How is your accuracy? You should not look past how easy the carbine is to shoot at under 10 yards. At 10 yards, with a pistol, throwing a shot is very easy to do.
I agree. I spent some time training in a live fire shoot house with my AR and I was surprised how easy it was to maneuver and make accurate quick shots at “inside a home” distances. You may get slightly better maneuverability with a pistol, but I agree that it’s easier to throw a shot with a pistol. With a little practice, an AR can be very maneuverable and gives you more preferable ballistic performance against a threat IMO.
Interesting enough even though we don’t have all the details on the construction. I just remembered that the distance was like, what, 15 meters? Oh, and cookoff. Can’t forget that. Kind of eliminates the whole reducing the structure to rubble w/ multiple shooters using small arms. In a quick manner that is.
To each their own. Speed/power is fine but accuracy is final.
10 yards is probably on the tail end of what could be considered justifiable defense. But from a low ready with a pistol i can ding an 8.5x11 sheet of paper at 10 yards inside of a second reliably. Inside of 1 yard it would seem the carbine would be a liability.
I’d certainly like a carbine and some time and training with one, but given that i have a pistol on me most of the time and a limited training budget, the time and effort goes into pistol shooting.
In the hands of someone who knows how to use ones, carbines are anything but a liability at close near contact distances.
10 yards? Not sure I understand.
An armed intruder is dangerous much further than 10 yards away.
Also, I don’t know of any castle doctrine states that sets a range limit on what distance you can shoot an intruder in your house.
Now, in many homes you may not have more than 10 yards of distance from one point to another, but that is a different matter entirely.
That was me lifting a random number from someone else.
Point is inside my house there could be shots long enough to outright miss a body. I do not know what my brain is going to do to me if I have to do something, but I know it will have a harder time fucking me with a carbine.
Call me old school, but I also see a carbine as a far superior impact/striking weapon to a pistol. Especially since all my serious pistols are plastic framed.
Incorrect. A justified shoot is a justified shoot. Couple that with the fact that most states have some form of a castle doctrine you the distance really does not matter.
But from a low ready with a pistol i can ding an 8.5x11 sheet of paper at 10 yards inside of a second reliably. Inside of 1 yard it would seem the carbine would be a liability.
I have seen good “square range” shooters miss a full size human target in a shoot house from 6 feet away. How? They were surprised and jerk the hell out of the trigger.
As I have said many times on this forum, I am no longer impressed with people’s ability on the square range. Show me how well you move and shoot in a kill house.
I’d certainly like a carbine and some time and training with one, but given that i have a pistol on me most of the time and a limited training budget, the time and effort goes into pistol shooting.
A pistol is just fine, but if you have the time or ability, always switch to a long gun.
Remember that unless you have had room clearing training with your pistol, then you are most likely even to worse off with it than you would be with a carbine. Why? Because it is much easier to throw a round a close distances.
C4
There is not only that, but the retention aspects are much improved as well. Granted, there are more opportunities for them to grab it as well, but their hands on the gun should not impact function nearly as much as with a handgun.
A long gun with a good sling is better in terms of weapon retention. Our training actually teaches to let go of the long gun if a suspect grabs it (very hard to do, instinct is to death grip it). The idea is that they won’t get it away from you if you have a good tactical sling and their hands will be tied up while yours are free to inflict as much damage as humanly possible on them (them grabbing the rifle is a deadly threat all by itself).
As for use for HD, a long gun is much easier to hit with under stress than a handgun. Much easier. I’ve spent some time in a shoot house as well as having done countless moving and shooting drills and the AR always wins. A mediocre rifle shooter will dominate a good handgun shooter every time.
If a handgun is what you have then by all means, train with it and use it. But if you have access to a long gun, train with it and go to it first.
In case you haven’t noticed, I’ve used the term long gun alot. A shotgun is also much better than a handgun. I still prefer the AR to the shotgun, however, due to my level of training is higher with the AR and I don’t care for the excessive penetration common with 12ga defensive loads.
BTDT. It’s almost inconceivable to the human mind one can miss a human sized target literally from arms distance until you have actually done it yourself.
Once it’s happened to you, and you have that “how the fu&% could I possibly have missed that??!!!” moment, one does not really appreciate the reality of your statement I think.
Poor light, target moving, you moving, pressure, etc, missing a human sized target from up close and personal distances is surprisingly common from what I have seen, but I’m far from LSHD type.
Point being as you said, anyone who thinks they can’t/wont miss a human sized target right in front of them with that handgun is dead wrong in my experience.
Grant, thanks for making this point. BTDT, first time in a class that had a shoothouse. I found out that it is possible to miss ( twice ) a target at a measured distance of 42". Had it been real life the target would have gotten his hair trimmed and maybe a few powder burns.
I have seen good “square range” shooters miss a full size human target in a shoot house from 6 feet away. How? They were surprised and jerk the hell out of the trigger.
As I have said many times on this forum, I am no longer impressed with people’s ability on the square range. Show me how well you move and shoot in a kill house.
Wouldn’t an SBR be appropriate for a home-defense weapon, instead of a 16" long gun.
Yes.
C4
I remember reading an Ayoob article a few years back about a guy who shot two assailants with a Mini 14. Because it was a select fire weapon, he faced all sorts of extra BS in court because it was an “evil machinegun” that was used.
Depending on the state and the jury you get, this kind of thing could probably happen with an AR, too. Of course, having won the fight and survived is the more important consideration, but would an SBR or use of a suppressor, or even just an AR itself create this kind of problem more than would a pistol or shotgun? Just picture the prosecution holding up for the jury your “evil assault weapon.”
If they can put you away for using an AR over a pistol you probably fucked up in the first place.
It would seem that way on the surface, but in the Ayoob article (wish I could fiind a link), it was clearly a justified shoot, but the prosecution used the fact that it was a select-fire weapon to demagogue the issue and make the defender look like the villain.
I know this has been back and forth in the past, but I will see to it that my overpriced lawyer knows that I chose my weapon based on what local LE would use.
But this could be (and is) a whole new thread.
Good call. I will start another thread on this topic and link to it here so as not to draw away from ballistics of 5.56 in HD scenarios.
Here is the new thread to discuss this other subject further: http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?p=1047454#post1047454