First time handgun advice...to a friend

[Beendare]

"First handgun" thread.............gets 1/2 dozen posts on shotguns!

Thats funny.....typical internet forum....

PS- a shotgun is hard to beat as a home defense weapon....especially since many don't train with a handgun. To the 'bullet through wall guys'...you can get ammo that is designed not to.....

 

[5MilesBack]

Why settle on only one self-defense home weapon? Keep a shotgun, semi-auto handgun, and an AR style rifle handy at all times. I keep one 6.8 loaded up with 85gr Barnes RRLP's.

 

[JWP58]

A few reasons,
1) To aim the shotgun you bring it to shoulder, put the front bead center of mass and squeeze the trigger. There's no worrying about the front and rear sight being lined up.
2)The sound of a shotgun being wracked is pretty unmistakable and is intimidating to just about anyone.
3)A person could use 1oz target loads going 1,200 fps and it's still a great man stopper. If you step up to pheasant loads you'd be looking at about 550gr of lead going 1,300fps and is not likely to go through 2-3 houses before the round stops.

Oh boy, didn't take long for the "racking" statement to come out. Ya I suppose it could work just like in the movies, or might attract unwanted attention (like projectiles).

 

[boom]

Oh boy, didn't take long for the "racking" statement to come out. Ya I suppose it could work just like in the movies, or might attract unwanted attention (like projectiles).

a digital sound recording would work.

 

[Backpack Hunter]

Bird shot is not nor has ever been a great man stopper. It is debated endlessly on internet forums if #5's are big enough for pheasants. Yet here we are trying to call it a great man stopper? Bird shot is for birds.
Whatever load you choose make sure it has adequate penetration....typically that means 12" or more.
Beendare, sorry I have derailed this a bit, but I couldn't really let that one slide. Maybe I have issues.

 

[backcountry_hunter]

^^^^Well that's odd, maybe we should ask Kurt Cobain if it is a man stopper? For the record nobody mentioned bird shot....

It is debated endlessly on internet forums if #5's are big enough for pheasants. Yet here we are trying to call it a great man stopper? Bird shot is for birds.

I don't follow any upland forums but this is ludicrous. I suppose a .308 isn't big enough for elk either.... Ive personally never shot anything bigger than 3" copper 5's at ringnecks and most of the time in October and earlier in November 2 3/4" 6's do absolutely fine.

 

[JWP58]

Ive personally never shot anything bigger than 3" copper 5's at ringnecks and most of the time in October and earlier in November 2 3/4" 6's do absolutely fine.

I could be wrong, but that was his point. Birdshot is for birds. Unless you've got some pheasant burglars/home invaders, don't use birdshot.

 

[Backpack Hunter]

^^^^Well that's odd, maybe we should ask Kurt Cobain if it is a man stopper? For the record nobody mentioned bird shot....

I don't follow any upland forums but this is ludicrous. I suppose a .308 isn't big enough for elk either.... Ive personally never shot anything bigger than 3" copper 5's at ringnecks and most of the time in October and earlier in November 2 3/4" 6's do absolutely fine.

1. Might want to read a couple posts up. Target loads and bird shot were both mentioned. People get killed with spoons, doesn't make spoons a man stopper, nor does it make spoons an adequate self defense weapon. As to Cobain, well I guess if I'm in a self defense situation and the intruder/attacker is willing to allow me to put the shotgun in their ear I would be willing to use bird shot.
2. Did you compare shooting a person with bird shot to shooting an elk with a 308? I hope I'm misreading that.

 

[backcountry_hunter]

Yep you did... I outlined that if #5's are inadequate for ringnecks then a 308 is insufficient for elk. Intended to highlight both are asinine.

Clearly your training and knowledge trumps mine so I'll be done with this. Every class and training I've had has pointed me in the realm of a shotgun inside the home. Something like 96% of lethal home encounters happen inside of 21'. 3 rounds of even #5 bird loads will inflict far more trauma at that range than 3 slugs from a 9mm. The odds of walking away from one of these two scenarios are much higher with the hand cannon. I realize these are archaic figures taught for years in defense courses so forgive my ignorance in being far less trained and informed than yourself....

 

[rayporter]

i could tell a pretty good story about racking a shotgun at night and watching the guy run through the briars where the rabbits couldnt go. ya it was funny. i still laugh when i think how cut up he was.

i dont like empty guns but it was empty when she brought it to me and i had to load it. and i swore i would not derail this thread.

 

[husky390]

and i swore i would not derail this thread.

Too late, that happened awhile ago. lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[theleo91386]

Bird shot is not nor has ever been a great man stopper. It is debated endlessly on internet forums if #5's are big enough for pheasants. Yet here we are trying to call it a great man stopper? Bird shot is for birds.
Whatever load you choose make sure it has adequate penetration....typically that means 12" or more.
Beendare, sorry I have derailed this a bit, but I couldn't really let that one slide. Maybe I have issues.

At ranges you're likely to see inside a home the pattern will spread a minimal amount. For the sake of taking your side lets say 10% of the pattern from a 1 1/4 oz doesn't hit the intruder at 30 feet, you still have 500 grains of lead hitting the intruder at 1,200fps. That's 1,600 ft/lb of energy for a person to take, it'll stop a man. Now apply a little common sense and set aside the ballistic gurus from the magazines and think of the real world results of what would happen if you hit somebody at 30 feet with a pheasant load. Nothing short of body armor is going to stop the majority of the shot from hitting soft tissue with some making it to vitals. Stopping a threat doesn't necessarily mean killing a threat.

Some guys love Glocks, I don't, they're just not my thing. Some guys start talking how they're the end all be all of self/home protection and they simply aren't. Auto's of every kind are not as fail proof as a revolver and require more time to learn their manual of arms. Handguns are a compromise between packability and firepower. They are the easiest to pack, hardest to shoot accurately, and have the least power. For home protection handguns rank highest in the least relevant category.

 

[Backpack Hunter]

Yep you did... I outlined that if #5's are inadequate for ringnecks then a 308 is insufficient for elk. Intended to highlight both are asinine.

Clearly your training and knowledge trumps mine so I'll be done with this. Every class and training I've had has pointed me in the realm of a shotgun inside the home. Something like 96% of lethal home encounters happen inside of 21'. 3 rounds of even #5 bird loads will inflict far more trauma at that range than 3 slugs from a 9mm. The odds of walking away from one of these two scenarios are much higher with the hand cannon. I realize these are archaic figures taught for years in defense courses so forgive my ignorance in being far less trained and informed than yourself....

I'm not sure what self defense classes you have been to but if they taught you to use #5 birdshot as your self defense load you should go and get your money back. Simply put #5 birdshot at 21' does not penetrate far enough to reliably stop a threat, this has been proven time and time again. I'm sorry the facts have not changed.
A shotgun can be great as a self defense weapon, but not if you load it with inadequate ammo.

 

[Backpack Hunter]

At ranges you're likely to see inside a home the pattern will spread a minimal amount. For the sake of taking your side lets say 10% of the pattern from a 1 1/4 oz doesn't hit the intruder at 30 feet, you still have 500 grains of lead hitting the intruder at 1,200fps. That's 1,600 ft/lb of energy for a person to take, it'll stop a man. Now apply a little common sense and set aside the ballistic gurus from the magazines and think of the real world results of what would happen if you hit somebody at 30 feet with a pheasant load. Nothing short of body armor is going to stop the majority of the shot from hitting soft tissue with some making it to vitals. Stopping a threat doesn't necessarily mean killing a threat.

Some guys love Glocks, I don't, they're just not my thing. Some guys start talking how they're the end all be all of self/home protection and they simply aren't. Auto's of every kind are not as fail proof as a revolver and require more time to learn their manual of arms. Handguns are a compromise between packability and firepower. They are the easiest to pack, hardest to shoot accurately, and have the least power. For home protection handguns rank highest in the least relevant category.

Again, it has been proven time and time again that birdshot does not reliably penetrate far enough to reach vitals. Reaching vitals is the only way to reliably stop a threat.
Your scenario has 500 grains of lead which is correct, but not really. Those little pellets are just that, little pellets that act independent of each other. They do not penetrate like a 500gr chunk of lead. They each have their own weight, and their own speed, and thus their own penetration.
As far as to real world results, I hope you do not have to experience a person shot with birdshot as I have.....maybe your screen name means you have? It is not pretty, lots of blood, quite gruesome injuries, but there have been a lot that did a whole bunch of damage after being shot. How much more does an adequate load cost vs birdshot? Maybe $3? Is $3 really worth it?

 

[Beendare]

......
Beendare, sorry I have derailed this a bit....

All good bro.....a little derail covers all the bases....grin


..... as long as it doesn't segue into pepper spray we will keep it under 10 pages....

BTW, my buddy owns a shotgun....and my recommendation to him WAS to add a light to the shotgun and use that as home protection. He knows nothing about handguns and he was the one that brought up the criteria. [agreed, almost everyone is better off with a shotgun as home defense]

I think there are many here that are pretty proficient with a handgun and no doubt own many. I'm trying to look at the question from a new guys perspective...what pistol for a guy that has never disassembled a weapon?

 

[theleo91386]

Again, it has been proven time and time again that birdshot does not reliably penetrate far enough to reach vitals. Reaching vitals is the only way to reliably stop a threat.
Your scenario has 500 grains of lead which is correct, but not really. Those little pellets are just that, little pellets that act independent of each other. They do not penetrate like a 500gr chunk of lead. They each have their own weight, and their own speed, and thus their own penetration.
As far as to real world results, I hope you do not have to experience a person shot with birdshot as I have.....maybe your screen name means you have? It is not pretty, lots of blood, quite gruesome injuries, but there have been a lot that did a whole bunch of damage after being shot. How much more does an adequate load cost vs birdshot? Maybe $3? Is $3 really worth it?

Your adequate rounds stand a real chance of finding their way into my neighbors house than bird shot is. I'm not saying liter shot is as lethal as buck shot or slugs, I'm saying it will stop someone from doing a person harm in the confines of a home. You say it's been proven over and over bird shot won't stop a fight but what news stories can you show that a bad guy shot with bird shot overcame his wounds and continued fighting? I have not seen a fresh gun shot wound but know what they look like and what the X-rays look like that go along with various wounds. Bird shot causes massive muscle and nerve damage which is more important to me than vitals. Two holes in the lungs leaves a lot more muscles working than a hundred little holes on one side of the torso that don't reach vitals. Defensive instructors rarely take college A&P classes to follow up with what they've been taught.

 

[Backpack Hunter]

It seems our premises are different. I say the only way to reliably stop an attacker is to reach vitals. You are disagreeing with that. You state that massive muscle and nerve damage are what is important. I'm not sure how to react to your two holes in lungs sentence.....two holes in lungs equals dead so no muscles working.....
As for news stories I have no clue, but I'm sure you can google them. I can tell you two years ago an officer friend of mine was shot literally at point blank range with a pistol gripped sawed off shotgun thru an open car window during a traffic stop. The majority of the birdshot failed to penetrate thru his belt and he ended up killing the perp. Quite a few years ago a block down from us a house was broken into. The lady living there was killed, the guy was arrested several days later when he went to the hospital for the load of birdshot he had taken to his upper torso. He was in pretty rough shape.
Any round that penetrates enough to reliably reach vitals will penetrate thru a typical wall. I have derailed this thread enough, if you care to discuss further by all means pm me.

 

[ben h]

I'm surprised how many people like the Glocks. I've never owned one, but shot a few and the grips felt to me like I was shooting a pistol with a 2x4 for a handle. I can't comment on their reliability, but I personally shoot the Dan Wesson .45 Bobtail, and I really like the feel of their grips and that gun in particular.

I think the shotgun route is better for home protection, but for sure don't use bird shot and don't use something with too much powder that your follow up shots are adversely affected. For example, a 120 lb woman shooting 3.5" heavy loads, if she doesn't hit on the 1st shot, she probably won't on the 2nd or 3rd because the recoil is too great to recover. The spread is not as big as many people think and this is compounded at close range.

 

[texag10]

Get what fits your hand, points natural and is reputable brand

Sent from my VS990 using Tapatalk

Hand fit and feel are not good metrics to use when choosing a pistol. Chasing feel led me down the HK P30 path 3 times, and each time I was slower and less accurate than a glock 17 or my current beretta 92 compact. Get a gun that has been around a bit, has a reputation for reliability, and readily available sights/holsters/mags. When you have enough experience to know what you want and why, you can always change things up.

Bird shot is not nor has ever been a great man stopper. It is debated endlessly on internet forums if #5's are big enough for pheasants. Yet here we are trying to call it a great man stopper? Bird shot is for birds.
Whatever load you choose make sure it has adequate penetration....typically that means 12" or more.
Beendare, sorry I have derailed this a bit, but I couldn't really let that one slide. Maybe I have issues.

You and I must have the same issues. When talking rounds that have enough penetration to reach vitals (which should be your first consideration when choosing SD ammo) buckshot or slug is going to go through the most walls, followed by pistol ammo, with an AR offering the least wall penetration.

That being said, all 3 are valid options for home defense depending on one's situation. If you're going to make a recommendation, make it for the right reasons. Shotgun deliver the most damage per shot when using proper ammo. Stop all this birdshot/racking the action to scare people crap.

 

[boom]

great thread..this derailed three times i think...hahhaha..

birdshot? dunno..but if you shoot any birdshot at 10 yards the group is about the size of a fist..that is one hell of a punch. i'm running if i hear a gun "rack". or a dog bark for that matter. probably why i didnt choose a life of crime.