bullwinkle
Pattern Altitude
BTW, if you need that Russian contraption to be "less less lethal" get close and aim for the face.
The military evaluated flechette rounds extensively in the 1960s and found that they are not worth the trouble. Buckshot is equal or better in 90% of situations.
BTW, in my opinion shotguns are terrible combat weapons. There is a reason that not one single army in the world issues a shotgun as a standard infantry arm. You are better off with a mid-caliber carbine like an AR or AK.
I can enumerate the reasons if you really need me to.
For some reason I thought shotguns were banned by treaty. Maybe that was just automatic shotguns.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
A Mossberg 590 being used by a US Marine for door breaching in Karma, Iraq, in 2005
I will assure you that in a thick jungle the shotgun is a very effective, read deadly, close range weapon.
That is not a 590. It's a 500. Really, really similar weapons, so please don't think I am being a pedantic prick, but I was in Iraq in 05. We had 500s. The difference is in the length of the magazine and bayonet lug on the 590. Super effective tool. Because it can be used for so much, I almost hate calling it a weapon (PLEASE don't flame me, I recognize that it is a weapon). I mean, sure, you can kill a human with it, but you can also kill a person with a shovel, you know? Shotguns are not banned by treaty.
A group of US Marines in Iraq in 2005, armed with a combat shotgun, assualt rifle, and squad automatic weapon.
A Joint Service Combat Shotgun Program report on the lethality of shotguns in war states, in support of the use of the shotgun in warfare, "the probability of hitting a man-sized target with a shotgun was superior to that of all other weapons", and goes on to support this with statistics compiled by the British from the conflict in Borneo in the 1960s.
The buckshot typically used in a combat shotgun spreads out to a greater or lesser degree depending on the barrel choke, and can be effective at ranges as far as 70 m (75 yards). The delivery of the large number of projectiles simultaneously makes the shotgun the most effective short range weapon commonly used, with a hit probability 45% greater than a sub-machine gun (5 round burst), and twice as great as an assault rifle. While each pellet is only as effective as a small caliber handgun round, and offers very poor penetration against an armored target, the multiple projectiles increases the likelihood of one or more peripheral wounds.
A Mossberg 590 being used by a US Marine for door breaching in Karma, Iraq, in 2005
I will assure you that in a thick jungle the shotgun is a very effective, read deadly, close range weapon.
They are a standard armament. They are not the primary weapon of an infantry unit, but they are certainly standard. We did one shotgun, one SAW, one M-4 or M-16, and one 203 per fireteam. I also usually carried an M9, since I was usually the SAW gunner.
I was researching one of the shotguns my dad gave me, he had a sporting version but they made the same shotgun with a different barrel/furniture for the military.
Neat feature mentioned was that if you held the trigger down and worked the action(pump), it would automatically fire the next round as soon as chambered. Mine indeed does this... completely useless but lots of fun!
Also very good for room clearing, but yes, a shotgun is also very good at opening a door. You are, I feel, minimizing the need to actually clear buildings. That shotgun was far, far more effective for room clearing than my 249. Don't get me wrong, I ****ing LOVED my 249, but it was a touch heavy to fire from the shoulder. I was at the back of the stack.
Nice! I do not believe that the Mossberg 500 does that. What kind do you have?
Ithaca model 37 featherlight. It's my favorite shotgun and not just because it does that little party trick. It's light, the action is reliable and I can hit the little clay pigeons with it pretty well.
You are forgetting that close quarters fighting doesn't work that way. Room clearing means that you are not firing at many targets. You are firing at few to none.We are not comparing to a 249, we are comparing to an AR or similar carbine.
Shotguns are worse than an AR or AK for clearing buildings. Reasons:
1) Horrendously slow follow-up shots. Bang...rack...bang. I can get off five rounds with a carbine before you can fire a single shotgun round, with better accuracy.
The recoil is not really relevant, since you are only engaging one or two targets.2) A shotgun is not easier to hit with at inside distances...the spread of a shotgun round at 20 feet is about two inches. The recoil, however is MUCH worse.
This is inaccurate. 00 buck is 7 pellets impacting at once, at your two inch spread. It is a MUCH more powerful impact, although it has much less penetrating power.3) The energy of the two weapons is equivalent. A 00 Buck round is about 1500ft/lb of energy, an M855 AR round is about 1320ft/lb, and AK round is about 1450ft/lb. Because of the faster on-target shot speed of the carbine, I can put 3-5x more energy on target in the same time as a shotgun.
At close ranges, I would much prefer to be engaged by a 7.62 over 00 buck. Both will ring your bell, and neither will make it through plate, but the 00 buck will still break your ribs through a plate.4) A shotgun holds 5-9 rounds. An AR holds 30. That means a MINIMUM of 3x more rounds and energy available for mayhem from the carbine. Shotguns make a lot of noise and smoke, but are not more powerful contrary to popular opinion.
This is true, if I were alone.5) If you have to reload a shotgun in combat, you are essentially out of the fight. I can reload an AR with 30 rounds before you can reload TWO rounds in the shotgun. So after the first reload, for every two rounds you can fire, I can fire 30 (all of which I can fire faster and more accurately than your two). That math is not in your favor.
Shotguns are only heavy and unwieldy if you compare them to an M-4 or pistol. It was my alternate compared to a 249. It was light, and easy to throw around, provided good corner clearance, and was able to open doors.6) Shotguns are heavy and unwieldy. The Mossberg is much longer than an M4, and harder to maneuver indoors, especially around corners. That's why when I was a cop I used to clear buildings with my pistol instead of the shotgun.
Indoors is the only place where a shotgun can even attempt to compete with an AR/AK carbine, and even in that scenario it's worse. It's fine for opening doors or skip firing into crowds for riot control.
Get yourself a large dog- that'll be a more effective deterrent than any "less lethal" gun. And it'll know who belongs and who doesn't.
You are forgetting that close quarters fighting doesn't work that way. Room clearing means that you are not firing at many targets. You are firing at few to none.
The recoil is not really relevant, since you are only engaging one or two targets.
This is inaccurate. 00 buck is 7 pellets impacting at once, at your two inch spread. It is a MUCH more powerful impact, although it has much less penetrating power.
At close ranges, I would much prefer to be engaged by a 7.62 over 00 buck. Both will ring your bell, and neither will make it through plate, but the 00 buck will still break your ribs through a plate.
This is true, if I were alone.
Shotguns are only heavy and unwieldy if you compare them to an M-4 or pistol. It was my alternate compared to a 249. It was light, and easy to throw around, provided good corner clearance, and was able to open doors.
I think what is happening here is that we are arguing the difference between police use of the weapon, and military use of the weapon. I have never used a shotgun as a police officer, and in your use cases, I am pretty sure I have to differ to your judgment, since I have no idea. In military use, it is a great weapon, and has a ton of uses.
I am here to talk about not guns and the coolest not gun I have read about.
I am sure there is some quote ready to go about how nonlethal weapons are a surefire way to get killed by the other guy's lethal one. Let's skip that. We have a spin zone for that. Please lets just talk about this thing. This awesome thing that the Russians have and I really want.
Right now if you break into my house, its going to be a barrage of kitchen knives or more likely me using my family as human shields while I run out the back screaming like a girl.
Check this out though:
Holds 4 shells, fires 5 different types of ammunition
1. Rubber Bullet
2. Flash-Bang Grenade
3. Self contained electric stun bullet (read that again. It sticks in them and shocks them. That's science right there. Russian effing science!!)
4. Signal flare
5. Tear Gas
Laser for aiming, computer chip so it knows what round to fire next and other scientific things. If I shoot one of the kids sneaking back into the house when they are teens, they are going to get jacked up but live to tell their friends how stupid they were.
And if someone did break in, Sending a barrage of Russian science at them is going to be better than screaming "Take what you want! You can have the children! Just don't hurt me! I'm very fragile!"
http://wasp.eu/index.php/en/osa-pb-4-2.html
I refuted all but one of your points, but that is irrelevant. You miss my meaning. You are playing a theoretical game. I am telling you that I have, in real life, used it, in that environment. Your opinion is nice, and I am glad you have one. It makes you a unique snowflake. It doesn't make you right.I am not arguing the cop side, I'm specifically arguing the effectiveness side. You have not refuted a single point I made, other than "it's not relevant since you are only engaging one or two targets". Which is entirely true, until it's not. If you have to engage more (you never know until you actually open the door) or your first shot misses, you are in hot water.
You are arguing as if you will always have a team of riflemen to back you up, I am arguing from a 1v1 perspective. The guy with the shotgun is at a distinct disadvantage in that case.
Sure, if you have a team of riflemen and SAW gunners with you it probably doesn't matter that you have a shotgun -- they can do all the work for you and cover for the deficiencies of your weapon. If you and one friend with a carbine bust in on a room full of five guys, you kill one and your buddy kills four. I don't see how that argues for the effectiveness of the shotgun in clearing rooms.
The main advantage of the shotgun is it has a large amount of energy transfer. You can pump several rounds of 5.56 in to somebody, but unless you get a head shot, it's going to take some time for them to become incapacitated and die. One frontal shot with a shotgun will incapacitate someone immediately.
I can't comment intelligently on the merits of a shotgun in room to room cleanup situation, as we didn't use shotguns in our urban clearing scenarios. We used MP5's. The theory is two or three whacks apiece from a 9mm SMG should give plenty of close in stopping power.
and....as soon as you kill em...your life will be forever changed.
and....as soon as you kill em...your life will be forever changed.
The moment someone breaks into my home with ill intent they are already dead IMO, won't be loosing any sleep
If you want to get a shotgun I'd get a Remington Marine Magnum, great defense gun and great bush gun
I'd get the speed feed rear stock though, keep some bird shot and Orion 12G flares for bush ops
Or a benelli m9 auto shotgun if it's just for defense.
ANY defense shotgun should have a surefire light mount too
I refuted all but one of your points, but that is irrelevant. You miss my meaning. You are playing a theoretical game. I am telling you that I have, in real life, used it, in that environment. Your opinion is nice, and I am glad you have one. It makes you a unique snowflake. It doesn't make you right.
The main advantage of the shotgun is it has a large amount of energy transfer. You can pump several rounds of 5.56 in to somebody, but unless you get a head shot, it's going to take some time for them to become incapacitated and die. One frontal shot with a shotgun will incapacitate someone immediately.
I can't comment intelligently on the merits of a shotgun in room to room cleanup situation, as we didn't use shotguns in our urban clearing scenarios. We used MP5's. The theory is two or three whacks apiece from a 9mm SMG should give plenty of close in stopping power.
So let's presume you can load all five. I predict the results will be:
1. Irritate him.
2. Try to blind him, and really **** him off.
3. Stun him, and get him totally outraged.
4. Signal his buddies to help him.
5. Incapacitate yourself because you shot the tear gas into the wind.
Sounds fabulous. I'll take 9+1 rounds of .40 or 15+1 rounds of 9mm, thank you.
My home defense gun is a flashlight and a 1911. I may not hit center of mass every time, but a shot to the shoulder is going to make you think twice especially with 230 grain hollowpoints
8+1 of .45 ACP works fine for me.
The sound of the slide going home on a 1911 is unique. Just like the slide going home on a pump shotgun. But, my 1911 is easier to handle in close quarters. And my side of the bed is closer to the door than my wife's. I agree with your choice.
8+1 of .45 ACP works fine for me.
Anyone who would use a 5.56/223 in a home defense situation, in most likely a stick and Sheetrock house, not too smart, also you better be sending quite a few rounds downrange weekly to keep up to snuff with that rifle.
The shotgun gives a little more margin for the dark room, seldome practice, scared girlfriend type, add to that picking a load that will transfer the required energy whilst not blowing through walls.
8+1 of .45 ACP works fine for me.