Gun Show tomorrow... Advice?

What is wrong with a revolver for the house? I would say it the better choice. Do you take your wife to the range often and train her on the semi-autos? The fact is, a revolver is simple...point and shoot. much easier for someone not familiar with handguns to simply pick up use if need be. And at the end of the day, if your wife needs to be the one to use it, it won’t take much for her to use the revolver.....unless you do train her at the range, then a semi-auto is ok as well.

For home defense I still say shogun above anything else. First off the sound of racking a shell in a pump shotgun is known worldwide by everyone, and will deter pretty much anyone. Secondly if you do have to start firing, the shotgun will lose power before it reaches your neighbors kids bedroom. A handgun/rifle round will travel much further endangering others you don’t even know are there.

 

I've learned to keep about 500 on me, and then wander aimlessly. If i find something cool, i'll stay and chat. If he can negotiate to a decent price, then i'll buy.

If not, I just wander some more.

And if i dont find anything except shitty guns, i'll just buy ammo before i head out the door.

 

Probably works better than most electronic sounds made by the alarm systems these days.

 

if youre racking the shotgun youre giving away your location in a dark room and youre also carrying a club because you apparently dont have a round chambered....

as for a revolver nothing wrong with them...i have the quintessential J-frame in 357 for CC and a few semi auto for CC or OC but im really think about picking up a M&P R8 which is an eight shot 357 magnum with a 5 inch barrel on a N frame(iirc) weighing in at 37 ounces. i wouldnt feel under gunned at all. or im thinking about getting a 327 NG with is an 8 shot 357 same frame but with a 2.5 inch barrel weighing in at about 24 ounces

 

2 is 1, ..., 1 is none... rings true, especially if you ever have to "use" it, ..because you can be sure the police will confiscate the firearm for investigative purposes... this is a good reason for law abiding citizens to have several in reserve...

..also, just a general comment about discharging a shotgun in the home, ...if you're using buckshot (which you probably should for defense against a human threat), ...assuming conventional drywall construction, you can be sure it will tear through many walls with ease..

 

Yes of course it will tear through the drywall, however the effective range for buckshot is 50 yards max (depends on your choke, often times less than that), add the fact that it depletes its energy tearing through a wall, slim chance of hurting the little girl riding her bike on the street in front of your driveway. I pistol or rifle on the other hand can also go through the drywall, but still carry energy several hundred yards away. At the end of the day, a shotgun is much more effective home defense weapon. (add the fact of the spread will be easier to hit someone when your adrenaline and fear are flowing that a single projectile)


And as far as giving away my position in a dark room...really? If I am in a break in situation, I will be YELLING at the top of my lungs warning the intruder that I have a gun (loud enough for my neighbors to hear so they can testify for me when the 100 miles of legal red tape take over if I actually take a shot) followed by racking a round so he/she knows I am not bluffing (and now that I have racked it, i have one chambered). Even though i hope to god I won’t have to use it.....you take a shot at another human being, your life will change forever....period, and I don’t just me psychologically handling taking a life, I mean legally (under a lot of circumstances, its unfortunate, but true).

 

... "effective" is a rather nebulous term if you are defining the threat of collateral damage.. a single projectile (piece of shot) traveling at a given speed will possess its own ballistic potential, regardless of it's proximity to other projectiles.. i.e. is a single round of buckshot traveling at pistol-bullet-speeds all that different from a handgun bullet, if it hits the aorta?..

..another thing, is the physics can be rather wily when it comes to the terminal behavior of various projectiles, angle of incidence, etc.. for example, .223/5.56 is a very bad penetrator of drywall, in fact, where tried this rifle projectile is lucky to penetrate a couple pieces of drywall before it yaws and breaks apart...

 

True, effective range is rather vague, however that is the common term, and I am trying to make it understandable to anyone reading this. I must admit that I made the mistake of assuming that the proven, common knowledge that a round of shotgun shot (not slugs) has much less effective range than rifles and handgun was known to everyone.

You are correct that a single projectile exiting a barrel at the same speed will have same "effect" at that point. Unfortunately, 3 inches later, the "effect" is no longer the same. First off, buckshot (a sphere) has a very high drag coefficient (typically assume 0.4 to 0.5....this really depends on surface finish, Reynolds number to determine if you’re in turbulent flow, etc), thereby slowing it down quickly. Add to that the fact that the buckshot has MUCH less mass than a large caliber handgun round (.357 was previously mentioned so let’s assume 158 gr vs 00 buckshot of about 54 gr), therefore much less momentum and carries much less potential energy.

I will also admit that the momentum argument stated here is very vague as well, as each round has completely different ballistics and capabilities. However it’s a “general statement”. Lighter rounds can still hold the same energy assuming they launch at higher speeds. For example, for long range 308, typically 2 rounds are used out to 1000 yrds……Sierra HPBT 175 gr as it has the mass to reach out, or the 155 gr Scenars, as they have the ability to launch out at break neck speeds. They both will reach 1000 yrd even though the mass difference.

I do not want to crap on the OPs thread here so I am just summarizing, however, if you would like more proof, we can discuss over PM...I can try to run some actual numbers for you sometime this week (you can simply Google it as well). Lucky for me, as an aerospace engineer, projectile motion fits perfectly into my everyday life, and ballistics fit into my hobby of long range shooting and being an avid reloaded, so it shouldn’t be hard. PM me if you would like to further discuss.

I suppose at the end of the day, no matter what you are shooting…just make sure you hit what your aiming for, and don’t aim at anything you aren’t prepared to kill (and take responsibility for that kill) and you won’t have to worry about any of this..haha. Better yet, lets hope none of us ever have to test any of this out.

 

i generally agree w/ your assessment here (as an engineer to an engineer ).. i was trying to just make a broad generalization that you might treat the potential for "collateral damage" (to a loved one, innocent, etc.) as a "binary" condition (i.e. the liklihood of getting "hit" by the projectile, vs. not getting "hit).. so, i was just trying to make a point that it would be unwise to assume using a shotgun in the home is "safer" when it comes to collateral damage - i would disagree based on the aforementioned critiera.. but othewise, i agree w/ your rationale for the projectile physics, "ballistics", as you explained it..

 

And a better choice

 

How many times have you changed the recoil spring?

 

That comment seems seriously inaccurate. We recently had 2 killed and 12 wounded because of a drive-by shooting at a local night club. Shooter left 63 .223 casings that were able to be found. The bullets went right through the cinder block walls to kill one and injure several others. Guess the club should have put up drywall instead of cinder block walls.

 

My wife is comfortable handling the Glock, and will be getting more comfortable as I get more practice with her. The revolver wasn't a bad idea, but the one that we had (.357 magnum) kicked like a mule. It hurt my hand to fire. The 22 and 23 kick, but much less, and are more easily handled by the wife. (Obviously, a smaller caliber revolver would have solved the problem, too.)

I agree about the shotgun, but the decision for a pistol has been made and while I appreciate the opinions (from everybody, not just you) and agree with the points made, I'm not going to get into a debate / discussion about it here. FWIW, if we get a third gun, it will likely be a shotgun.

My house sits on a lot w/ plenty of space, and tons of trees in all directions. To the front and back there is earth between me and my neighbors (we live in a little valley), and on each other side I have about 50 yards, plus trees and brick walls (mine and the neighbors).

 

Completely understandable, and yes a 357 mag is a BIG gun to handle for anyone.

Not sure if you have your heart set on a Glock, but one thing to note is that a Polymer gun (such as the glock, XD, ect) will have more kick than a steel gun. The mass of the gun will absorb some of the recoil (heavier gun will always kick less than lighter gun with same loads). as far as a .45 steel gun, by far my favorite would be the Sig P220...that gun is a work of art....so if you are still looking and not completely set on a Glock, it might be worth looking into that (Not saying there is anything wrong with Glocks).

 

you know you can run 38 special in a 357 gun right?? you can get reduced recoil reduced flash rounds

 

ballistics is not a "linear" science, ..i.e. projectiles of various weights, speeds, materials, angles of incidence can cause surprising results... as a fact the .223/5.56 is not good at penetrating layers of drywall, ..the small projectile traveling at high speed destabilises very rapidly upon passing through it causing it to yaw and fragment... the same bullet traveling at a much lower velocity would probably be much more effective at punching through drywall..

..have you seen the mythbusters episode, where they shoot various firearms into water/pool? the "high powered" rifle projectiles (.223, and .50 BMG) which are good at some things, like against armor, are horrible at penetrating through water, ...the impact basically caused them to fragment at shallow depths..

here's a real-world test w/ some .223 cartridges, and some other cartridge thrown in for fun:
http://230grain.com/showthread.php?65428-Ammunition-Drywall-Penetration-Analysis-Test-%28Adpat%29

..and if you still aren't convinced, ..look at this by the NJ division of criminal justice... there's a reason tactical squads like .223 for CQB, ...good effectiveness on humans and body armor, ..but also a lesser danger when penetrating into adjacent rooms..the rounds tend to tumble/keyhole and break up in the distances between the walls (i.e. the living spaces between wall 1, wall 2, wall 3, ...)
http://www.state.nj.us/lps/dcj/njpdresources/pdfs/wallboard_test.pdf

 

Yeah, I put several 38 special rounds through it, in fact. The difference in kick is really amazing.

I didn't want to worry about which rounds were immediately available to be loaded and if she'd be able to handle the kick of whatever came out when she pulled the trigger. With a .40 gun that she's experienced, she knows what to expect, and doesn't have to think about what rounds to load. Slam in the magazine and go.

 

Based on the NJ report your comments may have some validity for hollow point and frangible rounds. They are, of course, designed to started deformation upon impact.

I would suggest you go back and read the report again regarding full metal jacketed .223 rounds. They went through all four boards with little resistance and were found in the range wall 100 yards down range.

Your comments address bullet design, not ballistics.