Yeah, you knew i had to go there sooner or later....

[Soup DeVille]

They're all fairly worthless - can't dare use any for home defense and most aren't powerful enough or of legal caliber for hunting.

That's just plain crap. They're all legal calibers for hunting- most of those are 7.62X51 rifles, which is the same as a Winchester .308, which is one of the most popular hunting cartridges. I've dropped deer at over 100 yards with even the puny 5.56 round, and there are no legal restrictions against doing so. A 7.62 round will drop elk at over 250.

[Soup DeVille]

As I understand it, a high quality modern semi auto shotty is just as reliable as a quality semi auto handgun (read: very reliable).

I also think the intimidation from the sound of the pump argument is overrated.  All it does is give your position away.  I generally make the assumption that if someone has the balls to break into an occupied home they are armed, in which case I wouldn't want them to hear anything until the blast of the shotgun actually firing.

I've thought about this statement a bit, and I have to say I disagree on all fronts. You cannot ethically or legally shoot someone until you've both positiviely identified them (which is why a good mounted tac light is IMO essential on any HD weapon), and you have reason to believe you are in direct threat of grevious bodily harm.

To do so requires you give away your position: and in any case its more or less a foregone conclusion in any close quarters situation that your position is going to be known quite quickly.

You have to know who you're shooting, and you have to have a reason to shoot them, and you can't make the case that either of these things are true if you're shooting at shapes from a darkened corridor.

If you've properly loaded your shotgun for close quarters home defense, you may be rusing something like a Hornady low recoil birdshot load: which may in fact fail to feed on any inertia action gun. I've seen it happen too often for you to convince me otherwise.

[GoCougs]

That's just plain crap. They're all legal calibers for hunting- most of those are 7.62X51 rifles, which is the same as a Winchester .308, which is one of the most popular hunting cartridges. I've dropped deer at over 100 yards with even the puny 5.56 round, and there are no legal restrictions against doing so. A 7.62 round will drop elk at over 250.

My mistake in stating most - at least two of those are standard .223 - and in the least my state requires a minimum of a .243/6MM for game hunting

[Soup DeVille]

My mistake in stating most - at least two of those are standard .223 - and in the least my state requires a minimum of a .243/6MM for game hunting

Okay then, I did forget that you live out west. Well, there are AR-15s available in 6.5 Grendel...

[Lebowski]

I've thought about this statement a bit, and I have to say I disagree on all fronts. You cannot ethically or legally shoot someone until you've both positiviely identified them (which is why a good mounted tac light is IMO essential on any HD weapon), and you have reason to believe you are in direct threat of grevious bodily harm.

To do so requires you give away your position: and in any case its more or less a foregone conclusion in any close quarters situation that your position is going to be known quite quickly.

You have to know who you're shooting, and you have to have a reason to shoot them, and you can't make the case that either of these things are true if you're shooting at shapes from a darkened corridor.

If you've properly loaded your shotgun for close quarters home defense, you may be rusing something like a Hornady low recoil birdshot load: which may in fact fail to feed on any inertia action gun. I've seen it happen too often for you to convince me otherwise.

I don't know about where you live, so maybe that is the case for you.

In the state of FL if someone forcibly breaks into your home the presumption that your are in grave danger is automatically met.  No need to identify them, and no need to further ensure you are in danger of  "grievous bodily harm" - the fact that they have just kicked in your front door establishes that.  FL law is very clear on this, and I have read extensively on the subject in the last several months (FL gun laws and gun/self defense books and articles have constituted the bulk of my "shitter reading" since I bought a gun in June) and I am absolutely sure I am correct on this.  You do not need to wait until you are staring down the barrel of a gun before you can defend yourself.  You certainly are not required to give away your position.

I agree a tac light is a good idea and I have one mounted on my Glock 31.  I have it there as an option, I'd prefer not use it unless I need to as that too gives your position away.

Obviously, my situation is a bit different than some others because I live alone.  If you live with your two children, your wife, and your mother in law, and you hear a noise in the kitchen it obviously is not a good idea to run around shooting at shadows without positive identification.  Because I live alone, if there is an intruder in my house at night (and I don't have any guests staying over that night) I can be sure they do not belong there, and I have no intention on giving them any advantages.

[Soup DeVille]

I don't know about where you live, so maybe that is the case for you.

In the state of FL if someone forcibly breaks into your home the presumption that your are in grave danger is automatically met.  No need to identify them, and no need to further ensure you are in "grievous bodily harm" - the fact that they have just kicked in your front door establishes that.  FL law is very clear on this, and I have read extensively on the subject in the last several months (FL gun laws and self defense have constituted the bulk of my "shitter reading" since I bought a gun) and I am absolutely sure I am correct on this.  You do not need to wait until you are staring down the barrel of a gun before you can defend yourself.

I agree a tac light is a good idea and I have one mounted on my Glock 31.  I have it there as an option, I'd prefer not use it unless I need to as that too gives your position away.

Obviously, my situation is a bit different than some others because I live alone.  If you live with your two children, your wife, and your mother in law, and you hear a noise in the kitchen is obviously is not a good idea to run around shooting at shadows without positive identification.  Because I live alone, if there is an intruder in my house at night (and I don't have any guests staying over that night) I can be sure they do not belong there.

There's a reason why I stated "morally" as well as legally. No, you don't have to wait until the intruder's muzzle is trained on you, but you do have to determine that they aren't someone you know, or just a drunk who opened the wrong door. The most powerful reason why a gun works in home defense situations is that its a detterent first and foremost.

Sure, you can sneak up and shoot the guy and probably not get prosecuted in some states. That doesn't make it morally right.

[Lebowski]

There's a reason why I stated "morally" as well as legally. No, you don't have to wait until the intruder's muzzle is trained on you, but you do have to determine that they aren't someone you know, or just a drunk who opened the wrong door. The most powerful reason why a gun works in home defense situations is that its a detterent first and foremost.

Sure, you can sneak up and shoot the guy and probably not get prosecuted in some states. That doesn't make it morally right.

I lock my doors and windows - that keeps my friends and neighborhood drunks from wandering in.  My friends would never try to enter my house without calling me or ringing the bell.  None of my friends has a key to my house.  If a drunk is so out of his senses that he forces his way into a locked, occupied home and ends up getting shot - too bad for him. 

I consider myself an ethical person and I would have no qualms shooting someone who just broke into my home at night.  You don't "accidentally" break into someone's home.  My friends don't break into my home.  I've gone out and gotten pretty drunk a time or two, and I've never accidentally broken into someone's house - and if I did, I deserve the consequences of such a massively stupid act.

In a lot of situations, I agree with the gun as a deterrant theory.  But not in a home invasion.  No criminal is unaware of the fact that millions of American homes contain shotguns.  If they willfully broke into your occupied home, they are very likely armed and prepared to deal with you. 

[Soup DeVille]

Fine, but I still think positive friend/foe identification is 100% essential.

[Lebowski]

Fine, but I still think positive friend/foe identification is 100% essential.

Then once you have them in your sights, turn on the tac light, that's what it's there for.  Unlike the pump of a shotgun, the tac light doesn't give away your position until the barrel of your gun is bearing down on them.  They'd have a split second to react, staring down the barrel of a gun, with a blinding light in their face.  That's an advantage that's probably worth giving them, in exchange for ensuring 100% their identification.

[Soup DeVille]

Then turn on the tac light, that's what it's for.  Unlike the pump of a shotgun, the tac light doesn't give away your position until the barrel of your gun is bearing down on them.  They'd have a split second to react, staring down the barrel of a gun, with a blinding light in their face.  That's an advantage that's probably worth giving them, in exchange for ensuring 100% their identification.

No, there's no reason why you can't aim and pump the shotgun at the same time, and there's no reason why you shouldn't turn the light on first.

[Lebowski]

No, there's no reason why you can't aim and pump the shotgun at the same time, and there's no reason why you shouldn't turn the light on first.

But at this point, how much does this add to the "intimidation factor" that you said was the advantage of the pump?  He's already staring down the barrel of a gun with a blinding tac light in his face, if that isn't intimidation enough then it's time to start shooting.

In the form of the tac light, you trade a disadvantage (giving away your position) for an advantage (100% identification).  I just don't see what advantage you gain by the sound of the pump, and I don't buy that at this point in the game the "intimidation factor" of the pump sound is much of an advantage.

Just to reiterate, I am NOT saying a pump shotgun is not a great home defense choice - it is.  All I'm saying is, I don't think the sound the pump makes is an advantage.

[Soup DeVille]

You just added one unneccessary step and just gave him a fraction of a second that you didn't need to.  There is no prize for second place.

Guns can't unshoot. If you have a pump shotgun practice the motion I'm describing. It takes less than half a second.

The gun is trained on him already. He is not going to be able to react quick enough to fire back. period.

If he's quick enough to run- let him.

If you have no qualms about shooting at unidentified shapes in the dark, I don't have a good answer for you.

[Lebowski]

I'm not sure what kind of ammo that'd be. By the time you get the bullet either light enough and/or slow enough to not penetrate multiple walls, its effectiveness for home defense owing to its small caliber is greatly diminished. If it's something exotic, it's be probably way expensive and have dubious feed reliability.

It's not a matter of making the bullet lighter or slower, it's a matter of expansion and or frangible bullet vs. military spec FMJ.

BTW, as I said before I am not very knowledgable about assault rifles.  I'm going by what I've read on the internet, not first hand experience.  I would want to do more research before actually using an AR15 for self defense, I was just making an off hand comment.  There was a site posted on glocktalk.com a while back that tested the penetration of a .223 (either frangible or hollow point, I don't recall) through wallboard, and determined it wasn't any more likely to penetrate than a handgun, in fact I think it was less likely to penetrate than the handgun.  Of course, I can't find that article now.  I'll post it if I can find it later.

[Lebowski]

Guns can't unshoot. If you have a pump shotgun practice the motion I'm describing. It takes less than half a second.

Damnit, you replied before I deleted that part of my post.

Thinking it over, I realized I got a little carried away ... ALL I'm saying is, the sound of the pump as an "intimidation" that you hear touted so often IMO isn't a material advantage.  I think usually when people say that, they aren't talking about a situation with you bearing down on them tac light blasting them in the face and then you pump ... I think they mean it as, your bedroom door is closed and you pump the shotgun and that scares them away.  I'm not sure I buy that argument, and I'd rather they not know which door I am behind.

[Soup DeVille]

But at this point, how much does this add to the "intimidation factor" that you said was the advantage of the pump?  He's already staring down the barrel of a gun with a blinding tac light in his face, if that isn't intimidation enough then it's time to start shooting.

In the form of the tac light, you trade a disadvantage (giving away your position) for an advantage (100% identification).  I just don't see what advantage you gain by the sound of the pump, and I don't buy that at this point in the game the "intimidation factor" of the pump sound is much of an advantage.

Just to reiterate, I am NOT saying a pump shotgun is not a great home defense choice - it is.  All I'm saying is, I don't think the sound the pump makes is an advantage.

With a tac light in your face, in the dark, there's no way to tell what's behind it (this is after all, one of the reasons to have one). There's no way to really even see you. let alone know whether or not you're armed in anyway. The sound of the action will instantly resolve any doubt the intruder has of what's behind the light.

The light I prefer is an Insight Procyon. it emits 125 lumens. If you doubt the point I'm trying to make and have a comparable light, try to recreate the situation from the intruder's point of view. You're in the dark (most likely), you ahev been for some time and your pupils are fully dilated. You are not going to see shit behind that light, but your ears are going to be working just fine.

Sure, the defender can yell " I have a gun" (honestly, my voice tends to crack in high stress situations, so he might think he's being held up by Mickey Mouse), but why not let the gun say it for you?

[Soup DeVille]

Damnit, you replied before I deleted that part of my post.

Sorry.

[Lebowski]

If you have no qualms about shooting at unidentified shapes in the dark, I don't have a good answer for you.

The pump sound of a shotgun doesn't help you identify anything, so I don't know why you keep going down this tangent.

I don't go around shooting at shadows and shapes, if that's what you mean.  You have senses other than your eyesight to identify things. 

I'm laying in bed.  I HEAR a window break.  I HEAR the sound of someone crawling in.  I may HEAR the sound of voices if it is more than one intruder.  I HEAR my dog barking and going nuts.  I peer out of my bedroom and see a shape that I identify as a grown man, who clearly just crawled through the broken window.  He's coming towards me.  At this point, I've identified him as an intruder, period.  I don't need to know what color his eyes are in order to do this.  If there is any doubt in my mind, I shine the tac light on him to ensure identification 100% before firing.  The pump sound of a shotgun has zero value in identifying him, will give my position away if I pump before I've got him in my sights, and adds zero "intimidation value" if I pump after I've got him in my sights.

So again, how does the sound of the pump help you?

[Soup DeVille]

The pump sound of a shotgun doesn't help you identify anything, so I don't know why you keep going down this tangent.

You said you were worried about giving away your position. I'm making the case that that's really not an option if you want to identify who it is you're shooting at. You are going to give away your position.

[Lebowski]

You said you were worried about giving away your position. I'm making the case that that's really not an option if you want to identify who it is you're shooting at. You are going to give away your position.

So when you said the pump sound of the gun is an advantage, you were invisioning a scenario where you already had the gun pointed at him and already had the tac light on him?  As if that isn't intimindation enough?

[Soup DeVille]

So when you said the pump sound of the gun is an advantage, you were invisioning a scenario where you already had the gun pointed at him and already had the tac light on him?  As if that isn't intimindation enough?

Like I said- put a tac light on someone in the dark, and there's no way for that person to tell what's behind it. I could have a frikkin' 20mm chain gun, the guy would simply not be able to see it. He'd be blinded. He's instantly going to go into fight or flight mode.

The sound of the shotgun is going to clear up that question for him of whether or not I'm armed.

[Lebowski]

Like I said- put a tac light on someone in the dark, and there's no way for that person to tell what's behind it. I could have a frikkin' 20mm chain gun, the guy would simply not be able to see it. He'd be blinded. He's instantly going to go into fight or flight mode.

The sound of the shotgun is going to clear up that question for him of whether or not I'm armed.

Meh, I guess it's a tiny advantage, but more of an advantage to him than it is to you (you're giving him an awful lot of time to shoot you, making sure you get him in the light, pump the shotgun, then wait to see what his reaction is).  Admittedly my initial comment that it's not an advantage was assuming you'd pump before having the light on him, i.e. from behind a bedroom door.

I still completely disagree with you that you neccessarily have to shine the light on him in order to identify an intruder (in some cases you will have to, in other cases you won't, it's there as an option).  If you can't tell by the sounds of a break-in and the sight of a grown man in your home that you have an intruder ...

My opinion that you don't necessarily need to shine a light on them in order to identify them (if all the other signs that you have an intruder are there) is hardly a controversial one.  Pretty much everyone who writes on the subject agrees with me, as does the law and the instructor of my CCW class for that matter.  If you think that's unethical, fine, but in that case I think you're being a bit naive.  Innocent people simply do not accidently break into locked houses.

[Soup DeVille]

Meh, I guess it's a tiny advantage, but more of an advantage to him than it is to you (you're giving him an awful lot of time to shoot you, making sure you get him in the light, pump the shotgun, then wait to see what his reaction is). 

It's a lot less time than you're thinking it is. And if I could clearly see that the guy was armed, I'm not going to go through the same rigamarole.

[GoCougs]

Meh - going after someone in your house is major trouble. If they're their to kill or are ready to kill, there's a good chance they'll get the jump on the average person who actually has a measure of morality and is otherwise in a major fight/flight adrenaline rush.

Experts will teach you to have a safe room(s) whereby you holdout to call the police. The time to act, purely as a safety measure to the homeowner, is should the intruder try to enter the safe room(s).

I took some basic safety guns classes by a woman of about 40. Toward the end of the class she made it known that she was involved in a fatal civil defense shooting. She said that taking a life will affect your for the worse in a major way no matter how justified you are, and that you'll never get over it.

Her general motto was to have clear and defined steps before choosing to fire, if but for anything you're protecting your mental health as well as your physical well being (beyond adhering to the law of course) - a number of steps being AFTER the legal threshold for using deadly force has been met.

[Soup DeVille]

Meh - going after someone in your house is major trouble. If they're their to kill or are ready to kill, there's a good chance they'll get the jump on the average person who actually has a measure of morality and is otherwise in a major fight/flight adrenaline rush.

Experts will teach you to have a safe room(s) whereby you holdout to call the police. The time to act, purely as a safety measure to the homeowner, is should the intruder try to enter the safe room(s).

I took some basic safety guns classes by a woman of about 40. Toward the end of the class she made it known that she was involved in a fatal civil defense shooting. She said that taking a life will affect your for the worse in a major way no matter how justified you are, and that you'll never get over it.

Her general motto was to have clear and defined steps before choosing to fire, if but for anything you're protecting your mental health as well as your physical well being (beyond adhering to the law of course) - a number of steps being AFTER the legal threshold for using deadly force has been met.

I think its clear that not all experts teach the same thing on this. Lebowski has obviously gone to classes that advocate a free fire zone, and you've obviously gone to one that tell you to hide and hope. (yes, I'm exaggerating, you humorless drones).

[S204STi]

Good points, Cougs.  Taking a life should be taken seriously.

I would just like to point out that I picked the Remington 870 for these reasons: Cheap, birdshot won't penetrate walls but will brutalize a man at point blank range, and the slide action is a deterrent which may scare the intruder away by announcing not so subtly that I am armed and ready to fire.

[565]

This entire pump sound giving away your position is pointless.

With a semi auto you still need to manually cycle the action to bring a round into the chamber.  It's pretty LOUD noise in my gun, you could do it more slowly, but then again you could also pump the pump shotgun more quietly.  I'm bored so I've been playing with my two shottys, and you can definitely cycle the pump with less noise if you are going for the least amount of noise.  You can skip that step in either gun by leaving a round in the chamber, but I think it's pretty unsafe doing that because the only thing keeping it from firing is just the safety, which I don't believe is drop safe in either of my Benellis.

Basically the only difference is that after the first shot one gun will bring another round up and the other needs to be manually pumped, but after the first shot you've pretty much announced to everyone within a mile that you have a gun. 

[565]

Good points, Cougs.  Taking a life should be taken seriously.

I would just like to point out that I picked the Remington 870 for these reasons: Cheap, birdshot won't penetrate walls but will brutalize a man at point blank range, and the slide action is a deterrent which may scare the intruder away by announcing not so subtly that I am armed and ready to fire.

Seriously everyone is using bird shot now?  I've always heard that stuff only penetrates 6 inches and if someone is a bit large you might not reach the vitals.  The magazines in both guns are loaded with 00 buck with 12 pellets in 2 3/4 length. 

I've also heard #1 is good too.

[Minpin]

Doubly aucht buck or watever its called is what you want.

[Lebowski]

and the slide action is a deterrent which may scare the intruder away by announcing ...

Yeah, about that slide action sound as a deterrent ...

[Lebowski]

I think its clear that not all experts teach the same thing on this. Lebowski has obviously gone to classes that advocate a free fire zone, and you've obviously gone to one that tell you to hide and hope. (yes, I'm exaggerating, you humorless drones).

Mine was just a CCW course, he was talking more about WHEN you can justifiably use deadly force as opposed to HOW to best defend yourself in your home.

From a practical standpoint I agree w/ Cougs' advice - grab your gun, close the bedroom door, get behind some cover, and call the cops (in that order).  But when that flimsy bedroom door gets kicked in, I ain't screwing around shining the tac light on them before I start shootin.  At this point there is NO question as to their intent, and you've got the 911 tape as evidence that you took cover and called the cops before going into "free fire zone" mode.


Also from a practical standpoint, there are certainly some scenarios in which you'd want to clear the house.  You hear a suspicious noise but aren't sure there's an intruder ... you don't want to be the guy who barricades himself in the "safe room" and calls the cops every time your ice machine starts making some funky noises.