Are Shotguns Really Old and Busted?

[TheRoland]

So, I've been following the NY Long Gun Thread, and it took several pages for someone to mention a Remington 870 or Mossberg 500/590 as an option for OP. Even once mentioned, things like bolt-action rifles, lever guns, exotic AR pump-actions rifles all came up a lot more. GJM did mention Benelli M1/M2s pretty quickly, to be fair, but not much came of that mention.

Shotguns seems like they're going out of style for LEO applications, but for homeowners, especially in the coastal blue states, are they really so far down this list? Why? Is a lever gun really more practical or effective than a pump-action shotgun? If they're still relevant at all, what's the state-of-the-art for shotguns? Are pumps totally old news?

[Sherman A. House DDS]

I don't think they are. I used one for work, and still use one today. I think the push for civvies to run M4 style carbines, is the thinking that, "If the local PD and the USA are using them, then I need one too!" Which isn't necessarily untrue, but it also shouldn't supplant the shotgun for the civilian self defense mission. I wrote an article about this, just a week ago.

http://revolverscience.com/2016/03/1...omes-the-boom/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[spinmove_]

Honestly, the shotgun simply isn't what the cool kids are toting these days. The cool kids all have M4gerys with M-Lok fore ends and red dots or decked out AKs. Even cooler kids have Tavors.

A simple Mossberg 500 with a sling and a light is quite a lot of kick ass for not a lot of dough. I'd say for a home defense setup that you don't want to spend a ton of money on that's easy and cost effective to replace its really hard to beat. Feed it the right ammo and its kinda scary how precise you can be with one.

[BehindBlueI's]

Probably. Cost efficient and effective is no match for glossy color magazine covers and tacticoolness. Of course, I still think revolvers work just fine, so what the hell do I know?

[Dagga Boy]

I am penning a couple of shotgun articles right now. In California, the 870 was my primary long gun.

[Peally]

Simply a niche weapon (I think of them more like grenade launchers than AR-15 wannabes; lots of flavors of ammo to choose from).

[BillSWPA]

Tom Givens made the point elsewhere that he had no instances in his database about a shotgun ever having to be reloaded in a self-defense situation due to its stopping power advantage. That piece of information, combined with the testing done by another individual I respect showing how much faster a semiauto shotgun is than a pump shotgun, plus the Beretta 1301 thread here, have me potentially adding a 1301 Tactical to my wish list.

Many years ago I had the chance to pick up a police trade-in 870 at a gun show for about $150. One of those is one of the few guns I regret passing on. That would have been a very inexpensive, easily upgradable entry into defensive shotguns. Check out the functions, replace the stocks with something synthetic, extend the magazine tube, and add high visibility sights and a light, and cost still wouldn't be too bad.

Having said that, having seen video of what M855 (SS109) ball 5.56 ammo does to a gelatin block convinces me that even this choice in ammo out of an AR platform would ruin someone's day. Particularly with better ammo, decent stopping power with excellent accuracy and low recoil and a large magazine capacity is quite appealing. Adding minimized penetration of interior walls as compared to almost any other defensive choice, and it looks line a winning choice.

Part of what might make me choose a rifle over a shotgun - or vice versa - is where it will be used and under what circumstances. Inside a house, where it can be kept loaded and locked up, where distances will be short, and where anything that needs to be stopped needs to be stopped with particular decisiveness, a shotgun seems ideal. If the gun is kept in a vehicle, the fact that a rifle can be kept unloaded with a readily available box magazine (in a sufficiently separate location so that the gun is considered legally unloaded), and then loaded quickly when needed, might make even a bolt action rifle attractive over a shotgun.

[45dotACP]

I'd pick a pump gun before a lever action or bolt action any day of the week...5 rounds of a manually operated .223 vs 5 rounds of a manually operated 12 gauge is a no contest in my mind.

If I only needed two guns ever they'd be a 12 gauge shotgun and a .44 revolver simply because the enormity of roles you can fill with both firearms. Everything from defensive arm, to sporting arm to hunting arm.

Fortunately, I don't have to limit myself to two guns ever. That'd be just torture...

[SeriousStudent]

Simply a niche weapon (I think of them more like grenade launchers than AR-15 wannabes; lots of flavors of ammo to choose from).

Very much this, in my humble opinion. I've always treated them like mortars.

Heavy, requiring manual operation with a single round, but devastating if employed correctly.

And I would appreciate it if I could find a couple of young Lance Coolie's to hump the ammo for me.

[HCM]

For LEO's one of the big draws for the M4 is the cycle of operation is similar to the semi auto pistol they are most familiar with. We have more 14" 870's than M4's but maybe 1/3 of our officers can run them worth a damn.

IME Shotguns also tend to favor "full size operators" as Nyeti says. Not that smaller shooters cant run them but physics is physics and mass are an advantage with full power loads.

One reason I don't shoot shotgun more is outside of work, several of the local ranges prohibit shooting slugs or buck shot because they tear up the range and/or backers.