing interest on the part of my wife towards using “her” shotgun as a security blanket, is why I’ll ultimately choose the 1301 over the Benelli, and the only reason I keep clicking on these threads to begin with.

For every guy that thinks he’s choosing a shotgun over the AR because:reasons, there’s ten anachronistic gun owners that want to buck the trend simply because they think doing so makes them look innovative or smart.

Like the guys that keep insisting on re-writing the 4 Rules.

This post pretty much makes no sense to me...especially the bolded part, which also doesn't make clear sense to me but also makes me wonder about the basis for the assertion.

Maybe I just need to down this cup of coffee (then grab another) and wake my brain up.

[HCM]

This post pretty much makes no sense to me...especially the bolded part, which also doesn't make clear sense to me but also makes me wonder about the basis for the assertion.

Maybe I just need to down this cup of coffee (then grab another) and wake my brain up.

Reference to an old PF thread.

[blues]

Reference to an old PF thread.

Okay. Thanks.

[gato naranja]

Nicely written post.



One question and one comment(ary).

I haven't previously read about 1301 trigger bar replacement intervals. Do you have any links?

------------------------

In WWI, there was a lot of accusing the other side of unfair weapon use. It's reported that the French were summarily executing any German as a war criminal if he was captured in possession of truncated cone flat point 124gr 9mm ammo. It was the original bullet design for the cartridge, but was observed to be significantly more effective on meat than a round nose and therefore was argued to violate the Hague treaty.

I've also read that shotguns are considered in Europe, to this day, to be inhumane when used by against human criminals, even ones who need to be shot. The cultural reason for that is that shotguns escaped the near-universal, stringent gun control of Europe so that people could hunt ducks and farmers would have the ability to deal with predatory varmints and put down large farm animals when necessary. Thus, there is more than a century of shotguns being associated with "execution" of livestock. So today, and for generations past, if a shotgun is used against a human, it is perceived as them being treated like livestock. It's possible that when some corn-fed* midwesterners dropped into a trench and started laying down hate with the gauge, they perceived it as being morally like an animal slaughterhouse. Kind of complaining about the rope one is hung with.

I don't know to what extent that was a factor in objecting to the use of shotguns in the trenches, but I'm open to it being at least a part of it.

*Similarly, I've been told that when German prisoners were brought to the U.S. midwest and fed well with corn, they felt they were being treated inhumanely. The reason is that in Germany and Austria, corn is regarded as pig feed, not food for humans. So the POWs thought they were being intentionally treated as pigs would be treated. Which was obviously not the case.

Culture is a weird and interesting thing.

The extended family included a gent who had been injured early in WWII and later ended up guarding German POWs at a camp in the rural midwest. The POWs would often be trucked out to do farm work and many of them were fed lunch by the farm families who were no strangers to sweet corn; others worked in canneries that packed sweet corn. The Germans were often initially put off by the stuff, but the majority came around and differentiated "sweet corn" from "field corn." Incidentally, a large number of these farm families had German ancestry and often a member who spoke German, and some of the "grandparents" would tease these POWs in their "old-time" German about all sorts of things, including corn "phobia." By and large, the inmates of that camp were not hard cases, and things went surprisingly well. The gent in question who was guarding these corn-o-phobes had picked up enough conversational German as a child that he knew the lay of the land (so to speak). He had some interesting tales.

I have a bit of Teutonic ancestry, and my dad's maternal family were not much for guns, though they all had some sort of small-bore "boy's" rifles along with shotguns for bad critters and occasional hunting... a few of the more prosperous ones had GOOD shotguns. Other than to persuade reluctant bridegrooms, I don't think any of them used shotguns as social instruments.

[Caballoflaco]

The extended family included a gent who had been injured early in WWII and later ended up guarding German POWs at a camp in the rural midwest. The POWs would often be trucked out to do farm work and many of them were fed lunch by the farm families who were no strangers to sweet corn; others worked in canneries that packed sweet corn. The Germans were often initially put off by the stuff, but the majority came around and differentiated "sweet corn" from "field corn." Incidentally, a large number of these farm families had German ancestry and often a member who spoke German, and some of the "grandparents" would tease these POWs in their "old-time" German about all sorts of things, including corn "phobia." By and large, the inmates of that camp were not hard cases, and things went surprisingly well. The gent in question who was guarding these corn-o-phobes had picked up enough conversational German as a child that he knew the lay of the land (so to speak). He had some interesting tales.

I have a bit of Teutonic ancestry, and my dad's maternal family were not much for guns, though they all had some sort of small-bore "boy's" rifles along with shotguns for bad critters and occasional hunting... a few of the more prosperous ones had GOOD shotguns. Other than to persuade reluctant bridegrooms, I don't think any of them used shotguns as social instruments.

To continue the diversion, the reason that Europeans had such a low opinion of corn is that when it was first brought to Europe the Europeans didn’t bring over the American Indians’ process of adding lime (Nixtamalization) to the cornmeal. Thus their cornmeal was thus lacking in nutritional value (especially niacin) and quite a few peasants died of malnutrition, pellegra being one of the most common diseases, despite having “food” to eat. So the German dislike of corn wasn’t simple Teutonic snobbery.

A heavily corn based diet was also a problem in the rural southern states of the U.S. until fortified grains were added to the diet.

[TCinVA]

Anyone know where that guy is located? Sounds like somewhere in Britain. I noticed he cut away a big chunk of the serial number when opening his loading port.


Practical shotgun is a big deal in the UK because they are so limited in what they can own. They can own semi-automatic shotguns so they basically USPSA with them.

And that means they are doing USPSA levels of round counts in matches and training. Which is an order of magnitude above what I'm doing with my sustainment work.

[Guerrero]

:rolleyes:



https://youtu.be/1dQEEFwsCIg


SMH

[Unobtanium]

:rolleyes:



https://youtu.be/1dQEEFwsCIg


SMH

#1, My shotguns for HD are 14", and I'd not be wanting to grab the barrel of my gauge no matter how long it is. Yes, Ive attended training of multiple types and so forth. He is being very presumptuous/general, and also blamong hardware for a software issue.

#2, Yes, it is slow to load vs an AR. I am indeed figuring on solving the issue in 5-7 rounds that are in the gun. Kyle Rittenhouse solved multiple attackers in a mob environment with 8. Some cops have spent 20+ rounds in a vehicle stop encounter. It is what it is and you need to make calculated choices, here. Quality, or quantity?

#3, Yes, I agree. Racking it is a bad idea for effect. I do not agree on reliability. Ill take quality autoloader. His lack of concern over short stroking under stress, and yet his belaboring of lack of training regarding barrel length and short stocking and weapon retention is a clue that he has approached shotguns from an academic standpoint, and that this video is about preconceived notions he has, and not actual experience or more in depth fact finding.

#4, I agree, I am not a fan of magazine fed shotguns. Leaving mags loaded can, over time, cause the shells to "oval" and feed poorly/not at all. This is also why I like flite control. The wad keeps the shell from mushrooming in a tube.

#5, good talk on pattern and ammo

#6, he has excellent taste in PCCs.

My gauge isnt "unwieldy".
80052

[xtrtsqrt11]

My reasons for having my 870 as my primary HD long gun are these:

I have my HD G20 with X300 light in the quick access lock box for initial bump in the night and then assessing as to whether I need to take more time to access my long gun(s).

My wife grew up around Pump action shotguns and is reasonably comfortable with working them. I keep it chamber empty and safety off so that she only has to work the slide and she's off to the races. It's LOP is shortened so that she can make it work pretty easily. She is not familiar with ARs and is not really interested in taking the time to retrain.

As has been mentioned in this thread a few times, 5-7 rounds of 5.56 is not a bad idea to plan on needing per threat. When you talk about that kind of ratio, a 30 mag gets used up fairly quickly. Starts to put the 12 gauge being closer to as being able to serve as many threats as generally fewer rounds are needed with solid hits. Yes, I know, there are always exceptions to any generality, but 12 gauge usually does a pretty good job.

I'd also rather have my 870 involved in an investigation and the subsequent loss of said firearm until it's return, than my M4. If I was to have to use my 870 in an initial event, who's to say someone might take issue with me and seek out revenge and then I think having my M4 available would be advantageous.

I like being able to go from limited penetration #4 buck first round, then 00 for most of the remainder (mag tube + side saddle), then a couple rounds of slugs. This gives me quite a few options depending on the situation.

I need to get me a patrol bandolier like what Eagle used to make IIRC. It had loops for 12ish rounds and a couple pistol mags. Nice to stage along with the noise dampening electronic ear pro.

[Caballoflaco]

Body armor on badguys does happen, even if you’re crazy to prepare for that. Also, two carloads of badguys does happen. Getting lit up for trying to stop people breaking into cars has gotten a couple of people, including a Cop killed here in the last few years since car burglars almost always have guns, because idiots store guns in cars.

ETA: It doesn’t matter if you’re using a carbine or a shotgun if you start getting shot at by the guys in the second car that you didn’t see.


https://youtu.be/yrJpWS7ylE4

[Bio]

Body armor on badguys does happen, even if you’re crazy to prepare for that. Also, two carloads of badguys does happen. Getting lit up for trying to stop people breaking into cars has gotten a couple of people, including a Cop killed here in the last few years since car burglars almost always have guns, because idiots store guns in cars.

ETA: It doesn’t matter if you’re using a carbine or a shotgun if you start getting shot at by the guys in the second car that you didn’t see.


https://youtu.be/yrJpWS7ylE4

I live in a decent neighborhood, and a local community officer puts out a weekly crime report, which is almost entirely shoplifting from nearby stores, catalytic converter thefts, and crooks stealing stuff from unlocked cars. Every couple months, there's a report that one of the things stolen from an unlocked car is a handgun. It's dumbfounding.

[LHS]

:rolleyes:



https://youtu.be/1dQEEFwsCIg


SMH

I saw that on my YT feed and thought "Tell me you don't know how to run a gauge without telling me you don't know how to run a gauge."

[Edster]

The “Racking the shotgun will scare the bad guy away” thing is now starting to be challenged by “Racking the shotgun gives away your position.”

You know what other things “give away your position?”

Chambering a round in your rifle
Chambering a round in your handgun
Opening a lockbox or safe
Turning on a light
Saying, “Honey, did you hear something?
A door squeaking
A floor creaking
Your dog barking
Calling the police
Announcing you are armed, the police are coming, and whoever is in the house should identify themselves or leave

[GearFondler]

I saw that on my YT feed and thought "Tell me you don't know how to run a gauge without telling me you don't know how to run a gauge."Indeed... That video was hot garbage and full of both hypocrisy and ignorance.
- He demonstrates the slowest possible way to reload short of fishing the shells out of box stored under the bed.
- He bemoans the 18" barrel due to the NFA but then touts his PCC which is a 2 stamp solution. - - He also implies that somehow the 18" barrel is a detriment to room clearing by an untrained user whereas a 16" barrel would be acceptable.
- He completely ignores the extended ranges that Flight Control allows.
- He claims untrained people will probably fuck up the operation and load selection as if that only applies to a shotgun.
- He explains how the shotgun is so popular due to its broad application range but then claims it's a niche weapon... Make up your mind, douchebag!
Click-bait horseshit pot-stirring garbage sauce.

[HCM]

Body armor on badguys does happen, even if you’re crazy to prepare for that. Also, two carloads of badguys does happen. Getting lit up for trying to stop people breaking into cars has gotten a couple of people, including a Cop killed here in the last few years since car burglars almost always have guns, because idiots store guns in cars.

ETA: It doesn’t matter if you’re using a carbine or a shotgun if you start getting shot at by the guys in the second car that you didn’t see.


https://youtu.be/yrJpWS7ylE4


I live in a decent neighborhood, and a local community officer puts out a weekly crime report, which is almost entirely shoplifting from nearby stores, catalytic converter thefts, and crooks stealing stuff from unlocked cars. Every couple months, there's a report that one of the things stolen from an unlocked car is a handgun. It's dumbfounding.

I'd bet the body armor the suspect was wearing was stolen out of a vehicle as well.

[mmc45414]

I'd not be wanting to grab the barrel of my gauge no matter how long it is.
Didn't make it all the way through the video yet. I am old and weak and not very big and not formally trained with a shotgun but somebody being able to grab a shotgun that I am holding with two hands and taking it away from me from the muzzle end and me not being able to shoot them in the process is pretty far down on my worry list.

Apparently autoloader reliability was mentioned later in the video. This is where I will take comfort in personal experience. I have probably over 10k (maybe flawless) rounds through my Beretta 391. I bought a new 1301 that works the same way, so... I think this is just like my comfort with the 1911, I am sure I have over a hundred thousand personal experiences supporting my comfort level.

Another vote for Clickbait. Damnit, I clicked!!! :cool:

[Navin Johnson]

So....... With modern soft points or full copper hollow point whatever's...... A 30 round AR mag is only good for four people?

Seriously 5 to 7 rounds per person??

[Unobtanium]

So....... With modern soft points or full copper hollow point whatever's...... A 30 round AR mag is only good for four people?

Seriously 5 to 7 rounds per person??

Killing someone and stopping someone are not mutually exclusive. A shotgun with the proper ammunition at the proper distance is going go create much more blood loss than a 5.56. Either will disrupt the CNS, in which case this goes out the window. Short of CNS disruption, blood loss is the only way (not counting skeletal dismemberment or disruption, as with breaking down large game, but people have firearms and breaking them down may or may not win the fight and stop their actions of consequence. )

[joshs]

So....... With modern soft points or full copper hollow point whatever's...... A 30 round AR mag is only good for four people?

Seriously 5 to 7 rounds per person??

If you don't get a CNS hit or a psychological stop, how many rounds can you fire at inside a home distance with an AR before you're likely to get enough visual feedback to realize you can stop shooting?

[Navin Johnson]

If you don't get a CNS hit or a psychological stop, how many rounds can you fire at inside a home distance with an AR before you're likely to get enough visual feedback to realize you can stop shooting?

I would agree inside of home distances with the speed one can fire a rifle. I was thinking in general with a rifle where it could be used at distance and the effects of good hits would have more time to take effect.

Along those same lines with low recoil buck and a semi-automatic shotgun one would probably fire at least two to four rounds before they saw meaningful effects and the signal from the brain to stop pulling the trigger got to the extremities

[OlongJohnson]

Along those same lines with low recoil buck and a semi-automatic shotgun one would probably fire at least two to four rounds before they saw meaningful effects and the signal from the brain to stop pulling the trigger got to the extremities

"Assessment speed"

[MickAK]

Body armor on badguys does happen, even if you’re crazy to prepare for that. Also, two carloads of badguys does happen. Getting lit up for trying to stop people breaking into cars has gotten a couple of people, including a Cop killed here in the last few years since car burglars almost always have guns, because idiots store guns in cars.

ETA: It doesn’t matter if you’re using a carbine or a shotgun if you start getting shot at by the guys in the second car that you didn’t see.


https://youtu.be/yrJpWS7ylE4

Vehicles are a large part of why I'm considering shifting my longarm focus from AR to shotgun. As I don't have no-shoots in vehicles, not being LE, the ability to deliver a lot of lead in a short period of time before I make the decision to run like hell is attractive.

[mmc45414]

touts his PCC which is a 2 stamp solution.
About the same amount of money I just paid for a new 590 just for permission slips.

[Unobtanium]

If you don't get a CNS hit or a psychological stop, how many rounds can you fire at inside a home distance with an AR before you're likely to get enough visual feedback to realize you can stop shooting?

I have a friend who shot someone with a shotgun, with the proper load, at the proper distance. He was a Force Recon guy. He was in some shithole town in the sandbox on a roof, when Terry popped up on an adjacent roof or something similar. They both kinda surprised each other, he said. He fired 2 rounds. One into Terry, and one into the space where Terry was. Literally that pop-flop. There was no "shoot them to the ground...5-7x." It was boomdone.

Why? I think it likely one of the 00 projectiles clipped or disrupted the spine, and dropped the guy immediately, and he bled out very shortly thereafter. This is a buckshot and soft foster slug thing. Higher probability thereof. It is also why 300wm can drop animals like a boss. The TSC is large and violent enough to disrupt the spinal column and shock the cord whenbthe vertebra violently separate and return to their normal position. The animal then bleeds out before it regains its feet. This leads to the term "stopping power", because it literally IS....the round is disruptive enough to STOP something, and it bleeds out before it gets up. Now, as applies to handguns and so forth, it is rather misused, by and large.

[OlongJohnson]

This leads to the term "stopping power", because it literally IS....the round is disruptive enough to STOP something, and it bleeds out before it gets up. Now, as applies to handguns and so forth, it is rather misused, by and large.

Just yesterday, I was thinking about the chapters in The Hunting Rifle (1970) by O'Connor. He has one about how wonderfully adequate the 7x57 is, and how excellently effective the .270 Winchester is. And a chapter about how awesome the .375 H&H is if you can put the bullet in the right place.

That latter chapter is not quoted nearly as often as the others, for some reason.

[GearFondler]

Handgun calibers should probably be compared by their "pausing power".

[blues]

Handgun calibers should probably be compared by their "pausing power".

Let's take a moment to consider...


(I like your idea.)

[Unobtanium]

Handgun calibers should probably be compared by their "pausing power".

Unless they hit the CNS, handguns in common service calibers just poke holes. Imagine them as rods of rebar slammed through someone. If they mad...they don't know until they get a little dizzy.