Has 2020's Riots Changed Your Mind On Shotguns? Still Viable?

[Malamute]

The effect of 00 buckshot at 100 yards. Draw your own conclusions.

https://youtu.be/sxymVClJVhU

I just put a red dot on my carbine which is what the dude in the video had on his shotgun I think, not sure. I'll see if I can do better.

Unfortunately, they gave no details on make and type of load (unless I missed it), how it patterned in their gun at various ranges, what choke if any on the gun, then drew a conclusion about "buckshot" that has limited relevance to other guns and loads.

[Maple Syrup Actual]

In general I have come around to the shotgun more this year than others, although I think there's a reasonable point being made here: when your potential number of attackers goes from a likely handful of home invaders to a big crowd, you're really relying on the psychological effect of killing the first few people. Which will probably work, don't get me wrong, but you pick your poison. Big wreck on the receiving end, but slower and harder to reload, or moderate effectiveness but lots of rounds on tap. If I thought I would have any cover at all, I'd take a shotgun over a carbine. If I thought I was going to have to run for it and trade shots while on the move or from unconventional positions, I'd rather have the carbine.

But I continue to like the short barreled shotgun as a vehicle standoff gun, even though a semi-auto would be easier to drive with. I like it precisely for that "stop the most enthusiastic assailants" effect. I'm fairly confident that I won't have to abandon my vehicle so that counts as a bit of cover, enough to rack and sideload anyway. And my belief is that the odds of getting into a protracted battle with protestors are really low - this came up in another thread and some people talked about "true believers" treating the situation like a suicide bombing, and getting involved no matter what, and I acknowledge this is possible, but my belief is still that if they're trying to drag you out of your car, and suddenly the two or three most committed individuals to the task are headless blood fountains...I really don't see many people volunteering to be next.

But I'm speculating, obviously. Anyway no, I understand the limits of the shotgun but I still think it works here.

[blues]

Inside my home I'm comfortable with either, but cognizant of the issues with a pump that can arise under stress, aside from other potential shortcomings.

Outside my home I'd generally opt for an AR...but I'm not sure that there is a perfect hard and fast rule...for either locale.

[jh9]

Has it entered into the calculus at all that the incident everyone is referring too was with ball ammo in the AR? (And/Or do we know for certain it was ball? The details all seem to be in flux.)

Would it change things at all if instead of comparing #00 to M193/M855 you compared it to a 64gr GDSP or similar bonded soft point? For the unarmored / soft armored use case, what about 55gr Vmax?

That seems like a relatively big detail.

[JohnO]

No weapon is perfect for all situations. The shotgun is a devastating weapon at close range. Inside a home it will certainly get the job done. However if a group of rioters are moving down your street and fire bombing as they approach I would not want to wait for them to get into shotgun range.

[RevolverRob]

Has it entered into the calculus at all that the incident everyone is referring too was with ball ammo in the AR? (And/Or do we know for certain it was ball? The details all seem to be in flux.)

Would it change things at all if instead of comparing #00 to M193/M855 you compared it to a 64gr GDSP or similar bonded soft point? For the unarmored / soft armored use case, what about 55gr Vmax?

That seems like a relatively big detail.

I think it's only a big deal in the event someone is armored. Otherwise, the gap between terminal efficacy of 5.56 vs. 12-gauge buck might as well be the Grand Canyon, even Gold Dot. Nothing a 5.56 can do, even at the muzzle, is going to compare to what 12-gauge buck can do out to ~25y.
___

These events have not changed my opinion on the efficacy and viability of the 12-gauge shotgun as a defensive tool. It remains one of my go-to option for entrenched defense.

However, none of this changes the facts that legal carry of a shotgun is difficult in many areas, including my normal AO. A shotgun may not be carried or transported loaded (which means ammo in the tube, even if chamber is empty) where I normally operate. As a result, the shotgun has never really been a defensive option outside the home and pistols (AR, well Sig Rattler, and a handgun) are the primary and secondary options.

The end result is, I don't prioritize shotgun work as much as I'd like or want to, since I can't carry them. If something changes and I find myself living in a state when I can tote a folding brace-equipped Tac-13 instead of my Rattler, I probably will. Because 12-gauge buck is superior in all but armor penetration. But until that happens an AR-type weapon is the primary.

We talk about 'mission drives the gear train' - too often we think only about accomplishing mission objectives and we do not always think about mission parameters, like rules of engagement.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Times and splits for 10 targets in an IDPA-ish match with an AR vs. a Winchester 1300 with 5 rounds , so a reload. (we settle on that even though some guns hold more). Don't have the times anymore but it is a substantial difference.

Bear at the back door - 5 slugs in the 1300 are fine. One dude, sure. Multi player melee. Carbine! Stopping power - it's good enough with either gun.

[scw2]

Reminds me of this incident that was brought up in another thread here regarding shotguns of a British SAS operative doing work with a Benelli M4. Granted they're in a team setting and have the initiative on an operation, but I'm fairly certain a terrorist group counts as fairly motivated opposition.

Relevant quotes from the linked article:

So just before dawn, a breaching team entered through a doorway into a courtyard. There, they ran into heavily armed opposition forces.

One of the breachers immediately opened fire with a Benelli M4 shotgun. In short order, he reportedly killed three would-be bombers.

“One of the breach team opened fire with a shotgun and shot dead three before they could get a shot off,” the source continued. “Another two terrorists appeared from a building and he neutralized them as well. It was a case of bang, bang, bang, then bang, bang. It was over in seven seconds."

Several other terrorists emerged from the building but immediately surrendered and began panicking as two of the bodies didn’t have heads – they thought they were about to be executed,

[Mitch]

I look at it a lot like revolvers and semi autos.

I’d prefer a shotgun for a shooting and an AR for a fight.

[5pins]

I think the intimidation factor of the shotgun is overplayed. After center punching skater boi and giving lefty his new name the other insurgence backed the fuck off quickly. I dought a shotgun would have had a better effect. It's hard for me to believe someone would react to an AR like it's no big deal but run like a little girl when seeing a shotgun.

People don't want to get shot and no one is looking at what kind of gun is being shot at them.

As far as performance on target? Whatever load he was using took skater boi and lefty out of the fight pretty quick.

As far as the original question; no 2020 has not change my mind. I like the AR-style before and still do.