Mission drives the gear… (PR-RIP)
Outside the house in my urban/suburban environment- Glock 19 or bigger. These days G17 w an RDS.
Inside my house-Mossberg 500 with FC 00 Buck (though at my longest shot range, inside an older (circa 1920s) home, any buck shot is staying on target/inside the house.
IMHO-with my Shotgun 0-15 yards, with FC 00 Buck, if I knew I was facing a deadly threat, I will take the SG for 500 Alex.
I am not your attorney. I am not giving legal advice. Any and all opinions expressed are personal and my own and are not those of any employer-past, present or future.
Originally Posted by Borderland
Literally where the defensive shotgun is unchallenged.
If someone shoots a Beretta or Benelli for sporting clays, wing shooting, or competitive endeavors where they break clay then they are getting behind the gun and working with it on a regular basis. "I shoot a Beretta A400 twice a month for clays" would be music to my ears for someone considering a 1301. That whole "recent and relevant" thing is working in their favor. Similarly if somebody shoots a Benelli to break clay or take birds, an M4 that works identically to their field gun is probably a splendid idea even if it's more expensive than the 1301 because they're already running that set of controls on a regular basis with something on the line.
It's going to be the same as somebody who competes in IDPA or USPSA with the same setup they run for concealed carry. If somebody's hobby work is with a gun that matches the function of the gun they are using for social purposes it's enormously helpful to their ability to run the gun.
I personally don't have much use for Stack-A-Toe pistols, but last week I watched a USPSA Master class shooter running one in Tom Givens' IDC. He has run a 2011 style pistol in competition for years and so he's familiar with the things you need to do to keep such a beast happy. His carry gun is set up almost identically to his competition gun, just with a slightly heavier trigger. For him, that Stack-A-Toe makes all kinds of sense because he's running the same grip, controls, and a very similar optic on his gamer rig. Time on that translates directly to his ability to shoot his chosen carry gun. If somebody can get that kind of synergy on a shotgun that would have all the same benefits.
In that situation I'd probably even leave the factory stock on the gun so it mounts as similarly as possible to the game gun.
3/15/2016
At this point I have had dozens of police officers and more than a dozen people with significant military combat experience in class. The military folks include people who spent almost 20 years in SF, people who did two tours in the Ranger Regiment, and people who spent a lot of years in the USMC and participated in various middle-eastern adventures including the battle of Fallujah, which is the heaviest urban combat US forces have seen since WWII. The police officers have typically been veteran officers who serve on tactical teams and/or firearms instructors. Often they have been in multiple UOF incidents with pistols and rifles.
Out of those dozens of people who have shot a whole metric boatload of people with rifles (especially on the military side) and pistols, there isn't a single one who would willingly choose a pistol over a shotgun for the kind of room distance work the typical citizen faces in a real world defensive situation because a pistol is weak fucking gruel and the threat from one or more bad guys a room's distance away from you is severe. Beyond that, every single one of them was in my shotgun class because boatloads of experience actually shooting deserving motherfuckers with M4's taught them that bad guys needed at least 5 rounds and usually more in the range of 7 to reliably put out of the fight. Or, as some of them observed up close, one round from a shotgun.
Violence inside the confines of the US is not happening at 70 yards except in very, very rare occasions. Especially not in home invasion/home defense scenarios.
I'm a severely atypical person in that I have actually been shot at from more than 200 yards away inside the confines of the United States. Minding my own business talking to a friend in his yard, someone drove by and emptied a magazine from a 1911 right at us.
Even if I had a rifle on me at the time...which I did not because nobody who isn't on a SWAT team actually has a rifle on their person inside populated areas of the US...returning fire would have likely resulted in facing serious legal trouble because it's damned difficult to justify shooting someone at that kind of rifle distance even though there was clear physical evidence I had actually been shot at. It's incredibly difficult for me to argue immediate unavoidable jeopardy from a guy winging pistol shots at me from more than 200 yards away.
The vast majority of real world uses of a firearm...especially in home defense...are happening at distances where a shotgun is damn near the proverbial hammer of fucking Thor when applied against a lethal threat. Its ability to reliably put an end to the hostile actions of a threat at the distances where violence typically occurs is unmatched by any other weapon you can hold in your hands.
If you believe a rifle does the same things, you're simply wrong.
To quote DocGKR posted on this very forum:
Law enforcement 12 ga. shotguns using buckshot of #1 or larger size offer greater close range physiological incapacitation potential than virtually any other commonly used shoulder fired weapon-- this can be a significant advantage during urban entry missions and high risk warrant service in closely confined settings.
To quote Tom Givens, posted on this very forum:
The carbine is not equal to a shotgun in close range damage. Many top tier carbine instructors now teach a 5-7 round burst at close quarters to make up for the lackluster effect of 1 ball round on determined targets. It takes longer to fire 5-7 rounds from a carbine than to fire 8-9 pellets of 00 in one shot. If you fire 5-7 rounds from your carbine per target, it effectively holds no more ammo than a 5-6 round shotgun.
I am personally familiar with 3 shootings in this area where 1 stray pellet of 00 per incident killed a bystander, crippled a police officer, and killed a deputy sheriff in three shootings. That's just in this metro area. That's why we are somewhat concerned about large patterns.
What shotguns do better than anything else we have access to is turn motherfuckers off at the kind of ranges where violence typically happens. This is a significant advantage to someone who is working alone and is outnumbered by bad guys, especially in a confined space where opportunities for maneuver are limited.
If there is ever a small group of people who want to kill me, I pray to God above they are fucking stupid enough to try and come get me inside a structure I'm familiar with when I have a 12 gauge handy.
3/15/2016
A better assessment for your home defense needs might be found here.
https://www.pewpewtactical.com/best-home-defense-gun/
Don't go all Shotgun Joe on me here. It ain't that simple.
Last edited by Borderland; 09-24-2022 at 08:00 PM.
In the P-F basket of deplorables.
Really? Care to give us some examples of home defense shootings? I think you'll find that it's done with pistols/revolvers but I'm open to consider anything you might find.
Literally where the defensive shotgun is unchallenged.
Last edited by Borderland; 09-24-2022 at 08:20 PM.
In the P-F basket of deplorables.
I’m not sure what kind of examples you’re looking for because I’m not 100% sure what you’re asking. Are you asking about what’s more common or what’s more effective? If they’re examples of what’s more terminally effective, just look at any news story about anyone who was shot with a handgun and lived. Talk to any ER nurse or doctor in a busy metro area about how many people they see on a regular basis who have been shot with handguns and are easy to treat and how many of them are discharged within 24 hours. Ask any police officer who has responded to a call about people shot with handguns or any officer who was shot and continued to fight. Handguns just aren’t very effective at actually putting people down and I can’t imagine anyone seriously arguing they’re more effective than either type of long gun and actually believing what they’re saying. Now ask the same folks about incidents where people have been shot with a long gun. You’ll find that people who take peripheral hits aren’t physiologically stopped with whatever they’ve been shot with. You’ll also find that when people take solid upper thoracic hits with rifles or shotguns, they’re quite often put down for the count. Check out your stack of NRA magazines and look at the armed citizen column. You’ll likely find that the stories in which the defender used a long gun result in dead bad guys more often than the ones in which the defender shot someone with a handgun. Those stories quite often end with someone going to the hospital and the police arresting them after they’re discharged.
Handgun uses are definitely more common than long gun uses. You’ll find more examples of handguns used in shootings than any other type of firearm because that’s what people are carrying to commit crimes, respond to crimes, or defend themselves from crimes. Criminals tend to use handguns because they’re easier to conceal, although AR and AK pistols are becoming increasingly common. Good guys tend to use handguns because that’s what they have on them when they’re out and about, whether that’s the police or private citizens. The military is probably the only context in which long guns are used more often than handguns when it comes to shooting people.
If you’re talking about effectiveness within an ECQC kind of grappling affair where two people are fighting over a gun, it might be easier to position your handgun in a manner to shoot the bad guy than if you’re fighting them over a long gun.
My posts only represent my personal opinion and do not necessarily reflect the opinions or official policies of any employer, past or present. Obvious spelling errors are likely the result of an iPhone keyboard.
You didn't cite any statistics of home defense shootings. I'm looking for the firearms used in home defense shootings. That simple. Was it a rifle, a shotgun or a pistol? That information may not be available but I would still propose that it matters in home defense shootings and what people regard as a home defense firearm. That's what I am questioning here. What do people actually use in home defense shootings?
I understand the value of each platform. I'm not trying to put one over the other. I have all three. I can choose any of those for my particular needs.
Last edited by Borderland; 09-24-2022 at 09:48 PM.
In the P-F basket of deplorables.
I don’t really care what most people use or prefer. Most gun owners have no training or experience and no clue what they’re doing. I only care about what knowledgeable and experienced people have to say because not all opinions are created equal.
My posts only represent my personal opinion and do not necessarily reflect the opinions or official policies of any employer, past or present. Obvious spelling errors are likely the result of an iPhone keyboard.
Yo, we're talking to a guy who wants a shotgun, not arguing what we personally think is best. I just posted this elsewhere, but the reason most HD shootings involve a handgun is because it's what people have, not because they have a plan. If you believe gross data of untrained people who often use suboptimal caliber handguns is a basis for best practice, go for it.
"Gunfighting is a thinking man's game. So we might want to bring thinking back into it."-MDFA
Beware of my temper, and the dog that I've found...
Reply With Quote