If you don’t care about shooting through walls.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
Printable View
If you don’t care about shooting through walls.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
And caring about defending your home is a different story than caring about the people’s lives that live in your home. The stats are pretty clear about what is safest for that.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
I did see a video on something called an EO Tech Vector. It's a cool weapon...very "commando-like." Comes in .45 caliber, 25-shot clip, folding stock, and has a laser targeting system and built-in powerful flashlight that can strobe. It is not a long rifle and thus can be handled nicely in tight quarters, like inside a house.
But, for home defense, a very good choice is the Mossburg pump shotgun in 20-gauge. Can use #4 buckshot and it can be "fixed" to hold six shells. No one weapon is perfect, for any situation, but for home defense this shotgun checks most of the boxes. Why a 20 and not a standard 12-gauge? Again, if you are trying to have one weapon that affords the maximum utility, you might have to consider who will be using it. Would your wife or perhaps an older child be put in a position to pick it up and have to defend the family? The 20-gauge Mossburg is lighter and offers a lot less kick. But, will put down any intruder. It has a very easy short-stroke pump action too.
I wondered how long it would take you to go there. Your stats are meaningless since ALL the home invasions that were stopped are not included in the "studies". 100% of those that went wrong are included.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Many stats seem meaningless until it comes home to roost.Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
Absolutely the #1 concern and why the standard AR-15, especially in the .556 NATO round, is NOT a good choice for home defense. Oh, it will kill to death any intruders...and could also kill your kids sleeping several rooms over and maybe even your neighbors in the nearby houses too. Too much penetration potential to be used safely.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
It isn't just the AR-15 of course. It's also why my heavier weapons, like all my .30-06s, are locked away. I have no intention of relying on the heavy calibers for home defense. Not only will they kill everything in their path intended, but everything beyond the target as well. And, the rifles are simply too unwieldy for close contact combat...which most home defense scenarios will be. And my very heavy caliber revolvers would also present too high a danger of unintended consequences, so they too remain safely locked up.
Of course, if I ever find myself in a situation when enemies are marching up the street toward my house...the heavies will be brought out to reach out and touch somebody a hundred+ yards away.
That's silly. The reason the AR is more lethal in a mass shooting context is because of his hi magazine capacity. Good luck finding a 30 round mag for a 30-06. That's the same reason most LEO's shoot .40SW instead of .45ACP...because of magazine capacity. The less you have to reload the more lethal you are in a combat situation.Quote:
Originally Posted by DawgyNWindow
The FNX 45 kind of changes that.Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnylightnin
https://external-content.duckduckgo....jpg&f=1&nofb=1Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnylightnin
About that 45 thing.
https://shopkahrfirearmsgroup.com/pa...-gun/magazine/
No gun law passed to date has prevented or lessened the impact of any shooting incident. None. It's just the tool used by the idiot doing the shooting. Knee jerk gun laws banning these tools just lead to more laws banning more tools, because banning the individual firearms is not going to stop anything. They'll just keep banning the next gun in line until you have no rights at all. And that "combat situation" thing....not that difficult in a "gun free" zone. You can take your time and reload as you see fit.
Unless you can show me where owning a particular gun CAUSED someone to go on a shooting spree, or some accessory caused the spree or caused the spree to be more deadly, all these laws infringing on YOUR rights are just dumb. Remember, the ones making these rules are still surrounded by folks carrying these weapons (or worse, the weapon the civilian version was based upon) for their safety.
When I was younger, the push was to ban what they called "Saturday Night Specials". They were just too easy to carry, too concealable, and good for nothing but murdering your fellow American. We are talking 5 or 6 shot 38 special revolvers. That was considered "common sense gun law" at that time. Seems as dumb now as this AR argument will seem in the future.
I know of a case very intimately where owning a particular gun caused a shooting. And the capacity of the gun made the difference in losing one family member verses two. There is a very real danger to thinking you are an exception to the stats.Quote:
Originally Posted by DawgyNWindow
My son has a Mossberg model 702 Plinkster. Off brand 3-9x40 scope. 10 rounds. He can put all 10 rounds in an 8 inch paper plate at 100 yards in about 8 seconds. Think if he had 3 or 4 extra mags for it. Total cost under $200. In their minds, it’s all about perception of doing something. They know they will never get re-elected if they try to outlaw all guns. So they try to restrict the ones that are scary looking. Even if there are other styles that are equally or more effective in an experienced hand.Quote:
Originally Posted by DawgyNWindow
First of all, Joe, the admin, has been lying repeatedly about the "gun show loophole". I've been going to gunshows for 30 years in TX.. If you buy a gun at a show, the seller will run a background check on you before you walk out with that gun. No different than if you went to Cabelas's or Bass Pro to buy a gun. Now the "ghost guns".. they are in a panic because people are making guns that they cannot track, get money for etc. Since they do not currently have a massive gun registry database, they do not know who owns what firearms anyway. They are manufacturing a problem where one doesn't exist. Regarding the short barreled guns.. Pistols, etc. I personally do not have one, my nephew bought one and I watched him shoot it last weekend.. it is very loud. So I guess the 2nd amendment was amended to say, the right to bear arms shall not be infringed, unless you have a barrel length less than 16 inches and a brace stock then you need to pay $200 to the government.
That is because you are buying from vendors who “are in the business of” selling firearms. You might get a different result at a gun show or elsewhere if you bought from a collector or other private seller.Quote:
Originally Posted by FriscoDog
But private sells have never been in scope. This gun show loophole still doesn't cover private sells.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
That is why it is a loophole.Quote:
Originally Posted by FriscoDog