Is an AR-15 Appropriate for Home Defense?

[Tallbear]

Is an AR-15 appropriate for home defense? That’s a really big question, isn’t it? Way too big a question for a single article to address in adequate detail. So we’ll look at one issue at a time.
First, since AR-15 rifles cause all nature of mainstream media histrionics, we’ll consider the “high-power” issue, which in a practical sense, translates to penetration. If you torch off a .223 Remington or 5.56mm round indoors, will the building explode? Listening to the news, you might think so.


http://www.outdoorhub.com/stories/ar-15-appropriate-home-defense-part-one-penetration-issues/?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Nov%205%202013%20Daily%20Newswire%20% 281%29&utm_content=

[moose67]

Absolutely with the versatility the AR15 offers, who says you need to have it in.223/5x56 you could go with a 9mm 10mm .40cal or .45acp for home use would think the purpose would be the amount of fire you could lay down, not necessarily the caliber used.

[GreaseMonkeySRT]

My ear drums are throbbing just thinking about lighting off a 5.56 round indoors without hearing protection.

[Sgt 45]

Yes, it's a very capable weapon. Noise is an issue therefor a suppressor might be in order. Time to repeal NFA 1932.

[elwarpo]

I would avoid a rifle caliber bullet for home defense, unless you live alone and have no neighbors within a mile. Over penetration is way too much of an issue.

Positives
lots of firepower
long guns are more instinctive for pointing than pistols
good hand to hand weapon close in (club)

Negatives
Weapon is longer than a pistol so more difficult to use in tight spaces
over penetration of most calibers
needs 2 hands to operate

[GreaseMonkeySRT]

I would avoid a rifle caliber bullet for home defense, unless you live alone and have no neighbors within a mile. Over penetration is way too much of an issue.

Positives
lots of firepower
long guns are more instinctive for pointing than pistols
good hand to hand weapon close in (club)

Negatives
Weapon is longer than a pistol so more difficult to use in tight spaces
over penetration of most calibers
needs 2 hands to operate

If you have a smaller house with tight rooms/hallways, pistol is the way to go. I think a nice shotgun with 00 buck in a large open concept style house would work well in that environment.

[Donzie]

I would avoid a rifle caliber bullet for home defense, unless you live alone and have no neighbors within a mile. Over penetration is way too much of an issue.

Positives
lots of firepower
long guns are more instinctive for pointing than pistols
good hand to hand weapon close in (club)

Negatives
Weapon is longer than a pistol so more difficult to use in tight spaces
over penetration of most calibers
needs 2 hands to operate
Plenty of loads out there will penetrate less than 9mm ball ammo.

[10x25mm]

The M4 style carbine with its adjustability, light weight, low recoil, and close spaced controls is simply ideal for many women who are not confident in their handgun skills. The M855 5.56mm round is ideal for dealing with vehicular borne problems, but the same penetrating capability makes it a hazard in a close packed house/neighborhood. The pistol caliber conversions work well (I have a 10mm Olympic upper:bounce2: ) and offer an excellent alternative. Ultimately, you have to consider the safety of your backstop, even in defensive situations - and even with a pistol or pistol caliber carbine.

[thatguy423]

All you need is a double barrel shotgun.. 2 through the door..

[cmr19xx]

Interesting article. I was a little surprised by the results.

[bolonytony24]

its not my first goto for HD! 12 gauge pump or semi auto is my favorite . first and foremost the .223/5.56 is not a high powered rifle round. its a small varmit round typically . it was designed to mame and not kill in battle. plus the small round and recoil allows for more consistent follow up shots. accuracy by volume.
if you were to fire a rifle in your home you must be concerned with whats behind the wall or door behind your target. if the **** hits the fan its great. i would not use one for HD. :twocents:

[badmax18]

My advise is that you take MDFI Home Defense LongGun in Alliance, OH next year and bring whatever LongGun you would want to use at home and learn how to use it...pros and cons... HUGE eye opener....the Handgun home Defense class is also loaded with great info.

There were shooters running a shotty others were running an AR. Each platform shines in certain scenarios, does poorly in others. But you need to figure that out yourself what works for you.

And yes, after this class my SHTF/HD Goto is my AR.

[partdeux]

Results are in agreement with what GunTalk reported, .223 rd starts tumbling.

[NorthernBorn]

If properly trained an individual can use an AR15 carbine to great effect in this scenario.

Without that training... It's a liability to everyone around. Stick with a shotgun or pistol.

[Joeywhat]

If properly trained an individual can use an AR15 carbine to great effect in this scenario.

Without that training... It's a liability to everyone around. Stick with a shotgun or pistol.

How is that so? Explain yourself, please...

I'm especially interested in how an AR15 is is somehow not as safe as other firearms in the hands of an untrained individual.

[elwarpo]

How is that so? Explain yourself, please...

I'm especially interested in how an AR15 is is somehow not as safe as other firearms in the hands of an untrained individual.

An untrained individual may not consider what is behind the target, may miss or may not know of the penetrative power of the .223 round. In an urban setting, any shot not on target will go through several walls. more a case of the round and not rifle. I personally have seen how a 223 round will go through a building.

You also have to deal with a safety and possible jams in a semi that unless you train with them will turn the rifle into a club. A semi pistol is similar, if you do not train, you may be able to use it. For people who do not train a pump shotgun or revolver would be the best choice.

JMHO

[cmr19xx]

If properly trained an individual can use an AR15 carbine to great effect in this scenario.

Without that training... It's a liability to everyone around. Stick with a shotgun or pistol.

The article would lead you to believe you have a greater chance of over penetration with a 9mm pistol as compared to a 223 rifle round.

[DP425]

An untrained individual may not consider what is behind the target, may miss or may not know of the penetrative power of the .223 round. In an urban setting, any shot not on target will go through several walls. more a case of the round and not rifle. I personally have seen how a 223 round will go through a building.

You also have to deal with a safety and possible jams in a semi that unless you train with them will turn the rifle into a club. A semi pistol is similar, if you do not train, you may be able to use it. For people who do not train a pump shotgun or revolver would be the best choice.

JMHO


You do realize that most .223 rounds will not penetrate any further than a typical pistol slug right? This is especially true in the 45gr and below range.

Actually, lighter weight bullets from a .223 are SAFER for urban use than a pistol.

Here is an example:
55gr Horandy TAP LE Urban penetrates 7.5" with a max cavity of 3.5" after passing through wall board
http://www.hornadyle.com/products/rifle-ammunition/223-remington/55-gr-tap-urban

135gr 9mm TAP Critical Duty penetrates 13.5" with a max cavity of 2" after passing through wall board
http://www.hornadyle.com/products/handgun/critical-duty/135-gr-9mm-luger

Again, there are 45, 40 and 35gr bullets available that will show even greater decreases in penetration after passing through drywall.

[moose67]

Yes, it's a very capable weapon. Noise is an issue therefor a suppressor might be in order. Time to repeal NFA 1932.

suppressor are legal to own in MI now, you just have to jump through some hoops to get one.

[Buffman]

You do realize that most .223 rounds will not penetrate any further than a typical pistol slug right? This is especially true in the 45gr and below range.

Actually, lighter weight bullets from a .223 are SAFER for urban use than a pistol.

Here is an example:
55gr Horandy TAP LE Urban penetrates 7.5" with a max cavity of 3.5" after passing through wall board
http://www.hornadyle.com/products/rifle-ammunition/223-remington/55-gr-tap-urban

135gr 9mm TAP Critical Duty penetrates 13.5" with a max cavity of 2" after passing through wall board
http://www.hornadyle.com/products/handgun/critical-duty/135-gr-9mm-luger

Again, there are 45, 40 and 35gr bullets available that will show even greater decreases in penetration after passing through drywall.

Correct. Depending on ammo choice, .223/5.56 defense loads will often penetrate LESS through wall board then pistol defense loads.

http://how-i-did-it.org/drywall/results.html

[tote'ngranny]

An untrained individual may not consider what is behind the target, may miss or may not know of the penetrative power of the .223 round. In an urban setting, any shot not on target will go through several walls. more a case of the round and not rifle. I personally have seen how a 223 round will go through a building.

You also have to deal with a safety and possible jams in a semi that unless you train with them will turn the rifle into a club. A semi pistol is similar, if you do not train, you may be able to use it. For people who do not train a pump shotgun or revolver would be the best choice.

JMHO
So will a 9mm.

The class that I attended for my CPL .. AND Hunter Safety all stress the rule KNOW your target AND BEYOND.

Also .. Just how much experience do you have with today's semi auto guns & rifles? I had more problems with the S&W . 38 revolver that I had with the too heavy trigger weight pulling the trigger, too much recoil to get consecutive shots on target accurately .. and too low a rnd count. I'll stick with my semi autos rifle and handgun ( I do have shotguns)

[langenc]

I have always thought and expressed the opinion that anyone who would argue with 00 buck is on drugs or highly intoxicated!!

That remains my position.

I need to get my wife to shoot a few loads. I said 00 buck but I have some #4s and they will fill the bill just as well IMO, even in my Richland 20 gauge double w/ 18" barrels.

But to answer the original question--use what you have. A 223 w/ some 50-55 gr going thru 2 or 3 walls?? Guess Ill have to line us some 2x4 and old drywall I have in the garage.

[amontana086]

The article would lead you to believe you have a greater chance of over penetration with a 9mm pistol as compared to a 223 rifle round.
And I've seen it on numerous TV shows etc too. More people here should actually read the OP article it was a very good read.

AR still isn't my first choice for HD at least maybe not until they get off their azz and get the sbr thing pushed through. Still I wouldn't feel bad or unsafe using it if I had to. The numerous penetration tests don't lie.

[RSF]

I can tell you factually that the 556 has less penetration on structures with the correct ammo than a handgun round,

i can also tell you as a matter of fact that some 12 gaue slugs have less pentration than buckshot or handguns...

i can also say that lighter 556 rounds though some think are great have minimal penetration to reach vital organs

i can also say many dont of shot angles and how to employ there HD guns to there make effectiveness

i can also tell you that a handgun at full extension is just as long as an m4 carbine.shouldered or a 18 barreld shotgun...

having shot a lot of rounds in buildings and barrier testing and OIS reports that most of you are wrong......

[ATA Works]

But to answer the original question--use what you have. A 223 w/ some 50-55 gr going thru 2 or 3 walls?? Guess Ill have to line us some 2x4 and old drywall I have in the garage.

Save your boards and drywall, it's already been done and well documented.

http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/theboxotruth.htm

[bolonytony24]

lots of opinions and some stating "facts",lol. facts on the correct ammo ? but do not list ammo. we can google the balistics ourselves. the best gun for HD is the loaded one in the nightstand or the first one you can get too! :yikes:

[amontana086]

i can also tell you as a matter of fact that some 12 gaue slugs have less pentration than buckshot or handguns...
Nice, never heard that and wouldn't have expected it.

[amontana086]

i can also tell you that a handgun at full extension is just as long as an m4 carbine.shouldered or a 18 barreld shotgun...
And what about all those hip shot trick shot guys that allege hip shots are adequate at close HD type distances?

[RSF]

And what about all those hip shot trick shot guys that allege hip shots are adequate at close HD type distances?


Have at it

[elwarpo]

Save your boards and drywall, it's already been done and well documented.

http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/theboxotruth.htm

Similar to what I have seen in the infantry (9mm, .223 and.308 military rounds hitting various hard and soft things in my 15 years of service). The fact is a 9mm penetrated less than a 223. Yes you can use fragile versus other ammo to change the results, but in the end the 223 is not a great defense round.

[tote'ngranny]

Similar to what I have seen in the infantry (9mm, .223 and.308 military rounds hitting various hard and soft things in my 15 years of service). The fact is a 9mm penetrated less than a 223. Yes you can use fragile versus other ammo to change the results, but in the end the 223 is not a great defense round.
How long ago was that? Technology of weapons and ammo has changed a lot. RSF has more experience than just about EVERYONE on this board. He TRAINS military, LEOs and civilians. That is .. has been his job.

To say the .223 isn't a good defensive round .. when what was used last year at SC and just recently? Trayvon Martin? We are not looking at shooting 500 - 800 yards for defensive shooting when the average distance will be about less than 20 feet in a home. Comparing to what was or won't be effective with your military experience is like comparing apples and oranges with home defense situations.

[DP425]

Similar to what I have seen in the infantry (9mm, .223 and.308 military rounds hitting various hard and soft things in my 15 years of service). The fact is a 9mm penetrated less than a 223. Yes you can use fragile versus other ammo to change the results, but in the end the 223 is not a great defense round.


I've got 13yrs, mostly in specialized infantry... and if you use what you learn from the military as a leg grunt for your soul knowledge base, you're missing 95% of the pie.

Penetration isn't everything... energy isn't everything... velocity isn't everything. The correct 5.56/.223 load can be rather devastating... As can be a 9mm. But the military does not use the "correct" loads. Though, the Mk316 Mod 0 and M855A1 are an improvement over the M855... which itself was/is less effective than the M193. Even the Mk262 is a considerably better load than the M855 despite it's design focus on BC.

Your statement and experience are only useful to the conversation if the only thing available is a heavily jacketed .223 and an FMJ 9mm. I would advise you spend some time researching terminal ballistics, specifically in the area of mode and effectiveness of energy transfer and wound profile if this is unfamiliar information for you.


Start here:
http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/mechanics.html



A note of worth- while ballistics gel tests are a best assessment for wounding potential of a specific loading only second to live tissue tests, it is NOT an indicator of lethality. There are many variables to lethality that exist outside of some display of bullet performance on an artificial medium. Even identical impacts on identical animals will produce different results due to a variety of biological reasons. There is no legitimate scale of lethality; anyone who speaks otherwise doesn't know their rear from a hole in the ground. Ballistics Gel is nothing more than a "best guess" at wounding potential, but it's about the best we have outside of the highly isolated live tissue studies that are largely constrained to one or two gun/bullet combinations.

[Magnet]

I've had this discussion with different buddies over the years. I'm a stubborn ******* and it would be difficult for someone to change my opinion. For "inside the house" home defense I am of the opinion that a good pump "home defense" style 12 gauge shotgun (Rem 870, Moss 500, etc.) loaded with turkey loads is about as good as it gets for close quarters. The last thing I want is a stray bullet going through a window or wall and unknowingly shooting my neighbors grandchild who was enjoying a "sleep over" at their grandparents house (or any scenario of the sorts). I know chances are slim, but I would prefer to eliminate or greatly reduce the odds of something like that happening. If you hit center body mass, a shoulder, a leg or any other body part at 15 or twenty feet with turkey loads the perpetrator is going down. Easy way to clear a hallway.

[Budget]

I've had this discussion with different buddies over the years. I'm a stubborn ******* and it would be difficult for someone to change my opinion. For "inside the house" home defense I am of the opinion that a good pump "home defense" style 12 gauge shotgun (Rem 870, Moss 500, etc.) loaded with turkey loads is about as good as it gets for close quarters. The last thing I want is a stray bullet going through a window or wall and unknowingly shooting my neighbors grandchild who was enjoying a "sleep over" at their grandparents house (or any scenario of the sorts). I know chances are slim, but I would prefer to eliminate or greatly reduce the odds of something like that happening. If you hit center body mass, a shoulder, a leg or any other body part at 15 or twenty feet with turkey loads the perpetrator is going down. Easy way to clear a hallway.

That's why I like slugs. They don't penetrate that well but there is very little more devastating than a 1 oz slug, and if you miss it is one round not 8 or 9 pellets. Bird shot (including turkey) is for birds, people are medium game.

[Magnet]

That's why I like slugs. They don't penetrate that well but there is very little more devastating than a 1 oz slug, and if you miss it is one round not 8 or 9 pellets. Bird shot (including turkey) is for birds, people are medium game.
Well it's like this. Take a look around the room you're sitting in right now. Chances are the longest shot you could take without hitting a wall is less than 20 feet. Turkey loads will turn anything into scrambled eggs at 10 or 20 feet.... Just sayin'.;-)

[mikee1973]

Well it's like this. Take a look around the room you're sitting in right now. Chances are the longest shot you could take without hitting a wall is less than 20 feet. Turkey loads will turn anything into scrambled eggs at 10 or 20 feet.... Just sayin'.;-)
Ever pattern your turkey load at 10-20 feet? What is the spread? I run federal flight control buck in my 12GA and the pattern at 12.5yards is no larger than a palm.

I prefer a SG over an AR because I'd rather surrender my 870 than any of my ARs to the police if involved in a self defense shoot.

[Magnet]

About the size of a fist at twenty feet out of a short barreled SG. And yes, it's a relatively inexpensive solution as opposed to an AR. An AR is better suited for use outside the home..... But that's just my opinion and I am a stubborn *******.

[DP425]

Just for anyone not in the know reading this- bird shot is ineffective on human targets- don't listen to the hype, the wounds are usually only a couple inches deep. A load of all #2 or all BB may be workable, but No 4 buckshot is a better compromise.

Small, fast bullets in houses are often the safest option. But the reality is, anything that will be effective on a human, will be able to penetrate a piece or two of 1/2" drywall and still cause, at the very least, injury on the otherside

[partdeux]

Just for anyone not in the know reading this- bird shot is ineffective on human targets- don't listen to the hype, the wounds are usually only a couple inches deep. A load of all #2 or all BB may be workable, but No 4 buckshot is a better compromise.

Do you have any data to support that statement?

[Rara]

Do you have any data to support that statement?

I'm not DP425, but I will post a link I found with about 15 seconds of google searching. I will put the caveat out there that it appears the gelatin was either not calibrated correctly or the shots not taken at the correct block temperature, at any rate, the bulk of the shots seem to have ~20% more penetration than I've seen in many similar other tests elsewhere, and by well respected ballisticians. They touch on this point in the article as well.

Regardless of my concerns with the testing, they clearly show the relative disparity between birdshot, and buckshot and slugs.

Keep in mind that in a defensive situation that requires deadly force, you are not shooting to scare, or to wound, or to have the attacker die in the hospital from blood loss 2 hours from now; you are shooting to stop a threat RIGHT NOW, before you are so injured that YOU die from blood loss in the hospital 2 hours from now.
There is no doubt that someone being shot with say #4 birdshot would be injured, it would make quite a mess in fact, and they might even die, eventually.
The fact is, it will not penetrate deep enough to do enough immediate damage to stop that person RIGHT NOW, especially not if there is any heavy clothes like denim, or even a leather jacket.
Psychologically, it may be enough to incapacitate the attacker, but that's just a maybe. Personally, I prefer to eliminate as many "maybe"s as possible when it comes to fighting for my life.
If a projectile cannot punch through some drywall, its not going to do much good against a bad guy with a coat on. Sure, he may be bleeding, but if you haven't incapacitated him, he's just going to be more pissed off.

The reality is, even most pistol self defense rounds aren't all that effective at immediate incapacitation. Shot placement (assuming an effective round) is the universal key. Under duress, accurate shot placement is very very difficult, orders of magnitude more difficult that standing at a range. This is why it is imperative that you train train train with whatever you use for a defensive weapon. The best ammo in the world is useless if you can't hit things that will immediately incapacitate an attacker.

Because of the above, it is very common for shots to miss an attacker (look at the records of trained police shooters), so the basic firearm safety rules MUST always be followed, including knowing your target, its foreground, and its background. For home defense, you should have already thought about where you are likely to be, and where an attacker is likely to be coming from, and know what directions are likely to be best to fire from. HAVE A PLAN, the guy breaking into your house in the middle of the night sure does. Make sure yours is better than his.

Personally, I think that an AR makes a fantastic home defense tool when loaded with the appropriate ammo. I also think a shotgun makes a fantastic home defense tool when loaded with the appropriate ammo (#1 Buck is minimum in my opinion, based on test results and FBI specifications). And I also think that a pistol is a decent home defense tool when loaded with the appropriate ammo (9mm being the minimum in my opinion, and any caliber must be used with modern, high quality hollow point ammo to be reasonably effective).

Sorry for the long post, but these kind of discussions frustrate me to no end.

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2010/02/robert-farago/shotgun-penetration-with-various-rounds/

[Magnet]

Interesting read for sure.

[tote'ngranny]

Well it's like this. Take a look around the room you're sitting in right now. Chances are the longest shot you could take without hitting a wall is less than 20 feet. Turkey loads will turn anything into scrambled eggs at 10 or 20 feet.... Just sayin'.;-)
I'll save the bird shot for practice .. and the 00 buck or slug for defense.

[DP425]

thanks Rara

[Hawgrider]

I'll save the bird shot for practice .. and the 00 buck or slug for defense. Mocking bird

[luke000]

For someone like myself: who is 19, so I am not allowed to get a concealed carry permit, purchase a pistol, or even purchase "pistol" ammunition (including .22LR at some stores) My AR-15 is my home defense gun.

[bolonytony24]

I see this thread still going! if I had to fire at point blank in my home I would want to take care of the threat with one shot if I could. 12 gauge does that just fine. the 223 round is small and designed for multiple rounds to take down. still better than stick

[DP425]

For someone like myself: who is 19, so I am not allowed to get a concealed carry permit, purchase a pistol, or even purchase "pistol" ammunition (including .22LR at some stores) My AR-15 is my home defense gun.


You can buy a pistol, just must be from an individual.

[DP425]

I see this thread still going! if I had to fire at point blank in my home I would want to take care of the threat with one shot if I could. 12 gauge does that just fine. the 223 round is small and designed for multiple rounds to take down. still better than stick

.223 to the brain stem is a sure one shot drop... 12ga to an arm isn't.


Just making the point that a 12ga isn't always everything it's cracked up to be... and a .223 can often perform better than its reputation would suggest.


But, in the end, they both have positives and negatives; factors to be weighed by the user. But the user should have correct and accurate knowledge first; there has been a lot of neither floating around throughout this thread.

[RSF]

.223 to the brain stem is a sure one shot drop... 12ga to an arm isn't.


Just making the point that a 12ga isn't always everything it's cracked up to be... and a .223 can often perform better than its reputation would suggest.


But, in the end, they both have positives and negatives; factors to be weighed by the user. But the user should have correct and accurate knowledge first; there has been a lot of neither floating around throughout this thread.



12 gauge with approriate ammo offers over 1600fpe per press of the trigger and upwards of 2200fpe
both are good,

so compaing apples to oranges i see many so called trained shooters that on a square range cant hit a brain stem understress let alone a occular cavity region.

were the shooty shines is pure horsepower its send 8-24 pellets down range with the press of a trigger it shines in shooting on the move shooting moving object and in low light as well as payload and pattern overlay

shotgun is a very devestating weapon most shooting show that only one was needed to be fired from the shotgun in home defense and most LEO shootings with it..

while iam a huge advocate of the carbine for home defense the shotgun is very well suited to home gun less scary and the last thing i want is my 1500-2900 wonder blaster carbine on parade in front of a jury vs my wood stocked 1100 or 870 hunting gun in todays times good shoot or not.

I have very real correct factual knowledge of both there use and there terminal performance...in animals people and walls and other barriers...

most shotguns are given a bad name by those who do not understand it same with carbine ammo selection is critical in both

[DP425]

12 gauge with approriate ammo offers over 1600fpe per press of the trigger and upwards of 2200fpe
both are good,

so compaing apples to oranges i see many so called trained shooters that on a square range cant hit a brain stem understress let alone a occular cavity region.

were the shooty shines is pure horsepower its send 8-24 pellets down range with the press of a trigger it shines in shooting on the move shooting moving object and in low light as well as payload and pattern overlay

shotgun is a very devestating weapon most shooting show that only one was needed to be fired from the shotgun in home defense and most LEO shootings with it..

while iam a huge advocate of the carbine for home defense the shotgun is very well suited to home gun less scary and the last thing i want is my 1500-2900 wonder blaster carbine on parade in front of a jury vs my wood stocked 1100 or 870 hunting gun in todays times good shoot or not.

I have very real correct factual knowledge of both there use and there terminal performance...in animals people and walls and other barriers...

most shotguns are given a bad name by those who do not understand it same with carbine ammo selection is critical in both

Just to be clear, I wasn't stating an opinion on which is better- only that they can both be very effective... and also both can be very ineffective. Statements such as "Small and designed for multiple rounds to take down" is misleading by itself, downright bad advice when in the context it was used... essentially saying a shotgun is a guaranteed one shot stopper while a carbine is incapable of stopping anything without several bursts.




If wood stocks are the deal breaker... http://www.ar15wood.com/product_info_4.html

The jury might make fun of you for poor taste during deliberation though...
:poke:

[mp7570]

ugggh!!! It is amazing how everyone thinks that the average home invader is going to have any fight left in them at all after being shot by any firearm. The first response any of them is going to have is to flee, as the home is no longer an easy target. All the bravado and false statements of I want to make sure they never get back up and I need to put them down in one shot is sheer stupidity. The average person having never been involved in any kind of actual life and death situation with an aggressor is not going to possess the calm and concentration to put anyone down with a well placed shot. Training helps, but the fact is, you will most likely be caught unaware and the adrenaline is going to cause any kind of shot to go other than where it is intended. It is laughable to hear guys say they are going to do this and that and they will prevail. More likely is the fact that if you are lucky enough to get time to pull a weapon and lucky enough to get a shot off, you will most likely not hit your adversary, or not hit them where you intended with your first shot. The good news is that you most likely will not have too, because most prowlers are going to flee knowing you are not defenseless. In a situation such as a home invasion, a shotgun allows the greatest chance of hitting a target based on the fact that you do get a spread and do not have to be pinpoint accurate as you do with a rifle or pistol. Slugs would negate this advantage. And as far as ammo goes, anyone taking a load of birdshot to the face or chest is going to have no fight left in them, exception being someone who is beyond reason and drugged up. So imho, and experience, the argument of shotgun/rifle/pistol in a home defense situation is a waste of time for most and regardless of your work experience or background, there is going to be factors that limit accuracy and effectiveness. Police officers and military will admit that regardless of experience, adrenaline will most likely cause you to miss that first shot unless point blank, otherwise shot capacity and follow up would really be un-necessary wouldn't it. I myself would rather send a load of birdshot into an attackers face/chest area and have a much higher chance of hitting them and causing them to flee, than have to rely on back up shots and luck, or having to live with the fact that I killed someone, no matter how big a piece of trash they were. I love the bravado exhibited here by those who never consider the aftermath or consequences of their actions. Sorry about breathing more life into an old thread, but this has always bothered me...lol

[marine0341]

i would like to dispel 2 common untruths. the 5.56/223 is a long range, but not high powered rifle. for this reason it was designed to tumble on impact. the other is that it was not designed to kill. it was designed to kill. just not instantainiously. which makes it great on a battle field. it makes you also try to save the wonded. so for both theese reasons, it is a good home defense waqpon. case in point. military uses for cqb.

[Rara]

ugggh!!! It is amazing how everyone thinks that the average home invader is going to have any fight left in them at all after being shot by any firearm. The first response any of them is going to have is to flee, as the home is no longer an easy target.

Are you willing to bet your life on the odds that the home invader in your house isn't high on something that won't make them realize they have been shot? Or that they aren't so stupid as to just get pissed off when they are shot?


All the bravado and false statements of I want to make sure they never get back up and I need to put them down in one shot is sheer stupidity.

I don't know if you're referring to my previous post or not (#40, you should read it if you haven't) but I know I very clearly stated that my intent in a defensive scenario would be to stop the immediate threat. I don't think many folks here were seriously stating anything like what you said. Personally, I choose my firearm and ammunition to give me the most effective defensive tool I can manage. I want it to be effective, because I may not get more than one shot before its too late.


The average person having never been involved in any kind of actual life and death situation with an aggressor is not going to possess the calm and concentration to put anyone down with a well placed shot. Training helps, but the fact is, you will most likely be caught unaware and the adrenaline is going to cause any kind of shot to go other than where it is intended. It is laughable to hear guys say they are going to do this and that and they will prevail. More likely is the fact that if you are lucky enough to get time to pull a weapon and lucky enough to get a shot off, you will most likely not hit your adversary, or not hit them where you intended with your first shot.

You are mocking those that state what their plan is in such an emergency situation, but would you rather their plan be to miss wildly on every shot, and manage to get themselves killed when the attacker shoots them first? I do know that should I end up in such a scenario defending myself or my loved ones that will do everything I can to end the situation as quickly as possible, regardless of whether it goes as I would have hoped.


The good news is that you most likely will not have too, because most prowlers are going to flee knowing you are not defenseless.

Most, but not all. You're playing the odds again here. I prefer not to count on the sound of racking a shotgun to scare away an attacker; if it does, great, then I don't have to deal with the aftermath of shooting someone. (immediate, and long term)


In a situation such as a home invasion, a shotgun allows the greatest chance of hitting a target based on the fact that you do get a spread and do not have to be pinpoint accurate as you do with a rifle or pistol. Slugs would negate this advantage.

Why do people assume you don't have to aim a shotgun? Maybe I should invent a claymore gun that actually works like this... nah, the lawsuits would be ridiculous...


And as far as ammo goes, anyone taking a load of birdshot to the face or chest is going to have no fight left in them, exception being someone who is beyond reason and drugged up.

There you go, playing those odds again. I have a 2 year old son in my home; I'm going to make damn sure I can protect him regardless of the mental state of an attacker.


So imho, and experience, the argument of shotgun/rifle/pistol in a home defense situation is a waste of time for most and regardless of your work experience or background, there is going to be factors that limit accuracy and effectiveness. Police officers and military will admit that regardless of experience, adrenaline will most likely cause you to miss that first shot unless point blank, otherwise shot capacity and follow up would really be un-necessary wouldn't it. I myself would rather send a load of birdshot into an attackers face/chest area and have a much higher chance of hitting them and causing them to flee, than have to rely on back up shots and luck, or having to live with the fact that I killed someone, no matter how big a piece of trash they were. I love the bravado exhibited here by those who never consider the aftermath or consequences of their actions. Sorry about breathing more life into an old thread, but this has always bothered me...lol

I actually somewhat agree with the first two statements here. Except that the discussion isn't a waste of time, because each firearm option has distinct pros and cons, as to the ammo choices for each. And fwiw, most any shots in a home defense ARE going to be considered to be at or near point blank range. Personally, I train to give myself the best chance at first round (and follow-up) hits, I choose the most effective firearms and ammo choices for my situation to increase the chances of stopping an attacker, and to give myself the best chance to HAVE to deal with the aftermath of such a situation, rather than to not be able to, and have the attacker have to deal with the mental and legal issues of having murdered someone. A fight for my life or the life of a loved one is not something I'm willing to lose, not even a little bit, and I will do everything I can to stack the deck in my favor. You may call it bravado, I call it planning for success, or alternatively, not planning to fail.

[wsr]

ugggh!!! It is amazing how everyone thinks that the average home invader is going to have any fight left in them at all after being shot by any firearm. The first response any of them is going to have is to flee, as the home is no longer an easy target. All the bravado and false statements of I want to make sure they never get back up and I need to put them down in one shot is sheer stupidity. The average person having never been involved in any kind of actual life and death situation with an aggressor is not going to possess the calm and concentration to put anyone down with a well placed shot. Training helps, but the fact is, you will most likely be caught unaware and the adrenaline is going to cause any kind of shot to go other than where it is intended. It is laughable to hear guys say they are going to do this and that and they will prevail. More likely is the fact that if you are lucky enough to get time to pull a weapon and lucky enough to get a shot off, you will most likely not hit your adversary, or not hit them where you intended with your first shot. The good news is that you most likely will not have too, because most prowlers are going to flee knowing you are not defenseless. In a situation such as a home invasion, a shotgun allows the greatest chance of hitting a target based on the fact that you do get a spread and do not have to be pinpoint accurate as you do with a rifle or pistol. Slugs would negate this advantage. And as far as ammo goes, anyone taking a load of birdshot to the face or chest is going to have no fight left in them, exception being someone who is beyond reason and drugged up. So imho, and experience, the argument of shotgun/rifle/pistol in a home defense situation is a waste of time for most and regardless of your work experience or background, there is going to be factors that limit accuracy and effectiveness. Police officers and military will admit that regardless of experience, adrenaline will most likely cause you to miss that first shot unless point blank, otherwise shot capacity and follow up would really be un-necessary wouldn't it. I myself would rather send a load of birdshot into an attackers face/chest area and have a much higher chance of hitting them and causing them to flee, than have to rely on back up shots and luck, or having to live with the fact that I killed someone, no matter how big a piece of trash they were. I love the bravado exhibited here by those who never consider the aftermath or consequences of their actions. Sorry about breathing more life into an old thread, but this has always bothered me...lol

LOL

[SlowDog]

Just get a 45acp Hi-Point carbine. Run jhp's in it. that's 15 rounds with bigger mag and hard to beat. Cheap too....LOL

[DP425]

ugggh!!! It is amazing how everyone thinks that the average home invader is going to have any fight left in them at all after being shot by any firearm. The first response any of them is going to have is to flee, as the home is no longer an easy target. All the bravado and false statements of I want to make sure they never get back up and I need to put them down in one shot is sheer stupidity. The average person having never been involved in any kind of actual life and death situation with an aggressor is not going to possess the calm and concentration to put anyone down with a well placed shot. Training helps, but the fact is, you will most likely be caught unaware and the adrenaline is going to cause any kind of shot to go other than where it is intended. It is laughable to hear guys say they are going to do this and that and they will prevail. More likely is the fact that if you are lucky enough to get time to pull a weapon and lucky enough to get a shot off, you will most likely not hit your adversary, or not hit them where you intended with your first shot. The good news is that you most likely will not have too, because most prowlers are going to flee knowing you are not defenseless. In a situation such as a home invasion, a shotgun allows the greatest chance of hitting a target based on the fact that you do get a spread and do not have to be pinpoint accurate as you do with a rifle or pistol. Slugs would negate this advantage. And as far as ammo goes, anyone taking a load of birdshot to the face or chest is going to have no fight left in them, exception being someone who is beyond reason and drugged up. So imho, and experience, the argument of shotgun/rifle/pistol in a home defense situation is a waste of time for most and regardless of your work experience or background, there is going to be factors that limit accuracy and effectiveness. Police officers and military will admit that regardless of experience, adrenaline will most likely cause you to miss that first shot unless point blank, otherwise shot capacity and follow up would really be un-necessary wouldn't it. I myself would rather send a load of birdshot into an attackers face/chest area and have a much higher chance of hitting them and causing them to flee, than have to rely on back up shots and luck, or having to live with the fact that I killed someone, no matter how big a piece of trash they were. I love the bravado exhibited here by those who never consider the aftermath or consequences of their actions. Sorry about breathing more life into an old thread, but this has always bothered me...lol


This post is riddled with bad information, but the worst is in bold.

Many defensive 00 Buck loads will put all or 90% of the pellets into a human torso at 25 yards. That is 75 feet... I don't know about you, but I'd be lucky to get a 17 foot shot in my house. Perhaps you should pattern a shotgun before discrediting yourself so quickly.



Aside from that, statistically speaking, home invasions do not happen with what us grunts call "violence of action"- bust down the door and come in bullets flying. The majority of home defense encounters, the occupant has substantial time to retrieve a firearm that is not on their person to defend themselves with. So, that said and factoring in the range at which these things generally happen, there is ample time to set yourself for what is about to happen and short enough distance that shots can be accurately fired. This is all stuff that have numbers commonly available. The "adrenaline" factor is a non-issue when you are essentially in an ambush position 15' from your target.

[DP425]

i would like to dispel 2 common untruths. the 5.56/223 is a long range, but not high powered rifle. for this reason it was designed to tumble on impact. the other is that it was not designed to kill. it was designed to kill. just not instantainiously. which makes it great on a battle field. it makes you also try to save the wonded. so for both theese reasons, it is a good home defense waqpon. case in point. military uses for cqb.

You've got good intent here, but its actually not all that correct. High-power really depends on what your definition is. Is it velocity? Energy? Max Case pressure? It may be a bit light on energy, but it's pretty respectable on velocity. Case pressure is pretty close to .308, depending which method of measurement is used. So is it high-power compared to .300WM? No, not really. But is .300WM high-power compared to .338 LM? Nope...

Finally- being designed to tumble... Not true. Bullets designed to tumble are made so they are highly rear-heavy (example- heavy copper jacket with the front 60% being aluminum with the rear 40% lead). Additionally, the 5.56, being based on the .223, which itself is based on the .222 doesn't have any history of a design intended to "tumble". This misconception may have originated in the fact that when the M16 was first introduced, it has a 1:14 twist rate- this rate was barely enough to stabilize the bullet in flight- so much so that in colder weather, the stability was totally destroyed and accuracy went to crap with bullets key-holing on impact. This is why 1:12 became the standard twist rate. So what does this have to do with the misconception of a design to tumble? Simple- because the bullet was already on the cusp of instability, impact with just about anything caused it to lose stability and go into a tumbling path; this isn't a design characteristic, it is a result of twist rate. It is possible that this twist rate was chosen specifically to result in such behavior, but given 1:14 was not retained, it's a moot point really. Speaking in terms of standard issue ammunition, 1:12 and 1:7 both depart a high degree of stability on the 55gr and 62gr projectiles. Finally, the behavior of standard FMJ ammunition of .224 caliber in the .223Rem is really no different than what you would see in other FMJ calibers of similar velocities and sectional density.

[marine0341]

i do understand that it is the twist rate. it is just something that i did not have the time to get into. i was just wanting to get the point across that this is a reason that it can be an effective home defense weapon. because of the tumble. and lack of over penitration after impact.

[michiganfan]

All you need is a double barrel shotgun.. 2 through the door..

Joe Biden style

[Kefefs]

I'm a huge proponent of ARs for home defense. In my mind, a suppressed 5.56mm SBR with something like heavy Hornady TAP ammunition (60gr of 75gr) is the very best home defense tool available. Power-wise you get excellent lethality and minimal hard barrier penetration. Heavy TAP will begin to fragment as soon as it hits drywall and won't go through three sheets; it breaks up upon impact with the first wall, the fragments pierce the second, and then stop in the third. In a home this means, if you miss and hit a wall, a cluster of fragments will come out the other side and stop shallow in the next thing they hit. This is much, much better than centerfire pistol JHP or buckshot, which will both punch through several interior walls with minimal deformation and flight deviation.

http://how-i-did-it.org/drywall/results.html

[joelansing]

I have a nice Stag Arms AR-15. But I'd rather have my stupid cheap High Point carbine 9MM with its laser and 15 round mags for indoor defense. Bang for the buck the High Point wins! A decent high cap pistol with a laser would also be better for me. It won't just save lives, but the hearing of my family. In my house I'm not fighting the army, or the police. 15 rounds and a laser will make any scrub dead or running for the door. I've got a mossberg 500 persuader also, but then again. Do I want to do permanent damage to our hearing when something just as good will work at less decibels? Some people think the sound of my Mossberg 500 racking a shell is good defense. Against what? Some idiot that isn't scared enough to break in? It might scare a smart person, but I'd rather not depend on them being a brain? What if they are full of meth or drunk?
- Joe

[BernieLomax84]

Get a Vepr 12 with a two 10rd mags and load them with 00 buck. It's an AK platform shotgun and reloads like an AR. $799 free shipping on most websites and the mags run about $40 each.

[Nevermore]

I would steer clear of rifle calibers for home defense as well.

[Rara]

I would steer clear of rifle calibers for home defense as well.

Quit spamming for posts. It's pretty clear you didn't read any of the thread.

[Roundballer]

Quit spamming for posts. It's pretty clear you didn't read any of the thread.
Ya, but he got his 10 posts in so that he could add a pic to the for-sale-ad he has for a $1200 Ruger #1. Now all he has to do is bump it for a while.

[TomE]

I have a nice Stag Arms AR-15. But I'd rather have my stupid cheap High Point carbine 9MM with its laser and 15 round mags for indoor defense. Bang for the buck the High Point wins! A decent high cap pistol with a laser would also be better for me. It won't just save lives, but the hearing of my family. In my house I'm not fighting the army, or the police. 15 rounds and a laser will make any scrub dead or running for the door. I've got a mossberg 500 persuader also, but then again. Do I want to do permanent damage to our hearing when something just as good will work at less decibels? Some people think the sound of my Mossberg 500 racking a shell is good defense. Against what? Some idiot that isn't scared enough to break in? It might scare a smart person, but I'd rather not depend on them being a brain? What if they are full of meth or drunk?
- Joe

A 9mm going off in a 8 x 10 room will make a loud enough noise that your ears will ring for months

[ryan232478]

This post is riddled with bad information, but the worst is in bold.

Many defensive 00 Buck loads will put all or 90% of the pellets into a human torso at 25 yards. That is 75 feet... I don't know about you, but I'd be lucky to get a 17 foot shot in my house. Perhaps you should pattern a shotgun before discrediting yourself so quickly.


Wait... some guy on the interwebs told me that you don't even need to aim a shotgun, and that the bad guy would run away when he hears you chamber a round. Are you saying he is wrong??? :yikes:

[GreaseMonkeySRT]

A 9mm going off in a 8 x 10 room will make a loud enough noise that your ears will ring for months

Just for 1-2 days.

[Porter]

Just for 1-2 days.

you would know!!!

:)

[nrich1979]

Hasn't this topic been beaten to death? The 5.56 besides being loud is perfectly acceptable for home defense...

Every ballistic test I've seen shows it to have very little penetration against things like walls and studs..

It hits and bounces and tumbles and loses velocity..

where as the 9mm and 45 actually keep going..

a 12 gauge slug is even worse..

[mike657894]

ugggh!!! It is amazing how everyone thinks that the average home invader is going to have any fight left in them at all after being shot by any firearm. The first response any of them is going to have is to flee, as the home is no longer an easy target. All the bravado and false statements of I want to make sure they never get back up and I need to put them down in one shot is sheer stupidity. The average person having never been involved in any kind of actual life and death situation with an aggressor is not going to possess the calm and concentration to put anyone down with a well placed shot. Training helps, but the fact is, you will most likely be caught unaware and the adrenaline is going to cause any kind of shot to go other than where it is intended. It is laughable to hear guys say they are going to do this and that and they will prevail. More likely is the fact that if you are lucky enough to get time to pull a weapon and lucky enough to get a shot off, you will most likely not hit your adversary, or not hit them where you intended with your first shot. The good news is that you most likely will not have too, because most prowlers are going to flee knowing you are not defenseless. In a situation such as a home invasion, a shotgun allows the greatest chance of hitting a target based on the fact that you do get a spread and do not have to be pinpoint accurate as you do with a rifle or pistol. Slugs would negate this advantage. And as far as ammo goes, anyone taking a load of birdshot to the face or chest is going to have no fight left in them, exception being someone who is beyond reason and drugged up. So imho, and experience, the argument of shotgun/rifle/pistol in a home defense situation is a waste of time for most and regardless of your work experience or background, there is going to be factors that limit accuracy and effectiveness. Police officers and military will admit that regardless of experience, adrenaline will most likely cause you to miss that first shot unless point blank, otherwise shot capacity and follow up would really be un-necessary wouldn't it. I myself would rather send a load of birdshot into an attackers face/chest area and have a much higher chance of hitting them and causing them to flee, than have to rely on back up shots and luck, or having to live with the fact that I killed someone, no matter how big a piece of trash they were. I love the bravado exhibited here by those who never consider the aftermath or consequences of their actions. Sorry about breathing more life into an old thread, but this has always bothered me...lol

you get 0 spread at an inside your home distance. unless your hugh hefner or bill gates.

[Bearcat989]

How long ago was that? Technology of weapons and ammo has changed a lot. RSF has more experience than just about EVERYONE on this board. He TRAINS military, LEOs and civilians. That is .. has been his job.

To say the .223 isn't a good defensive round .. when what was used last year at SC and just recently? Trayvon Martin? We are not looking at shooting 500 - 800 yards for defensive shooting when the average distance will be about less than 20 feet in a home. Comparing to what was or won't be effective with your military experience is like comparing apples and oranges with home defense situations.

Distance is the key issue. If it is Defensive shooting, one will not need anything other than a shotgun. If you have a rifle and are tempted to take that 20 yard shot as a felon flees your home, it will be considered an offensive action and if you do kill the perp, you will go to prison for homicide.

[throttletony]

good link and good info

It's all about personal preference and use (also, living conditions)
Multiple studies show that the .223 is NOT the "over-penetrator" that many folks think it is, most handgun rounds will go through more sheetrock and shed their energy slower than a 223 after hitting just 1 wall of sheetrock.
There's a reason the 4 rules exist.

[Triggerman]

I think it is. I believe you and your hearing will defiantly part ways though! Beats being dead though

[costanza]

Distance is the key issue. If it is Defensive shooting, one will not need anything other than a shotgun. If you have a rifle and are tempted to take that 20 yard shot as a felon flees your home, it will be considered an offensive action and if you do kill the perp, you will go to prison for homicide.
Maybe a shotgun is the best round per round, but they are cumbersome to handle in close quarters. Also, a home defense shotgun is harder to conceal/secure when you are not at home. Mine was stolen in a break-in. I'm not likely going to put it in the vault every time I leave the house, so I use my carry gun for home defense instead.

[RifleGuy]

50738

[dice]

50738

This is my favorite post ever.


Dice