shotgun vs rifle for home defense

[Kindrox]

I thought PD's are moving to 5.56 for a combination of range and penetration of body armor.

 

[shephard19]

Do you honestly think 5.56 Nato does more damage more quickly than a 12 gauge slug or OO buckshot? Thats ridiculous. The slug would put a huge hole through someone and thats not even considering possible expansion, aswell as the tremendous kinetic energy that would be transfered. OO Buckshot can put nine holes throgh a person compared to the rifle rounds one and each seperate hole is larger than the 5.56 round. The police departments probably adopted 5.56 for its greater potential penetration and the high capacity relative to shotguns of the AR-15.

 

[dom1104]

Yes, I agree, this is stupid.


You wouldnt hunt a deer with a 223, but a slug has no problems with quick and efficient death.

How in the world would it be different in a human?

 

[ugaarguy]

You wouldnt hunt a deer with a 223, but a slug has no problems with quick and efficient death.

Maybe you wouldn't. One of my co-workers took a 10 point whitetail last year with a 55 grain Nosler ballistic tip .223. He's a retired police officer who was hunting with his personal AR-15 because he was still on recoil restriction months after open heart surgery. The .223 ballistic tip round entered the chest, and literally vaporized the heart and lungs. There was no exit wound, but a massive puddle of blood came out of the entrance wound. The deer walked about ten yards, then laid down, and died.

The police departments probably adopted 5.56 for its greater potential penetration

I thought PD's are moving to 5.56 for a combination of range and penetration of body armor.

Police departments are not using M193 or M855 ball; or the Hornady DOE penetrator load in their AR-15s. They're using rounds like Hornady TAP, loaded with SST (Hornady's version of the ballistic tip) to minimize overpenetration in urban environments (yes, even compared to buckshot from a shotgun).

Do you honestly think 5.56 Nato does more damage more quickly than a 12 gauge slug or OO buckshot? Thats ridiculous. The slug would put a huge hole through someone and thats not even considering possible expansion, aswell as the tremendous kinetic energy that would be transfered.

Here in reality, where the laws of physics are still very much at work, you get very little energy transfer when the round passes through the target. It keeps flying with most of its energy retained.

 

[Bad Penny 03]

Do you honestly think 5.56 Nato does more damage more quickly than a 12 gauge slug or OO buckshot? Thats ridiculous. The slug would put a huge hole through someone and thats not even considering possible expansion, aswell as the tremendous kinetic energy that would be transfered.

Yes. Some times.
Depends on the load and other factors.


http://www.brassfetcher.com/M855bareblock1.html

http://www.hornadyle.com/assets/uploads/556_NATO_75_BTHP_WC_T2_4website.jpg

http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Ballistic_Gel_Experiments/BTAmmoLabsTest3/Test3_files/GP90.jpg

http://www.jesseshunting.com/photopost/data/500/medium/WallProfile.jpg

http://saxtech.eu/Zielwirkung/wound1.gif



http://www.stripersonline.com/surftalk/attachment.php?attachmentid=229358&d=1237785481

http://www.brassfetcher.com/12gaugeFBITest32.html

http://www.chuckhawks.com/energy_transfer_12ga.jpg

http://saxtech.eu/Zielwirkung/Frog.html

 

[inSight-NEO]

I think the core of this debate centers around which particular load is used in either a rifle or a shotgun. Both can certainly be "one shot stoppers," depending on the chosen load (or caliber in the case of the rifle).

To me, though, I prefer the shotgun (pump shotgun anyway) because of its inherent reliability vs. say, a semi-auto rifle. In addition, the shotgun does afford a better chance of actually hitting an intruder. Now, before you begin the flames, I am certainly aware of "spread patterns" at the usual HD ranges. And yes, Im also aware that even shotguns need to be "aimed" vs. simply "sweeping and praying." Anyway, we are looking at roughly a 1 1/2" to 2" diameter of shot vs. (approximately) 1/4" to 1/2" or so; slugs, Im thinking, fall somewhere in between the two. Regardless, to me at least, the SG increases the odds of not only hitting an assailant but striking a vital area with enough energy for a potential one shot stop (depending on the chosen load). Of course, the semi-auto rifle can make up for certain things (lack of speed vs. the pump shotgun)...but, then again, so can the semi-auto SG.

Again, Im not disavowing the rifles effectiveness, Im just of the mind that more can be accomplished with the SG w/less "effort." For instance, I cannot guarantee that I would even have the time to properly shoulder any long gun during an HD encounter. Therefore, I would certainly feel more comfortable "hip shooting" a SG vs. a rifle...if absolutely necessary.

After all is said and done, the rifle seems to be more of a precision based weapon, with the shotgun being more of a "point and shoot" weapon. For me at least, if absolutely nothing else, the "point and shoot" nature of the SG makes it much more suitable for HD.

 

[DGTigers]

I think I would grab either a pistol for maneuverability or my winchester 1300 12gauge for knockdown power if I'm able to get to a bedroom for better positioning. AR-15 is a great gun, but I think I would feel more comfortable with one of the other options for what I'll need it for in my house.

 

[Bad Penny 03]

After all is said and done, the rifle seems to be more of a precision based weapon, with the shotgun being more of a "point and shoot" weapon. For me at least, the "point and shoot" characteristic is more suitable for HD.

The bead and rib (or grooved receiver) arrangement makes for a good sight picture, and is simple and fast. All good attributes. One could do a lot worse.

 

[shephard19]

Bigger hole= more damage

more wounds=more damage than less wounds

All other things being equal.

Of course there is 5.56 frangible ammunition that can be used, but the .223 bullet is so small it still doesn't make up for the difference in mass.

I can't believe I am even having this conversation, some people just want to believe that the AR-15 and everything that comes with it is perfect, with such people there can be no debate. Go ahead live in your fantasy.

 

[ugaarguy]

Bigger hole= more damage

more wounds=more damage than less wounds

All other things being equal.

All other things being equal is the key, because they're not equal. You're not taking into account permanent wound cavitation caused by hydrostatic shock.

Of course there is 5.56 frangible ammunition that can be used, but the .223 bullet is so small it still doesn't make up for the difference in mass.

Ballistic tip ammo is not frangible. The lack of mass is made up for by driving that mass at so high a velocity that it has enough energy to create a permanent wound channel by way of hydrostatic shock. Buckshot doesn't do so well in this area. Slugs do it, but they're very likely to pass through the target, which causes a liability issue. You can also get saboted ballistic tip slugs, but you need a rifled shotgun bbl with rifle sights or an optic to effectively use them. You end up with a a heavy recoiling 60 caliber rifle, which takes away any advantage to using a shotgun. You might as well use a 45-70 lever action in that case.

I can't believe I am even having this conversation, some people just want to believe that the AR-15 and everything that comes with it is perfect, with such people there can be no debate. Go ahead live in your fantasy.

No, the AR-15 isn't perfect. However, the 5.56 NATO round in ballistic tip loadings offers an incredible amount of wounding capability with comparatively low overpenetration potential. Feel free to live in your fantasy where hydrostatic shock from rifle rounds isn't a wounding mechanism though.

After all is said and done, the rifle seems to be more of a precision based weapon, with the shotgun being more of a "point and shoot" weapon. For me at least, if absolutely nothing else, the "point and shoot" nature of the SG makes it much more suitable for HD.

There's the beauty of no and low magnification red dot sights. It's amazing how quickly you can acquire a target with one on any long gun (rifle or shotgun).

 

[shephard19]

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/01/10/ballistic-gelatin-tests-of-wide-variety-of-ammunition/

Observation from testing the above Federal slug:



"The 16×6x6 inch block, upon being struck with the projectile, flipped 1.5 feet into the air and off of the test stand. Permanent cavity was 6” in diameter, until 10.5” depth."


I am not denying that 5.56 is a very deadly round and a messy one usually because it breaks apart quite a bit often, I do however think a 12 gauge slug is significantly more potent as a man stopper in the short term.

 

[inSight-NEO]

There's the beauty of no and low magnification red dot sights. It's amazing how quickly you can acquire a target with one on any long gun (rifle or shotgun).

My point is that you may not get such a chance. If not, "shooting from the hip" or something to that affect, may become necessary. In this case, I would feel better equipped with the shotgun...regardless of the sighting system used (including laser systems). Although, I will admit that laser sighting devices can help in target acquisition via unorthodox angles. However, I dont currently use them, so I must go with what is available to me.

 

[JShirley]

I can be reassured that if I cannot afford a rifle, the a pump shotgun will be a good choice for HD.

iyn, I believe the carbine is a better choice in general than a shotgun.

Despite what some have said, I believe sighting is easier with an AR-15 than a shotgun (making good hits at 100 meters with an AR-15 or similar platform is easy for most people, but most shooters have a hard time making decent hits at the same distance with a shotgun).
I believe .223 poses less risk of overpenetration through an adversary than effective shotgun rounds. Despite what half of "everyone seems to know" expanding high-velocity rounds usually penetrate less than slower ones in tissue. This is especially true when the high-velocity rounds are lightly constructed, as many .223 bullets are.
I believe clearing malfunctions is easier with an AR-15 than shotgun. The drill is exactly like most autoloading handguns- tap, rack, bang. Too easy. Any serious malfunction with a shotgun will be hard to clear.
I believe good .223 ammunition is almost as effective at close range as the best 12 gauge ammunition, and any .223 or 5.56x45mm that's not a close-range training round will be more effective than most 12 gauge ammunition.
I believe the carbine will allow more hostiles/targets to be addressed in less time than a shotgun;
the carbine holds many more rounds than the shotgun;
the carbine can be reloaded much more quickly than the shotgun;
the carbine is more range-versatile, allowing hits from contact distance to 300 meters without ammunition changes;
the lack of recoil means it's easier to train inexperienced shooters on the carbine.

NOW, having said all that, I believe the very BEST reason to choose a shotgun for defense is either because the shooter already owns a shotgun, but not a carbine, OR because funds are limited. The 12 gauge shotgun, with practice and good ammunition selection, is still a highly effective close-range tool. It is powerful, and if a slide-action, fast enough with practice. If it's what you have the funds for, make a good choice, practice, and breathe easy.

John

 

[C-grunt]

Both the 12 gauge and the .223 are great home defense weapons. In a likely HD distance shooting of a bad guy's COM with a shotgun, buckshot is not going to have the spread to really take advantage of the multi projectile function. If you live in a rural area where intruders on property might need some investigation, thats different.

A slug will easily demolish a chest cavity, as will buckshot and a good .223. Basically a good COM shot with any of the three is likely to create similar actual damage to the target. It might look different. The slug is likely to leave a big exit wound and a expanding/frangible .223 isnt, but destroyed organs are destroyed organs.

 

[chieftain]

Do you honestly think 5.56 Nato does more damage more quickly than a 12 gauge slug or OO buckshot? Thats ridiculous

No I don't think it does, I know it does. I have witnessed it, multiple times. It's that real life thingy going on, once again real life blows all those myths and unsubstantiated opinions to hell.

Understand the difference between the 12ga and a proper 5.56 NATO bullet isn't as far apart as that 12ga and any handgun caliber.

Remember we are talking about effect on a human target, not jello, the rifle/carbine is supreme.

I like the Shotgun platform for several defense applications, better than a rifle or carbine. But the rifle/carbine with proper pullets (just like with a hand gun or shotgun) has a superior effect on target, lighter, less recoil, higher rate of fire, more accurate, and most importantly, More fire power. The rifle/carbine is generally a superior fighting weapon, particularly up close and personal. Put'em down fast, and keep'em down.

If the Bad guy should be found in your loved ones bedroom, that accuracy may become very important. I would not want even the small spread of buck shot. And if you are using slugs inside, why are you using a shotgun to simulate a rifle in the first place, almost all disadvantages, and very few advantages.

Go figure.

Fred

 

[Girodin]

No I don't think it does, I know it does. I have witnessed it, multiple times. It's that real life thingy going on, once again real life blows all those myths and unsubstantiated opinions to hell.

In my experience a 1 oz 12 gauge slug does significantly more damage than a 5.56 round. I've shot animals with both and the effects of a slug are notably different than that of a 5.56 round. Consider the following

How many debates do you see about whether a slug is adequate or ethical to use on deer? How many for the .223?

How many people have you heard of carrying an AR in 5.56 (I know of a guide in Alaska who uses a .50 Beowulf) for bear defense? How many a SG with slugs?

The energy of each. Energy is not the whole story of course but still. Comparing a 437.5 grain .72 diameter hunk of lead traveling 1500-1900 FPS to a .223 diameter 55-75 grain projectile traveling 3200-2600+/- fps is silly. A 2 3/4" slug at 1500 FPS has more than 1000 Ft Lbs of energy than a 75 grain Hornady TAP 5.56 round. I think the 5.56 is up to HD. I own multiple carbines chambered in it. That said, I have never seen a 5.56 round that I think would do more damage than a slug. A 5.56 carbine might have certain advantages over a 12 gauge loaded with slugs but power is not one of them.

And if you are using slugs inside, why are you using a shotgun to simulate a rifle in the first place, almost all disadvantages, and very few advantages.

I think the discussion above answers that nicely. One doesn't need to make 100 meter shots for HD. It is very very improbable that one would need 30 rounds. I am not saying that a carbine is a bad choice or that a slug gun is a better choice. I am merely pointing out that some of the rifles advantages do not really matter for HD. I have and use both SGs and carbines. I honestly believe that the one a person has training with is proficient with is the best choice. For me personally I vacilate between the two. I do really like a suppressed carbine for HD though.

the carbine can be reloaded much more quickly than the shotgun;

This depends on the shotgun. A magwell equiped saiga can be reloaded pretty quick. I would wager an AR is quicker on average but not that much.

I know it does. I have witnessed it, multiple times. It's that real life thingy going on,

Would you care to elaborate?

 

[RJM]

I like to use a pistol, specifically a 1911 loaded with .45acp as I like to have a hand free if need be. I also carry the pistol and train with it at every range trip, not so with rifle/shotgun. The shotgun is a backup to the pistol for me, specifically a Remington 870.

I see no reason to use a rifle in my home for defense, it just isn't that long that I would need the long range effectiveness of a rifle over my pistol and shotgun.

I have actually shot deer sized animals with both rifle rounds and shotgun slugs. I have been using the .243 winchester the last few years and the shotgun is a 12 guage. Within 40 yards (much longer distances than inside my house) the shotgun slug dropped the deer instantly in both instances, the .243 winchester did not. I can only imagine the .223 would be either the same or less impressive than the .243 winchester, which did the job but the deer did have a chance to run a little ways. When I say instantly, I mean it just plowed the deer over and the thing didn't move after. It surprised me the first time I shot one using a slug.

 

[BushyGuy]

reason i would rather have my Bushmaster instead of a shotgun is cuz i know how to shoot and hit what i aim at, shotgun is good for those who dont have much range time you can just point and shoot without aiming and still hit the target you have a wider chance of hitting the target with a shotgun then an AR15.

but the pros is what if the BG has body armor? i would opt for the AR15 cuz alot of Bg these days are getting a side order of body armor to go with their handgun for armed robberies cuz they are adapting to the evironment - alot more homeowners are arming themselves.

best bet is get an AR15 with a 16 inch barrel and a flashlight mounted on the front-and the Magazine filled with FMJ you have a devastating weapon to even hit the bad guy trying to take cover .

 

[cleetus03]

I wonder what the 1 shot stopping power of a 12 gauge 00 Buck to the chest is?....

 

[Broken11b]

I love these threads, some people use facts, some people use fiction, some mix and match.
A shotgun is a fine choice for home defense, but it is not a magic wand
A carbine (AR or other) is a fine choice for home defense, also not a magic wand

I would not break into a house that was protected with either.

It comes down to what rounds you are using in the firearm. Slugs will over penetrate, as will FMJ. the overpenetration poses a risk to my family, making neither one of these a viable option. I care less about what it would do to a neighbor than what it would do to a member of my own family in theevent of a miss.
And miss you will, the talk i hear of shooting from the hip is frightening. I have been in combat, it is hard enough to hit a man when you are aiming at him, at close ranges. Let alone adrenaline pumping not aiming at close ranges.
I use a carbine with appropriate ammo for defense, 3-4 rounds into a targets chest will put him down. I also have a shotgun with appropriate loads for defense, 2 rounds in the chest will also work. I also have a pistol, battlerifle, pistol-carbine etc.
firearms are nothing more than ammo delivery devices, whatever the end user can use to put the accurate fire into the badguy the quickest is the answer.
I feel more confident using the carbine, but I have spent many years training to double tap (or controlled pair if you will) a man in the same room, a carbine is my choice. someone who has spent more time using a shotgun will have a different choice, no choice is more valid than the other.
But dont assume that one is a poor substitute or compromise over the other, or that the 5.56 will not put a man down, I am alive because it did. Likewise can be said for the 12 gauge.

 

[Broken11b]

one more thing, dont ever rely on the one stop shot. If you shoot once, and just assume you have hit the threat, you have wasted time, and the threat has gained time. Put 2 rounds from the pump gun into the target.

 

[JShirley]

To me, though, I prefer the shotgun (pump shotgun anyway) because of its inherent reliability vs. say, a semi-auto rifle.

You know, I missed this earlier, and I would like to address it. So many things actually come down to personal preference, but I do NOT believe this is one.

So: I believe slide-action shotgun tend to be inherently more reliable than autoloading ones (even though prone to operator-induced malfs by short-stroking).

I believe military autoloading carbines are an order of magnitude more reliable than slide-actions shotguns. In my experience, it is considerably more common to encounter a bad shotgun shell than a bad rifle round. I believe this is largely a matter of construction- brass and copper are stronger than plastic.

Broken, Foster slugs at close range tend to not penetrate as deeply as 00 buckshot. "Slugs will overpenetrate" is an authoritative statement, but not necessarily true. It's also interesting to me that anyone who has put down (several?) enemy troops with a 5.56x45mm finishes that statement with "...as will FMJ". There's no good reason in most states to defend your house with FMJ when good expanding ammunition is available, but almost all .223 FMJ is NOT known as being very overpenetrative. What unit did you say you were with?


John

 

[Broken11b]

Im not sure what you were trying to say/ask there. anything with sufficient mass and speed to penetrate a person deep enough to cause incapacatation runs the risk of overpenetrating, you are correct, not all slugs will overpenetrate all the time, but the risk is always present, as for the 5.56 round, the 62 grain green tips are notorious for overpenetrating. that is why i will not use them in my home
steps can be taken to lessen this, but the risk is always present, soft pointed slugs and lesser grain 5.56 with the appropriate tips help. but dont make the mistake of thinking that they cannot overpenetrate
And if you must know what units i was in, I was with the 3rd ID for OIF 1, and the transitional MATT team run with tenth group in OIF 3, after my injury i helped out at the designated marksman school at benning, until i was med boarded

 

[C-grunt]

Hey a fellow broken TV patch man. What brigade/battalion were you in? I was in the 3rd brigade, 1/30 inf. Did OIF 1 and 3 with them.

I too have seen the green tips completely penetrate a bad guy on several occasions. Now most of the time the exit wounds were pretty nasty, leading me to believe the bullet was probably tumbling or in pieces as it exited.

 

[JShirley]

M855 is more expensive, and harder to find for the average citizens. I'm fairly sure, if you're talking about .223/5.56mm, most shooters are automatically going to assume you mean M193 when you say FMJ, unless you specify "green tip" or M855

I was with the 1st of the 25th when I was first active, but later deployed with the 45th ID.

John