Poll: Better over all protection 870 or ar-15

[Boats]

I do have neighbors and I dont think they would want 00.00 buck pellets flying through their house. Also, I have multiple family members around the house. If you are going to use a shotgun indoors and neighbors are a concern, lighter loads are still devastating at "inside the house" ranges. If I had to choose between a shotgun and an AR I would choose an AR with 55 grain hollow points that will fragment appart as they go through walls

Bruce.

The "Box 'o Truth" pretty much exposes a lot of the conventional wisdom about 5.56mm being used indoors as old wives tales. It doesn't matter if it is ball, or soft points, or JHPs, anything worth shooting at a human out of a 5.56mm rifle is going to penetrate multiple layers of drywall.

http://www.theboxotruth.com/index.htm

Even frangible, the stuff not intended for SD, penetrates drywall. Worse yet, 5.56 presents a bit of a huge problem for the self-defender.

Unlike common handgun rounds, 5.56 has a disturbing tendency to deviate from its aim point after striking drywall, to the point of total unpredictability as to the flight path.

In my mind, this causes 5.56 to violate one of the four basic rules for the shooter.

"Know your target and what lay beyond it."

A pistol round will carve a fairly straight path through drywall and will burrow into studs. Therefore, you can have a reasonable certainty of what might lay beyond its flight path. A miss with 5.56 means all bets are off as the round goes on penetrating far enough and fast enough in an unknown direction with a enough momentum to kill or maim an unintended target.

A shotgun will fire a tight initial group at room distances and the pellets will penetrate drywall as well, but the pellets take a predictable course and spread and as demonstrated at the Box, will penetrate fewer sheets of drywall than service caliber pistol rounds.

5.56 "breaking up" off of drywall is an internet exaggeration. It will eventually do so, but not fast enough to save you from a bad outcome in the next room or two if you hit a loved one unintentionally. Anything that can penetrate a bad guy adequately is going to also put the hurt on walls in the event of a miss.

 

[Bruce]

That is fine Boats, but the point is still that 00.00 buck and pistol rounds still keep going their direction of travel through several walls (and maybe the neighbors house) with lethal force.

Bruce.

 

[Boats]

I don't know about you, but if push came to shove, I'd rather risk the lives of my neighbors than those of my family.:winkkiss:

 

[SquatchWorks]

$585 cmmg bargin barrel ar-15

vs

$275 remington 870 with 18" Non-rifled barrel


870 wins hands down!!!!

 

[Gunner3456]

The "Box 'o Truth" pretty much exposes a lot of the conventional wisdom about 5.56mm being used indoors as old wives tales. It doesn't matter if it is ball, or soft points, or JHPs, anything worth shooting at a human out of a 5.56mm rifle is going to penetrate multiple layers of drywall.

http://www.theboxotruth.com/index.htm

Even frangible, the stuff not intended for SD, penetrates drywall. Worse yet, 5.56 presents a bit of a huge problem for the self-defender.

Unlike common handgun rounds, 5.56 has a disturbing tendency to deviate from its aim point after striking drywall, to the point of total unpredictability as to the flight path.

In my mind, this causes 5.56 to violate one of the four basic rules for the shooter.

"Know your target and what lay beyond it."

A pistol round will carve a fairly straight path through drywall and will burrow into studs. Therefore, you can have a reasonable certainty of what might lay beyond its flight path. A miss with 5.56 means all bets are off as the round goes on penetrating far enough and fast enough in an unknown direction with a enough momentum to kill or maim an unintended target.

A shotgun will fire a tight initial group at room distances and the pellets will penetrate drywall as well, but the pellets take a predictable course and spread and as demonstrated at the Box, will penetrate fewer sheets of drywall than service caliber pistol rounds.

5.56 "breaking up" off of drywall is an internet exaggeration. It will eventually do so, but not fast enough to save you from a bad outcome in the next room or two if you hit a loved one unintentionally. Anything that can penetrate a bad guy adequately is going to also put the hurt on walls in the event of a miss.

All very good and true, but the question isn't about home defense. The OP asked which is best for "overall defense." It sounds as if we are being asked to choose just one gun for all situations - either or.

What does the military use for that purpose - for clearing buildings, fighting outside, going on patrol...? mostly the 5.56 rifle. Do they outfit the troops routinely with Remington 870 Express 18" shotguns? No.

Imho if I can choose just one weapon from the two choices given, and I have to stick with it for "overall defense" it would be the 5.56.

If the SHTF and I have to defend in a variety of "overall" situations and I choose a defensive shotgun, I will be severely limited as to what I can do, due to a lack of range.

$.02

 

[Boats]

Not trying to be impolite, but you've bought into a misconception on several levels.

First of all, the "military" is a lot of different folks doing a lot of different things.

Perhaps the Army forms up squads into sticks and assaults buildings to clear them with M4 carbines, but even then, several key differences stand out:

1. There are several of them and only one of you.
2. They have select fire rifles.
3. They are told what to carry and use, no ifs, ands, or buts.
4. There will often be a "door guy" who is using a breaching shotgun or doing point service with a M9, it's not exclusively a M-4 affair in every situation.
5. Collateral damage is of little overall concern against possible hostiles and bystanders. Not so in the civilian world.

Additionally. "the military" does it a little to a lot differently in other branches. The Marines have always been a more shotgun using service than has the Army and in MOUT, it would be uncommon NOT to see at least one or two shotgun equipped Marines on a house raid rocking Benelli semi-autos.

The Navy, also "the military," is even more into the shotgun, especially for ship self-defense and for boarding operations. They have overpenetration concerns much like civilians do in that compromising a live steam pipe, or a jet fuel line during a shootout could be a lethal form of "backfire" to the shooter. Oddly enough, a well built combat shotgun is also a better "butt stroker" in CQB than is a M-4 with a collapsible stock.

Do they outfit the troops routinely with Remington 870 Express 18" shotguns? No.

"They" routinely equip Marines and sailors with shotguns much better than an 870 Express. Both the Benelli M4 and the Mossberg 590A1 are real combat shotguns, not a cheapened bird gun masquerading as a combat shotgun.

Imho if I can choose just one weapon from the two choices given, and I have to stick with it for "overall defense" it would be the 5.56.

If the SHTF and I have to defend in a variety of "overall" situations and I choose a defensive shotgun, I will be severely limited as to what I can do, due to a lack of range.

IMO "range" for a civilian is a vastly overrated concern. First of all, even if you live on five acres of property or more, you have to positively identify your target before shooting at it.

Secondly, I have been on this earth about 42 years now and other than the shooting at the Texas clock tower before I was born, I cannot think of one criminal incident where a private citizen legitimately defended himself at range with a rifle. The LA riots do come to mind, but reports of any looters being claimed by rifle fire are sketchy at best and a shotgun from a rooftop provides the same level of visual deterrence to an idiot banger as does a military pattern rifle.

Most criminal incidents by their very nature preclude range as a factor. To be in "imminent fear" of your death or bodily harm from an unlawful actor, you actually have to be in pretty close proximity to one another in all but the most unusual cases, ones wherein you probably don't have a long arm on you in the first place. In most states you are reasonably allowed to stand your ground, but that is not in a 500m circle. You will be relentlessly second guessed by the authorities for attempting to zap bad guys at any appreciable distance approaching more than 50 yards on the outside is my guess, especially, in town, or where easy retreat or breaking contact was possible.

Even in a LA Riot or a drowned New Orleans, the law is coming back, and if you zapped someone at 200m and they catch wind of it, there will be an inquiry as to the circumstances.

And thinking that the shotgun is limited to 35m and in is outdated. I would have agreed with you even 10 years ago that a shotgun was too range limited to be a SHTF weapon. With the advent of slugs, even with a primitive bead sight, ringing a 100m gong is child's play. With better sights, such as those found on a Benelli M4 or a the Mossberg 590, which have rifle style sighting systems, 200m is in reach with practice. That is enough range for the real world, where even most infantry gun fights held outside of Afghanistan are within 100m.

IF things go all Mad Max, I would be reaching for a military pattern rifle myself. In a world with prosecuting attorneys and sheep like jury members, I'm leaving the assault rifles in the safe for the "bumps in the night," the far more likely scenario in "overall defense" than is circling the wagons with a carbine.

A whole world of hurt in one convenient package:

 

[Gunner3456]

Not trying to be impolite, but you've bought into a misconception on several levels.

First of all, the "military" is a lot of different folks doing a lot of different things.

Perhaps the Army forms up squads into sticks and assaults buildings to clear them with M4 carbines, but even then, several key differences stand out:

1. There are several of them and only one of you.
2. They have select fire rifles.
3. They are told what to carry and use, no ifs, ands, or buts.
4. There will often be a "door guy" who is using a breaching shotgun or doing point service with a M9, it's not exclusively a M-4 affair in every situation.
5. Collateral damage is of little overall concern against possible hostiles and bystanders. Not so in the civilian world.

Additionally. "the military" does it a little to a lot differently in other branches. The Marines have always been a more shotgun using service than has the Army and in MOUT, it would be uncommon NOT to see at least one or two shotgun equipped Marines on a house raid rocking Benelli semi-autos.

The Navy, also "the military," is even more into the shotgun, especially for ship self-defense and for boarding operations. They have overpenetration concerns much like civilians do in that compromising a live steam pipe, or a jet fuel line during a shootout could be a lethal form of "backfire" to the shooter. Oddly enough, a well built combat shotgun is also a better "butt stroker" in CQB than is a M-4 with a collapsible stock.



"They" routinely equip Marines and sailors with shotguns much better than an 870 Express. Both the Benelli M4 and the Mossberg 590A1 are real combat shotguns, not a cheapened bird gun masquerading as a combat shotgun.



IMO "range" for a civilian is a vastly overrated concern. First of all, even if you live on five acres of property or more, you have to positively identify your target before shooting at it.

Secondly, I have been on this earth about 42 years now and other than the shooting at the Texas clock tower before I was born, I cannot think of one criminal incident where a private citizen legitimately defended himself at range with a rifle. The LA riots do come to mind, but reports of any looters being claimed by rifle fire are sketchy at best and a shotgun from a rooftop provides the same level of visual deterrence to an idiot banger as does a military pattern rifle.

Most criminal incidents by their very nature preclude range as a factor. To be in "imminent fear" of your death or bodily harm from an unlawful actor, you actually have to be in pretty close proximity to one another in all but the most unusual cases, ones wherein you probably don't have a long arm on you in the first place. In most states you are reasonably allowed to stand your ground, but that is not in a 500m circle. You will be relentlessly second guessed by the authorities for attempting to zap bad guys at any appreciable distance approaching more than 50 yards on the outside is my guess, especially, in town, or where easy retreat or breaking contact was possible.

Even in a LA Riot or a drowned New Orleans, the law is coming back, and if you zapped someone at 200m and they catch wind of it, there will be an inquiry as to the circumstances.

And thinking that the shotgun is limited to 35m and in is outdated. I would have agreed with you even 10 years ago that a shotgun was too range limited to be a SHTF weapon. With the advent of slugs, even with a primitive bead sight, ringing a 100m gong is child's play. With better sights, such as those found on a Benelli M4 or a the Mossberg 590, which have rifle style sighting systems, 200m is in reach with practice. That is enough range for the real world, where even most infantry gun fights held outside of Afghanistan are within 100m.

IF things go all Mad Max, I would be reaching for a military pattern rifle myself. In a world with prosecuting attorneys and sheep like jury members, I'm leaving the assault rifles in the safe for the "bumps in the night," the far more likely scenario in "overall defense" than is circling the wagons with a carbine.

A whole world of hurt in one convenient package:

I still think you're missing the point. In this scenario, forever and ever, you get to chose just one weapon for self defense. You don't get to have multiple people with multiple weapons, or a choice depending on the circumstances.

You get to make one choice just once for all circumstances. You don't know what the future holds.

To each his own but for me the AR is far more versatile, can provide more than three times as many rounds in the same space and weight, holds more rounds, is a deadly round, and will do the job from close up to 600 yards out.

If I have a justifiable shooting I'm not going to worry about explaining why I chose a 5.56 round instead of blowing a hole in a BG with a blast of buckshot or pumping him full of holes with a Glock 23.

I do not believe that the military would limit itself to shotguns only. I believe that if they did they would be quickly wiped out.

If you want to limit yourself to only a shotgun, that's up to you.

 

[Boats]

Well the entire "debate" as it were, is artificial since my personal answer is rifle and shotgun, depending on the application, but for a person financially forced into having only one long gun, the 12 gauge shotgun is a viable choice with less upfront buy in.

"Forever and ever" a AR rifle doesn't even make the short list for me because it is too maintenance intensive and not robust enough to be an "end of the world rifle."

If I had post apocalyptic access to parts, cleaning tools, and depot level service, sure, the AR-15 can come along.

People trying to perpetually turn the AR into "the one true sword" amuse me to no end. It just isn't that good. The ill-advised and totally unconstitutional import ban has elevated it to a prominence it might otherwise not enjoy.

 

[Gunner3456]

Well the entire "debate" as it were, is artificial since my personal answer is rifle and shotgun, depending on the application, but for a person financially forced into having only one long gun, the 12 gauge shotgun is a viable choice with less upfront buy in.

"Forever and ever" a AR rifle doesn't even make the short list for me because it is too maintenance intensive and not robust enough to be an "end of the world rifle."

If I had post apocalyptic access to parts, cleaning tools, and depot level service, sure, the AR-15 can come along.

People trying to perpetually turn the AR into "the one true sword" amuse me to no end. It just isn't that good. The ill-advised, and totally unconstitutional, import ban has elevated it to a prominence it might otherwise not enjoy.

I have a question for you. It's an IQ test.

Are you capable of simply reading the original question and comprehending it without the space cadet act?

That question is so simple...

 

[Boats]

I have a question for you. It's an IQ test.

Are you capable of simply reading the original question and comprehending it without the space cadet act?

That question is so simple...

You have defined for yourself, what is "overall defense." I think your military-centric definition was absurd and not much reflective of life outside of a war zone. Like it matters for an individual what the armed forces are using?

For most folks in the real world, even a crappy 870 Express, as much as I loathe Remington, is going to be the better choice from a cost, versatility, training, and likeliest use standpoint.

Nothing "space cadet" about it.

 

[Bon Sauvage]

Overall protection?.......AR without question!

 

[Trlsmn]

Overall protection?.......AR without question!

Question.

 

[pogi]

:nuts:

Where's the AK option?

870 by default......

 

[Boats]

:nuts:

Where's the AK option?

870 by default......

Don't go all "spacey" on a boring two question poll when both choices suck, okay?

 

[hondakilla98]

Don't go all "spacey" on a boring two question poll when both choices suck, okay?

LOL!!! Ak sbr to the rescue!!! Just my opinion.

 

[Gunner3456]

You have defined for yourself, what is "overall defense." I think your military-centric definition was absurd and not much reflective of life outside of a war zone. Like it matters for an individual what the armed forces are using?

For most folks in the real world, even a crappy 870 Express, as much as I loathe Remington, is going to be the better choice from a cost, versatility, training, and likeliest use standpoint.

Nothing "space cadet" about it.

OK, got the IQ reading. I'll help you out here.

On this forum we often discuss "what happens if there is a major natural or political disaster and you have to bug out (and maybe head for the hills.") What if you then come up against roving bands or gangs? Some of us think that's possible, even if not all think it's probable.

This poll has two options and the question has two options only.

Two comes after one and doesn't include three.

 

[RobertJ.]

The real answer to the question is this: Mossberg 590.

Why take a bird gun or a varmint rifle to a gun fight? From its non pinching shell lifter to its ambidextrous tang safety, the Mossberg was built as a fighting shotgun, not cobbled together out of a modified wing shooter.:winkkiss:

Please! Next you'll be telling us that Taurus is superior to S&W or Beretta!

No, seriously, I know that the 590 is a true fighting shotgun. I also know that it shoots as good as an 870. But to say that it's a better gun than the 870 is laughable. And I did "cobble" mine together, by trimming the barrel to 20", and adding the mag. extension, heat shield, and fiber optic sight. But what I wound up with was a gun that not only shoots flawlessly, but with the beautiful walnut stock and the rich blueing, is a lot more pleasing to the eye than any Mossberg.

The Remington 870 is the standard by which all other pump shotguns are judged.

 

[Gunner3456]

Please! Next you'll be telling us that Taurus is superior to S&W or Beretta!

No, seriously, I know that the 590 is a true fighting shotgun. I also know that it shoots as good as an 870. But to say that it's a better gun than the 870 is laughable. And I did "cobble" mine together, by trimming the barrel to 20", and adding the mag. extension, heat shield, and fiber optic sight. But what I wound up with was a gun that not only shoots flawlessly, but with the beautiful walnut stock and the rich blueing, is a lot more pleasing to the eye than any Mossberg.

The Remington 870 is the standard by which all other pump shotguns are judged.

Hey, I agree wholeheartedly. I could sure see cutting a Wingmaster down (or changing barrels) and adding an extension tube, or getting an 870 Police, etc. Those are gorgeous and high quality guns.

In this case the OP started a poll and asked a question, giving us two choices. All chatter outside of that is off topic and even thread jacking.

He wanted to know if we could choose just one gun, either an 870 Express or an AR-15, what percentage of us would chose one or the other.

It's his thread. Why is it just killing some people to simply answer his question?

I voted AR and stated AR. Others can vote 870 Express. How simple is that?

 

[Boats]

OK, got the IQ reading. I'll help you out here.

On this forum we often discuss "what happens if there is a major natural or political disaster and you have to bug out (and maybe head for the hills.") What if you then come up against roving bands or gangs? Some of us think that's possible, even if not all think it's probable.

This poll has two options and the question has two options only.

Two comes after one and doesn't include three.

Help thyself faithful defender of the short bus poll. In lots of threads, if the two offered choices stink, third options are a game in itself, even if it is highjacking. Who knows, maybe someone will be saved from becoming another poodle shooter or from buying the craptastic version of the Wingmaster?

If the crosswalk was 50 yards up the street and there was no traffic I'll bet you wouldn't jaywalk.

 

[Gunner3456]

Help thyself faithful defender of the short bus poll. In lots of threads, if the two offered choices stink, third options are a game in itself, even if it is highjacking. Who knows, maybe someone will be saved from becoming another poodle shooter or from buying the craptastic version of the Wingmaster?

I see. You are accusing the originator of this thread of making a "short bus poll."

Also, you want to insult everyone here who has an 870 Express by calling it the "craptastic version of the Wingmaster?"

Don't you think you're a little new here to start insulting people, insulting their guns, insulting and disrespecting their threads, hijacking their threads, and generally trying to run the place?