Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You do know, obviously NOT, that the Ar-15 is AVAILABLE in MULTI calibers? Even in a .22
A .357 PISTOL would do the same thing as you describe. So could a .45.
I don't think you know much about guns or munitions.
You don't know me. Actually, I have more than one and I've built more than one. I just don't see the need to brag. Or bloviate.
You might want to check out a site called "The box O'truth" for good, first person information on penetration.
But hey, it's the interweb and you're a instant expert with the answers. Knock yourself out champ.
On the shotgun racking scaring away the intruder debate, I just have a quick question. How would we know if it worked? If the Bad Guy is successfully scared away by that noise, we'll never find out about it. It can't be proven. The only thing which can be accurately reported is that the suspect fled.
I'm not saying it does or doesn't do the trick in any situation. My philosophy is to not give away my position by making unnecessary noise. I'm just trying to figure out how one can conclusively state that it's a myth.
Can we just stop with this debate. If you feel better with the "racking" sound, of a shotgun, a pistol, whatever, then fine, go with it. But let's not pretend that it's the 'best' or even 'better' way to deal with these situations.
....
For me, personally, I'd rather be in condition one, to a) reduce the probability of operator error in a high stress situation of getting the round into battery, b) reduce the probability of a mechanical issue getting at least one round into battery and c) reduce the response time of my ability to get that first shot in flight because of the proximity or timeliness of the situation.
I know that folks will disagree for various reasons and I'm cool with that, it's just when someone claims that their approach is 'best' or even 'better'. Choose what works for you in your situation given your balance of the variables involved.
It's not being debated, disputed or pretended to be the best. I did say they did not rack the guns, just lock the action, as in carrying the weapon in the unlocked condition in leu of an impossible to find safety which is in any case impossible to know which side is on or off.
I was told that when the bad guys heard that action lock, they stopped being aggressive! Make of that what you will. Mind you, on one occasion, the one bad guy continued being aggressive but he changed his mind when the police officer shot him in the head. The others quietly got back into the vehicle and gave no more resistance. That cop was alone. So yeah, neither the 'racking of the gun' (if it was even done), nor the aiming of the gun at the man's face, stopped his aggression. So there is that.
I do not know what I would do if I had to use a shotgun for home defense. I have only ever relied on a hand gun. It's what I am practiced with. I however, I do think that an AR-15 carbine would be an ideal home defense weapon. The only sound an intruder or attacker would hear would be the safety slipping off. Or not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gungnir
There are two parts of psychological effect. One is the person you're trying to intimidate.
The other is yourself, I'm pretty sure cops who feel that racking a shotgun is intimidating do feel a whole lot more confident after hearing it. There's just no evidence that it's intimidating to the people its meant to intimidate.
Yes, that makes a lot of sense. On the other hand, there is no evidence it does not have an effect. Or is there? Well, my account above would seem to support the lack of evidence claim.
Perhaps it is more about the cops feel more confident with the racking the shotgun. Or maybe it's the only effective way to make sure the gun will fire, as in actually chambering a round. The guns would typically be carried with an empty chamber, would they not? In which case it would have nothing to do with intimidation, but rather, preparing to fire.
Anyway, as I said before, I don't know, but what Gungnir said makes sense to me.
I'm just trying to figure out how one can conclusively state that it's a myth.
Simple, it's from the definition of the word myth.
Myth, a symbolic narrative, usually of unknown origin and at least partly traditional, that ostensibly relates actual events and that is especially associated with religious belief.
There's no actual evidence it does what's claimed, thus there is belief, and adherents to the story do have a religious fervor about it. There's a lot of claims made about shotguns that really aren't borne out on testing.
Racking or even just locking from an unlocked condition also reduces your round count by one.
No it does not. Five rounds in the magazine. Intruder alert, grab shotgun (kept specifically for the purpose), do one of two things - rack the gun to chamber a round or proceed to the danger zone without racking the gun. One can, after racking the gun, release the unfired round latch and partially open the bolt i.e. unlock it. Never ever fiddle with the safety catch! How many rounds does that leave you with? Five, whichever way one chooses to do it.
Should you be storing the weapon with five in the magazine and one in the chamber, I would hope the bolt is unlocked. Never fiddle with a safety! Not on a pump action shotgun. A semi-auto can get you into trouble in so far as loaded cocked and locked is concerned. If you folks don't want to believe me, then get ahold of a pump action or semiauto shot gun and take it to the range and practice all the possible scenarios. Sooner or later the damn thing won't fire because the safety is in in the wrong position!
Anyway, we are getting off topic, as interesting as it may be.
P.S. Are we sure it's not a myth that it's a myth?
I can't speak for anyone else but I would (insert desired word) myself is someone wracked a shotgun at me! Maybe it's because I know what a shotgun can do at close quarters. Or what my intentions would be if I were doing the wracking! But again, I do not know.
Mine differs. I think the Extar EP9, with a 33 round magazine is a perfect home defense firearm. While not a true "AR" it is based off one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 92greenyj
Disagree. The 12 gauge shotgun is a fantastic home defense weapon. A pump action in particular. The sound of racking the pump to chamber a shell is so distinctive and unmistakable that the noise of chambering a shell itself is often enough to ward off a would be assailant. Even if you aren’t into guns you know exactly what that sound is.
Past that, the spread of the pellets means you don’t have to be terribly accurate in the dark and the pellets don’t suffer the issue of over penetrating thru the walls.
I'm not knocking anybody or their choices.
I stated, "Just my personal opinion."
"Past that, the spread of the pellets means you don’t have to be terribly accurate in the dark and the pellets don’t suffer the issue of over penetrating thru the walls"
Which is why I prefer the judge, a 410/.45 pistol. Pus it is much easier to maneuver in a house then a shot gun.
Simple, it's from the definition of the word myth.
Myth, a symbolic narrative, usually of unknown origin and at least partly traditional, that ostensibly relates actual events and that is especially associated with religious belief.
There's no actual evidence it does what's claimed, thus there is belief, and adherents to the story do have a religious fervor about it. There's a lot of claims made about shotguns that really aren't borne out on testing.
I didn't think there was anything more concrete saying it doesn't work than saying it does. Thanks for confirming that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gungnir
So I'm going to stick with myth.
That's fine. I'll go with hypothesis. It's less insulting.
You know damn well unauthorized militia is highly illegal. Try organizing your buddies for a little tactical domestic warfare training in the neighborhood and let the FBI/ATF catch wind of that... Yes militia is illegal in governments eyes, as their only intent is to fight government tyrants.
The police state has over taken and suppressed the free state.... Patriot Act sealed that deal with the NDAA the icing on the cake.
The privilege of only citizens 21years of age non-felons and mentally sane may keep but never bear the small arms government allows, and shall be altered when government feels threatened.
Everyone knows this.
" Everyone knows this"
Here you go AGAIN, claiming to know what everybody else knows.
And you are WRONG, AGAIN.
"The privilege of only citizens 21years of age non-felons and mentally sane may keep but never bear the small arms government allows, and shall be altered when government feels threatened."
"Under federal law, licensed dealers cannot sell or deliver handguns to individuals under age 21 or long guns to those under age 18. Unlicensed individuals cannot sell, transfer, or deliver handguns to individuals under age 18. With some exceptions,federal law prohibits individuals under age 18 from possessing handguns,but it does not place age restrictions on the possession of long guns (18 U.S.C. 922).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Actually, I have more than one and I've built more than one. I just don't see the need to brag. Or bloviate. 
