Home defense shotgun: Myths and reality

[Hoosierdood]

Curious, if they are clear that they have no intention of do ANY training/familiarization with what they are about to buy, why would a gun be even considered? I would argue that person possessing a firearm (who intents to use it) who has never fired one or trained with one is actually LESS SAFE than a person who owns no firearms at all.

1. As Cedartop stated, gun shop employees are generally not encouraged to talk people out of a sale (although I have done that in a few cases).

2. To a purist like me, lack of training is no reason to prohibit someone from their basic right to keep and bear arms. I sincerely wish that everyone who owned a firearm would pursue training in their use. However, I have come to understand over the years that probably 50-70% of gun owners (my estimation) have never had any kind of training. This is based mostly on observation of the folks who come to the gun shop and purchase firearms.


Side note... I like the article, but there is one flaw. The article comes with the assumption that you are dealing with someone who is either already trained or who will seek training. That may be the case with many of us here on INGO, but that would not describe the majority of gun owners.

 

[tjh88]

I'm not sure what to think of this. I've always got a shotgun as backup to my handgun, which is the firearm I keep close. The shotgun is never loaded and ready. I would head to it if I had time but so far have never when I hear something that needs checked out. I usually grab my closest handgun and a magazine or two and head to look. I'll have to look into this some more. Thanks for the article. I'm never too stubborn to listen to other thoughts.

 

[Lectric102002]

I'm not sure what to think of this. I've always got a shotgun as backup to my handgun, which is the firearm I keep close.

That's good.

The shotgun is never loaded and ready.

That's not good. How can it be ready if it is never loaded ? Maybe I misunderstood.

 

[Amishman44]

I think 95% of what you do for home / personal defense comes down to what you are comfortable with and what you have!

I would HATE to face my wife with her Remington 870 Tactical 20 GA in close quarters...she loves it and is 'nails' with it!

I, on the other hand, LOVE the Mini-14 at short-medium range (1m-300m)...it's just 'natural' for me!

Anyone can state their 'ideal' but in reality, if you're comfortable with it...and train with it...you'll probably have an 'even' chance in a violent confrontation!

 

[Denny347]

Because in this hypothetical you work in a gun store and will get fired if you talk people out of buying a gun. Good point though.

Oh right.

 

[Bfish]

Great article with putting out the right info! Thanks for sharing

 

[Kirk Freeman]

As Cedartop stated, gun shop employees are generally not encouraged to talk people out of a sale (although I have done that in a few cases).

Yes, that was my instruction at Galyan's. I was to never to have an opinion excepting that the more expensive gun was better.

 

[the1kidd03]

Wait...I thought racking the slide would scare the bad guy away?!?

It's not that this method is "ineffective" or "never possible." Statistically, the large majority of criminals will run from the thought of being faced with an armed opponent. Most of them seek easy victims.

It's just that you should not count on/rely on this ending the threat and you must be psychologically prepared to go further than this when necessary. Some people may be of the mindset that this will be all they need to do and THAT is a problem.

Father Scares Off Three Armed Home Invaders by Racking Shotgun?Yeah, That Actually Happened#

 

[Libertarian01]

To All,

This article seems to represent the very thing that the author despises.

I do not want to come off the wrong way or be misunderstood. Much of what the author writes seems to make sense. It seems to be reasonable and fact based. Yet, upon close examination it is not.

The only real fact the author appeared to state on close reading was the "shot spread" he witnessed firsthand. That is it.

The bulk majority of the rest of it is an opinion piece - which is worth anyone else's opinion on the face of it.

Not a single study was quoted or cited. Not one. Even if someone else did not do the study the author himself could have, and wound up being surprised by the results.

Some may ask, "What kind of study would you use to prove the quality of a shotgun in home defense?" A good question. You could do some sort of research on all the shotguns used in home defense cases in the State of Kentucky from 2000 - 2010. You could determine what kinds of shotguns were used, if shots were fired, how many criminals were hit, killed, wounded and so on. You might find that double barreled shotguns were only used in 30% of the cases where a round was discharged but resulted in 70% of the deaths! Who knows? Neither us nor the author because NO OBJECTIVE RESEARCH was cited or conducted.

I am not trying to slam opinions. God knows I have plenty of my own. Most of the time when I am trying to come to reasonable, logical conclusion to a decision making process I want my opinion to be based on FACTS and not opinions.

Some gun owners will swear by a shotgun for home defense, others a pistol, revolver or semiauto, some an semi automatic rifle, and a few a taser or pepper spray. Until valid, objective research is done no one will know who is closest to being correct - if any at all!

The author also mentions to seek a "qualified" instructor. A very good idea yet he gives no input on what "qualified" means. Is there a special license for being a qualified shotgun home defense instructor? Does he mean NRA certified? Or a law enforcement officer? What about an ex army commando, would he be qualified? I am fairly certain that if I went into most local gun stores and asked if they were "qualified" to teach me how to handle a shotgun for home defense many would answer in the affirmative. Is that what he means? I think not but who knows as he doesn't say.

What can I take from this article? The author seems to have some apparently reasonable thoughts and ideas that I may ponder and consider. Alas, no true facts to back up his conclusions, save the one (1) on shot spread.

We gun owners are very good sometimes at quoting some objective studies for use in our arguements against gun control, such as another thread on this very forum talking about concealed carry reducing crime. A fact based, objective study. But internally, amongst ourselves regarding some very important firearms issues we often times rely much more on opinion than on facts. By doing so I think we flounder in the dark more than we should.

I believe we could do much better! (Caveat: That is just my opinion.)

Regards,

Doug

 

[Hoosierdood]

Very well stated Doug. Rep inbound.

 

[Disposable Heart]

Interesting article. As a person who studies the shotgun and employs one for trunk and home defense, I am always taking a class or trying to learn my shotgunnery more.

Training: People seem to think shotguns are Claymore mines on sticks. Hate that conception. The idea of "just buy a 12 gauge with (insert some size buck here) and go" is asinine. Sure, buy a 12 gauge, but train with it. Sure, buy that #1/#4/00/000 buck, but train with it. Most folks, when they talk about using a shotgun they brought to the range for HD, don't even know the longest unobstructed distance in their house, just giving me a blank stare. They rip off a box of birdshot at a target at 7 yards, laugh as it falls over, load with buck and go home. These people scare me as they have no idea that cheap Rio #4 buck doesn't pattern well and could send alot of pellets into something that's not the bad guy.

Best for HD? I love my shotgun, but I know the load, I know the gun, I know the house, I have a light and I practice, regularly.

I kinda like the ballbat and alarm concept: A kid I went to high school with in Toledo became a hood after he graduated and broke into a ball bat armed home and ended up with half his face crushed in, both arms broken in several places and a lung collapsed after only, apparently, 7 hits from a wooden bat. Funny thing was, I knew the homeowner too. Taught alot of lessons with that: Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Also, eat lots of calcium.

 

[k1500]

I was in Cabella's and watching the sales guy with some sort of "tactical" shotgun, flipping it over, and motioning that he was slamming shells to load it. He mentioned the word "tactical" Ugh. The two people watching him seemed to be absorbing ALL of it as though they've never fired a shotgun. I've used a shotgun when hunting birds...a pump action. It is a fine weapon during a nice sunny day when nobody is charging at me. The most notable part of that article is the real mistake of not returning it to full battery making the weapon useless as the thug draws down and fires (or charges at full speed). A shotgun still needs to be aimed. My local range won't allow shotguns for training. So, where is a person going to go?

Any weapon needs some training, but at least a pistol will offer more rounds and simpler operation. Depending on whether it is a revolver or semi-auto, it can be set up such that the defender need only draw it from where ever, aim quickly, and pull the trigger. Bad guy still up? Pull trigger again. Bad guy falls and...oops...another bad guy is behind him in some aggressive position. Pull the trigger again.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

In multi-gun competitions, which are held around the country, any experienced shooter will tell you this. Loading the shotgun is what makes or breaks you.

Repeat after me. Real life is not a 3 gun competition. I believe this is where a lot of over emphasis on capacity comes in. Real self defense shootings would be extremely boring for competition, and competition scenarios would have very low survival rates in the real world. In real life, you seldom get a chance to reload before the encounter is decided. Throughout the article he talks about 3-gun, but the article is about home defense. Competition is great, and its a good way to hone your skills...but that doesn't mean you're going to be running 15 shells through your shotgun in a home defense scenario.

The majority of folks aren't going to spend much time practicing shooting, let alone loading under stress in various positions and loading under stress is one of the skills least likely to be used. Train for that last.

Not having a sight did not hinder me one bit.

I think it would hinder most people. Perhaps we just haven't gotten the level of shotgun zen the author has, but I'm skeptical of this one.

Other than that, I'm pretty well on board with most of what he says.