Another reminder of why a long gun is better for defence...

[Preacherman]

Many of you will have read this thread, about a private citizen helping a police officer by shooting the guy with whom he was struggling. Latest details to emerge show that the attacker was shot once in the torso by the officer (details of weapon and caliber unknown), and then four times - FOUR TIMES!!! - in the torso by the passer-by, using a .45 ACP pistol, and was still struggling. It took a fifth round of .45 to the head (and the sixth round to hit him) to finally stop the assailant.

This reminds me once again of my own life lessons. I observed (and was sometimes a reluctant participant in) well over a hundred armed encounters during South Africa's prolonged period of civil unrest from 1976-1994. Again and again, I saw how no handgun, no matter how powerful, could be relied on to successfully stop an attacker who was enraged, or drunk, or hopped-up on one or other narcotic. Major calibers were certainly more effective than minor calibers, but even so, multiple hits were often required, and even then, the attacker often stayed on his feet long enough to do some serious (even fatal) damage to the shooter before expiring.

Since coming to the USA, I've had the opportunity to study reports of many thousands of US LEO shooting encounters, working as I have done for a Federal LE agency. They impart precisely the same lesson. Multiple handgun hits are a normal requirement to stop someone, not the exception. Furthermore, accurate hits to the central nervous system, while an almost certain "stopper", are very difficult to achieve under the stress of a gunfight, with a moving target and (probably) a moving shooter as well.

Once again, I'm struck by how much more effective a long gun is as a fight-stopper. In South Africa, I saw shotguns with buckshot and slug, as well as rifles in .223, .308 and similar calibers being used. Rarely did it take more than one or two well-placed shots (using decent ammo) to stop an attacker, and usually to do so instantly, before he could get close enough to hurt the shooter. In the USA, the same fact emerges from countless shooting reports: a well-placed hit or two with a long gun will do the job much more reliably than similar hits from a handgun.

To refresh my memory, I took a quick look at muzzle energy figures for common defensive rounds. From Remington's ballistics info, I took the following figures (all arranged in ascending order by muzzle energy):


HANDGUN:

.25 Auto (6.35mm.), 50gr. ball: 64 ft/lbs.
.32 ACP (7.65mm.), 71gr. ball: 129 ft/lbs.
.380 ACP, 102gr. JHP: 200 ft/lbs.
.38 Special, 158gr. LSWCHP +P (the famous "FBI Load"): 278 ft/lbs.
9mm. Parabellum, 115gr. JHP, standard velocity: 341 ft/lbs.
.45 ACP, 230gr. JHP or ball, standard velocity: 391 ft/lbs.
9mm. Parabellum, 115gr. JHP +P: 399 ft/lbs.
.40 S&W, 165gr. JHP: 485 ft/lbs.
.45 ACP, 185gr. JHP +P: 534 ft/lbs.
.357 Magnum, 125gr. JHP: 583 ft/lbs.
.44 Magnum, 240gr. JHP, 741 ft/lbs.


RIFLE:

.30 Carbine, 110gr. JSP: ME 967 ft/lbs.
.223 Remington, 55gr. JSP (equivalent energy to 55gr. or 62gr. military ball): ME 1282 ft/lbs.
7.62x39mm., 123gr. FMJ (equivalent to military ball): 1527 ft/lbs.
.30-30, 150gr. JSP: ME 1902 ft/lbs.
.308, 150gr. FMJ (equivalent to military ball): 2648 ft/lbs.
.30-'06, 150gr. FMJ (equivalent to military ball): 2820 ft/lbs.


SHOTGUN:

12ga. 2¾" #00 buckshot, 8 pellets, reduced-recoil load: 1174 ft/lbs.
12ga. 2¾" slug, 1 oz., reduced-recoil load: 1397 ft/lbs.
20ga. 2¾" slug, 5/8 oz., standard velocity: 1513 ft/lbs.
20ga. 2¾" #3 buckshot, 20 pellets, standard velocity: 1554 ft/lbs.
12ga. 2¾" #00 buckshot, 9 pellets, standard velocity: 1918 ft/lbs.
12ga. 2¾" slug, 1 oz., standard velocity: 2361 ft/lbs.
12ga. 2¾" #1 buckshot, 16 pellets, standard velocity: 2428 ft/lbs.


The energy figures are a pretty graphic illustration of just how much more power there is in the average rifle and/or shotgun round in comparison to the average handgun round. Even the lowly .30 Carbine, much despised as a "stopping round", is more than twice as powerful as most often-used defensive handgun rounds, while even a 20ga. buckshot or slug round has more than twice as much energy as the much-touted .44 Magnum!

Just a thought for the day... if you're likely to need a gun, make it a long gun! Or, as Clint Smith would put it, a handgun is a tool to fight your way to your long gun. I'm not knocking handguns at all - one can't CCW a long gun very easily, after all - but if at all possible, have a long gun handy.

 

[Capital Punishment]

If only there were more people in this world like that civilian.

What ever happened to actually helping people out, especially a peace officer?

 

[Bob F.]

Preacherman: Thanks! That cinches it! I have handguns and my deer rifle plus shotty. Gotta have an "assault rifle"! Really needed an excuse!! Thanks again!

Stay safe, and armed with a LONG gun!
Bob

 

[armoredman]

Hmm,. if he'd had a Yugo SKS in the trunk....remember, he did have to go to his car and retrieve a firearm!

 

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

My father wants to buy a handgun for home defense. I tried to explain to him why a long gun would be a better choice, but I couldn't quite get the message accross. Maybe this story would help.

Are there any good sources that can help me explain to a non-shooter why a rifle or shotgun is such a superior defensive tool?

 

[Preacherman]

HTG, I'd offer the following suggestions:

1. Demonstrate in his hands how much easier it is to hit a target with a comparable rifle or handgun (e.g. a .22 pistol/revolver versus a .22 rifle, at normal range - say 10 yards or so). Show him how his hits are more accurate with the long gun.

2. Compare the energy figures above. He should be able to see immediately how much more powerful a typical long gun load is than a typical handgun load. Also, point out that to control a medium-power rifle round such as .223 or 7.62x39 is vastly easier than a powerful handgun round like .45 ACP +P or .357 Magnum, yet delivers two to three times the power.

Hope this helps.

 

[13.45]

sage advice, sir, sage advice

 

[Mulliga]

Are there any good sources that can help me explain to a non-shooter why a rifle or shotgun is such a superior defensive tool?

http://www.theboxotruth.com/

Nothing like a visceral demonstration. Fire some .223, 7.62x39, or 00 buckshot into a water-filled milk jug and compare with even a .45 HP. Then you can move onto the penetration tests, which the long guns (well, the rifles anyway) will easily win.

 

[LAK]

Once again, I'm struck by how much more effective a long gun is as a fight-stopper

When I am asked about a firearm for general defensive purposes I usually do my best to pursuade people to get a long gun first. Unless the weapon is intended for on the person carry or other convenience to which a long gun is out of the question.

As Col. Cooper has stated and written; "The rifle is the queen of personal weapons". And on this matter I agree wholeheartedly.

-------------------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org

 

[Darkness]

While I cannot disagree with your facts regarding the relative power of handguns vs. long guns, I would like to add a little something to the arguement of fitness for defense. I think it is all very situational.

Using a long gun when given the opportunity to fire before the bad guy gets close to you is definitely more effective than a handgun. No doubt about that. At closer ranges, things would change, though. Not the power of the round, but the usability. Let's say the perp is at 50 feet and closing in on you at a run.

With a long gun, the action makes a big difference. How many shots can you get off with a bolt action, or even a lever action? You cannot guarantee a stopping hit on your first shot, each time and every time. Semi-auto rifles and shotguns would still be very viable. Okay, so now we are talking about only certain long guns. With most handguns you could get off several rounds.

What about home defense? Long guns take time to swing around and can be more easily grabbed by the BG, where as handguns can be kept closer to the body, making it tougher to grab and increasing your firing arc. Not every BG entry situation has families snug in their beds, waking to a strange noise, and barricading themselves in their rooms with their favorite long guns pointing at the door. How about when someone crashes in your front door while you are making waffles in the kitchen and you need to scramble for a firearm? How about if you are sitting in your car, and someone who just robbed a business runs out and decides he wants your car to get away in, and starts plinking at you through the windshield? DO you want to try and swing your long gun around inside your car to shoot back, or maybe scramble out of the car with your long gun in tow, trying to find a position where you can safely swing the long barrel around to defend yourself?

Etc, etc...

I am just saying that I don't think a generalization can be applied, that long guns are simply better defensive firearms. You can always say "Well, if.. blah, blah." Heck, using energy figures for comparison, packing a .50cal rifle would be even better, but it really would not be practical. With everything being equal, time to set up the shot and whatnot, yes, the long gun will deliver more potential energy. In that case, you could even use a Thompson Center Contender and have the best of both worlds.

In the end, it is shot placement that really counts, in my opinion. A friend of mine took a .22 short to the heart. It killed him just as much as a 308 would have. Practice with the guns you have, get proficient with them, learn them so you can stay calm and place your shots where you need to. That's the best defense.

 

[ball3006]

The only problem with....

carrying a long gun, is how do you carry it concealed?............A pistol in the pocket is WAY much better than a long gun in the house or car..........chris3

 

[CAS700850]

My grandfather always said that his handguns were handy, but his long guns were useful. I think he and Preacheman would gang up on me if they ever realized I have no long guns except a .22 rifle. Mea Culpa!

 

[TallPine]

if at all possible, have a long gun handy.

Which is why there is a s/a rifle under my bed at night, and it leans in a handy corner downstairs during the day - even though I carry a revolver on my belt during the day

 

[dpesec]

I remember somebody saying that the only use for a handgun is to fight you way to the long gun. That's why I got a SKS Mil-sup for the truck.

 

[Oleg Volk]

Moving with long guns is much harder, esp. indoors. They require two hands for effective firing, whereas handguns can be fired somewhat well with one.

Time spent getting the long gun may be better spent finding cover or running away.

Long guns are great if you have forewarning and can't run away.

 

[Phoenix_III]

Things to be careful of are 'point blank' shots.

The sights on your rifle will not line up on target if trying to shoot something at literally three feet away... You're better off backing up to 10ft or more, or going metal to target contact distance... just FYI.

 

[Thain]

I just point no-shooters to the one example of firearms use they all know" the Army. Point out that there is a reason we don't equip our men with pistols alone.

With regards to the absolute newbie, I think you should steer them to whatever they can shoot well, comfortably, and afford. That said, you can get a good used shotgun and a decent handgun for under $800 these days.

The only thing better than a handgun or a longgun is a handgun and a longgun.

 

[Frandy]

I am just saying that I don't think a generalization can be applied, that long guns are simply better defensive firearms.

Oh, I think Preacherman's post is exactly that: a good generalization. What you did was provide good specific exceptions.

Bottom line for me is my being able to get to my loaded shotgun, my loaded carbine, my loaded pistol, or my loaded revolver. If the luxury presents itself, it will be the shottie or carbine. If under duress, I hope I have any of them close by.

 

[Can'thavenuthingood]

So a good compromise would be a .357 handgun (10 inch barrel?) and a 16 inch lever action.

Or a .44 special/ magnum with a 16 inch lever.

This is just for lounging around the house in my pajama wear.

Vick

 

[benEzra]

Things to be careful of are 'point blank' shots.

The sights on your rifle will not line up on target if trying to shoot something at literally three feet away... You're better off backing up to 10ft or more, or going metal to target contact distance... just FYI.

Even inside 10 ft, a good rifle is very easy to shoot accurately. In that close, you don't even need the rear sight; using the entire front sight post as a guide works well enough, at least for my mini-14 and SAR-1. Yes, you have to deal with sight offset, but you also have the shoulder stock working in your favor. It evens out, at least for me.

The sight offset problem is real, but not that big a deal if you have practiced close-range shooting. I know about how low the rifle shoots at that range and can compensate. Backing up to 10 ft doesn't help you much with a tall-sighted rifle, since first crossover doesn't occur until 25-50 yards.

 

[Preacherman]

I am just saying that I don't think a generalization can be applied, that long guns are simply better defensive firearms.

Darkness, you have a point. As I noted in my opening post:

I'm not knocking handguns at all - one can't CCW a long gun very easily, after all

In situations where a long gun is not practicable to carry or have immediately accessible, a handgun is indispensable. That's why I carry all the time! However, in the scenario you posted:

Let's say the perp is at 50 feet and closing in on you at a run. With a long gun, the action makes a big difference. How many shots can you get off with a bolt action, or even a lever action? You cannot guarantee a stopping hit on your first shot, each time and every time. Semi-auto rifles and shotguns would still be very viable. Okay, so now we are talking about only certain long guns. With most handguns you could get off several rounds.

I agree with you that a bolt-action rifle would not really work here, although some types (e.g. the Lee-Enfield) are very fast in operation with a trained shooter. However, a lever-action rifle should be pretty fast to operate, and a pump-action weapon even faster. Mas Ayoob's training standard is that a trained pump-gunner, with a 12ga. shotgun, should be able to get 5 rounds of buckshot on target, at 10 yards, in 2 seconds. I've achieved this (2.03 seconds, to be precise) while training with him. A person running in from 50 feet will take a couple of seconds to get to me, and I'm very confident of nailing that person with a shotgun or lever-action rifle during that time. A semi-auto, of course, would be even faster: Mas's standard there is 5 rounds of buckshot, accurately placed, from a semi-auto shotgun in 1 second, and I've seen that achieved.

So, I don't think that most sporting or defensive long guns are as slow and unwieldy as you think.

What about home defense? Long guns take time to swing around and can be more easily grabbed by the BG, where as handguns can be kept closer to the body, making it tougher to grab and increasing your firing arc.

A hunting rifle or shotgun is long, yes, but not necessarily unwieldy. If you train with one, using a retention position, they can be surprisingly difficult to grab away from someone. And, one isn't likely to do one's own house-clearing, is one? (At least, not if one has any sense!) As a defensive weapon, a shorter carbine or short-barreled pump or auto shotgun is a very manageable tool, and I don't think the risks of a BG grabbing it are any worse than for a handgun. (Again, this assumes proper training.)

As for use in a car, or convenient to one's person while doing other chores, obviously this is the sort of situation where a handgun is indispensable, and I agree that the short gun is the best available option.

In the end, it is shot placement that really counts, in my opinion.

Yes, agreed - provided that one places a shot with a round powerful enough to stop one's attacker. A .22 Short in the heart is a killing shot, all right, but not a stopping shot. One wants to deliver enough power with the shot(s) to stop the attacker doing what he's doing, and in such a situation, the more power one can accurately deliver, the better. The long gun wins this one hands down.

 

[azredhawk44]

Wow... The same forum where 357magnum is a concern for overpenetration and 44mag is way overkill for self defense now has suggested rifle for self defense. Because a 308, 7.62x39 or 223 does not overpenetrate at all.

Yeah, they are more powerful, but there is a HUGE liability involved in using slugs in a shotgun or rifle rounds for home defense.

My M1A is loaded with 20 rounds of softpoint 308 ammo as a last ditch self defense weapon, but I know that has a serious chance of penetrating my neighbors house.

 

[benEzra]

Wow... The same forum where 357magnum is a concern for overpenetration and 44mag is way overkill for self defense now has suggested rifle for self defense. Because a 308, 7.62x39 or 223 does not overpenetrate at all.

Yeah, they are more powerful, but there is a HUGE liability involved in using slugs in a shotgun or rifle rounds for home defense.

My M1A is loaded with 20 rounds of softpoint 308 ammo as a last ditch self defense weapon, but I know that has a serious chance of penetrating my neighbors house.

Depends greatly on the load used. .357/125gr isn't an overpenetration problem, and neither is .223/55gr JHP; both have penetration characteristics similar to 9mm/115gr JHP at most. .223/40gr JHP penetrates less than almost anything.

.223/62gr FMJ, .357/158gr hardcast, and 9mm FMJ would probably be overpenetrative in most situations, but would still not penetrate a brick exterior wall.

 

[crofrog]

Things to be careful of are 'point blank' shots.

The sights on your rifle will not line up on target if trying to shoot something at literally three feet away... You're better off backing up to 10ft or more, or going metal to target contact distance... just FYI.

Or learning how high to hold over... Which on an AR15 at those ranges is about 2.5 inchs...

 

[Darkness]

Mas Ayoob's training standard is that a trained pump-gunner, with a 12ga. shotgun, should be able to get 5 rounds of buckshot on target, at 10 yards, in 2 seconds. I've achieved this (2.03 seconds, to be precise) while training with him.

Wow! Now, I have never trained extensively with a shotgun, but I can tell you that in 2 seconds I might be able to get two shots off. Will the second shot hit? I dunno. I have done a lot more training with handguns of various makes and caliber, and am simply more comfortable with them.

If you have the talent and training, by all means, use a long gun. In your example, you would probably place more lead in the assailant than I would use a 4" .44 mag in the same amount of time.

No doubt that a long gun would provide more stopping power, but at the same time, it might require more training to use in a, dare I say it, tactical manner. Given my current state of comfort and familiarity with long guns, I think I'll just stick to my handguns for a while.