Sujet : Re: guns again.
De : am (at) *nospam* yellowjersey.org (AMuzi)
Groupes : rec.bicycles.techDate : 17. Jul 2024, 15:38:54
Autres entêtes
Organisation : Yellow Jersey, Ltd.
Message-ID : <v78hhe$1rgni$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 7/16/2024 8:57 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 7/16/2024 8:48 PM, John B. wrote:
>
Yet more proof that Frankie doesn't know what he is talking about. A
shotgun fires a spray of pellets and certainly wouldn't be the best
choice in a case where the "Bad Guys" are close to the victims as
seems very likely in the above reference.
Argue with Andrew about that. He was the one who originally posted that a shotgun would be much better for home defense than an AR.
Beyond that, I disagree with you on the applicability of a shotgun to these specific cases. But again, I'll let Andrew explain, if he cares to.
As with concurrent discussions, 'optimal', 'adequate' and 'best' are inherently subjective.
My statement is based on the general consensus among firearms mavens. Typical assessment here:
https://tacticalgear.com/experts/best-guns-for-home-defense1 through four are 12ga shotguns, then 9mm, .357 and .45ACP pistols.
Eighth is an FN pistol in 5.7 which is a NATO round.
#9 is an .223 AR, #10 an AK in 7.62 (.30cal)
but there are many quite similar conclusions.
I agree that a rifle is less than optimal, but adequate. .223 or .30 cal is up to you.
That article, as most, does not discuss what's behind your target (beyond/through walls, for example) and in many situations that is a severe risk factor for unintended damage.
-- Andrew Muziam@yellowjersey.orgOpen every day since 1 April, 1971