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

[JRB]

At this point, I'd be more concerned about being on the right side of the law when using lethal force than the particular specific type of lethal force I have at hand.

Drawing on my military experience I think it's prudent for me to stick with an AR, simply because operating it is muscle memory at this point. I can keep that much more of my situational awareness on the situation at hand instead of wasting 'operator headspace' on manipulating a weapon system I've spent less time using. But I'd feel pretty comfortable with a 7 or 8 round Benelli or 870 full of Brenneke slugs or Flite-Control if that's what I happen to have. A 1301 or Benelli has been on the 'short list' for awhile but I missed the chance to grab one before all the current craziness started.

There's a 'why not both?' argument to be made, perhaps, for a vetted & tuned Saiga-12 or VEPR-12 with a drum magazine. But short of a belt-fed machine gun I can't imagine a worse weapon system to show to a jury.

[Rex G]

On a tangent, I was pondering a few points and just sorta thinking out loud here... so please pardon my rambling...

- According to reports, Rittenhouse seemingly fired 4 rounds in the initial encounter with Rosenbaum (red shirt guy). The head shot is being widely reported as a grazing wound, and it is reported that the fatal shot was to the torso. Would a shotgun used in the same circumstances required fewer rounds?

- Guns are loud. 5.56 is somewhere around 165+ decibels. Is it possible that the sound of the gunshots had a chilling effect on the motivation of the other potential attackers? Would a shotgun have had the same potential effect? It's impossible to know. Seeing their compatriots being shot could have been a significantly contributing factor to their decision to not press the attack.

1. A grazing head wound, with a rifle, would be a deeper graze, with a shotgun slug, and half of the pattern, if a swarm of pellets.

2. In short, yes. Find, and listen to, Ed Mireles‘ description of the devastating psychological effect of Platt’s Mini-14 shots, during that notable mid-Eighties gun battle, FBI-versus-Platt/Mattix.

[Rex G]

At this point, I'd be more concerned about being on the right side of the law when using lethal force than the particular specific type of lethal force I have at hand.

Drawing on my military experience I think it's prudent for me to stick with an AR, simply because operating it is muscle memory at this point. I can keep that much more of my situational awareness on the situation at hand instead of wasting 'operator headspace' on manipulating a weapon system I've spent less time using. But I'd feel pretty comfortable with a 7 or 8 round Benelli or 870 full of Brenneke slugs or Flite-Control if that's what I happen to have. A 1301 or Benelli has been on the 'short list' for awhile but I missed the chance to grab one before all the current craziness started.

There's a 'why not both?' argument to be made, perhaps, for a vetted & tuned Saiga-12 or VEPR-12 with a drum magazine. But short of a belt-fed machine gun I can't imagine a worse weapon system to show to a jury.

Well-said.

Re: “muscle memory,” I agree. Your conditioned reflexes are built around the AR system, whereas mine were built around shotguns, starting in the early Eighties, whereas I started AR-Fifteening in 2002, at age 40, and have far more total trigger time with shotguns. I reached for the shotgun, countless times, during a three-decade-plus police career, but only got the patrol carbine of out its then-mandated cased-in-the trunk condition thrice, during a relatively few years or being a “carbine unit,” that I can recall. With a moment to get my mind lined-up, I am OK with the AR15/M4 system, but with two specific shotguns, I can do most things unconsciously, most of the time.

[Seven_Sicks_Two]

1. A grazing head wound, with a rifle, would be a deeper graze, with a shotgun slug, and half of the pattern, if a swarm of pellets.

2. In short, yes. Find, and listen to, Ed Mireles‘ description of the devastating psychological effect of Platt’s Mini-14 shots, during that notable mid-Eighties gun battle, FBI-versus-Platt/Mattix.

Regarding point #2. That's kinda what i was thinking. I've listened to the Mireles interview on (the excellent) Ballistic Radio podcast, but had forgotten that point. To go further down that rabbit hole, and again, just sorta thinking out loud, could there be a potential advantage to an SBR/braced pistol? 5.56 out of a 10.5-12.5" barrel is pretty concussive, particularly with a brake. I suppose the noise could have the potential to work both ways though.

[Rex G]

Regarding point #2. That's kinda what i was thinking. I've listened to the Mireles interview on (the excellent) Ballistic Radio podcast, but had forgotten that point. To go further down that rabbit hole, and again, just sorta thinking out loud, could there be a potential advantage to an SBR/braced pistol? 5.56 out of a 10.5-12.5" barrel is pretty concussive, particularly with a brake. I suppose the noise could have the potential to work both ways though.

If you are more ready for the blast, than your opponent, probably so. Of course, the worst of that blast does go outward, and An extreme-close-range opponent is closer to the sonic wave, if super-sonic.

Look up Darryl Bolke’s thoughts on the flash-bang effect of short-barreled .357 Magnum revolvers.

[JRB]

Regarding point #2. That's kinda what i was thinking. I've listened to the Mireles interview on (the excellent) Ballistic Radio podcast, but had forgotten that point. To go further down that rabbit hole, and again, just sorta thinking out loud, could there be a potential advantage to an SBR/braced pistol? 5.56 out of a 10.5-12.5" barrel is pretty concussive, particularly with a brake. I suppose the noise could have the potential to work both ways though.

I fired one round outdoors from my 11.5in Colt without earpro as a 'what if' experiment. It cured me of any notion of using it without earpro if there's any way I could help it. Once funds permit, I'm getting a YHM Turbo or Turbo K for it.

If a truly effective muzzle device exists that 'forwards' the muzzle blast better than the A2 flash hider, that would be almost mandatory for defensive use IMHO. I'd also keep that an 'outside only' sort of solution if at all possible.

But there's definitely some psych value to the muzzle blast. A fire team of guys with M4's on semi that start dumping suppressing fire sounds like hell unleashed without earpro, especially to folks without 'trained' ears. Throw in a SAW gunner that has the shorter barrels for his SAW and it's just that much more of the same. That's one of the few non-cost arguments against issuing suppressors DoD wide.

[03RN]

Not to say any of that is wrong, but the Benelli M4 has been bought by a lot of militaries. Many someones still see a new for the shotgun in combat. Whether they are right is another question.

I used one in Fallujah

[03RN]

Id have no problem riding the river with a 590.

There is nothing that happened that night that changed my mind.

[RevolverRob]

So, let's summarize this thread:

1) No most people's opinions have not been changed regarding current riots. They had already chosen their offensive/defensive weapons of choice due to experience, familiarity, and/or comfort.

2) 12-gauge buck is still the superior load at close range.

3) If your fight(s) may extend beyond normal urban ranges or are against armored targets - get a carbine or carbine-style pistol.

[03RN]

I have worked hundreds of "protests" in my police career, many of which devolved into riots. I have skirmished with these wannabe revolutionary idiots countless times. They are undisciplined cowards. They are not going to keep coming like waves of Moros after you shoot a few of them -- you can safely put that out of your mind as a tactical concern.

I think underestimating your enemy is dangerous