Home Defense weapons

I've never been a fan of carbine, shotguns or any long gun for basic home defense. I don't like anything that requires two hands to operate or won't fit through a door or down a hall sideways.
I call the police to take the report. It seems like a bad idea to invite armed people, hopped up on adrenaline, to the party when they don't know the good guys from the bad guys.
 
I have seen the 9MM carbine advocated in areas where handgun ownership is restricted. there was an article recently in American Rifleman by a retired SF E-9 on house defense and clearing with an AR-15. In a shotgun birdshot and skeet shot are not to be trifled with a close range. Wide spread, reduced penetration of walls, low recoil. And the shotgun-like a the submachine gun-requires a lot more training than most realize, the effectiveness of "point and pull" is "greatly exaggerated." What really counts is the combat mindset.
The guns are just tools. The mind is the weapon.

Personally, I think BIRDSHOT is a horrendously BAD IDEA for self defense inside a home. If you happen to miss with any of the shot cloud, and any of that shot hits a hard surface, it's liable to ricochet right back into the shooters eyes. STICK WITH BUCK SHOT PEOPLE.
 
Kids are grown and gone .. just me and the wife and a 90 pound German Shepherd named Eko .. she would be raising the dead if someone tried to come in .. really think they would turn and run ..

But think one could use any firearm as long as the appropriate self defense ammo is used so over penetration was eliminated ..
 
  • Like
Reactions: A10
Personally, I think BIRDSHOT is a horrendously BAD IDEA for self defense inside a home. If you happen to miss with any of the shot cloud, and any of that shot hits a hard surface, it's liable to ricochet right back into the shooters eyes. STICK WITH BUCK SHOT PEOPLE.

...video below pretty well proves that at across the room distances...shotgun loads...even birdshot... are still in the shot cup when they impact...basically a frangible slug...

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gq3RVvL9ZjU[/ame]
 
Last edited:
...video below pretty well proves that at across the room distances...shotgun loads...even birdshot... are still in the shot cup when they impact...basically a frangible slug...

Shotgun Ammo for Home Defense - Gunblast.com - YouTube

I've shot bowling pins (at 10 yards) in a match setting with #6 shot and had the shot come right back at me. Video or no video, your choice, I'll stick with personal experience.
 
Last edited:
I'd probably discount leverguns and single-action revolvers, though.

Why? 10 rounds in a handgun caliber lever gun could be pretty darn effective. Single action revolvers have been used for self defense for a long time. Ever watch a cowboy match? Some of those folks are downright scary good.

IMHO, use what you have, and practice!
 
The late Dave McCraken once suggested to me that I take my cylinder bore 18.5" 870 Wingmaster to the trap range and shoot from the 16 yard line with birdshot.

If you shoot fast you can break the birds and it is great practice
 
Why? 10 rounds in a handgun caliber lever gun could be pretty darn effective. Single action revolvers have been used for self defense for a long time. Ever watch a cowboy match? Some of those folks are downright scary good.

IMHO, use what you have, and practice!

What does a single-action revolver or levergun do, that a double-action revolver or semiautomatic carbine cannot?

Now, what do DA revolvers and semiautomatics do that SAs and levers cannot? Fire more than once in a row.

They may be effective, but they are obsolete. There's no objective reason to select one.

diegobxr said:
Good morning to you, sir.
Everyone has their own personal preferences, but I don't think there's much to be puzzled about. The shotgun is and has always been one of the most devastating close-quarters anti-personnel firearms available; used by police and military everywhere when trouble is to be expected.

While trying to be condescending, you've missed the point. Which is that that shotgun, contrary to popular thinking, is far from a one-size-fits all solution. Its weaknesses are glossed over, its strengths are overestimated, and folks tend to ignore the fact that they can't remember the last time they actually used their shotgun.

Is it good? Yes, if you're an avid shotgunner. If it's been a few years since you've used one, but you practice weekly with a handgun, a pistol or revolver is a much better bet.

Also, isn't complaining about hearing damage after a defensive shooting a bit like pissing and moaning that your seat belt gave you a bruise?
 
I have a free roaming Rottweiler. Here he is watching Top Gear with me. (The real Top Gear, not the current one. Now we watch The Grand Tour on Amazon.)

Off topic a little.... Beautiful dog!! I love Rottweilers! I have had two in the past (at different times) plan on getting one when I retire in a few years. Best dogs ever!!

Thank you for your service sig! Both military and with the PD.
 
While trying to be condescending, you've missed the point. Which is that that shotgun, contrary to popular thinking, is far from a one-size-fits all solution. Its weaknesses are glossed over, its strengths are overestimated, and folks tend to ignore the fact that they can't remember the last time they actually used their shotgun.

Is it good? Yes, if you're an avid shotgunner. If it's been a few years since you've used one, but you practice weekly with a handgun, a pistol or revolver is a much better bet.

Also, isn't complaining about hearing damage after a defensive shooting a bit like pissing and moaning that your seat belt gave you a bruise?

I wasn't at the least being condescending, sir.
I am sorry you understood it that way.
I disagree with your points but will just leave it at that.
 
I own two large working-line German Shepherd dogs. They roam the house at night. They'd love to meet an intruder that visits my home. I'll probably just remain in bed, asleep.
 
I was a cop for 30 years, the SWAT commander (extensive training & experience) and a gunfight survivor but now I'm a 70 y/o who walks w/a cane and I WOULD NOT "clear" my house in an emergency. I'd call 911 and wait in the locked bedroom w/my wife (just the two of us now) until the real cops showed up. My home protection weapon is a Glock 17.
 
Also, isn't complaining about hearing damage after a defensive shooting a bit like pissing and moaning that your seat belt gave you a bruise?

I agree with you on the shotgun pros and cons, but the hearing problem is avoidable, and the solution can be used to advantage.

The hearing muffs I use for clays now sit on the nightstand. They are the type with electronic hearing attenuation (Howard Leight Impact Sport) - the kind that amplify conversation, but cut off high decibel sounds. Inside, when you max out the volume, you'd be amazed how much more you hear. They give me better hearing (useful in the dark, that) and if used under fire, I've got a much better chance to hear the sound of bad people either coming at me or departing.
 
What does a single-action revolver or levergun do, that a double-action revolver or semiautomatic carbine cannot?

Now, what do DA revolvers and semiautomatics do that SAs and levers cannot? Fire more than once in a row.

They may be effective, but they are obsolete. There's no objective reason to select one.

Your first point is valid. Neither is better than the other. Your second point is inaccurate. The firearms just operate differently. Your comment on obsolescence is questionable. The ones most often used are modern firearms. Archaic, maybe anachronistic, but I would argue no less effective. As far as objectivity, I would argue that personal firearm choice is purely subjective. To each, their own.
 
There is nothing wrong with a 9mm carbine. There is nothing wrong with a good handgun, M1 Carbine or shotgun. Choose a firearm based on your experience, your family situation and your willingness to practice with it.

The choice of a home defense firearm is a small part of the big plan required to properly defend yourself and your family in the home.
 
Your first point is valid. Neither is better than the other. Your second point is inaccurate. The firearms just operate differently. Your comment on obsolescence is questionable. The ones most often used are modern firearms. Archaic, maybe anachronistic, but I would argue no less effective. As far as objectivity, I would argue that personal firearm choice is purely subjective. To each, their own.

So a single-action .38 Spl is as effective as a DA? Can they be reloaded and fired as quickly?
 
  • Like
Reactions: A10
Back
Top