Home Defense Opinions by AnthonyT

I think it would work fine, but if there are more than two intruders you might be in a little trouble.

I don't have any guns now but someday I'll get around to getting one of more. My preferred home defense tool would be a Barrett light fifty (I think its the A3 that's bullpup), but those are expensive and tend to punch holes in houses (cars, people, neighbors house, neighbor on the other side of the neighbor and their car too) so that probably wuldn't be the best idea. Other than that I'd say a .50 Desert Eagle, giant gun (intimidation), huge bullet (can use a low velocity bullet and still get great stopping power), but more maneuverable than a longarm and magazine loaded.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 15, 2007 3:28 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Shotgun with shortest legal barrel.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 15, 2007 3:47 PM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Rue, you and I are of a like mind.

Fred, LOL! I love the looks of the Desert Eagle .50, but just looking at the price tag on the gun and its ammo gives me the vapors.

I thought about the 'more than two intruders' possibility. But gee, if you blow away two guys with a shotgun and any remainders don't take off, they are some pretty determined hombres, eh? Braver than I am, at any rate.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 15, 2007 4:14 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
I thought about the 'more than two intruders' possibility. But gee, if you blow away two guys with a shotgun and any remainders don't take off, they are some pretty determined hombres, eh? Braver than I am, at any rate.

Or they know you only have 2 shots and are pissed that you shot their friends. Other than a a Desert Eagle I'd say the biggest .44 or .50 pistol you can afford, biggest because if you intimidate them enough you won't have to shoot, .44 or .50 because they are big bullets so you can get cold loads that will still put someone down but won't have as much recoil or penetrating power, pistol because revolvers take too long to reload.

EDIT: I think that the shotgun is fine so I'm not suggesting you ditch it, just I'd prefer a larger magazine.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 15, 2007 5:33 PM

Keep the Shiny side up

Lots to consider.

1. Are you willing to take a person's life? You must make this decision, and be sure of it, before the time comes. If not, invest in better locks, and possibly make an interior room as secure as possible and fall back and call the cops. Have a cell phone handy in case the phone lines are cut.

2. What is on the other side of every wall in your house? Anything that's adequate for stopping an assailant will go through drywall like it isn't there. Especially important if you live in an apartment building. If your neighbor next door catches a stray buckshot, it won't matter if you were shooting at a burglar.

3. Are you willing to practice until you are able to fire your weapon accurately in low-light situations? Regardless of what you see in movies, a shotgun at close range is not a streetsweeper. At typical inside ranges, the pattern isn't much bigger than a closed fist. Practice reloading. You can buy dummy shells, called snap-caps, which allow you to do this without having to handle and load live ammo. A course in safe gun handling is also a good idea.

4. Do you have a tactical plan of retreat? In many jurisdictions, if you can avoid confrontation by getting out yet shoot instead, you can be prosecuted.

5. Be aware that no matter what, you may be prosecuted or sued in civil court if you shoot someone, even if you felt threatened. Do you know a good lawyer? You should.

6. Oh, yeah. Do you ever have children or folks you wouldn't want finding a loaded gun over to your place? If so, you need secure storage for your guns.

Really not trying to scare you off, but this is just some of the stuff you have to consider when you own a deadly weapon. That being said, if you follow a few common sense rules, you'll be OK. I've been around firearms for close to 50 years, and haven't shot anything I didn't mean to yet.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 15, 2007 5:53 PM

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by fredgiblet:
I think it would work fine, but if there are more than two intruders you might be in a little trouble.

I don't have any guns now but someday I'll get around to getting one of more. My preferred home defense tool would be a Barrett light fifty (I think its the A3 that's bullpup), but those are expensive and tend to punch holes in houses (cars, people, neighbors house, neighbor on the other side of the neighbor and their car too) so that probably wuldn't be the best idea. Other than that I'd say a .50 Desert Eagle, giant gun (intimidation), huge bullet (can use a low velocity bullet and still get great stopping power), but more maneuverable than a longarm and magazine loaded.

Barrett model 95 (the bullpup version) weighs around 23 lbs and kicks like a mule. If you fired one in-doors you'd be flashblinded and deaf for a week. It's also bolt-action, which can be problematic in stressful situations. Desert Eagle also kicks like a mule, and isn't a pistol for a rookie.

Handguns are OK if you're willing to dedicate a good bit of time to practice, since they're a lot harder to shoot than folks think. I was at the local pistol range recently watching guys from some Federal agency trying to qualify. They were having a hard time making effective shots on a humanoid target at 7 yards.

For most folk, I think the shotgun is really the best home defense weapon. It's pretty easy to aim, has great stopping power, even with reduced loads, and the sound of a pump-action slide is surely intimidating. You still need to practice, and still need to observe safe gun handling, but it's probably a lot easier than anything else.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 15, 2007 6:19 PM

GINOBIFFARONI

My Favorite option allows for safe weapons storage,
safe around kids, kinda hard to carry, but doable, is always loaded and safe when I'm loaded...

Its a DOG

I call mine Kaylee

Bearspray can be handy too

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 15, 2007 6:26 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Barrett model 95 (the bullpup version) weighs around 23 lbs and kicks like a mule. If you fired one in-doors you'd be flashblinded and deaf for a week. It's also bolt-action, which can be problematic in stressful situations.

Actually I was thinking of the M82A2 which is semi-auto, and I was kidding (sort of

)

Quote:
Desert Eagle also kicks like a mule, and isn't a pistol for a rookie.

Hence the suggestion for cold loads, less recoil, though probably less reliability as well since they are gas operated.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 15, 2007 6:47 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
If not, what's your preferred defense tool?

Glock 22

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 15, 2007 7:34 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK

Live in a crappy house with a crappy car in a good neighborhood and then all you have to worry about protecting yourself from is the FEDs. Only an idiot will try to rob the poorest looking house on the block.

As far as guns go, you all probably know I'm an advocate for guns rights, but I don't own one personally, so I can't say. I've been meaning to get around to getting one, but I've got a lot of research to do and then I gotta get out to the range too. I've actually never fired anything short of a pellet gun before.

Nice thread though. I like to read Browncoat's opinions on this.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 15, 2007 9:26 PM

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT

I hafta agree with a lot of whatGeezer wrote.
I remmeber hearing about a gun group ( not the NRA, but somebody similar.) counseling home owners here in Los Angeles county on this subject. Their main point was, " No matter what happens, if you shoot a burglar, even inside your own house, expect to have your weapon permanently confiscated, and expect to go to jail that night. If you kill him, expect to be charged with homicide. This is how the LA County DA's office handles it. "

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 15, 2007 10:44 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK

Yeah... that's a load of crap and an infringement of our Constitutional rights. Not to mention one of the leading reasons that the crime rate is so high in this country, which in turn lends to the willingness of the taxpayers to pay even more of their salaries to subsidize a larger police force, who most of the time are busy doing nothing but harassing the very citizens paying their salaries by pulling them over for misc trivial bullshit so they can meet their quotas to justify their own jobs and pay. It's a sad, sad circle.

If you are in my house and you don't belong there, I have every right to shoot your ass dead if it means the welfare of myself or my family as opposed to your own. Period. If I ever go to jail for that, then go ahead and make me a martyr.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 16, 2007 2:25 AM

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
If not, what's your preferred defense tool?

Forgot this before.

Browning Hi-Power in 9MM. I've had this pistol for over 30 years, put tens of thousands of rounds through it, and it's never failed to fire - not once.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 16, 2007 7:35 AM

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
If not, what's your preferred defense tool?

Forgot this before.

Browning Hi-Power in 9MM. I've had this pistol for over 30 years,

OH, my, the dinosaur of the nines. Classic weapon.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 16, 2007 3:19 PM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Heh.

I like dinosaurs, myself.

All the weapons I own... I think all of them have a design that is over 50 years old.

My most modern weapon is a Makarov semiauto from (if I recall) Bulgaria.

Tied is my SKS rifle from (if I recall) Yugoslavia.

Then my Gaucho single-action revolver from Taurus, who manufactures in Brazil if I recall.

Then my new double-barreled side-by-side external hammer shotgun from Interstate Arms, who imports it from China.

Dinosaur designs have character.

And now that I look at the list... I see I don't have a single firearm made in the USA. Does that make me a
communist? ;-)

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 16, 2007 3:22 PM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Oh! How could I forget! My one American weapon!

First handgun I ever bought... for 100 bucks.

A single-action .22 caliber revolver from Heritage Manufacturing! They are based in Opa Locka, Florida. (again, if I recall correctly.)

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 16, 2007 3:27 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
And now that I look at the list... I see I don't have a single firearm made in the USA. Does that make me a communist? ;-)

Yes. Yes, it does.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 16, 2007 3:31 PM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Since I got them all not only because they were 'classic' designs, but also because they were cheap as dirt, can I also be capitalist?

Capitalist Communist?

Is there a such thing? ;-)

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 16, 2007 3:48 PM

CITIZEN

Well judging by American military standard issue it may make you someone who wants quality merchandise...

M16, Worst. Assualt Rifle. Ever.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 16, 2007 3:57 PM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Yeah,

I've got no love for the M-16. I prefer a weapon designed for barely-trained troops with half-arsed maintenance skills. A weapon that will eat almost anything and spit the required measures of death. A weapon that is highly malfunction resistant.

Give me an AK. (I might get one next year.)

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 16, 2007 4:08 PM

CITIZEN

As I understand it the M16 was only developed as a weapon to be used for base security on USAF bases, but a certain amount of under the counter dealing got it on to the regular issue.

The M16 reminds me of the orginal SA80 variants. I've been told by collegues that it was like being back in the 1800's:
Fire
Use barrel cleaner to clear jam
Fire
Use barrel cleaner to clear jam
Fire...

Though they were so accurate the British Army had to redesign the range tests, because the ones used for the SLR weren't accurate enough.

The difference is the SA80 has improved, it works now.

The problem with the AK47 is that it's inaccurate, a symptom of it's wide manufacturing tolerances that are also the reasons why it doesn't take a monkey to maintain. A weapon you can bury and leave in the ground for six months, scoop out the crap and it'll still fire first time.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 16, 2007 4:20 PM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

I have to agree that the AK is less accurate than either the British or American Assault rifles.

On the other hand, how accurate does an assault rifle need (or even want) to be? Most particularly in urban conflicts, 400 meters accuracy is more than enough. I have to believe that most firefights are taking place at 100 meters or less.

I have always said that if presented with a choice between accuracy and reliability, I'll choose reliability every time.

A weapon would have to be darned inaccurate for me to ditch it in favor of something that is unreliable.

Though, I have heard that the latest issue of the M16 (the A2, is it?) is a much improved weapon over what was initially issued in Vietnam. Perhaps the stigma of that era carries its stink upon the new models, which are better?

Still, I'm hoping the US military will adopt an H&K design. I think those people have a handle on good weapons design and manufacture.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 16, 2007 4:39 PM

M16 has been improved also. And it is far from the worst assault rifle; in fact I would say that it is one of the best, but you choose an assault rifle that fits the missile parameters. There are situations in which the M-16 would not be preferable, but as a modern infantry rifle it is pretty good.

The AK-47 is a hard weapon to shoot. You’re lucky to hit anything and only fanatics can stand to shoot it because it’s like trying to hold onto a kicking pig. But it’s also an older weapon. There are more modern versions such as the AK-101 which is a much superior weapon, if for no other reason then that it shoots a 5.56 NATO which is ballistically far superior to the 7.62s

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 16, 2007 4:42 PM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

How do you feel about the AK-74?

I hear it is lighter and has low recoil, but keeps its reliability edge.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 16, 2007 4:50 PM

CITIZEN

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
I have to agree that the AK is less accurate than either the British or American Assault rifles.

On the other hand, how accurate does an assault rifle need (or even want) to be?

Depends on what it's being used for. As long as the reliabillity of the weapon isn't ridiculous accuracy for a general issue weapon is very important. British SAS tend to be issued with H&K MP5's for engagements in confined areas like aircraft or buildings because it's compact and hugely accurate at close range. Carbines of the various standard issue Assualt rifles are used for the same reason.

A standard issue rifle has to be used in lots of circumstances and enviroments, and most often accuracy is very important.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 16, 2007 4:53 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
How do you feel about the AK-74?

I hear it is lighter and has low recoil, but keeps its reliability edge.

I’ve never shot it, but I would think that it is comparable to the AK-101.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 16, 2007 8:30 PM

PIRATECAT

First I would marry that little woman. Very thoughtful. Can she fry chicken? Second a dog is good for first alert. Getten ya up at night. Second is the stage coach shot gun perfect. Keep it close. Practice with it. Always keep a backup like a snub nose Rossi .38 its not how big the caliber but how good you shoot with it. I have alot of rifles, carbines, pistols, revolvers, baseball bats and knives. Loaded and layin around waiting for some poor soul to steal my Nascar collectables. Of course it never happens. Just like my unlocked 88 Chevy S-10 never gets stolen. But yeh that is a hell of a good home defense gift. Bless her little heart. 911 doesn't work its a joke. Worthless cops come out late and say its your word against his. Make sure you kill em inside your home. If ya got dog problems give him ground beef and then while he is eaten paint him pink. So the neighbor can keep his poopen mutt in his yard. I love the thought of a woman buying a gun for someone she cares for.

"Battle of Serenity, Mal. Besides Zoe here, how many-" "I'm talkin at you! How many men in your platoon came out of their alive".

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 16, 2007 8:42 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
As I understand it the M16 was only developed as a weapon to be used for base security on USAF bases, but a certain amount of under the counter dealing got it on to the regular issue.

The M16 reminds me of the orginal SA80 variants. I've been told by collegues that it was like being back in the 1800's:
Fire
Use barrel cleaner to clear jam
Fire
Use barrel cleaner to clear jam
Fire...

Though they were so accurate the British Army had to redesign the range tests, because the ones used for the SLR weren't accurate enough.

The difference is the SA80 has improved, it works now.

The reliability issues of the M16 are blown out of proportion. When it was first developed it was intended for the Army, but they weren't interested in the lighter bullets. An Air Force General saw it demonstrated at a party and thought that the lighter gun with less recoil would be perfect for the Air Force guards. The Army was forced to evaluate it by the big-wigs in charge at the time, they still didn't like it so they sabotaged the test by telling the soldiers that it was such an advanced gun that it didn't need to be cleaned. This naturally resulted in severe reliability issues. After the Army adopted it and the soldiers were properly trained to use it (clean it whenever ou get a spare moment), it turned out to have decent reliability, high accuracy and sufficient stopping power.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 16, 2007 9:35 PM

PIRATECAT

I totally agree with ya Freddy Gibb. Alot of it in the begining was Matel making some weak parts. Also the Army in that jungle war was not fully trained on how to keep it in firing condition along with bad cleaning techniques which led to jamming in the begining. But it has become for a long time an excellent carbine and rifle. The AK 47 design is topps but its for people who can't shoot. The US goverment has got their money out of weapons. Alot of 1911s where very old and refurbished when they got the knock that is was not accurate. Nobody beats the 1911. The Germans and Cong were doped up and you needed a combat knock down gun. This was discovered in the Spanish American war when facing the muslim philipino indians who were also doped up in battle. The 1873 45lc single action had been replaced with the colt .38 revolver which the US soldiers had problems dropping the indians. Then Mr Browning made the legendary Colt 1911 .45 automatic. Cool history.

"Battle of Serenity, Mal. Besides Zoe here, how many-" "I'm talkin at you! How many men in your platoon came out of their alive".

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, February 17, 2007 10:57 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Untrue - in vietnam many of the incidents in the original issue were caused by using a heavier powder than the test versions, and the issue weapons not having the chromed bore, which was to some degree rectified in the M16A1, but a bit too late for our boys who depended on it.

Really though, apologies to Mr. Stoner, but the M-16/M4 platform is pure junk.

The problem stems from the fact that instead of the expelled gases striking a piston rod to charge the next round, they are blown straight into the chamber itself - along with powder residue, carbon fouling and what have you, over and over.

And the tolerances are such that a mere 3 grains of sand in the wrong place will cause a jam.

Essentially the weapon craps on it's own dinner plate, and eventually it *will* jam due to this, even the most spotless weapon might get one mag off, but that fouling builds up quick in a protracted engagement and then you're stuck with a plastic club.

Somehow I don't think the enemy is going to be kind enough to stop and let you break out the cleaning kit every 2 or 3 mags.

Front line units get the M-4 and supposedly it's been improved somewhat, but the shorter barrel would make the terribly anemic .223 it already fires even less effective and less accurate besides.

Supply units usually get decades-old M16 relics on their way to the scrap heap, often with mechanical defects or shot out bores besides - and this was one VERY significant factor in the ambush of the 507th Maintanence company and related casualties.

Excerpts from official report.

"While under fire, PVT Nace, SPC Johnson, and SGT Petrik successfully maneuvered their respective vehicles around and through obstacles and continued all the way through the city. Soldiers in this group returned fire while moving. Most of the Soldiers in this group report that they experienced weapons malfunctions."

"Corporal Luten, in the tractor-trailer driven by PFC Dubois, attempted to return fire with the 507th’s only .50 cal. machinegun, but the weapon failed. Luten was wounded in the leg while reaching for his M16."

"SPC Grubb returned fire with his M16 until wounded in both arms, despite reported jamming of his weapon, while PFC Elliot maneuvered their fuel truck through the ambush."

"SGT Riley attempted to secure 1SG Dowdy’s M16, since his own rifle had malfunctioned, but was unsuccessful. SGT Riley then directed SPC Johnson and SPC Hernandez to take cover. Riley also attempted to fire Johnson’s and Hernandez’s M16s, but both jammed. Johnson and Hernandez were both wounded."

"In the HEMTT wrecker towing a 5-ton tractor-trailer, SPC Hudson attempted to fire his M249 SAW while driving, but it malfunctioned."

End Result.
"Of the 33 Soldiers who entered An Nasiriyah in 18 vehicles (including two that were being towed) on 23 March, 11 Soldiers were killed, seven were captured and nine were wounded (including some of those captured). Sixteen Soldiers in eight vehicles emerged from the attack. The number of Iraqi casualties inflicted by Soldiers of the 507th and 3d FSB could not be determined. From start to finish, the attack on the 507th lasted an estimated 60 to 90 minutes."

This was a more or less wipeout of a US Armed Forces Convoy caused in part due to reliance on junk weapon platforms that are unreliable in the extreme.
Go on and look up the relevant details - many of the 'captured' were so because they were unable to fight due to jammed weapons.

After experiencing the 'reliability' of the M16 in training, when I got placed with my unit I opted for the only other option we had in the armory, an M60 with what seemed to be an AA barrel on it, yet another scrapheap relic with a long history of problems, not the least of which was getting parts for it, since at any one time *something* on it would be broken.

My loader carried an M79 and an officers M1911, and I carried a non-issue Colt .380 Mustang, cause when it came right down to it, neither one of us was going to stake our lives on stuff we couldn't trust.

While not as accurate or as pretty as the M16/M4, the Ak-47 passes the one true test of a battlefield weapon, every time you pull the trigger, it goes bang.
And it uses a piston rod to charge the action rather than blowing crap into the chamber and fouling it like the M16 does, which means it will continue to go bang when the M16 clogs up and jams.

If I am to bet my life on a weapon (which, when you depend on it for defense of that life, you are!) it would be the Ak-47 every time.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, February 17, 2007 1:32 PM

PIRATECAT

Its not untrue. Still their is people who can't shoot a gun or keep it maintained. Give me a M16 anyday never had a problem with when I was in.

"Battle of Serenity, Mal. Besides Zoe here, how many-" "I'm talkin at you! How many men in your platoon came out of their alive".

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, February 17, 2007 8:00 PM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

My only direct experience with the M-16 is actually a civillian variant that a friend of mine brings shooting sometimes. I believe it is called a Bushmaster.

I have never seen his AK jam, but there have been occasional problems with the Bushmaster.

Now, a Bushmaster is not a proper military version, so the comparison may be moot.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, February 17, 2007 8:15 PM

There is no question or debate about the AK being more reliable than the M-16. The question is is the increase in reliability worth the drop in accuracy.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, February 17, 2007 8:25 PM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Well, an AK can hit something reliably out to 300-400 meters... and since our own military has established that most firefights happen at 300 meters or less... I'm still of the mind that reliability trumps accuracy here. The AK isn't a Saturday Night Special by any means. It's still accurate enough.

What is the benefit of having a rifle (the M16) accurate to 500-600 meters when it is seldom used at such ranges? Meanwhile, this more accurate rifle suffers increased maintenance and reliability issues.

I'll throw my vote in with the guy above who says that the #1 criteria of a firearm is that it must go boom when you pull the trigger.

Every Time.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, February 17, 2007 8:57 PM

Accurate out to 400 Meters, alright, but how accurate is accurate? Accurate enough to hit a person? Accurate enought to hit a moving person? Accurate enough to hit one person out of a group? The ability to hit EXACTLY what you are shooting at is frequently critical especially in urban warfare where civilians are all around.

P.S. my preference runs to the M82 area personally

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, February 17, 2007 9:01 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Boys ! It's late. Way past time to put your toys away and go to bed. Do you hear me ??

Nag nag NAG nag nag nag

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 18, 2007 6:24 AM

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
"Corporal Luten, in the tractor-trailer driven by PFC Dubois, attempted to return fire with the 507th’s only .50 cal. machinegun, but the weapon failed. Luten was wounded in the leg while reaching for his M16."

If these guys had a Ma Deuce fail on them, I have to suspect that they weren't doing very effective weapons maintenance. The M2 hasn't been been in service for almost 90 years for nothing.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 18, 2007 6:41 AM

KANEMAN

Concerning the M16: Lets go ask all the corpses around the world what they think of the M16's accuracy.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 18, 2007 7:21 AM

All right, lets try a different question, what would be the third choice, and why wouldn't it be the first? I don't have enough experience with guns to actually pick one but I'll toss a few names out, FN FAL, Steyr Aug, H&K G11, H&K G36, FAMAS. Any comments?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 18, 2007 8:22 AM

DHAERUVUSRAVENSHADOW

I have a Heritage as well. A Rough Rider with bird-head grip. From checking around and reading reviews of it, apparently it was marketed to Western recreationists and trick-shooters. That would seem to imply they are accurate. The one I have also has interchangeable cylinders for .22 or .22 Magnum rounds. The .22 Magnum Hollow-Point gives more bang for the buck than expected from such a small gun. Overall, I rather like it.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 18, 2007 12:34 PM

OLDENGLANDDRY

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:

If not, what's your preferred defense tool?

Danish Long Axe, but you need a bit of room to swing it (figure of Eight style).

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 19, 2007 4:20 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hey there Raven's Shadow,

I hardly ever meet another Heritage owner. Huzzah! I love it because it's an inexpensive (and fairly accurate) plinker.

Good for evil empty water bottles and pepsi cans at up to twenty paces. ;-)

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 19, 2007 5:00 AM

DEADLOCKVICTIM

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Lots to consider.

1. Are you willing to take a person's life? You must make this decision, and be sure of it,

This is the number one thing to consider in my opinion. I think Geezer gives some very good advise on this topic. I would take what he has to say to heart.

A deputy sheriff friend once told me that if you pull a gun on another person you'd better have a damn good reason and you'd better be willing to shoot to kill. Often people who have a gun in the home for defense, end up being shot or killed by their own gun.

I live in a rural area where crime is not as rampant as some urban settings. I do own a home defense shotgun - a simple Mossberg model 500, 6-shot, 18 inch barrel - good for nothing but close range. Recently I added Crimson Trace laser sighting to my Sig-Sauer P229 .40 cal. S&W - which aids in night sighting.

Take a gun safety course or at least learn to use your firearm from an experienced gun owner. And lastly, pray you never have to use it.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 19, 2007 1:16 PM

MALBADINLATIN

I hope all you guys are sure you have the guts and quick thinking to keep those guns from being used on yourselves.

Are you familiar with the writings of Shan Lu?

"You can believe your eyes...or you can believe me." -Groucho Marx

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 20, 2007 3:09 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Quote:
Originally posted by Malbadinlatin:
I hope all you guys are sure you have the guts and quick thinking to keep those guns from being used on yourselves.

Are you familiar with the writings of Shan Lu?

"You can believe your eyes...or you can believe me." -Groucho Marx

It's a good caution, but one that can't be tested except under fire. Hopefully it will never be tested.

You can train. You can practice and imagine and think about it in your head. That's the most anyone can do. The rest is the moment and your will.

However, the alternative does not appeal to me. Anyone who would break into my home and take my gun and use it on me... would be the same sort who would take advantage of me if there was no gun.

Your money or your life was the old cliche.

Modern times replaces 'or' with 'and.'

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 20, 2007 3:26 PM

FREMDFIRMA

Quote:
Often people who have a gun in the home for defense, end up being shot or killed by their own gun.

Common myth perpetuated by anti-gun folk.
Rate of occurance is statistically insignificant.

If it's so damned easy to take a gun from someone, then just take it back and shoot them with it.

My only advice is thus - should you have to draw on a home intruder, make sure there's only one story.

Yours

Anything less, in todays culture and society, and you might as well have put the barrel in your mouth when you pulled the trigger.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 20, 2007 6:39 PM