New Home Defense Choice?

[WinThePennant]

A pistol caliber carbine is not nearly as useful as a rifle caliber carbine. The recoil on a 5.56mm isn't much, the wound tract is going to be much bigger on a fragmenting 5.56mm than on a hollowpoint 9mm (and fragmentation will be much more reliable than expansion).

The biggest thing is that after going through bone, heavy clothing, or a wall, a 5.56mm round will still fragment or yaw (depending on design). A JHP will very likely fail to expand in these scenarios. If it fails to expand, it will overpenetrate MORE, increasing the risk of collateral damage.

Pistol calibers are designed to fit in handguns and produce effective results in a 4" barrel. They don't gain much from a 16" barrel, where rifle rounds are designed to be more effective. Going for a pistol caliber carbine over a rifle caliber carbine is like asking for all of the benefits of a rifle, but with the power of a pistol.

The question isn't whether or not a rifle is going to cause more damage than a pistol, but what is a suitable HD caliber and weapon. Of course a rifle is going to cause more damage, but a 9mm carbine is sufficient. You are completely wrong when you say that a 9mm doesn't gain much when fired from a longer barrel. Fired from a carbine, the 9mm's performance approaches the vaunted .357 magnum.

Then, you must consider cost. A Kel-Tec Sub 2000, which is a fine 9mm carbine from what I've read, can be had for just over $300 (cheap). It uses Glock mags (cheap). And, it fires 9mm ammo (cheap).

Other advantages of a 9mm carbine include reduced noise, practically zero muzzle flip, handling, and its folding stock allows it to be stowed away easily.

I know that a lot of people recommend an AR-15 for a nightstand HD gun, and I've given it some thought. But, I couldn't imagine firing that thing in a house. The flash would blind me, and the blast would very likely cause permanent hearing loss.

 

[jmstevens2]

Without reading all the replies, go to the wall of truth and see for yourself. Surprisingly .223 varmints are best.

 

[ugaarguy]

The flash would blind me, and the blast would very likely cause permanent hearing loss.

If you live in a state where flash hiders are legal that isn't the case. Any firearm fired, unsuppressed, without hearing protection will cause hearing damage. Everything from major handgun calibers up are within a few dB of each other.

 

[Mike1234567]

go to the wall of truth and see for yourself

I think you mean The Box O' Truth.

 

[Skribs]

I've seen the ballistics gel results of birdshot, and it doesn't penetrate to the FBI's minimum requirements. Anyone advocating birdshot because "it won't go through walls and kill your neighbors" is forgetting one thing - the reason it won't go through walls is because it lacks the penetration to cause a physiological stop in your attacker.

Anything which is capable of penetrating deep enough to cause damage to your attacker's CNS or vital organs (the only way to ensure a physiological stop) is going to penetrate through walls. There isn't a magical bullet that will not penetrate through walls, but will stop an attacker.

Relying on something that will just cause pain isn't going to help. First off, due to adrenaline or drugs, the target might not feel pain until after he's bludgeoned you to death with whatever he brought with him. Second, if he does feel the pain, it's just as likely to make him angry as it is to make him leave (or he could ignore it). I had a friend in high school that would go into blind rages...if he were to break into a house and get shot with birdshot, the guy who shot him would probably get beaten to death. But if he were shot with something that would physically prevent his body from continuing, the attack would be stopped.

That's not to say birdshot won't stop people in a few situations. However, it should not be relied upon as a reliable method.

Frangible handgun ammo penetrates through drywall like any other handgun ammo, but it doesn't penetrate through a person nearly as much. So what you get is the same overpenetration problem through walls, and then a failure to reach vital organs once it hits the target. It's a lose/lose situation.

Terminal ballistics isn't magic. It's based on physics. There isn't a way to NOT go through a couple of inches of drywall but still go through 12-18" of human flesh. The FBI recommends 12-18" of penetration to cope with different firing angles when shooting at a human target with the intent to stop them from whatever they're doing.

Basically, if it won't go through drywall, it's a lousy self defense piece.

ETA: Also remember, you're not trying to kill your target in an HD situation, you're trying to stop it. Some rounds may kill the target a half hour later due to blood loss, but that won't stop him from beating you to death. You want results in seconds, not minutes or hours.

 

[WinThePennant]

If you live in a state where flash hiders are legal that isn't the case. Any firearm fired, unsuppressed, without hearing protection will cause hearing damage. Everything from major handgun calibers up are within a few dB of each other.

You know, at first I didn't believe it. But, upon researching the matter, it is true that decibel levels are pretty much the same for a 9mm pistol and a 5.56 rifle.

 

[Mike1234567]

It's not just dB levels... the frequencies and duration at those levels is just as important with regard to hearing damage.

 

[Freedom_fighter_in_IL]

Scribs, I have to completely disagree with you on the bird shot theory. The FBI is not an all knowing all seeing organization as some like to believe. A friend of mine and I were out rabbit hunting and a couple of his dogs ran a deer (yes I scolded him on this after). He had set up on a hillside, thinking the dogs were on a rabbit, and low and behold here comes a buck. Mind you it was deer season but we were hunting a part of my farm that I was not hunting deer that year. I saw this buck heading for him. He raised his arms and shouted trying to get the deer to veer away. Damn thing lowered its head and was about to gore my buddy. At 5 yards (15 feet), after yelling and screaming trying to shy the buck off, he said screw it and fired. ONE shot of #5 2 3/4 high brass dropped that buck dead in its tracks. Didn't even twitch. So don't try to sit there and say a shotgun with game loads will not "stop" an attacker. If it will stop an adrenaline charged 240 pound charging white-tail buck, it will stop ANY human on earth quite effectively.

Unless you live in a mansion, around 5 to 8 yards will, more than likely, be on the long side of any home defense shot you will have inside the home. After passing through a couple of inner drywall walls, I am sure it would hurt like crazy but that gypsum will dissipate a LOT of energy on the light pellets therefor causing less damage if it did hit someone on the other side.

EDIT: On a side note, the shotgun he was using was a mossburg 500 with a 28 inch barrel and, if I remember correctly, he had an "improved cylinder" in for a choke.

 

[LeonCarr]

12 Gauge with 00 buckshot. Birdshot is for birds, and in most cases will not penetrate deep enough to reach the vital organs. Would you trust birdshot on Joe Dirtbag, 6'6" 350 loaded up on Meth inside your house at 0200?

All of this talk about hearing loss and duration of the noise and all that stuff means that your priorities are way off. Your priority is to survive a gunfight in your home in order to save your life and your family's life. If my ears ring the rest of life because I shot a shotgun at an intruder in my home without hearing protection, that is fine. If I can hear the ringing in my ears, it means I am alive.

Just my .02,
LeonCarr

 

[Skribs]

Well, I'll trust the numerous articles and posts I've read from both mall ninjas and industry-reputed sources alike (who have put decades of experience and research into their findings) over the anecdote from someone who can't even spell a 6-letter name correctly...especially when the name is written down for you in the post you're arguing with.

It is entirely possible that a lesser caliber can kill a target. After all, a .22 is capable of killing really quick. However, that doesn't mean it will do so reliably. The fact is that each pellet of birdshot has very little mass, and thus has very little inertia. It is not designed to penetrate very far, but rather to have a very high density of shot.

I guess if you have a more condensed shot, via a longer barrel and a tighter choke, that you'd get a more concentrated pattern and that might help. But there are three points to make:

1) It probably still won't be as reliable a penetrator as buckshot, just like frangible handgun rounds aren't as reliable as hollowpoints.

2) If it is capable of stopping a person, it is capable of going through a wall and hitting someone else.

3) At short range, a really long barrel is less than ideal for self defense. If you're only at 5-8 yards, you would be much better served with a 16" carbine or 18" shotgun.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

#6 birdshot out of a 2.75" shell at 10' will reach about 6" into 10% ballistic gelatin. That's Jello - no skin, no clothing, no bones, just plain old jello. Is that enough penetration to potentially kill somebody at 10'? Absolutely.

Are there a whole bunch of situations where that won't be enough penetration to physiologically stop an attacker? You bet there are. Would buckshot give you better odds of a physiological stop? Absolutely.

 

[Warp]

I suggest a 12 gauge pump or semi-auto shotgun.

Load it so the first shotshell to be fired is 2 3/4" #6 birdshot or smaller.

Load the rest with 2 3/4" Federal #4 Buckshot (Federal product no. F127 4B).

One shot might be all you get. It had better count. Ditch the birdshot.

 

[WinThePennant]

Also, I'd interject that concerns with overpenetration are, IMHO, grossly over done. Personally, I WANT penetration. If someone breaks into my house, I don't want them to avoid my shots because they are hiding behind (fill-in-the-blank). I find it abhorrent to think about using a bullet that won't go through a wall. More and more home invasions involve the use of body armor.

 

[Shawn Dodson]

Warp advises:

One shot might be all you get. It had better count. Ditch the birdshot.

Mr.Blue (the original poster) queried:

]What platform would you choose for home defense in MY SITUATION?

Given the OP's concern about "overpenetration", which appears to me to more of a concern about minimizing penetration of building materials in the event of an errant shot, then birdshot is the best choice to achieve this performance requirement among the various options he presented for us to consider. The shot cluster will probably penetrate through a firewall separating townhouse units, but after breaching the firewall the penetration potential of the birdshot is substantially reduced, which in turn reduces the lethal risk to innocent lives on the other side.

 

[BADUNAME37]

Isn't there a concrete block (cinderblock) firewall dividing those units? I realize a bullet could just as easily go out another way, though instead of the common-wall.

 

[robhof]

I worked over 15 yrs in emergency rooms and never saw a close range shotgun shot that survived. We never got any shot with #9 shot, we got from buckshot to #6 and all were fatal. Perps with body armor, usually don't worry about their head, so why should we avoid such an opportunistic target. The sheer mass of a shot load would drop a perp with body armour and a follow up shot will insure stability.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

I worked over 15 yrs in emergency rooms and never saw a close range shotgun shot that survived.

There are more than a few of them out there, whether you came across any or not: http://punchbaby.com/2011/10/kid-getting-shot-with-a-shotgun-multiple-times-and-survives/

I've got news stories of everything from a 12yr old girl shot in the back of the head from across a porch (survived by running away) to a 94yr old man who shot himself in the stomach at contact distance, stumbled about for a bit, went to his bed and took a nap, then got up the next day and finally went to the hospital.

And frankly, I don't really care if they don't die in the ER. My goal is to stop the attack as quickly as possible. Buckshot is a better choice for that than birdshot. The only real reson to use birdshot on a 200lb mammal is if you are more concerned about a potential miss than you are about the 200lb mammal.

The OP has already said:

That said, over-penetration is my distant secondary concern. Putting down the intruder and protecting my family is primary.

Unfortunately, I don't trust the frangible rounds or bird shot. I have to have confidence in the defensive round.

I am least proficient with a shotgun.

There are only 4 choices because these are the only 4 rounds that I will consider. They are effective rounds, which is my #1 PRIORITY. From those 4, I want opinions on effectiveness vs. over-penetration.

So it appears to me from reading, that the OP doesn't trust birdshot, is least proficient with a shotgun of all of the weapons listed, and is primarily concerned with stopping the threat most effectively.

 

[Warp]

. The sheer mass of a shot load would drop a perp with body armour

You can NOT count on that. It wouldn't do that any more than the old Hollywood move myth where people who get shot are lifted up off their feet and flung through windows.

I don't believe the term "sheer mass" applies to ~1 ounce objects.

 

[rem22long40x]

All this back and forth , in a perfict wold give me a canon ,but to best meet the needs exspest I still say bird shot , untill you have had to take a life in SD it is all just speculation , I have seen what happens firsthand ,and out of a 20in.full choke at 14 feet, it WILL all but take your head off.

 

[Mike1234567]

^^^ But that's a head-shot... and at 14 feet. Torso shots will be very different. With what ammo and how big was the attacker... how tough? There are huge anatomical differences between humans. What if one had to take that shot at 40 feet? Effect of ammo on live targets can be dramatically different from one shot to the next. Personally, I'm not taking unnecessary risks. With this stated, to minimize collateral damage, my first 2 rounds are #4 buckshot. The rest are #00 buck. I'll never use bird shot for self defense unless I'm surprised by dirt-bags while target shooting and was too short-sighted to bring something better for SD.

 

[Warp]

untill you have had to take a life in SD it is all just speculation

No, it isn't.

 

[WinThePennant]

I agree that it is not all speculation. For example, we can plan ahead and decide what caliber and firearm is best for handling, etc. We can understand the likely vulnerable locations, and determine where an aggressor might enter our home. Practice 'clearing' your home with your preferred weapon and light is extremely important in determining whether or not your gear selections are optimal. Practice clearing also reveals a lot of potential hiding places. A few practice clearing drills have made me do all sorts of things differently around the house. Spot lighting is now aimed so that corners are illuminated, shower curtains are never shut all the way, and furniture was moved so that hidey-holes are unavailable to potential bad guys.

 

[Skribs]

It isn't speculation, because I'm pretty sure the research is based on people who HAVE had to take lives, and who have been actively using firearms for LE or military roles. I am using their experience to base my decision on what I need in order to effectively protect myself.

 

[JohnBiltz]

I personally knew two people who have survived 12 gauge birdshot. One was gut shot from a distance of across the hood of a car. The other is my neighbor who was shot by that pair of thrill shooters we had in Phoenix a few years ago. The distance there was from the curb to the sidewalk. I will say this they both went down and did not get back up. The biggest problem with birdshot is if someone has a heavy coat it may not make it through the coat. All the testing I've seen shows that a .223 TAP is the safest thing to avoid over penetrating wall board. Its counter intuitive but the TAP round was designed to do just this.

 

[Warp]

[It isn't speculation, because I'm pretty sure the research is based on people who HAVE had to take lives, and who have been actively using firearms for LE or military roles. I am using their experience to base my decision on what I need in order to effectively protect myself.

Well said.

Only fools ignore lessons learned by others.