More shotgun advice from the NRA

[Glenn E. Meyer]

https://www.americas1stfreedom.org/a...-self-defense/

Important things you should remember:

The rate of success in repelling invaders is likely due to the shotgun’s simple design, easy maneuverability and effectiveness in close distances. A shotgun is basically a point-and-pull mechanism—lacking the more complex mechanical details of pistols and carbine rifles. Most shotguns are simple to load and fire. Since most shotgun ammunition consists of shells filled with shot pellets, it is highly probable that a shotgun fired at close range will hit something of its target; this means that law-abiding gun owners seeking to defend themselves during home invasions need not have a perfect stance or superior marksmanship to wield a shotgun effectively.

Other important tips, if you read the article:

1. Shoot them in butt with birdshot. BTW, see Greg Ellifritz's latest on birdshot.

One small quote of the discussion:

Law-abiding shotgun owners do not need to use expensive ammunition to successfully defend themselves against intruders; shotguns function so effectively that even birdshot can effectively stop an intruder without causing fatal injury.

2. Scare them!

Also shotguns can be effective as deterrents; sometimes the mere sight of a shotgun is enough to frighten off an intruder.

The studies that show ARs are less scary, are they in the literature?

Note, I have a shotgun, trained with a shotgun, shot it in competition and think it is a fine weapon. I might change out the fancy flight controlled buck or expensive 'tactical' slugs for birdshot though. Why bother to aim? No cracks.

[BWT]

How do you take an endorsement of a shotgun as an indicator from the NRA that AR’s and pistols are not endorsed?

I can see that you’re concerned they’re endorsing shotguns but they’re not saying all you need is a shotgun. Perhaps I misread the article?

The NRA has its issues and I’m no longer an active member over some of the stuff going on - but I do not feel that this is an accurate characterization.

I say this as politely as I can.

[Bergeron]

Well, that’s a terrible article.

How, in the name of all things gun related, can NRA have P-F members published in Shooting Illustrated, yet print such total and complete derp in First Freedom?

[Borderland]

Shotgun Joe wrote that article under an alias.

He probably wants to see if he can dupe the NRA out of 30 million for his campaign.

[Totem Polar]

All I know is that @blues let the cat out of the bag the other day: I did not realize that I can go into my membership and choose "no magazine." When I have free time to monkey with it over the holiday break, I plan to do exactly that.

[blues]

All I know is that @blues let the cat out of the bag the other day: I did not realize that I can go into my membership and choose "no magazine." When I have free time to monkey with it over the holiday break, I plan to do exactly that.

When I get "Shooting Illustrated" I read Tam's column and then I toss it. I suppose I could just get the electronic version and save resources.

[the Schwartz]

When I get "Shooting Illustrated" I read Tam's column and then I toss it. I suppose I could just get the electronic version and save resources.

Tree killer!



😁

[Lex Luthier]

This has to give @Tamara a fair bit of eye twitch.

[blues]

Tree killer!



😁

Shhh...it'll be our secret.

[BehindBlueI's]

Recommending birdshot for defense in a lethal force situation should result in the equivalent of a malpractice lawsuit. Yeah, no shit, it works sometimes. So would a gun with blanks. Or a speaker playing the sound of gunshots. It'll work right up until you actually need to stop the threat physically. Then you're fucked. Maybe literally, depending on the intruder's intent.