AR as a home defense gun?

[Rastoff]

There's the lack of effective range when using buckshot.

Remember this is a "home defense" situation. Lack of effective range? Maybe in the Hearst castle, but not in 99.99% of the homes in the US. I personally know guys that have taken deer at 100 yards with buckshot. No, I don't think range is an issue when comparing these two tools.

Also the liability issues from the spread of the pattern. I have an enduring memory of a gray object on a sidwalk that turned out to be a hostages brain. Seems a stray pellet evulsed it from the head of a hostage.

Yes, I see that. Even so, at the distances we're talking about the likelihood of a miss is a wash between the two guns. (Nice word usage. I had to look it up too and that doesn't happen often.)

Then there's the cost of training and qualification.

Hmmm, training will cost the same. Ammo might be a shade more, but you use less of it during training.


This has been an interesting thread. I'm certainly changing my position on the AR as a home defense gun. I'm glad I started it.

 

[CrustyShellback]

Lack of effective range when using buckshot?

If I'm in my house, there isn't any range that a shotgun, loaded with buck, isn't going to rip limbs off.

If I'm going outside, that would depend on the situation... but in a HD situation, bringing up "effective range" of buckshot, is a moot point.

 

[WR Moore]

The "lack of effective range" with buckshot comment was concerning why patrol rifles are replacing shotguns in many LE agencies. We're talking streets, folks, not living rooms. I also know guys who've claimed to have killed deer at 100 yards with buckshot. Somehow witnesses are real scarce. There's a difference between dumb luck and significant chance of success. Premium buckshot & optimized chokes can possibly extend the range, but most LE agencies are using lowest bidder & cylinder bore. When I started at my present employer, WW buckshot could put pellets off a B27 at 25 yards.

Also a lack of plaintiffs counsel in the deer woods to litigate over the pellets that might have struck someone/something else. This unfortunate sampling might have lived another century and become a mighty oak!!!!

I'd also argue the ammo cost differential if we're talking proper shotgun training, not the 5 rounds at 15 & 25 yard training & qualifications that all too many agencies use(d).

 

[Rastoff]

The "lack of effective range" with buckshot comment was concerning why patrol rifles are replacing shotguns in many LE agencies. We're talking streets, folks, not living rooms.

That may be true, but this thread is about living rooms not streets.



Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

[rojodiablo]

The "lack of effective range" with buckshot comment was concerning why patrol rifles are replacing shotguns in many LE agencies. We're talking streets, folks, not living rooms. I also know guys who've claimed to have killed deer at 100 yards with buckshot. Somehow witnesses are real scarce. There's a difference between dumb luck and significant chance of success. Premium buckshot & optimized chokes can possibly extend the range, but most LE agencies are using lowest bidder & cylinder bore. When I started at my present employer, WW buckshot could put pellets off a B27 at 25 yards.

Also a lack of plaintiffs counsel in the deer woods to litigate over the pellets that might have struck someone/something else. This unfortunate sampling might have lived another century and become a mighty oak!!!!

I'd also argue the ammo cost differential if we're talking proper shotgun training, not the 5 rounds at 15 & 25 yard training & qualifications that all too many agencies use(d).

These are well trained LEO we are talking about in your post.
Which is precisely why they should be using a shotgun instead of a pistol or rifle. Seems like they often can't hit the broad side of a barn, and if it were down to a uniformed officer trying to take a precision shot to save me????? I'd shoot myself in the leg to save him the trouble.

 

[ChattanoogaPhil]

That may be true, but this thread is about living rooms not streets.



Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

WR was answering a question I had posed to another member. It was posted that there's a reason law enforcement is swapping from shotguns to ARs. I asked the reason. WR answered. Let's move on.

 

[cyphertext]

Premium buckshot & optimized chokes can possibly extend the range, but most LE agencies are using lowest bidder & cylinder bore. When I started at my present employer, WW buckshot could put pellets off a B27 at 25 yards.

I'll second this. I am not using premium, low recoil, flight control type buck and my HD shotgun has cylinder bore. Across the room, less than 10 yard type distance, I have a softball size pattern. Back it up 12 to 15 yards, opens up to chest size pattern, very possible for pellets to be off target. Out at 25 yards, guaranteed to have at least 3 out of 9 pellets off the target. This is aiming center of mass.

 

[bhayles]

It seems that the folks replying here assume that civilians are untrained...except for them, of course...

There is a lot of talk here that puts trained LEOs in one group and the great unwashed masses...the rest of us...in another. Why?

I contend that if someone plans to own a firearm and use it as a home defense weapon then, if they are responsible (and we ARE responsible, aren't we?) they will avail themselves of training as well, no?

So...while the discussion of which type of gun to use goes on, and the different locations of probable uses (inside a home vs "the streets) is part of the equation, seperating the groups by training is a non-starter. There is nothing about putting on a badge and a gun to go to work that makes one superhuman or trained like a Navy SEAL, and NOT being an LEO does not make civilians incompetant.

Blast away.

 

[ChattanoogaPhil]

It seems that the folks replying here assume that civilians are untrained...except for them, of course...

There is a lot of talk here that puts trained LEOs in one group and the great unwashed masses...the rest of us...in another. Why?

I contend that if someone plans to own a firearm and use it as a home defense weapon then, if they are responsible (and we ARE responsible, aren't we?) they will avail themselves of training as well, no?

So...while the discussion of which type of gun to use goes on, and the different locations of probable uses (iUnside a home vs "the streets) is part of the equation, seperating the groups by training is a non-starter. There is nothing about putting on a badge and a gun to go to work that makes one superhuman or trained like a Navy SEAL, and NOT being an LEO does not make civilians incompetant.

Blast away.

We're getting way off track, but the answer is no. Average Joe/Jane gun owner has no clue. Lucky if they can remember what drawer or closet it's in. Never the less, they often somehow successfully muddle through using a gun in self defense.

Those of us who are gun enthusiats practicing with thousands of rounds a year, jabbering on gun Forums all the time, are the exception among the hundred+ million gun owners in America. Gun enthusiasts tend to know other gun enthusiasts and it's easy to get a false sense that most others view guns and the responsibility that goes along with it the same. Most don't.

 

[Mister X]

The handgun makes the most sense in the majority of home defense situations although the AR and shotgun do have their place such as when barricaded in a safe room or other fixed location. If someone is going to pick only one, them definitely go with a handgun. Quick access and quick to get on target in response to a sudden unexpected violent encounter and also consider not all home defense scenarios play out only at night. Plus you may have to move to family members located in other parts of the home and performing routine tasks like answering the door with an AR or shotgun in hand is a bit extreme and moving through the home with a long-gun in hand is tactically inefficient due to restricted maneuverability as well as disarm risks. SWAT entry teams use them, but they are multiple-membered teams performing pre-planned offensive acts on their own timing and terms unlike the defensive reactive response the civilian homeowner who reacts alone in response to a unexpected home invasion.

WILSON DEFENSE JOURNAL: Role of the Handgun

 

[Muss Muggins]

Wow. Next time you get assaulted, let's hope it's completely dark, you are damn near completely asleep, the perp is moving quickly left and right, and down behind cover and shooting at you. Then explain to me about shot placement.

Because last time I was in a shooting situation, it was 2am, I was dead from a 15hr workday, had a baby to consider in the room right next to me, and was being shot at in total darkness, with multiple perps (Only 1 shooter though) and a whole lot of confusion. I really wish I had shown up with the shotgun, to make my part of the show more simplified. Instead, I was in the weird position of sending a full magazine at a moving person who shot back, and then into his vehicle as he shot and sped away. It was kinda toe to toe throwing ammo. Shot placement on MY part was much better than his, thankfully.

But I'd have rather never done it in the first place. Please; give up on the fantasy of pinpoint accuracy, and having the advantage of superior weaponry and training. It does not really work a lot like that when the director says "Action". Yes, your training does go onto motion, and you react to the ability you can and are trained. But a few critical steps are always missed.....

Is there a link to a news story regarding this incident?

 

[spad124]

We're getting way off track, but the answer is no. Average Joe/Jane gun owner has no clue. Lucky if they can remember what drawer or closet it's in. Never the less, they often somehow successfully muddle through using a gun in self defense.

Those of us who are gun enthusiats practicing with thousands of rounds a year, jabbering on gun Forums all the time, are the exception among the hundred+ million gun owners in America. Gun enthusiasts tend to know other gun enthusiasts and it's easy to get a false sense that most others view guns and the responsibility that goes along with it the same. Most don't.

A 911 tape was released yesterday from the Chicago PD in which an off duty Chicago LEO gets into an altercation across his backyard fence with an 86 year old neighbor who brings a shotgun out of the house. On the recording you can hear multiple people shouting and then 10 or 11 shots as the officer shoots his neighbor. I've thankfully never been in a gunfight but the situation is certainly not calm or as controlled as we try to write it up in these posts.

 

[Jamie]

My .02, either my AR or my 870 have more stopping power than my handguns. The AR is lighter, carries more ammo than the 870, (though if I count pellets...). IMO the 870 will stop someone COMPLETELY more often than my AR. Inside my house, the 870 is the weapon I'd most like in my hands, (or my wife's, yes, she shoots it AND likes it), range in the house doesn't really matter. If I move outside, now I'm more likely getting into an offensive situation. Plain 00 buck will cover a person out to about my street, if a pellet or two miss, the neighbor is another 25 yards or so across the street, (maybe the AR would be a better choice). Flite Control or slugs would be preferred for say, a vehicle with occupants shooting at my house, this ASSumes I have the thought process to load them at the right time. Of course, should I be shooting back at a vehicle when I could hide behind a concrete block wall? I'm sure I could argue "I was afraid for my life and my family's.." but if a stray bullet or pellet hits a neighbor it could be argued I was NOT defending, I went outside and became offensive....nope, not interested in a gunfight

 

[A10]

...nope, not interested in a gunfight

Pretty much sums it up for me too......

 

[Rastoff]

...the situation is certainly not calm or as controlled...

This is the universal truth here. This is why practice is so important. If a person practices enough, it becomes second nature. When the stress of the situation hits, they will simply react and react properly.

This is also why I harp on training. Without the proper training, practice will only reinforce bad habits.

I've said before, when I started this, I thought the AR was not a great home defense tool. My stance on that has changed. What has not changed is if it's the tool that you're most familiar with, it's the right tool to use in any situation.

 

[Muss Muggins]

I would use my Colt M4 as a home defense weapon in a heartbeat, although it might not be the first weapon I head to. Always remember, your little gun is to be used to fight your way to your big gun . . .

 

[rojodiablo]

I would use my Colt M4 as a home defense weapon in a heartbeat, although it might not be the first weapon I head to. Always remember, your little gun is to be used to fight your way to your big gun . . .

I concur. Use the 223 to fight your way to a big rifle. M4 IS a little gun.

 

[bhayles]

My nephew was over yesterday...24 years old, full of piss and vinegar...and a member of the Army's special forces. He says the M4 is his favorite weapon for close in, home defense type use.

Big enough for him, big enough for me.

 

[Rastoff]

I concur. Use the 223 to fight your way to a big rifle. M4 IS a little gun.

Brother, if you need a bigger gun, you're in a world of hurry and probably won't survive it. [emoji6]

 

[rojodiablo]

Brother, if you need a bigger gun, you're in a world of hurry and probably won't survive it. [emoji6]

Shotgun. Bore is about 7/8" vs. .223


Yes, a bigger gun.

At this point, this thread could use a visit from the SPCA, for beating a dead horse!! (It's all in fun at this point.......)