yup, I do this with my dad's .44 sometimes (which kicks like a bitch) and I have a huge flinch...I don't really have this problem when I shoot smaller caliber guns (.22 & 9mm) but give me something with a little kick and I'll start flinching. I really don't know how to correct it

Is it true that a shotgun is safer to fire in a confined space such as an apartment building with people on the other sides of walls than a rifle or pistol?

Pros of rifles and pistols are that I could plink cans at an outdoor range in my neighborhood in Pennsylvania, but in terms of "home defense", the argument above makes the case for a shotgun. So is it right?

yea shotgun is best.

it def wont be going through a wall like a rifle.

Any of you guys notice that gun prices are going up before Obama takes office?

I havent been gun shopping in awhile now but I do know that the local gun store sold out of ar-15's because everyone is thinking obama is going to ban assault rifles again.

i've seen a few articles stating that gun sales are up 2 to 3x what they were at this time last year...i really hope obama doesn't do anything drastic wrt to gun control

yea all the semi autos and lots of ammo is flying off the shelves around here as well.
prices will go up as there is going to be a backlog of demand for guns.

why do people want automatic rifles? Just for coolness? Serious question, i know next to nothing about guns.

for many of the same reasons you may want to own an ipod

That's the problem. 90% of people "know next to nothing about guns" yet they all have an opinion about them.

I'm not saying that to be snide or mean towards you in particular- at least you were honest about it- but usually, whenever someone who admittedly 'knows nothing about guns' presumes to pass philosophical judgment on the technical functionality of a particular class of firearms, they've just bought a one way ticket on the failboat.

I'm not patient enough to type it all out, but the guns in question aren't "automatic weapons".

The media would love to have you believe that (See ex-Sheriff Ken Jenne's anti gun rights hit piece on CNN and the summary "correction"). Anti-gun groups rely heavily on the publics ignorance in believing that any firearm that looks a certain way is a "machine gun" and "ZOMG WHO NEEDS MACHINEGUNS"...

They're "semi automatic" guns. While that term has been demonized in and of itself, in reality, it means "bang bang" as opposed to "brrrrrrrrrrrrrrap". There's an epic difference, definitely well outside the realm of semantics.

The discussion is complicated further by the fact that machineguns are technically legal to own, but extraordinarily expensive, VERY heavily controlled and in no way related to the AR15's or "AK47's" that people are buying in gun stores. Ultimately, gun laypeople who are casually party to a gun rights conversation aren't ever interested enough to learn the minutiae of the issue, but that minutiae is essential to having a legitimate opinion.

ha, wtf

If you want a shotgun for home defense, remember the dangers of the 'hair trigger' on the majority of shotguns. It can be very dangerous for someone who tends to keep their finger on the trigger which could easily cause an accidental discharge.

The best shotgun round for defense is 00 Buckshot, however, it will definately go through drywall and pretty much mess up anyone on the other side of the wall. Bird shot probably won't kill anyone from a distance, but the loud bang will definately get an intruders attention. STAY AWAY from 'Slug' rounds. Slugs will go through a friggin telephone pole!

If you decide on using a handgun for home defense, the slower moving round of a 45 acp with hollow points to slow it down even more upon impact is probably the ideal choice as opposed to a much faster round like a 9 mm.
Plus the 'knock down' force of the larger and beefier 45 acp round is much more effective in stopping an intruder upon impact than a 9 mm is.

For handguns, hollowpoints are best, because the hollowpoint bullet will 'mushroom' upon impact which drastically reduces the bullets speed.
Ball ammo should be avoided, because ball ammo will travel much farther through walls than hollowpoints will.

I am an ex-cop in case you are wondering how I know so much.

Good Luck.

yeah watchmaker basically already mentioned this but assault rifle != machinegun...the assault rifles we and the media are talking about are semi-automatic which means you need to pull the trigger every time you want to fire a round, you can't just hold the trigger down and people want them because they're fun to shoot, some may use them for self defense etc...

I own quite a few 'fightin' scatterguns' and shot competitive 3 gun for four years. Defensive shotgunning has always been my favorite of the lot. Never in my life, of all the shotguns I own or have owned (and believe me- I've owned "one of each" at least once) have I ever experienced them to be more prone to ND's because of some 'light trigger weight' that is inherent to shotguns. Matter of fact, almost all shotguns configured for defense/combat have intentionally heavier triggers. I certainly know that's the case with Remington products- their sporting versions have one sear and their Police versions have another, achieving a pull upwards of 8 pounds.

If someone is keeping their finger on the trigger when they aren't staging it for a shot, it doesn't matter if they have a shotgun or a Glock with a New York trigger- they're definitely going to have a ND eventually, but it will happen because of their piss-poor training, not because of the mechanics of the gun.

The best thing about owning a shotgun for home defense is the noise it makes when you **** it. Handguns basically suck at home defense unless you have at least 2 of the 3: lots of training, night sites, laser sites.

If you insist on a handgun for home defense, keep it loaded with hollow points, which should keep you from killing your neighbors in a worst-case scenario. Also, revolvers >>>>>> semi-autos. I love my Glock, but seriously, it's there for recreation as it jams up every now and again, something you don't have to worry about with a revolver.

i am looking to get a compact pistol.. maybe a .380 or a 9mm . I already own a glock23 and a SigSauer p2340 . I like the Sig more than the glock when it comes to shooting.. but the glock is smaller, lighter, and holds an extra round. The sig has significantly less recoil, amazing night sights, and double action 5 lb pull after the first shot.. it is extremely accurate and fire very quicky. The glock feels much more of a point and shoot weapon, clunky sights.. but would be excellent as a self defense weapon. What gun wouldnt be?

anyway any recommendations would be great.. I am probably going to sell the Glock or do a trade, since it has high resale value and the sig is significantly older. I'd be willing to trade for a smaller cal pistol . The glock is basically brand new condition ive only put maybe 30 rounds through it..

i was considering a kel tec 9mm.. i will ahve to see what my local shops have.. lightweight, small, anything above a .22 is cool.. recommendations/anyone want to trade? im in MD btw, all legal with papers of course.

If you're talking about home protection and pistols in the same sentence, I really think 40 cal is the minimum. You need stopping power, and I'm sorry... even if you lit someone like me up (I'm 6'2" 220) with 9mm rounds or lower, we're still going to carry forward. As I said before, the best home defense is always a shotty. If you still insist on a pistol, I really like my glock 20, 40 cal.

So I guess that my 8 years of Military Experience combined with another 15 years of Law Enforcement experience does not count then eh?
Every shotgun that I have ever used in the line of duty or privately owned has what I consider to be a 'hair trigger'.
The trigger pull that is required for MOST 12 gauge shotguns is very light compared to the trigger pull of most handguns.

Yes, correct. Your 8 years of military experience and 15 years of Law Enforcement experience means absolutely nothing in the context of this discussion. A typical high rated 3 gun competitor probably empties more 12 gauge hulls in one season than you ever have in your life. The whole "cops know a lot about guns because they spent 8 months in the community college police academy" thing is a myth. The only thing that your having been in the military and law enforcement tells anyone about you is that you have, at minimum, a high school diploma and no prior felony convictions. It means nothing when it comes to firearms knowledge, aside from maybe we can assume that you can field strip an M16 and put 8/10 rounds into the 4 ring at 7 yards.

I was originally going to post pics of my combat scattergun collection just to embarrass you, but I won't bother. Gun threads always turn into dumb dick waving contests, but I can say without hesitation that you are completely, 100% wrong with your blanket assertion about shotgun triggers. Some sporting shotgun triggers may be on the 'lightish' side comparatively speaking, but there is no mechanical function native to shotguns that automatically presume that they must have 'light triggers', as you've suggested. As I noted, a lot of combat configured shotguns have intentionally heavier triggers, like the Remington P's (and I believe the FN's too).

I cannot count how many times we had some mustachioed moron cop saunter into one of our 3 Gun meetings, puffing his chest about being in "law enforcement", only to slink away when he saw the competitors in action and realized that being "in law enforcement' didn't mean much as far as guns go, when in the presence of a 17 year old girl who could drop 8 poppers in 3 seconds with an 11/87P.

...and you start a thread about your new sweet gun

you might carry forwards but then you'll keel over and die : ) . I dont need the blowback power of a .45 .. I'm still going to keep one of my .40's and i keep em packed with HP's.

what im really lookin for is a good suggestion for a small carry piece with a decent caliber. Emphasis on small . .38 would be fine imo. any suggestions?


sorry was ur comment even directed at me? lol i dunno.. still any suggestions would be cool.

being anonymous is FUN!

For carry purposes, I have a Kel Tec .32, it's flimsy and cheap, but fairly accurate and does the job at 15ft.

For by the bed purposes, incase of home invasion I keep a S&W snub nose .38.

I delight in telling my mother when asked why I need a AK-47, the .38 is for when robbers break in, the AK is for when the cops break in. *

* I am not a criminal, I believe in owning the AK for the true purpose of the 2nd Amendment, post apopclyptic anarchy, and/or zombie invasions.

I think many anti-gun people do know the difference between automatic and semi-automatic weapons, and it is a meaningless distinction for most people involved in the debate anyway. The hardcore gun people would like both semi-auto and fully auto guns to be legal, and the anti-gun people would like heavy restrictions or an outright ban on both. The debate comes down to a fundamental difference in philosophy, and I really doubt that the anti-gun people people would change their minds if they knew more about guns.

BTW, here is a really cool video of people blowing **** up with automatic guns in Oklahoma:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrwgGsmoCRw

No, I really don't think they do... I've had this discussion too many times with too many of them to believe that out there somewhere, there's a magical group of informed anti gunners, riding unicorns and basing their opinions on a practical understanding of firearms. More often than not, they're people who know absolutely nothing about firearms and exist on philosophy, dogma and ideals alone.

Also, the difference between semi auto and full auto isn't a "meaningless distinction". It's a very, very meaningful distinction. Just because anti-gun people "don't care" about that distinction because they dislike guns in general and would like to see them all (or, most) banned doesn't make the distinction between semi auto and full auto "meaningless".

Look at it like this.
You can buy a kit car that looks just like a Lamborghini, but uses a Fiero engine and chassis. Or, you can buy a real Lamborghini.

Lets say some "safe driving advocates" who wanted to ban fast sports cars came along and wanted to eliminate both $200K Lamborghinis and $15K Lamborghini kit cars built on Fiero chassis (for the children...). The kit car owners might point out "er, well, yeah, it looks like a Lamborghini, but it doesn't do the same thing.... It can't go 200mph... It's slower than your Civic or Volvo..."

Does the philosophical aversion to sports cars held by the "safe driving advocates' suddenly render the practical difference between the actual Lamborghini and the fiberglass kit car "meaningless" ? Just because a few morons operate on a all-encompassing philosophy that can't be bothered with facts? Maybe to them, the difference it meaningless, but that very inconsideration also empowers the other side to point a finger at them and say "Yeah, you're a bit ignorant."

Pretend you are arguing with someone who believes the following:

All guns are bad and no one should own them, therefore the difference between guns does not matter for the purposes of whether or not someone should own them.

IF the first clause is true, then the conclusion logically follows. In order to disprove the statement, you need to disprove the first clause.

After you have disproved the first clause, then you can move on to arguing the merits of different types of guns.