CarSPIN Forums

Assuming a legal to own for civilians rifle in the US outside of California.

M14.

I'm leaning that way. I currently have a Romak-3 (which I've mistakenly referred to as a Dragunov-clone before), and a Mosin-Nagant. 7.62x54R ammo is just too expensive anymore, and I think I'm going to sell both of these and buy a "serious" rifle. I'm leaning towards either the FAL or the M14.

no love for the HK416 or the G36C?

For 5.56, I'd go with an M4 (bushmaster).  For 7.62, I'd go with an M14.

In an ideal would get a G36C and an Hk 417, but I have a feeling neither of those are civilian available. 

In Massachusetts, I would get arrested for anything more powerful than a pea shooter.

I voted M14 because I know nothing about the rest. :mask:

Quote from: Submariner on November 01, 2008, 05:38:55 PM
no love for the HK416 or the G36C?

For 5.56, I'd go with an M4 (bushmaster).  For 7.62, I'd go with an M14.

In an ideal would get a G36C and an Hk 417, but I have a feeling neither of those are civilian available. 

In Massachusetts, I would get arrested for anything more powerful than a pea shooter.

Both of those are select-fire full autos. While technically not illegal, they are NFA34 firearms, which require you to get BATF approval and to pay a $200 tax before pruchase. I've no need or desire for a full auto rifle.

A civilian version of the HK416 is supposed to be available- the MR223, but I've never seen one for sale.

I've tried to limit the choices to those for which a decent supply chain exists in the US market. For H&Ks, that's the 91.

Quote from: Tave on November 01, 2008, 05:43:03 PM
I voted M14 because I know nothing about the rest. :mask:

The M14 is probably the best amongst this group as far as accuracy goes. Its also a well proven and well loved gun, and is  also reasonably priced to boot. Mags are expensive though- $50-$70 bucks, and they're all used or military surplus at this point.

I thought you had to be approved by BATF for all firearms?

Quote from: TBR on November 01, 2008, 06:08:02 PM
I thought you had to be approved by BATF for all firearms?

No. You have to fill out your form 4473 for all firearms, and you have to do the NICBS background check for handguns, but unless you're a convicted felon or have a history of domestic violence, you're not disallowed. In most states, you can walk into a gun store or show and buy any long gun you see and walk out with it.

To buy a full-auto, you have to specifically ask for permission by writing a letter of intent to the BATF, paying your tax and waiting until you get approved befotre ever taking possession; andthat usually means waiting six weeks to six months.

That sounds like a PIA. I am not really sure why a regular Joe would need a full-auto anyway.

Quote from: Tave on November 01, 2008, 05:43:03 PM
I voted M14 because I know nothing about the rest. :mask:

AR15 is a single fire civilian use M16, as I recall.  And you probably know what an AK is.

Quote from: TBR on November 01, 2008, 06:14:53 PM
That sounds like a PIA. I am not really sure why a regular Joe would need a full-auto anyway.

Need doesn't really have anything to do with it- Its hard to imagine a scenario where even a police officer would need a full auto.

But, yeah, I don't see a need for one.

M-16?

or should I just vote for the AR-15?

Quote from: HotRodPilot on November 01, 2008, 06:22:59 PM
M-16?

or should I just vote for the AR-15?

Yeah, that would be the civilian equivalent.

Where is the "Post pics of your arensal" thread, as it seems we are headed there.

Maybe Ifcar can make a "What we shoot at carspin" thread.

Quote from: 565 on November 01, 2008, 06:36:35 PM
Where is the "Post pics of your arensal" thread, as it seems we are headed there.

Maybe Ifcar can make a "What we shoot at carspin" thread.

An arsenal is a place where weapons are made.

An armory is a place where they are stored.

Usually, I have a total "no grammar/vocab corrections" policy, but that one annoys me because of the way the media abuses the term "arsenal."

Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 01, 2008, 06:38:39 PM
An arsenal is a place where weapons are made.

An armory is a place where they are stored.

Usually, I have a total "no grammar/vocab corrections" policy, but that one annoys me because of the way the media abuses the term "arsenal."

Where is the "Post up pics of your armory" thread?

I didn't even spell Arsenal correctly anyway.

 :thumbsup:

:lol:

(http://www.deactivated-guns.co.uk/images/Mini%2014/mini%2014-19.jpg)

With a wood finish, of course.

Quote from: Raza  on November 01, 2008, 06:44:08 PM
(http://www.deactivated-guns.co.uk/images/Mini%2014/mini%2014-19.jpg)

With a wood finish, of course.

Can't see the pic, is it something I should add to my list?

Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 01, 2008, 06:51:13 PM
Can't see the pic, is it something I should add to my list?

Only if you love the A-Team.

Ruger Mini-14, folding stock.

Added.

Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 01, 2008, 07:21:51 PM
Added.

Crap, I didn't think about it until after I voted.  Now I want to vote for it!

I kind of want a AR-15, but I wouldn't know what to do with one if I got it.

I am very partial to semi auto shotguns though.

(http://s4.tinypic.com/2d0yv5v.jpg)

Is that an older model benelli?

Shotguns are cool. My step father was an avid bird hunter, and I learned to shoot with a pump Ithaca. I like range shooting now though, and rarely hunt.

Besides, I've seen inertia mechanism semi-auto shotguns fail to feed too many times to prefer one over a pump. And, there is no sound more intimidating than hearing a 12 gauge rack one in.

I'm not entirely sure what model that is, but my M1014 has too small a capacity.  I love being able to hit someone twice quickly, but when engaging multiple tangos, I find myself high and dry too quickly.*






*COD4

Quote from: Raza  on November 01, 2008, 07:33:48 PM
I'm not entirely sure what model that is, but my M1014 has too small a capacity.  I love being able to hit someone twice quickly, but when engaging multiple tangos, I find myself high and dry too quickly.*
*COD4

It's actually a Benelli M4 super 90, which is designated as the M1014 by the US military.

*Well actually there is just one difference, the removable choke in the civilian model.

I think the M1014 only holds 4 rounds in the game right?

In real life with the full length magazine tube (or +2 magazine extension) it holds 7 shells in the mag, one in the chamber and one in the receiver, for a total of 9 shots. 

Benelli sells them to civilians with a shortened mag tube (damn Benelli USA), and those lame AWB laws in CT make it illegal to have both 5+ shots and a pistol grip.  You can still get 7 shells in the gun, 1 in the chamber and one ghosted in the receiver.

The price for the collapsible stock (which Benelli stopped selling to civilians) is ridiculous on the market, and I heard it isn't as comfortable anyway.

Yeah, it's only got four rounds in the game.  The Winchester 1200 has 7 rounds chambered. 

If the collapsible stock shortens the gun to less than 26 inches overall, it would be illegal anyways.

Oh, and I looked it up and apparently the M4 is a gas operated semi auto, which may solve the misfeed problems I've seen in the past.

I don't believe in guns.  When our new president is elected, I think we should abolish the second amendment.  It has no real place in a morally decent society such as ours.

Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 01, 2008, 07:33:27 PM
Besides, I've seen inertia mechanism semi-auto shotguns fail to feed too many times to prefer one over a pump. And, there is no sound more intimidating than hearing a 12 gauge rack one in.

Yeah I've got the opposite perference that everyone else has.  Most everyone says pump shotguns for HD, and semi auto for birds and targets.

My target gun is a pump, but my HD gun is a semi auto, it's actually a gas driven gun, the only gas driven benelli shotgun (their R1 rifle is also gas driven). 

My reasoning for this opposite think is this.  Most of the complaints with semi autos failing to feed or eject either comes from low powered rounds or some debris in the weapon in the field.  Since my HD gun pretty much stays well oiled at home and fires full powered rounds, it's not a big deal.  I didn't buy a semi auto bird/target gun cause I couldn't afford one.

I rarely short stroke when shooting the pump, but I'm sure I've short stroked at least once in my life before.  I'm sure I've also forgotten to stroke at least once in my life before.  This is while I was under zero pressure.  I figure if it was ever a true home invasion situation I'd be scared shitless, I want as little chance for human error as possible.

I don't think the semi auto has ever failed to cycle for me while shooting full powered rounds.  I'm sure plenty of these guns do jam in the battlefield, but this well oiled and sheltered machine's perfect record so far beats my personal non perfect record.

So in the end it's a matter of mechanical reliability vs human reliability.  My pump probably has a much better mechanical reliability, but the semi auto removes my human error part.

That said, it's totally not worth the money over a pump.  Since I own both already, the M4 is the one under the bed, but if I had to do it again I'd just buy a 400 dollar Mossberg.  Basically I got shaken up by that Cheshire home invasion thing a while back, since it was literally down the street from me, and the theives targeted them after seeing their car drive from Stop and Shop.  That Stop and Shop is like 3 blocks from my place and I go there all the time in the Z06, so I freaked out and figured a combat shotgun was a good investment.  As I basically knew absolutely nothing about firearms at the time, I figured whatever the US military used had to automatically be the best ever right?  :rolleyes: And since it was a matter of life protection, no price was too great.  :banghead: I placed an order and it took something like 7 months to arrive, by which time my fears cooled down and I wised up a bit and already got something else.

Basically I'm now really pissed about those home invaders/ child rapists/murders because I got paranoid and wasted 1400 on a gun that took 7 months to arrive.  And then I actually got interested in firearms (what young male isn't?) and ended up blowing like 1500 more dollars on various firearms.  Those bastards cost me 3000 dollars in money, not including range time and ammunition.

Still the price of these things seems to be holding pretty steady, and if the Democratics take office and pass more restrictive gun laws the M super 90 family of shotguns seem to be on the chopping block, so the value might actually go up.

Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 01, 2008, 07:46:39 PM
If the collapsible stock shortens the gun to less than 26 inches overall, it would be illegal anyways.

Oh, and I looked it up and apparently the M4 is a gas operated semi auto, which may solve the misfeed problems I've seen in the past.

It's apparently still 34 inches with the collapsed stock.

While more or less useless if you don't plan on jumping from a plane with the gun, those stocks were an amazing investment while they were still sold.

Benelli sold them for 180 bucks, but since they stopped importing them, prices have jumped to 500-700 for two pieces of plastic.

Gotta love that supply and demand and the need to tacticool your gun.

AR 15

Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 01, 2008, 05:59:40 PM
Both of those are select-fire full autos. While technically not illegal, they are NFA34 firearms, which require you to get BATF approval and to pay a $200 tax before pruchase. I've no need or desire for a full auto rifle.

Unnecessary.  But...

A civilian version of the HK416 is supposed to be available- the MR223, but I've never seen one for sale.

I would guess they are expensive.

I've tried to limit the choices to those for which a decent supply chain exists in the US market. For H&Ks, that's the 91.

G3?

Quote from: Raza  on November 01, 2008, 07:46:36 PM
Yeah, it's only got four rounds in the game.  The Winchester 1200 has 7 rounds chambered. 

the M1014 holds 7 I believe.

Quote from: the Teuton on November 01, 2008, 08:12:36 PM
I don't believe in guns.  When our new president is elected, I think we should abolish the second amendment.  It has no real place in a morally decent society such as ours.

Guns are real whether you believe in them or not.

There might be one hiding under your bed right now waiting to shoot you.

Quote from: 280Z Turbo on November 01, 2008, 08:48:01 PM
Guns are real whether you believe in them or not.

There might be one hiding under your bed right now waiting to shoot you.

I will be ever so happy when you people no longer have your weapons of death.  The president will do what is needed to preserve the civility of this desecrated nation.  What will you people cling to if not for your guns and religion, just religion?

Quote from: 280Z Turbo on November 01, 2008, 08:48:01 PM
Guns are real whether you believe in them or not.

There might be one hiding under your bed right now waiting to shoot you.

Oh noes there are a couple under my bed right now!  Now I'm scared.

Quote from: 565 on November 01, 2008, 08:12:56 PM
Yeah I've got the opposite perference that everyone else has.  Most everyone says pump shotguns for HD, and semi auto for birds and targets.

My target gun is a pump, but my HD gun is a semi auto, it's actually a gas driven gun, the only gas driven benelli shotgun (their R1 rifle is also gas driven). 

My reasoning for this opposite think is this.  Most of the complaints with semi autos failing to feed or eject either comes from low powered rounds or some debris in the weapon in the field.  Since my HD gun pretty much stays well oiled at home and fires full powered rounds, it's not a big deal.  I didn't buy a semi auto bird/target gun cause I couldn't afford one.

I rarely short stroke when shooting the pump, but I'm sure I've short stroked at least once in my life before.  I'm sure I've also forgotten to stroke at least once in my life before.  This is while I was under zero pressure.  I figure if it was ever a true home invasion situation I'd be scared shitless, I want as little chance for human error as possible.

I don't think the semi auto has ever failed to cycle for me while shooting full powered rounds.  I'm sure plenty of these guns do jam in the battlefield, but this well oiled and sheltered machine's perfect record so far beats my personal non perfect record.

So in the end it's a matter of mechanical reliability vs human reliability.  My pump probably has a much better mechanical reliability, but the semi auto removes my human error part.

That said, it's totally not worth the money over a pump.  Since I own both already, the M4 is the one under the bed, but if I had to do it again I'd just buy a 400 dollar Mossberg.  Basically I got shaken up by that Cheshire home invasion thing a while back, since it was literally down the street from me, and the theives targeted them after seeing their car drive from Stop and Shop.  That Stop and Shop is like 3 blocks from my place and I go there all the time in the Z06, so I freaked out and figured a combat shotgun was a good investment.  As I basically knew absolutely nothing about firearms at the time, I figured whatever the US military used had to automatically be the best ever right?  :rolleyes: And since it was a matter of life protection, no price was too great.  :banghead: I placed an order and it took something like 7 months to arrive, by which time my fears cooled down and I wised up a bit and already got something else.

Basically I'm now really pissed about those home invaders/ child rapists/murders because I got paranoid and wasted 1400 on a gun that took 7 months to arrive.  And then I actually got interested in firearms (what young male isn't?) and ended up blowing like 1500 more dollars on various firearms.  Those bastards cost me 3000 dollars in money, not including range time and ammunition.

Still the price of these things seems to be holding pretty steady, and if the Democratics take office and pass more restrictive gun laws the M super 90 family of shotguns seem to be on the chopping block, so the value might actually go up.

Those are all good points. Like I said, I grew up shooting pump shotguns though, so I automatically pump without thinking about it. I actually had to condition myself not to pump rifles whe I started with them. It may be something to think about now that the wife is started to get used to the idea of using the shotgun.

Quote from: the Teuton on November 01, 2008, 08:52:21 PM
I will be ever so happy when you people no longer have your weapons of death.  The president will do what is needed to preserve the civility of this desecrated nation.  What will you people cling to if not for your guns and religion, just religion?

I'm an atheist. Aint got nothing but guns then I guess.

Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 01, 2008, 09:00:53 PM
I'm an atheist. Aint got nothing but guns then I guess.

Sucks to be you.  I can't wait for everyone to turn in their guns to make for a safer America.  It's a change I can believe in.

Quote from: the Teuton on November 01, 2008, 09:04:19 PM
Sucks to be you.  I can't wait for everyone to turn in their guns to make for a safer America.  It's a change I can believe in.

Do you believe in getting stabbed instead?

Quote from: 280Z Turbo on November 01, 2008, 09:10:12 PM
Do you believe in getting stabbed instead?

Ban knives then.  They're just as dangerous.

Quote from: the Teuton on November 01, 2008, 09:16:39 PM
Ban knives then.  They're just as dangerous.

Do you believe in getting beaten with a bat?

Quote from: 280Z Turbo on November 01, 2008, 09:22:03 PM
Do you believe in getting beaten with a bat?

Ban baseball.  The Japanese are better at it than us, so it's no longer as "American as apple pie." 

Baseball bats are weapons of violence and a display of how far we've fallen as a country.  Get rid of NASCAR, too, while we're at it.  The best car in that series is Japanese.

Quote from: the Teuton on November 01, 2008, 09:25:33 PM
Ban baseball.  The Japanese are better at it than us, so it's no longer as "American as apple pie." 

Baseball bats are weapons of violence and a display of how far we've fallen as a country.  Get rid of NASCAR, too, while we're at it.  The best car in that series is Japanese.

What about tire irons?

Quote from: the Teuton on November 01, 2008, 08:12:36 PM
I don't believe in guns.  When our new president is elected, I think we should abolish the second amendment.  It has no real place in a morally decent society such as ours.

:rolleyes:

Quote from: 280Z Turbo on November 01, 2008, 09:27:36 PM
What about tire irons?

They should be made of plastic, impact-absorbing plastic.  Iron is such a crude material.  I mean, come on, it's the twenty-first century.  Tire irons are so unsafe.

Quote from: 565 on November 01, 2008, 08:18:23 PM
It's apparently still 34 inches with the collapsed stock.

While more or less useless if you don't plan on jumping from a plane with the gun, those stocks were an amazing investment while they were still sold.

Benelli sold them for 180 bucks, but since they stopped importing them, prices have jumped to 500-700 for two pieces of plastic.

Gotta love that supply and demand and the need to tacticool your gun.

Are shotguns cheaper than handguns?

I might need to get myself a pistol grip pump and keep it in my lap at all times.

Quote from: the Teuton on November 01, 2008, 09:31:47 PM
They should be made of plastic, impact-absorbing plastic.  Iron is such a crude material.  I mean, come on, it's the twenty-first century.  Tire irons are so unsafe.

Prohibition of weapons is what makes prisons so safe.

Quote from: Raza  on November 01, 2008, 09:36:25 PM
Are shotguns cheaper than handguns?

I might need to get myself a pistol grip pump and keep it in my lap at all times.

Depends on the shotgun, the sky's the limit for some, but super cheap ones can be pretty cheap.

You can get a cheap pump for like 250 new at Dicks sporting goods.

Quote from: 565 on November 01, 2008, 07:28:56 PM
I kind of want a AR-15, but I wouldn't know what to do with one if I got it.

I am very partial to semi auto shotguns though.

(http://s4.tinypic.com/2d0yv5v.jpg)

My first gun was an 1187.  God I miss that thing.   With the plug removed I could fire off 5 shots in a couple of seconds.  Sadly, I couldn't hit the broad side of a barn with it.

Quote from: Raza  on November 01, 2008, 09:36:25 PM
Are shotguns cheaper than handguns?

I might need to get myself a pistol grip pump and keep it in my lap at all times.

I forget what my 870 went for, but it was fairly cheap especially compared with a hand gun.

I think that guns with a pistol grip tend to be on the higher end though, which is more costly.  The 870 has been around for nearly a century, so it's a rugged but very cheap gun.

Quote from: Raza  on November 01, 2008, 09:36:25 PM
Are shotguns cheaper than handguns?

I might need to get myself a pistol grip pump and keep it in my lap at all times.

You can get a good pump 12 ga for less than $300. Remington 870s would probably be your best bet.

If I were buying a first gun for home defense, I'd get a remington 870 super express, and an Insight Procyon tac light with mount and remote pressure switch, and load it with 7 1/2 birdshot, or brenneke slugs depending on how worried I was about penetrating the drywall.

A setup like that could probably be put together for less than $400. Add another $100 for tritium sights.

As an Australian, by default I must respond in the Icky.

Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 01, 2008, 06:17:45 PM
Need doesn't really have anything to do with it- Its hard to imagine a scenario where even a police officer would need a full auto.

But, yeah, I don't see a need for one.

L.A. Shootout or any situation where your criminal has a similar single shot semi-auto you obviously want better firepwer but a 3 round burst can be just as good.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zm1PEY8F4xE

This was pretty tuff because the Mini-14 is a GREAT gun and it's easy to use and really reliable.  The other one I really like is the AR-15.  I have at my house an AR-15 tac A3.  I really like them.

I'ld also give almost anything for a really nice M1 Garand.

Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 01, 2008, 10:51:47 PM
You can get a good pump 12 ga for less than $300. Remington 870s would probably be your best bet.

If I were buying a first gun for home defense, I'd get a remington 870 super express, and an Insight Procyon tac light with mount and remote pressure switch, and load it with 7 1/2 birdshot, or brenneke slugs depending on how worried I was about penetrating the drywall.

A setup like that could probably be put together for less than $400. Add another $100 for tritium sights.

Also atop my wishlist is the Benelli semi-auto 12ga.  We have them in all our patrol cars as primary long gun and M-16a3's we got from the MSP armory last year to replace our aging AR-15's that were about 15 years old.

Benellis are really good guns, I can't fault them: except on price.

M-16's are like Jeeps - they get the job done, but they're not much fun. I'd rather have a Ferrari. Which gun is the Ferrari? I dunno, I picked Ar-15.

Quote from: NACar on November 02, 2008, 06:24:09 PM
M-16's are like Jeeps - they get the job done, but they're not much fun. I'd rather have a Ferrari. Which gun is the Ferrari? I dunno, I picked Ar-15.

The Sig 556 or HK91 would probably be the Ferrari of the bunch.

I'd like to get my hands a FAL 50.63 para.

Quote from: sandertheshark on November 02, 2008, 06:33:13 PM
I'd like to get my hands a FAL 50.63 para.

Call DSA arms.

And thanks for the vote, I was getting worried.

Quote from: NACar on November 02, 2008, 06:24:09 PM
M-16's are like Jeeps - they get the job done, but they're not much fun. I'd rather have a Ferrari. Which gun is the Ferrari? I dunno, I picked Ar-15.

The AR-15 is like a jeep with one gear and a smaller fuel tank.

As for me...I'll take this

(http://www.militarypictures.info/d/219-3/M249SAW.jpg)

Somebody didn't read the rules...

Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 02, 2008, 06:47:18 PM
Somebody didn't read the rules...

I'm sorry  :(

 :lol:

Quote from: rohan on November 02, 2008, 10:13:51 AM
L.A. Shootout or any situation where your criminal has a similar single shot semi-auto you obviously want better firepwer but a 3 round burst can be just as good.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zm1PEY8F4xE

This was pretty tuff because the Mini-14 is a GREAT gun and it's easy to use and really reliable.  The other one I really like is the AR-15.  I have at my house an AR-15 tac A3.  I really like them.

I'ld also give almost anything for a really nice M1 Garand.

(http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/08/01/ateam_6.jpg)

George Papard was Chuck Norris before Chuck Norris was Chuck Norris.

None of these are really my fancy. I voted for the HK though. If I had a choice? Barret .50 for it's sheer size and power. I can only imagine the rush you would get shooting that thing.

Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 01, 2008, 07:33:27 PM
Is that an older model benelli?

Shotguns are cool. My step father was an avid bird hunter, and I learned to shoot with a pump Ithaca. I like range shooting now though, and rarely hunt.

Besides, I've seen inertia mechanism semi-auto shotguns fail to feed too many times to prefer one over a pump. And, there is no sound more intimidating than hearing a 12 gauge rack one in.

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.

Quote from: Raza  on November 01, 2008, 09:27:54 PM
:rolleyes:

He laid the sarcasm on pretty thick.

Who's stupid?

Quote from: Raza  on November 01, 2008, 09:36:25 PM

Are shotguns cheaper than handguns?

Generally speaking yes, shotguns are cheaper.  Of course you can spend $1000+ on a sweet Benelli like 565 did, but you can generally get a decent quality NIB pump shotgun for less than a decent quality NIB handgun.  My local gun store/range is almost always running a 'special' on a mossberg 500 for $289, I'm sure you can beat that price since my gun store isn't that competitive on prices but you'd be hard pressed to find a quality handgun for that price, at least if you want to buy new.

That said, I'm of the massad ayoob school of thought that if you only have one gun, it should be a handgun.  Shotguns are great for HD, but I'd get one after the handgun. 

I voted AR15, but I really don't know much about assault rifles.

I've just recently got into guns, and thus far I've been more focused on learning about handguns and shotguns before eventually moving on to potentially adding an assault rifle to my collection.  Problem is, by the time I get to learning about assault rifles, it'll be that much harder to buy one with Dickweed obama in office.

Quote from: Lebowski on November 03, 2008, 09:22:26 AM

He laid the sarcasm on pretty thick.

Who's stupid?

I was rolling my eyes at the general sentiment, not necessarily the sensationalized version he presented, which I'm sure isn't far off from what many people think.  Also, the fact that he felt the need to politicize another thread.

A picture really isn't worth a thousand words, I guess.

Quote from: Raza  on November 03, 2008, 11:48:30 AM

I was rolling my eyes at the general sentiment, not necessarily the sensationalized version he presented

But he was being sarcastic.

Which makes you stupid.

I've only had one gun. It was a black powder rifle that came in a kit. I shot it once and then got rid of it.

Quote from: 280Z Turbo on November 03, 2008, 03:31:19 PM
I've only had one gun. It was a black powder rifle that came in a kit. I shot it once and then got rid of it.

A what?

Quote from: NACar on November 02, 2008, 06:24:09 PM
M-16's are like Jeeps - they get the job done, but they're not much fun. I'd rather have a Ferrari. Which gun is the Ferrari? I dunno, I picked Ar-15.

Um.

Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 02, 2008, 06:27:49 PM
The Sig 556 or HK91 would probably be the Ferrari of the bunch.

Quote from: Submariner on November 02, 2008, 06:38:57 PM
The AR-15 is like a jeep with one gear and a smaller fuel tank.

Correct.

Quote from: Lebowski on November 03, 2008, 02:00:12 PM

But he was being sarcastic.

Which makes you stupid.

No, he was exaggerating.  If I had said it, it would have been sarcastic.  He probably does believe in a smaller scale version of that sentiment.  After all, he is voting for McSame.

Quote from: sandertheshark on November 03, 2008, 05:38:22 PM
Um.
Correct.

How much can I get a Mini-14 for?

My next rifle is going to be a Remington 700, but I absolutely love the Mini-14, especially in stainless:

(https://www.vanraymond.com:4442/productcart/pc/catalog/RugerMini14AWbig.jpg)

Quote from: Raza  on November 03, 2008, 08:26:15 PM
How much can I get a Mini-14 for?

I've seen 'em for less than $700.

Quote from: sandertheshark on November 03, 2008, 10:27:52 PM
I've seen 'em for less than $700.

Nice.

Now I just need a van...

I've shot an M-14 of my brothers so it probably be that one. I don't really need any of these listed however.

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 said, I'd probably just opt for the AK-47/SKS style. They're easy weapons shoot, service and chamber.

However, as of yesterday I'll never buy another firearm from a dealer - no registration is my motto from here on out.

I also need to get a safe before I do anything else firearm related.

Quote from: GoCougs on November 05, 2008, 09:27:51 AM
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 said, I'd probably just opt for the AK-47/SKS style. They're easy weapons shoot, service and chamber.

However, as of yesterday I'll never buy another firearm from a dealer - no registration is my motto from here on out.

I also need to get a safe before I do anything else firearm related.

Meh, I wouldn't have any qualms using an AR-15 for home defense if that's what I had and it was a justified shoot.  FL is a pretty friendly state for gun owners defending their home.  That said, I think I'd rather have a semi-auto 12 gauge for HD.


I'm in the same boat ... I don't want to start buying expensive long guns until I've bought a high quality safe, and don't really want to buy a safe until I buy a house due to the massive pain in the ass involved in moving it.

Quote from: Lebowski on November 05, 2008, 09:36:05 AM
Meh, I wouldn't have any qualms using an AR-15 for home defense if that's what I had and it was a justified shoot.  FL is a pretty friendly state for gun owners defending their home.  That said, I think I'd rather have a semi-auto 12 gauge for HD.

I'm in the same boat ... I don't want to start buying expensive long guns until I've bought a high quality safe, and don't really want to buy a safe until I buy a house due to the massive pain in the ass involved in moving it.

You may not have qualms, but after the prototypical AR-15 .223/5.56/7.62 round rips through your walls and into your neighbors' homes, it'd be a different matter. It's only really be safe for home defense if bastardized for pistol rounds but and then it becomes a self-defeating weapon.

Good safes are yes, very heavy, and very expensive.

Quote from: GoCougs on November 05, 2008, 09:46:18 AM
You may not have qualms, but after the prototypical AR-15 .223/5.56/7.62 round rips through your walls and into your neighbors' homes, it'd be a different matter. It's only really be safe for home defense if bastardized for pistol rounds but and then it becomes a self-defeating weapon.

Good safes are yes, very heavy, and very expensive.

Quite the contrary, given the right choice of ammunition .223 is supposedly a great choice inside a home precisely because it doesn't penetrate walls.

Quote from: Lebowski on November 05, 2008, 10:11:32 AM
Quite the contrary, given the right choice of ammunition .223 is supposedly a great choice inside a home precisely because it doesn't penetrate walls.

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.

In my experience shooting the round in various incarnations, it'll zip right through cars, 6"+ of wood, and all sorts of stuff. It is a nasty round. Further, rifles cartridges in general are louder and have more muzzle flash. If but for nothing else the small caliber makes it unsuitable for home defense IMO.

Quote from: GoCougs on November 05, 2008, 09:27:51 AM
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.

Quote from: Lebowski on November 03, 2008, 08:58:03 AM

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.

Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 05, 2008, 03:05:23 PM
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

Quote from: GoCougs on November 05, 2008, 04:12:31 PM
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...

Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 05, 2008, 03:13:21 PM
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.

Quote from: Lebowski on November 05, 2008, 04:21:53 PM
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.

Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 05, 2008, 04:23:24 PM
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. 

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

Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 05, 2008, 04:35:29 PM
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.

Quote from: Lebowski on November 05, 2008, 04:39:52 PM
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.

Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 05, 2008, 04:42:20 PM
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.

Quote from: Lebowski on November 05, 2008, 04:47:21 PM
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.

Quote from: GoCougs on November 05, 2008, 10:41:32 AM
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.

Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 05, 2008, 04:52:58 PM

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.

Quote from: Lebowski on November 05, 2008, 04:47:21 PM

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?

Quote from: Lebowski on November 05, 2008, 04:58:48 PM
Damnit, you replied before I deleted that part of my post.

Sorry.

Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 05, 2008, 04:52:58 PM

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?

Quote from: Lebowski on November 05, 2008, 05:03:08 PM
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.

Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 05, 2008, 05:05:57 PM
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?

Quote from: Lebowski on November 05, 2008, 05:07:42 PM

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.

Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 05, 2008, 05:12:43 PM
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.

Quote from: Lebowski on November 05, 2008, 05:33:00 PM
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.

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.

Quote from: GoCougs on November 05, 2008, 05:55:05 PM
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).

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.

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. 

Quote from: R-inge on November 05, 2008, 06:03:33 PM
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.

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

Quote from: R-inge on November 05, 2008, 06:03:33 PM

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

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



:mask:























:lol:

Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 05, 2008, 05:58:33 PM
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.

Quote from: 565 on November 05, 2008, 06:04:21 PM

This entire pump sound giving away your position is pointless.

Listen, all I'm saying is the oft touted "the pump sound of the gun will scare away the intruder" line is overrated.  I had no intention for that comment to spark such a long winded argument.

If you think otherwise, get one and use hte pump sound to scare away anyone you'd like.  IMHO, there about 1,001 reasons why a pump action 12 gauge is an excellent choice for self defense and the noise the pump makes ranks about 3rd to last on that list.

Quote from: Lebowski on November 05, 2008, 06:44:26 PM
Listen, all I'm saying is the oft touted "the pump sound of the gun will scare away the intruder" line is overrated.  I had no intention for that comment to spark such a long winded argument.

If you think otherwise, get one and use hte pump sound to scare away anyone you'd like.  IMHO, there about 1,001 reasons why a pump action 12 gauge is an excellent choice for self defense and the noise the pump makes ranks about 3rd to last on that list.

No I totally agree with you that the myth that pumping a shotgun somehow makes people lose their bowel movements is stupid.

It's just a noise, and everyone says it's really distinctive, but it's really no more distinctive than cycling a semi auto.  Your preaching to the choir about not scaring people with the pump sound, that's why I've got the semi auto under the bed and the pump as a target gun.

I'm saying that there is no advantage or disadvantage to the pumping noise over a semi auto cycle noise, as they are both rather loud and manditory to chamber a round. 

I guess 00buck is next on my list of things to get at Walmart.

Quote from: Lebowski on November 05, 2008, 06:29:55 PM

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.

I understand you live alone, as does Cougs.  I have a wife and two sons. While I may direct them to take cover, I am most certainly not hunkering down into a "safe room" and waiting.

Quote from: 565 on November 05, 2008, 06:08:19 PM
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.

Remember, the point is to disable the guy, not necessarily to kill him. If he happens to die- well, I'm not losing any sleep over it, but that is not my primary intent.

Birdshot (7 1/2 will not penetrate two a 3/8ths drywall on stud wall, 4 might) still packs all the kinetic energy you need to disable 95% of intruders.

Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 05, 2008, 07:05:15 PM
Remember, the point is to disable the guy, not necessarily to kill him. If he happens to die- well, I'm not losing any sleep over it, but that is not my primary intent.

Birdshot (7 1/2 will not penetrate two a 3/8ths drywall on stud wall, 4 might) still packs all the kinetic energy you need to disable 95% of intruders.

According to Dave Chappelle, you want to load "birdshot, buckshot, birdshot, slug, slug, slug!  Slugs for everybody!"

Quote from: Raza  on November 05, 2008, 07:06:58 PM
According to Dave Chappelle, you want to load "birdshot, buckshot, birdshot, slug, slug, slug!  Slugs for everybody!"

There are some that teach that, but really: if the birdshot doesn't stop him, just go straight to the brenneke slugs. (and in winter, when clothing may be heavy enough t stop the birdshot, just start with the slugs).

If I was the only one expected to ever clear the house, I'd use the Sig, but my wife is much more comfortable with the shotgun, and she will be much more likley to fire if she doesn't think she's going to blow big holes in somebody.

If she's afraid to use it, its useless.

Quote from: GoCougs on November 05, 2008, 09:27:51 AM
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 said, I'd probably just opt for the AK-47/SKS style. They're easy weapons shoot, service and chamber.

However, as of yesterday I'll never buy another firearm from a dealer - no registration is my motto from here on out.

I also need to get a safe before I do anything else firearm related.

A few people I know use some sort of semi auto .223/5.56 round for HD.

I'd love to get my hands on an HK416, but the price is rather high.  For now, it's a pistol, and perhaps an M4 with an HK upper reciever, aimpoint, etc.

Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 05, 2008, 07:10:33 PM
There are some that teach that, but really: if the birdshot doesn't stop him, just go straight to the brenneke slugs. (and in winter, when clothing may be heavy enough t stop the birdshot, just start with the slugs).

If I was the only one expected to ever clear the house, I'd use the Sig, but my wife is much more comfortable with the shotgun, and she will be much more likley to fire if she doesn't think she's going to blow big holes in somebody.

If she's afraid to use it, its useless.

Well, he said it was set up for two intruders.  Birdshot the first guy, buck him if he's still coming, then birdshot the second guy. 

Quote from: Lebowski on November 05, 2008, 06:44:26 PM
Listen, all I'm saying is the oft touted "the pump sound of the gun will scare away the intruder" line is overrated.  I had no intention for that comment to spark such a long winded argument.

It was more your argument about "giving away your position" that I found disconcerting than anything else.

Quote from: Submariner on November 05, 2008, 07:13:59 PM
A few people I know use some sort of semi auto .223/5.56 round for HD.

I'd love to get my hands on an HK416, but the price is rather high.  For now, it's a pistol, and perhaps an M4 with an HK upper reciever, aimpoint, etc.

I'm going to get a pistol (most likely Glock 30) and this:

http://www.remington.com/products/firearms/premier_dealer_exclusives/model_870_express_7-shot.asp

Quote from: Raza  on November 05, 2008, 07:26:26 PM
Well, he said it was set up for two intruders.  Birdshot the first guy, buck him if he's still coming, then birdshot the second guy. 

Hmmmm....

If the second guy aint running away by that time, he should get slugged.

Quote from: Raza  on November 05, 2008, 07:27:32 PM
I'm going to get a pistol (most likely Glock 30) and this:

http://www.remington.com/products/firearms/premier_dealer_exclusives/model_870_express_7-shot.asp

If you're going with a polymer, have you looked at the Springfield XD? Not that you can go wrong with a Glock really.

Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 05, 2008, 07:29:20 PM
If you're going with a polymer, have you looked at the Springfield XD? Not that you can go wrong with a Glock really.

Polymer wasn't really my main concern (and again, this is all tentative, as I'll have to fire them all before I buy anything), but I was looking at caliber vs. size and cost. 

But man, that XD is an ugly gun.  Not a big deal, though.

Is that a hand squeeze safety?  My old BB gun had one of those, I didn't know they had them on real guns.

I mean, what I really want is a USP Compact 40, but they seem too expensive.  I'd also consider a Glock 27, because I've been told by many that the G30's small frame and big caliber don't make for a user friendly gun, and many have also said that .40 is the best round for home defense.

Quote from: Raza  on November 05, 2008, 07:36:17 PM
Polymer wasn't really my main concern (and again, this is all tentative, as I'll have to fire them all before I buy anything), but I was looking at caliber vs. size and cost. 

But man, that XD is an ugly gun.  Not a big deal, though.

Is that a hand squeeze safety?  My old BB gun had one of those, I didn't know they had them on real guns.

I mean, what I really want is a USP Compact 40, but they seem too expensive.  I'd also consider a Glock 27, because I've been told by many that the G30's small frame and big caliber don't make for a user friendly gun, and many have also said that .40 is the best round for home defense.

yeah, its a grip safety, and there's a glock-type trigger lever safety too. Since I'm left-handed, I like things that are ambidextrous, and this also has ambi mag catches. Yeah, its kind of ugly, and no, I've never fired one, but they intrique me: especially the M series.

Quote from: Raza  on November 05, 2008, 07:36:17 PM
Polymer wasn't really my main concern (and again, this is all tentative, as I'll have to fire them all before I buy anything), but I was looking at caliber vs. size and cost. 

But man, that XD is an ugly gun.  Not a big deal, though.

Is that a hand squeeze safety?  My old BB gun had one of those, I didn't know they had them on real guns.

I mean, what I really want is a USP Compact 40, but they seem too expensive.  I'd also consider a Glock 27, because I've been told by many that the G30's small frame and big caliber don't make for a user friendly gun, and many have also said that .40 is the best round for home defense.

USP compact is the way to go.  I love those pistols.

Quote from: Raza  on November 05, 2008, 07:27:32 PM

I'm going to get a pistol (most likely Glock 30) and this:

http://www.remington.com/products/firearms/premier_dealer_exclusives/model_870_express_7-shot.asp

H&K USP, 1911 .... you change your mind every week :lol:

Seriously, I still say start with a 9mm.  If you end up getting into guns/shooting, 1) your first gun purchase will NOT be your last, and 2) you will be shocked at how much $$$ worth of ammo you can go through in an hour at the range.  Multiply that by 3-4 range trips a month and you have a $200-$300/month hobby, just in terms of ammo costs.  9mm ammo costs a third less than .45.  Start with the 9mm, and as you get more into shooting add more expensive guns (that use more expensive ammo), like that USP compact, to your collection.

Also, like you said, try to shoot as many as you can before you buy.  When I bought my G26, I shot it back to back w/ the G27.  I was all set to buy the G27, but I shot the 26 much more accurately with faster follow up shots, so I got it instead (and the cheaper ammo costs were another reason to get it over the 27).  That's just me - I didn't like the snappy recoil of the .40.  I also don't shoot my G31 as accurately with the .40 barrel as I do .357sig ... again that's just me, I'm not a particularly big fan of the .40 because I don't shoot it that well (you might).  Greg has said he's the complete opposite (he shoots .40 better than .357).  Everyone seems to be different as far as what they prefer or who shoots what more accurately, so rent as many as you can to see what YOU shoot the best.

There seems to be alot of gun owners on Carspin, so I really did make a "post pics of your armory" thread.

Here it is.

http://www.carspin.net/forums/index.php?topic=16330.0

Let's see all those fine firearms!

Quote from: Lebowski on November 05, 2008, 08:41:22 PM
H&K USP, 1911 .... you change your mind every week :lol:

Seriously, I still say start with a 9mm.  If you end up getting into guns/shooting, 1) your first gun purchase will NOT be your last, and 2) you will be shocked at how much $$$ worth of ammo you can go through in an hour at the range.  Multiply that by 3-4 range trips a month and you have a $200-$300/month hobby, just in terms of ammo costs.  9mm ammo costs a third less than .45.  Start with the 9mm, and as you get more into shooting add more expensive guns (that use more expensive ammo), like that USP compact, to your collection.

Also, like you said, try to shoot as many as you can before you buy.  When I bought my G26, I shot it back to back w/ the G27.  I was all set to buy the G27, but I shot the 26 much more accurately with faster follow up shots, so I got it instead (and the cheaper ammo costs were another reason to get it over the 27).  That's just me - I didn't like the snappy recoil of the .40.  I also don't shoot my G31 as accurately with the .40 barrel as I do .357sig ... again that's just me, I'm not a particularly big fan of the .40 because I don't shoot it that well (you might).  Greg has said he's the complete opposite (he shoots .40 better than .357).  Everyone seems to be different as far as what they prefer or who shoots what more accurately, so rent as many as you can to see what YOU shoot the best.

Well, truth be told, I really want a 1911, I just can't seem to find one that I can afford.  I'd like to spend no more than $500, so that's the main constraint here.  I have limited cash flows. 

But yeah, just like car shopping, you look at paper, and then the real thing before you make a decision.  I'll be sure to shoot before I buy.  I'll keep SPIN updated as it gets close.  I'm looking to purchase no sooner than January.

Quote from: Raza  on November 05, 2008, 09:26:17 PM
Well, truth be told, I really want a 1911, I just can't seem to find one that I can afford.  I'd like to spend no more than $500, so that's the main constraint here.  I have limited cash flows. 

But yeah, just like car shopping, you look at paper, and then the real thing before you make a decision.  I'll be sure to shoot before I buy.  I'll keep SPIN updated as it gets close.  I'm looking to purchase no sooner than January.

Argh, you have limited funds - just get a Glock 9mm!  Buying a 1911 now would be like a 16 year old kid who's never driven a car buying a Porsche 911, whereas the Glock is the Honda Accord.

You're what, 12 years old?  Which means, with your drinking, you have about another 35 years to live?  Plenty of time left to collect 1911s.

Start with something cheap to buy, cheap to shoot, easy to use, easy to take care of, and reliable.  There will be plenty of room in your armory for $3000 custom 1911s in the future.  Learn the basics with something cheap that works perfectly right out of the box.

Quote from: Raza  on November 05, 2008, 09:26:17 PM

I'm looking to purchase no sooner than January.

Good thinking.  No reason to buy it any more than 3 weeks before Obama takes it away from you, and puts it in a vault somewhere with Dazzleman's money.

Quote from: Lebowski on November 05, 2008, 09:32:34 PM
Argh, you have limited funds - just get a Glock 9mm!  Buying a 1911 now would be like a 16 year old kid who's never driven a car buying a Porsche 911, whereas the Glock is the Honda Accord.

You're what, 12 years old?  Which means, with your drinking, you have about another 35 years to live?  Plenty of time left to collect 1911s.

Start with something cheap to buy, cheap to shoot, easy to use, easy to take care of, and reliable.  There will be plenty of room in your armory for $3000 custom 1911s in the future.  Learn the basics with something cheap that works perfectly right out of the box.

Why not get a .40, since my main concern will be stopping power?  I won't go to the range 4 times a month, not after I feel comfortable firing.

12 gauge bird shot with standard 2.75" shells will stop anyone at inside distances (~15' or less). That is some nasty nasty stuff at short range. Go for goose loads, and/or 3" shells, and/or full choke, and you'll literally start taking limbs apart at that range.

And I need to get a new camera...

Quote from: Raza  on November 05, 2008, 09:45:46 PM
Why not get a .40, since my main concern will be stopping power?  I won't go to the range 4 times a month, not after I feel comfortable firing.

Impact energy of the .357 sig is above that of the .40.

edit: In some rounds.

Quote from: Raza  on November 05, 2008, 09:45:46 PM
Why not get a .40, since my main concern will be stopping power?  I won't go to the range 4 times a month, not after I feel comfortable firing.

9mm is cheaper to shoot and easier for a noob to shoot accurately w/ quicker follow up shots, especially in a subcompact like the 26/27.  It also holds one more round in that size w/ the standard magazine, and has the option of accepting a 33rd magazine.  Yes the .40 has marginally more stopping power.

Quote from: 565 on November 05, 2008, 08:53:04 PM
There seems to be alot of gun owners on Carspin, so I really did make a "post pics of your armory" thread.

Here it is.

http://www.carspin.net/forums/index.php?topic=16330.0

Let's see all those fine firearms!

Cool!  I'll post my one gun tonight.

Here's a question that I am in a dilemma over; do you guys usually leave your primary home defense weapon loaded at all times, or do you keep it empty?

I understand with a pistol that you can at least load the mag and leave it out of the gun, but for me I don't really have that option.  I can load the magazine tube and leave the chamber empty, but I still don't feel comfortable with guests or kids around doing that sort of thing, just in case someone finds it and starts screwing around.

At the same time, I don't want to have to grab a handful of shotgun shells and hustle them into the gun while the perp has his way in my home.

Any thoughts on that?

Quote from: R-inge on November 06, 2008, 07:18:34 AM
Here's a question that I am in a dilemma over; do you guys usually leave your primary home defense weapon loaded at all times, or do you keep it empty?

I understand with a pistol that you can at least load the mag and leave it out of the gun, but for me I don't really have that option.  I can load the magazine tube and leave the chamber empty, but I still don't feel comfortable with guests or kids around doing that sort of thing, just in case someone finds it and starts screwing around.

At the same time, I don't want to have to grab a handful of shotgun shells and hustle them into the gun while the perp has his way in my home.

Any thoughts on that?

http://www.gunvault.com/


Leave it in a quick access safe like that, loaded and ready to go.  Won't protect anything from thieves (they can just pick up the whole safe and carry it out), but will keep out kids and curious friends/family.



Edit:  Oh you mean a shotgun?  I don't know, maybe a locking gun case?  This is one reason I wouldn't have a shotgun as my only home defense gun, it's just easier to store a pistol safely but still have quick access to it.

Keep saying that, I need an excuse to buy one but the spousal unit won't hear of it. :mask:

Quote from: R-inge on November 06, 2008, 07:50:37 AM
Keep saying that, I need an excuse to buy one but the spousal unit won't hear of it. :mask:

Oh you mean a shotgun?  I don't know, maybe a locking gun case?  This is one reason I wouldn't have a shotgun as my only home defense gun, it's just easier to store a pistol safely but still have quick access to it.

Oh you mean a shotgun?  I don't know, maybe a locking gun case?  This is one reason I wouldn't have a shotgun as my only home defense gun, it's just easier to store a pistol safely but still have quick access to it.

Oh you mean a shotgun?  I don't know, maybe a locking gun case?  This is one reason I wouldn't have a shotgun as my only home defense gun, it's just easier to store a pistol safely but still have quick access to it.

Oh you mean a shotgun?  I don't know, maybe a locking gun case?  This is one reason I wouldn't have a shotgun as my only home defense gun, it's just easier to store a pistol safely but still have quick access to it.

Oh you mean a shotgun?  I don't know, maybe a locking gun case?  This is one reason I wouldn't have a shotgun as my only home defense gun, it's just easier to store a pistol safely but still have quick access to it.

Oh you mean a shotgun?  I don't know, maybe a locking gun case?  This is one reason I wouldn't have a shotgun as my only home defense gun, it's just easier to store a pistol safely but still have quick access to it.

Quote from: Lebowski on November 06, 2008, 08:00:34 AM
Oh you mean a shotgun?  I don't know, maybe a locking gun case?  This is one reason I wouldn't have a shotgun as my only home defense gun, it's just easier to store a pistol safely but still have quick access to it.

Oh you mean a shotgun?  I don't know, maybe a locking gun case?  This is one reason I wouldn't have a shotgun as my only home defense gun, it's just easier to store a pistol safely but still have quick access to it.

Oh you mean a shotgun?  I don't know, maybe a locking gun case?  This is one reason I wouldn't have a shotgun as my only home defense gun, it's just easier to store a pistol safely but still have quick access to it.

Oh you mean a shotgun?  I don't know, maybe a locking gun case?  This is one reason I wouldn't have a shotgun as my only home defense gun, it's just easier to store a pistol safely but still have quick access to it.

Oh you mean a shotgun?  I don't know, maybe a locking gun case?  This is one reason I wouldn't have a shotgun as my only home defense gun, it's just easier to store a pistol safely but still have quick access to it.

Oh you mean a shotgun?  I don't know, maybe a locking gun case?  This is one reason I wouldn't have a shotgun as my only home defense gun, it's just easier to store a pistol safely but still have quick access to it.

ROFLCOPTER

Quote from: Lebowski on November 06, 2008, 05:29:39 AM
9mm is cheaper to shoot and easier for a noob to shoot accurately w/ quicker follow up shots, especially in a subcompact like the 26/27.  It also holds one more round in that size w/ the standard magazine, and has the option of accepting a 33rd magazine.  Yes the .40 has marginally more stopping power.

Okay, I'll consider the 9mm then.

What about .380?  I really like the PPK/S.

Quote from: Raza  on November 06, 2008, 09:33:10 AM
Okay, I'll consider the 9mm then.

What about .380?  I really like the PPK/S.

.380 is weak.  It's the same diameter as a 9mm, but it's a lighter bullet going slower with very little energy.  For whatever reason the name of the cartridge doesn't always exactly correspond to the diameter ... 380ACP, 9mm parabellum (or 9mm luger or 9x19), and .357sig all use a .355" diameter bullet.  .38 special and .357 magnum (and I believe. 38 super), all use a bullet that is within one or two hundredths of an inch from that (I think .356 or .357").  So that general bullet diameter is extremely common, but there is a huge variance in energy from the weakling 380ACP to the monster .357magnum, with 9mm and .38 special falling somewhere in the middle and .357sig and 38super closer to (but not quite equalling) the magnum.

There's only one reason to own a 380 - because some guns chambered in 380 can fit in your pocket, and thus you can have them on you all the time.  A 380 in your pocket is better than nothing, but for a true self defense + range gun don't go smaller than 9mm (or .38 special if you're going revolver, which I doubt you're interested in).  I wouldn't get a PPK/S simply because if I wanted a weak ass 380, there are newer options that are much smaller and will disappear in your pocket (like the Ruger LCP or Kel-tec P3AT).

Quote from: Lebowski on November 06, 2008, 09:42:51 AM
.380 is weak.  It's the same diameter as a 9mm, but it's a lighter bullet going slower with very little energy.  For whatever reason the name of the cartridge doesn't always exactly correspond to the diameter ... 380ACP, 9mm parabellum (or 9mm luger or 9x19), and .357 sig all use a .355" diameter bullet.  .38 special and .357 magnum (and I believe. 38 super), all use a bullet that is within one or two hundredths of an inch from that (I think .356 or .357"). 

There's only one reason to own a 380 - because some guns chambered in 380 can fit in your pocket, and thus you can have them on you all the time.  A 380 in your pocket is better than nothing, but for a true self defense + range gun don't go smaller than 9mm (or .38 special if you're going revolver, which I doubt you're interested in).  I wouldn't get a PPK/S simply because if I wanted a weak ass 380, there are newer options that are much smaller and will disappear in your pocket (like the Ruger LCP or Kel-tec P3AT).

I figured it's too small.  But isn't it just a shorter 9mm round (9X17, I think)?  Oh well, I'll get one later.  The PPK/S just looks so good and it's reasonably priced.

I am interested in revolvers, but I wouldn't go smaller than .38 Special (those things usually also chamber .357 Magnum, right?  Most .357s I've seen chamber .38s, like the SW 686+, which I'd love to own).

Quote from: Raza  on November 06, 2008, 09:49:40 AM
I figured it's too small.  But isn't it just a shorter 9mm round (9X17, I think)?  Oh well, I'll get one later.  The PPK/S just looks so good and it's reasonably priced.

I am interested in revolvers, but I wouldn't go smaller than .38 Special (those things usually also chamber .357 Magnum, right?  Most .357s I've seen chamber .38s, like the SW 686+, which I'd love to own).

PPK could be a cool gun to own, but that's something that you would buy more from a collectors standpoint than something you would actually want to use for self defense.  In a pinch it would do, but I wouldn't recommend making it your nightstand gun.

.357magnum revolvers can shoot .38special, but not the other way around. 

Actually, .357/9MM is the nominal diameter of the bullet whilst .38/.380 is the nominal diameter of the casing. Also, the tolerances are not hundreds (0.01") but thousandths (0.001").

Raza, my suggestion is a 4" .357 Magnum revolver from a second tier manufacturer like Taurus. Very popular (relatively inexpensive), versatile, easy to use (most semi-autos are complicated in function - trigger safeties, hammer safeties, slide safeties, etc.) and most importantly, they will also shoot the cheaper/easier-to-handle .38 for learning purposes. (NOTE: .38 will not shoot .357 by design - the .357 cartridge is too long to fit).

Quote from: Raza  on November 06, 2008, 09:49:40 AM

I figured it's too small.  But isn't it just a shorter 9mm round (9X17, I think)?

The cartridge is shorter, which means less gunpowder equals less power.  The bullet is lighter, usually 90 or 95 grain vs. 125 grain for 9mm.

To compare the difference, go to www.midwayusa.com and browse the handgun ammo.  They give bullet weight, velocity, and energy (which IIRC is mass * velocity^2).  Compare the 380ACP to the 9mm, there is a huge difference in energy.

Oh, also keep in mind to get the best out of 9mm for self defense it's important to use high quality hollow point ammo.  This is less important for larger bullets like the .45.  A lot of the time when you see studies knocking 9mm, it's looking at full metal jacket.  Use the FMJ for the range.  Don't get me wrong, the 9mm is still not as good a manstopper as a .45, but with quality ammo it's got decent stopping power and I just think it's a good choice for a first gun, given the low cost of ammo and lighter recoil, plus having 15 or 17 rounds is nice.

Quote from: GoCougs on November 06, 2008, 09:56:17 AM
Actually, .357/9MM is the nominal diameter of the bullet whilst .38/.380 is the nominal diameter of the casing. Also, the tolerances are not hundreds (0.01") but thousandths (0.001").

Raza, my suggestion is a 4" .357 Magnum revolver from a second tier manufacturer like Taurus. Very popular (relatively inexpensive), versatile, easy to use (most semi-autos are complicated in function - trigger safeties, hammer safeties, slide safeties, etc.) and most importantly, they will also shoot the cheaper/easier-to-handle .38 for learning purposes. (NOTE: .38 will not shoot .357 by design - the .357 cartridge is too long to fit).

Ah, I always wondered about that naming convention, now I know.  I just figured it was a goofy marketing ploy, kind of like BMW using the 328 330 335 name to refer to the same basic 3.0l, or MB using E55 to refer to the 5.4l.  In the case of the .357sig, the name purely is a marketing ploy (9mm-sig doesn't sound very cool).  I misspoke on the hundredths vs. thousandths, though since I posted the actual numbers I thought the point was pretty clear.


A .357mag would be a good choice, but I never really understood the argument that a semi-auto is hard for a beginner to use.  For anybody with half a brain, learning how to operate a semi auto (especially the simpler ones, like a Glock or a number of other newer designs) takes about 2 minutes.  Hell anyone who's ever watched American TV knows how to put in the magazine and rack the slide to chamber a round.  Learning how to take it apart and clean it takes about another 5 minutes.  Maybe that's not the case for a more high maintenance semi auto like a 1911, but a glock is as simple as you could possibly want, which is another reason I recommend it as a first gun.

Quote from: Lebowski on November 06, 2008, 10:06:45 AM
Ah, I always wondered about that naming convention, now I know.  I just figured it was a goofy marketing ploy, kind of like BMW using the 328 330 335 name to refer to the same basic 3.0l, or MB using E55 to refer to the 5.4l.  In the case of the .357sig, the name purely is a marketing ploy (9mm-sig doesn't sound very cool).  I misspoke on the hundredths vs. thousandths, though since I posted the actual numbers I thought the point was pretty clear.


A .357mag would be a good choice, but I never really understood the argument that a semi-auto is hard for a beginner to use.  For anybody with half a brain, learning how to operate a semi auto (especially the simpler ones, like a Glock or a number of other newer designs) takes about 2 minutes.  Hell anyone who's ever watched American TV knows how to put in the magazine and rack the slide to chamber a round.  Learning how to take it apart and clean it takes about another 5 minutes.  Maybe that's not the case for a more high maintenance semi auto like a 1911, but a glock is as simple as you could possibly want, which is another reason I recommend it as a first gun.

I think one of the reasons is that a semi is trickier to operate vs a revolver.  It's too easy to accidentally squeeze off 6 rounds on a semi and basically impossible to do that on a revolver.  My kids' first pistol will be a revolver for sure. 

But semi-autos are more difficult; even a Glock, especially a concern for safety and self-defense.

Quote from: GoCougs on November 06, 2008, 11:21:10 AM
But semi-autos are more difficult; even a Glock, especially a concern for safety and self-defense.

Nothing beats the simplicity of a nice revolver.  Plus, you basically always have a heavy double action pull to fire it, as opposed to the very easy single action pull once you chamber the first round in a semi.  A little twitch of your finger shoots a round from a semi-auto - not a good scenario if you're a nervous novice.

Quote from: saxonyron on November 06, 2008, 11:36:57 AM
Nothing beats the simplicity of a nice revolver.  Plus, you basically always have a heavy double action pull to fire it, as opposed to the very easy single action pull once you chamber the first round in a semi.  A little twitch of your finger shoots a round from a semi-auto - not a good scenario if you're a nervous novice.

I think where you and Cougs are coming from is that you're both old school ...

There are DAO semi-autos!  Hell it seems like most of the modern polymer framed semis are either DAO or Glock-style striker fired (which also have a consistent, long trigger pull similar to DAO).  Glock even has the trigger safety which makes it virtually impossible to fire unless you get your bugger hook in there and give it a good deliberate squeeze.

With a 1911, yeah I could see the safety issue.

I don't know, just seems like the operation of the modern semis is extremely simple.  Maybe not quite as simple as a revolver, but close enough that anyone with an interest in firearms can figure it out in a matter of minutes.  The safety isn't an issue, IMO, but I agree single action isn't the best idea for a first gun.

I find the complexity of a glock sufficient.  I can't even remember how to fire one.  A revolver on the other hand is ingrained in our culture through westerns, so I'm sure even the youngest kid can figure it out.  The hammer-pull would be the only deterrent.

Quote from: Lebowski on November 06, 2008, 11:38:49 AM
I think where you and Cougs are coming from is that you're both old school ...

There are DAO semi-autos!  Hell it seems like most of the modern polymer framed semis are either DAO or Glock-style striker fired (which also have a consistent, long trigger pull similar to DAO).  Glock even has the trigger safety which makes it virtually impossible to fire unless you get your bugger hook in there and give it a good deliberate squeeze.

With a 1911, yeah I could see the safety issue.

I don't know, just seems like the operation of the modern semis is extremely simple.  Maybe not quite as simple as a revolver, but close enough that anyone with an interest in firearms can figure it out in a matter of minutes.  The safety isn't an issue, IMO, but I agree single action isn't the best idea for a first gun.

Yeah, I agree.  But I'm not thinking so much about a little kid stumbling upon the gun and accidentally shooting it.  Any loaded gun at that point is a disaster.  I'm just thinking about using the gun and not accidentally blowing a hole in your hand trying to unjamb it like my dad's gunsmith friend inexplicably did about 30 years ago.  But I suppose any stoopid move like that with any gun would do you in.  It's just that I've never had my revolver jam, but I've had plenty of semi's lock up.

Quote from: R-inge on November 06, 2008, 11:38:51 AM
I find the complexity of a glock sufficient.  I can't even remember how to fire one.  A revolver on the other hand is ingrained in our culture through westerns, so I'm sure even the youngest kid can figure it out.  The hammer-pull would be the only deterrent.

Meh, I guess a revolver is easier to use in the sense that if you know how to use one, you can use them all.  If you randomly pick up any semi auto in the store you might have to ask if it is SA/DA, where the slide release is etc 

But if you are talking about buying a gun (and that's what Raza is talking about), you take the 2 minutes necessary to have the salesman show you (or read the manual) where the slide release and takedown lever are, what the trigger system is, and you're good forever.  If you own the gun, you aren't going to forget how to use it unless it rots in the safe for 3 years at a time and never gets touched.

We aren't talking about a 3 year old here (tho Raza sometimes acts like one  :evildude:).

Not old school - if one is new to firearms, it takes FAR more than two minutes to become proficient with a firearm - even a revolver.

That is the inherent disadvantage to a semi-auto - proficiency in use in all situations (especially self defense), not the fundamental mechanics of operation.

It's not huge, but it is palpatable for new user. I've been on both sides of it.

Quote from: GoCougs on November 06, 2008, 12:52:22 PM
Not old school - if one is new to firearms, it takes FAR more than two minutes to become proficient with a firearm - even a revolver.

That is the inherent disadvantage to a semi-auto - proficiency in use in all situations (especially self defense), not the fundamental mechanics of operation.

It's not huge, but it is palpatable for new user. I've been on both sides of it.

By 2 minutes, I meant the basic operation of it ... how to load it, how to put a round in the chamber, how to check and make sure there is not a round in the chamber etc ... I didn't mean becoming proficient.  Becoming proficient with either a revolver or semi auto takes considerable range time, and I'm not sure a revolver would take any less range time than the semi auto.  For one thing, getting used to that heavy double action trigger pull on a revolver takes some time.

I guess in a self defense scenario, yeah you could have to clear a jam which could cause problems if you're not proficient.  At the same time, if it comes down to it reloading that six shot revolver under a high stress situation is also going to cause problems if you're not proficient.  A quality semi-auto jams almost never.  A revolver WILL have to be reloaded after 6 (or 8 or whatever) shots.  True most firefights don't last that long, but it's still something to think about (and the likelyhood of needing a reload after 6 shots is probably as high as if not higher than having a quality semi auto jam on you)

Quote from: saxonyron on November 06, 2008, 11:36:57 AM
Nothing beats the simplicity of a nice revolver.  Plus, you basically always have a heavy double action pull to fire it, as opposed to the very easy single action pull once you chamber the first round in a semi.  A little twitch of your finger shoots a round from a semi-auto - not a good scenario if you're a nervous novice.

That's another argument Greg had for the Glocks.  Aren't they DAO?

And I certainly know how to operate a semi-automatic (TV rules!!) and I don't think that's an issue.  Revolvers are cool though.  Face always handled a .357 magnum.

Cougs, would a Taurus really be reliable?

What is so unsafe about a 1911?  They have an external safety and require you to pull back the hammer to fire your first round.  Are you saying it's too easy to fire subsequent rounds?  From a first shot perspective, I'd think that revolvers are more dangerous since they have no safety. 

Quote from: Raza  on November 06, 2008, 01:22:58 PM
What is so unsafe about a 1911?  They have an external safety and require you to pull back the hammer to fire your first round.  Are you saying it's too easy to fire subsequent rounds?  From a first shot perspective, I'd think that revolvers are more dangerous since they have no safety. 

I think just that you have to carry it "cocked and locked", and once the safety is off you've got the light single action trigger.  Much easier to accidentally pull the trigger on a light hairtrigger, and if you forget to set the safety while the hammer is back you're asking for an accident.  The upside of the 1911 is that you get to say "cocked and locked" all the time.  I wouldn't say they are unsafe, just better suited to more experienced gunowners.  It's not the best choice for your first gun IMO.

On the DAO revolver, they don't need a manual safety because the trigger pull is very long and heavy.  You aren't going to accidentally pull it unless you're acting like an idiot.

A Glock operates like a DAO (it's technically not DAO, it doesn't have a hammer it has a striker, but it operates similar to DAO with a consistent, long trigger pull).

With a 1911, couldn't you chamber a round and then decock the hammer?  Or is that not possible?

Quote from: Raza  on November 06, 2008, 01:59:52 PM
With a 1911, couldn't you chamber a round and then decock the hammer?  Or is that not possible?

I assume so, but for whatever reason people carry them cocked and locked.  I assume because it's easier to release the safety quickly than it is to cock it?  I dunno, I don't own a 1911.

In my limited experience with 1911s (I have an accurate Airsoft replica), I find pulling the gun from a holster and cocking the hammer to be a more natural movement than releasing the safety.  But I think we can all agree that I'm not exactly what passes for normal.  But if you're a lefty, there's no way that the safety on a 1911 is more convenient that pulling the hammer unless they have different spec for southpaws. 

Quote from: Raza  on November 06, 2008, 02:20:54 PM
In my limited experience with 1911s (I have an accurate Airsoft replica), I find pulling the gun from a holster and cocking the hammer to be a more natural movement than releasing the safety.  But I think we can all agree that I'm not exactly what passes for normal.  But if you're a lefty, there's no way that the safety on a 1911 is more convenient that pulling the hammer unless they have different spec for southpaws. 

http://smartcarry.com/cocklock.htm

He says because when you re-holster it (after drawing and cocking), you have to lower the hammer over a loaded chamber, which can cause an ND if you are not careful.

Quote from: R-inge on November 06, 2008, 07:18:34 AM
Here's a question that I am in a dilemma over; do you guys usually leave your primary home defense weapon loaded at all times, or do you keep it empty?

I understand with a pistol that you can at least load the mag and leave it out of the gun, but for me I don't really have that option.  I can load the magazine tube and leave the chamber empty, but I still don't feel comfortable with guests or kids around doing that sort of thing, just in case someone finds it and starts screwing around.

At the same time, I don't want to have to grab a handful of shotgun shells and hustle them into the gun while the perp has his way in my home.

Any thoughts on that?

Both the Sig and the shotty stay in condition three (loaded, no round in chamber, safety on), in the safe, which is in the closet and about three feet from the bed.

The safe (which only holds those guns, plus a couple of unloaded rifles) is unlocked at night when either of us are home, with the bolts engaged. It takes enough force to turn the wheel that it would be very unlikely for either of the kids to do it, even if they could reach it, even if they could sneak into our room at night without being noticed. And even if they did do that, they'd still need to chamber a round before the guns actually became dangerous.

Yes, I'm sure some of you will lambast me for this method, but I see nearly zero chance of an "accident" involving the kids occuring with this setup.

When the kids are older, they will be taught about the guns, and they will be allowed to inspect, look at and shoot them when they ask to.

Quote from: Lebowski on November 06, 2008, 10:06:45 AM
.  In the case of the .357sig, the name purely is a marketing ploy (9mm-sig doesn't sound very cool). 

That, and the round was developped to mimic the characteristics of the .357 magnum in a more semi-auto friendly cartridge.

Quote from: Raza  on November 06, 2008, 01:16:07 PM
Cougs, would a Taurus really be reliable?

I don't own one, but I know a lot of people of do. They're quality and reliable, but they won't quite have the top notch fit and finish of the top end brands like Colt or S&W.

Quote from: GoCougs on November 06, 2008, 03:58:12 PM
I don't own one, but I know a lot of people of do. They're quality and reliable, but they won't quite have the top notch fit and finish of the top end brands like Colt or S&W.

Apparently a distant cousin of mine owns one and fires it regularly without trouble.

Quote from: Raza  on November 06, 2008, 01:16:07 PM
That's another argument Greg had for the Glocks.  Aren't they DAO?

And I certainly know how to operate a semi-automatic (TV rules!!) and I don't think that's an issue.  Revolvers are cool though.  Face always handled a .357 magnum.

Cougs, would a Taurus really be reliable?

The operation of a TV gun isn't always like a real one.

Quote from: Submariner on November 06, 2008, 09:19:12 PM
The operation of a TV gun isn't always like a real one.

Yes, my Nintendo blaster isn't like my SIG.

Quote from: R-inge on November 06, 2008, 07:18:34 AM
Here's a question that I am in a dilemma over; do you guys usually leave your primary home defense weapon loaded at all times, or do you keep it empty?

I understand with a pistol that you can at least load the mag and leave it out of the gun, but for me I don't really have that option.  I can load the magazine tube and leave the chamber empty, but I still don't feel comfortable with guests or kids around doing that sort of thing, just in case someone finds it and starts screwing around.

At the same time, I don't want to have to grab a handful of shotgun shells and hustle them into the gun while the perp has his way in my home.

Any thoughts on that?

I keep a loaded clip and my 9mm Makarov nearby.  Can have a round chambered in about 10 seconds if the need arises.  So far the nearest thing to a need arising was a pack of coyotes descending on a foal of mne a few years ago.  I thought I'd have to come out blazing, but sadly, the bastards disappeared once I got outside.  It was exciting while it lasted though.. :ohyeah: :lol:

Quote from: Onslaught on November 06, 2008, 10:14:33 PM
Yes, my Nintendo blaster isn't like my SIG.

yeah 4 srs

I actually have no idea how to operate any other pistol than my Glock.

I can't imagine it being any easier.  Stick magazine in.  Pull slide.  Pull trigger,  Kill stuff.

Quote from: R-inge on November 06, 2008, 07:18:34 AM
Here's a question that I am in a dilemma over; do you guys usually leave your primary home defense weapon loaded at all times, or do you keep it empty?

I understand with a pistol that you can at least load the mag and leave it out of the gun, but for me I don't really have that option.  I can load the magazine tube and leave the chamber empty, but I still don't feel comfortable with guests or kids around doing that sort of thing, just in case someone finds it and starts screwing around.

At the same time, I don't want to have to grab a handful of shotgun shells and hustle them into the gun while the perp has his way in my home.

Any thoughts on that?

Jamming shells into the magazine in the night sucks.  I've actually managed to be completely retarded and stick a shell in backwards once, and the shell blocked the magazine release lever.  I had to take the magazine spring out to get the shell out.

Quote from: Submariner on November 06, 2008, 09:19:12 PM
The operation of a TV gun isn't always like a real one.

I know how to use a gun.  My dad has a pre-Brady Glock that I messed around with.

Quote from: 565 on November 06, 2008, 11:09:18 PM
Jamming shells into the magazine in the night sucks.  I've actually managed to be completely retarded and stick a shell in backwards once, and the shell blocked the magazine release lever.  I had to take the magazine spring out to get the shell out.

TecLoader SL-12

Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 06, 2008, 03:13:39 PM
Both the Sig and the shotty stay in condition three (loaded, no round in chamber, safety on), in the safe, which is in the closet and about three feet from the bed.

The safe (which only holds those guns, plus a couple of unloaded rifles) is unlocked at night when either of us are home, with the bolts engaged. It takes enough force to turn the wheel that it would be very unlikely for either of the kids to do it, even if they could reach it, even if they could sneak into our room at night without being noticed. And even if they did do that, they'd still need to chamber a round before the guns actually became dangerous.

Yes, I'm sure some of you will lambast me for this method, but I see nearly zero chance of an "accident" involving the kids occuring with this setup.

When the kids are older, they will be taught about the guns, and they will be allowed to inspect, look at and shoot them when they ask to.

Thanks, that's helpful.

Quote from: saxonyron on November 06, 2008, 10:19:27 PM
I keep a loaded clip and my 9mm Makarov nearby.  Can have a round chambered in about 10 seconds if the need arises.  So far the nearest thing to a need arising was a pack of coyotes descending on a foal of mne a few years ago.  I thought I'd have to come out blazing, but sadly, the bastards disappeared once I got outside.  It was exciting while it lasted though.. :ohyeah: :lol:

lol!

Quote from: R-inge on November 07, 2008, 03:59:05 PM
Thanks, that's helpful.

Obviously, you need to look at your own circumstances and your own tactical situation when deciding how to do these things. I think my system would work partially because of the layout of my house (all one floor) gives me less warning from a break-in than it would if there was a staircase involved, and because of the particular shape of my room and line of sights towards the hallways.

Keeping a cocked and locked rifle in an open rack next to your bed gives you the fastest access, but the next to zero safety when there asre children (or anyone else) in the house. Keeping the gun and ammo in seperate locked boxes provides the best safety, but makes the weapon nearly completely useless. I think you need to take a hared logical look at your own situation and decide where in the middle of those two is right.

Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 07, 2008, 04:16:27 PM
Obviously, you need to look at your own circumstances and your own tactical situation when deciding how to do these things. I think my system would work partially because of the layout of my house (all one floor) gives me less warning from a break-in than it would if there was a staircase involved, and because of the particular shape of my room and line of sights towards the hallways.

Keeping a cocked and locked rifle in an open rack next to your bed gives you the fastest access, but the next to zero safety when there asre children (or anyone else) in the house. Keeping the gun and ammo in seperate locked boxes provides the best safety, but makes the weapon nearly completely useless. I think you need to take a hared logical look at your own situation and decide where in the middle of those two is right.

My situation is similar minus the kids.  I like the idea of a safe that is locked during the day when potential visitors are around but unlocked/closed at night.

Quote from: R-inge on November 07, 2008, 04:34:04 PM
My situation is similar minus the kids.  I like the idea of a safe that is locked during the day when potential visitors are around but unlocked/closed at night.

That's a good system, just don't forget to lock the safe when you get up in the morning.

Quote from: Lebowski on November 08, 2008, 06:34:48 AM
That's a good system, just don't forget to lock the safe when you get up in the morning.

That is its drawback, but once something begins part of your routine, its hard not to.

I'd sooner go to work without pants at this point than leave the guns unlocked at home.

What the hell is a .41 Magnum?

Quote from: Raza  on November 09, 2008, 02:29:27 PM
What the hell is a .41 Magnum?

Exactly what it says it is. Next, you'll be asking about .444 Magnums and .454 Casulls...

Quote from: Lebowski on November 05, 2008, 04:56:29 PM
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.

It's very interesting how things penetrate and how people vastly over estimate the penetration of a rifle bullet (through the criminal, through the wall and into a neighbor)and vasty underestimate the penetration power of other weapons, like say a shotgun (they think the 00 buck pellets will stop in the bad guy).  Alot of those .223 rounds were designed to penetrate enough as FMJ and don't really penetrate all that much overall.

In ballistics gel testing (at home defense range 3 yards) you can see that the 69 grain .223 penetrates about 13 inches.  Supposedly you want at least 12 inches of penetration for stopping power, so the .223 just meets that lethal mark and doesn't really over penetrate. (Red lethal line is 12 inches)

(http://www.tacticalshotgun.ca/content_sub/gelatin_testing/223_69gr_Sierra_HPBT_14in_barrel/223_69gr_sierra_hpbt_match_14in_barrel_b_illustrated.jpg)

http://www.tacticalshotgun.ca/content_sub/gelatin_testing/223_69gr_Sierra_HPBT_14in_barrel/gelatin_69gr_sierra_hpbt.html

Even a 150 gr .308 round designed to fragment for personal defense doesn't overpenetrate like crazy either.  Here it is penetrating about 16 inches.

(http://www.tacticalshotgun.ca/content_nonsub/gelatin_testing/308_155gr_hornady_tap_18in_barrel/308_155gr_hornady_tap_a_small_illustrated.jpg)

http://www.tacticalshotgun.ca/content_nonsub/gelatin_testing/308_155gr_hornady_tap_18in_barrel/gelatin_308_155gr_hornady_amax.html



By comparision, the 00 Buck shot can overpenetrate and you have to be careful with it.  I've got 12 pellet 00 Buck in the guns right now, which penetrates the least of the full power 00 bucks (more shot, less powder).

It still manages to penetrate a whomping 20 inches.

(http://www.tacticalshotgun.ca/content_nonsub/gelatin_testing/buck_00_fed_mag/buck_00_d.jpg)

http://www.tacticalshotgun.ca/content_nonsub/gelatin_testing/buck_00_fed_mag/gelatin_buckshot_00_mag.html


Standard 9 pellet 00 buck will penetrate even more, here at over 22 inches.

http://www.tacticalshotgun.ca/content_sub/gelatin_testing/buck_fed_00_classic/buck_fed_00_classic.html

Even those low recoil 8 pellet 00 buck tactical rounds will penetrate over 20 inches of gel.

(http://www.tacticalshotgun.ca/content_sub/gelatin_testing/buck_00_rem_tac/buckshot_00_tac_remington_b.jpg)

http://www.tacticalshotgun.ca/content_sub/gelatin_testing/buck_00_rem_tac/gelatin_buckshot_00_rem_tac.html


And just for comparsion that cheapo #8 birdshot you get at Walmart isn't really suitable for home defense, only about 4 inches of penetration.

(http://www.tacticalshotgun.ca/content_nonsub/gelatin_testing/bird_8_heavy_dove/bird_8_heavy_dove_a.jpg)

http://www.tacticalshotgun.ca/content_nonsub/gelatin_testing/bird_8_heavy_dove/gelatin_shot_8.html

Quote from: GoCougs on November 05, 2008, 09:46:18 AM

You may not have qualms, but after the prototypical AR-15 .223/5.56/7.62 round rips through your walls and into your neighbors' homes, it'd be a different matter. It's only really be safe for home defense if bastardized for pistol rounds but and then it becomes a self-defeating weapon.

While we're on the topic of penetration:

http://www.olyarms.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=15&Itemid=27

the quick and dirty:

Quote
The 55 grain HP .223 has less penetration than any of the other ammunition tested. Based on the results of this testing, there appears to be no basis for concern regarding the over penetration of the .223 [HP] round. In fact, it seems even safer in this regard than .40 S&W handgun ammunition.

The hollow point cavity in the .40S&W round filled with material when shot through the wall. This caused [these bullets] to fail to expand when they entered the gelatin. As a result, they penetrated 8.5" farther than when shot directly into the gelatin. 

Uh, go down to your local gun shop and tell the guys behind the counter you want to buy a .223, 7.62x54, .308W, .30-'06, et al., for home defense.

I have plenty of experience shooting these rifle cartridges, plus a fair number of pistol cartridges (9MM, .38, .40S&W, .357M and 44M), at things in hindsight I shouldn't have been shooting at; whatever was at the gravel pits left by other shooters - old RVs, vehicles, 55 gallon drums, rail road ties, all manner of appliances, etc.

There is simply no comparison. None. Nada. Zilch. Zero. Zippo. I've seen the 7.62x54 out of an SKS rip through two rail road ties, though a tree about the diameter of telephone pole, all the way though a car front to back, plus other amazing feats (not all at once). There's a reason why there are rifles and pistols.

And the physics will tell you much of this as well. The muzzle energy of your average above rifle cartridge is many, many times that of your average pistol cartridge, and just as importantly, the energy is dissipated over a much smaller area (usually) - both of which speak volumes to deeper penetration.

The only specific comparison test I (we) did was the SKS 7.62x54 vs. .44M. The .44M had a leg up versus a pistol as it was being shot out my 18" lever-action Winchester. Both rounds were FMJ. The .44M couldn't hold a candle at anything we shot at. Of course there's the caveat the the load and bullet tell the whole story, but not to this extent. The .44M wouldn't make it through two 2x4s; the 7.62 easily zipped through 5+. Suffice it to say that the on-scene .40S&W, 9MM and .38 might as well have been .22LR compared to the rifles.

As to the penetration of 00-buck - chalk that up mostly to synergistic impact. One 00-buck pellet won't penetrate nearly like a shell full - when a shell is fired the pellets don't all strike the target at the same time plus the pattern will be spread out, aiding in penetration by way of "softening."

Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 09, 2008, 03:01:41 PM
Exactly what it says it is. Next, you'll be asking about .444 Magnums and .454 Casulls...

Okay, what is the point of a .41 Magnum, and why isn't as widely known/used as .357 and .44 Magnums?

Also, if I go the revolver route, Taurus does seem to have some pretty good deals.  Right now, I'm thinking about a 4" Taurus Model 66, a 7 shot .357 Mag. 

http://www.taurususa.com/products/product-details.cfm?id=278&category=Revolver

(http://www.taurususa.com/images/imagesMain/66SS4.jpg)

What is it about Taurus that makes them so second tier?  I only knew of them as a company that made cheap Beretta 92 knockoffs. 

Quote from: GoCougs on November 10, 2008, 04:56:42 PM

Uh, go down to your local gun shop and tell the guys behind the counter you want to buy a .223, 7.62x54, .308W, .30-'06, et al., for home defense.

blah blah blah I know everything blah blah blah ....

30-'06?  I should ask about the 30-06 because that's relevant to an AR15 how?

I was talking very specifically about .223, and assuming a round was chosen for the specific task of indoor self defense (like a 55gr soft point).

That said if I ever get around to taking some shooting lessons at my local range, I will ask the instructor what his opinion is.  I understand any of those CAN penetrate a wall, it just seems from what I've read that .223 with the properly chosen ammunition isn't significantly more likely to than many of the common handgun calibers.  Either way you have to be careful.  And yes I know the difference between a rifle and a handgun, I'm talking about a bullet that fragments on impact, not one that fails to penetrate due to lack of energy.

Quote from: GoCougs on November 10, 2008, 04:56:42 PM
. I've seen the 7.62x54 out of an SKS rip through two rail road ties,

SKS is chambered for 7.62x 39. if you had an SKS looking rifle chambered in 7.62 X 54R, you probably had a Romak-3.

Quote from: Raza  on November 10, 2008, 05:36:32 PM
Okay, what is the point of a .41 Magnum, and why isn't as widely known/used as .357 and .44 Magnums?

Also, if I go the revolver route, Taurus does seem to have some pretty good deals.  Right now, I'm thinking about a 4" Taurus Model 66, a 7 shot .357 Mag. 

http://www.taurususa.com/products/product-details.cfm?id=278&category=Revolver

(http://www.taurususa.com/images/imagesMain/66SS4.jpg)

What is it about Taurus that makes them so second tier?  I only knew of them as a company that made cheap Beretta 92 knockoffs. 

I think the .41 magnum lacks a rebated rim, and is a revolver-only cartridge. There are lots of underutilized, oddball calibers that you rarely hear about.

Taurus makes very good revolvers. You have to realize that there are a lot of snobbish gun-polishers out there that look down on anything othe rthan their pet brand.

After Boondock Saints, I never want a six shooter.  :lol:

Quote from: R-inge on November 07, 2008, 04:34:04 PM
My situation is similar minus the kids.  I like the idea of a safe that is locked during the day when potential visitors are around but unlocked/closed at night.

A real smart idea.

There are no kids in my life at this point, and there rarely are children under the age of 14 around.  If they are, they're with there parents, so gun security isnt a real concern. 

Home invasions are very possible in the day, however.  Keep the gun relatively accessable no matter what.

Quote from: Minpin on November 12, 2008, 05:48:46 PM
After Boondock Saints, I never want a six shooter.  :lol:

Well, Faceman packed a .357 revolver.  And it seems that all medium frame .357s from Taurus are 7 or 8 shot.

Damn, I'm really starting to seriously consider getting a rifle now ... leaning towards M1A after researching them a bit.

First I need to find a good outdoor range in my area, though.  Something tells me shooting a rifle at my local indoor range that only goes out to 15 yards wouldn't be too much fun (there's another indoor range a bit further away that goes out to 25 yards, but still).

Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 12, 2008, 03:09:07 PM
SKS is chambered for 7.62x 39. if you had an SKS looking rifle chambered in 7.62 X 54R, you probably had a Romak-3.

My bad - it was an SKS so 7.62 x 39.