A number of years ago, so someone posted a demo on the subject of whether a woman untrained in the use of firearms would be better served with a revolver, a shotgun, or an AR.
The "test", as I recall, involved shooting at a torso target outdoors, at something like, or maybe more than, seven yards. Don't hold me to the distance.
The shooter was ineffective with the big revolver. She did poorly with the 12 ga pump shotgun, and was so unhappy wit the recoil that she refused to shoot it more. She did well with the AR.
What did that demo show us? It showed how one person fared with different weapons when she had the gun in hand and knew in advance where the target would be--in an outdoor scenario.
Neither portability nor sound pressure nor possible over-penetration was very important.
Some of what was shown in the demo was worthwhile. When a neighbor of mine mused about acquiring a shotgun for home defense, I told him about the experiment and suggested hat he might find an AR easier to use.
In a real HD situation, we may or may not be able to access the gun timely, and we will not know where in the house the invaders will be at any particular time
I think it is a mistake to assume that a home invasion will occur when one is in the bedroom, or that the resident will necessarily be afforded sufficient warning to get to the gun or to the safe room.
Some of the scarier home invasions in our area have involve multiple perps; some have occurred in mid-day when the residents were nowhere near their bedrooms; and with virtually no warning.
I suggest that before people decide upon which firearm(s) to acquire and where to keep them, they consider those realities and perform a structured risk analysis and risk mitigation analysis.
Risk analysis starts with identifying the risks.
I'll list a few for starters:
The next steps are to analyze the risks and consider mitigation strategies.
I suggest that those should encompass much more than choosing firearms and deciding where to keep them
The "test", as I recall, involved shooting at a torso target outdoors, at something like, or maybe more than, seven yards. Don't hold me to the distance.
The shooter was ineffective with the big revolver. She did poorly with the 12 ga pump shotgun, and was so unhappy wit the recoil that she refused to shoot it more. She did well with the AR.
What did that demo show us? It showed how one person fared with different weapons when she had the gun in hand and knew in advance where the target would be--in an outdoor scenario.
Neither portability nor sound pressure nor possible over-penetration was very important.
Some of what was shown in the demo was worthwhile. When a neighbor of mine mused about acquiring a shotgun for home defense, I told him about the experiment and suggested hat he might find an AR easier to use.
In a real HD situation, we may or may not be able to access the gun timely, and we will not know where in the house the invaders will be at any particular time
I think it is a mistake to assume that a home invasion will occur when one is in the bedroom, or that the resident will necessarily be afforded sufficient warning to get to the gun or to the safe room.
Some of the scarier home invasions in our area have involve multiple perps; some have occurred in mid-day when the residents were nowhere near their bedrooms; and with virtually no warning.
I suggest that before people decide upon which firearm(s) to acquire and where to keep them, they consider those realities and perform a structured risk analysis and risk mitigation analysis.
Risk analysis starts with identifying the risks.
I'll list a few for starters:
- One or more criminals, likely violent if confronted, may enter a residence forcibly at any time of day.
- The defender may not be near where a long arm is kept at the time, and may not be able to access it timely.
- The residents, adults and/or children, will likely not all be in the same place at the time.
- The intruders will most likely be armed, and be willing and programmed to shoot instantly if they are endangered.
- Extensive study and simulation have shown that if the defender attempts to move about and leaves the safety of cover, things are unlikely to end well.
- The probability that an "intruder" is a child returning home, a relative, a friend of the family, a neighbor, someone the the wrong address, or another innocent is greater than zero.
The next steps are to analyze the risks and consider mitigation strategies.
I suggest that those should encompass much more than choosing firearms and deciding where to keep them