SBRs and Home Clearing

[John Badertscher]

This is primarily for Rick or DR, but I'd be interested in other opinions.

I know you prefer a handgun for clearing the home as opposed to a shotgun. Primarily as the handgun is much harder for a BG to take away.

I was wondering if this preference extended to an SBR as well. I presume there is little functional difference between a shotgun disarm and an SBR disarm and so a handgun would still be your preference.

Does an SBR have any advantages that mitigate the choice of a pistol? I know the .223 round is supposed to penetrate walls less than a 9mm, but I don't know that this is enough reason to choose a long gun over a pistol.

[Brad VanHorn]

I really know better than to chime in... my posts tend to draw fire when I talk about CQB and shotguns :-)

Up front, I think home CQB is a bad idea of most people, unless circumstances dictate you must. If you really think you've got an intruder, set up a defensive position, call 911, and let the police do their thing. However, if you have family in other parts of the house, and have to "rescue" them before calling 911, then yes you probably need to maneuver.

As we all know, weapons training makes a significant difference when it comes to competence with a gun (of any type). However, if we assume all things being equal, and in the home CQB scenario, I think the handgun is the simple choice for maneuverability and flexibility. Yes, it trades away wound potential of a rifle or shotgun, but you gain advantages in retention and agility. You can possibly even hide the handgun if you suddenly find yourself looking at one of your kids getting a glass of warm milk...

In a previous thread I've clearly stated (I think) my preference for rifle or pistol caliber carbines over shotguns. There are always exceptions, but in general the carbine is lighter, shorter, has less recoil, higher ammo capacity, and is faster/easier to reload. Higher penetration of walls and such could be a disadvantage, but if it's truly a significant concern, you can always use frangible ammo.

The carbine for home CQB can be a solid choice. Some factors I consider important towards this selection include shooter competence, floor plan, furniture layout, and location of family members. An open floor plan with furniture widely spaced makes for easier manuever of a longer weapon. Having family secured obviously makes field of fire or the need to use one hand to guide children or some such, less of a worry.

By way of example, here are my considerations. It's just me and my wife in our home. Assuming she's in bed, where she normally is in the middle of the night, I have no family concerns if I have to maneuver. My home has a tight series of hallway turns and blind spots getting out of the bedroom area; however, once I get out of the hallway, my floor plan is wide open. I have great visibility and fields of fire from the end of the hall. I also have a modest amount of furniture, and all kept close to the walls. This complements the open floor plan with regard to ease of manuever. I also have night lights in various outer rooms, which (unless extinguished) provide backlighting in those spaces, giving me better chance to see.

My initial response will be a 1911 and a Surfire flashlight coming from my nightstand. My wife has her Sig P225 and a Surefire in her nightstand. My gun safe is immediately available, and I can upgrade to either my AR carbine or my 11-87 as desired (I know I've repeatedly said "shotguns bad", but until I get my second AR back, I'm stuck with the shotgun, which I'm quite comfortable employing, even if I consider it less than optimal). If I truly felt the house were invaded, and presuming they have not yet reached my bedroom, I would give the AR to my wife, and I'd take the 11-87; then we'd bunker down and dial 911 on the cell phone. If I'm hearing something out of the ordinary, but am still uncertain whether someone is in the house, I'd probably take the AR and investigate as far as the end of the hall. If I'm hearing noises, but am relatively certain it's something ordinary, then I'll work through the house with my 1911, with my wife securing the end of the hall with her P225.

Some other things you can do to make a carbine (or shotgun or rifle) more defensible should you have a surprise close encounter... Consider a bayonet if your weapon will take one, and learn the thrust and slash. It may sound extreme (or even absurd), but few things are as potentially lethal as a well executed bayonet thrust. If you think your buttstock will take the punishment (though in a crisis who cares), learn the buttstroke and smash. I teach all these techniques to Marines and am available for lessons ;)

Anyway, I'm not sure if I've answered your question, but hopefully this was somewhat helpful. And, now that everyone has my response plan, come on over :)

[John Badertscher]

Good answer Brad,

I've seen people obsessed with an M4 SBR with a can over at m4carbine and was wondering why. While I'd love an SBR with can in general it has less to do with home defense.

I concur with yours and Rick's earlier assessment. A pistol does seem to be a better choice. Hell I think CZ even makes a bayonet for a pistol. :D

[Paul Sharp]

For me, I'll take a long gun over the pistol any day. It's all in the training. I run a 16" barrel flat-top with an A1 fixed stock. I also have a A2 flat-top. With the EeoTech you can move the stock up over your shoulder for negotiating tight corners and still get a sight picture when needed.

Re; retention. Again, it's all in the training. I can assure you that you can leave a nice 'donut' shaped welt/bruise as well as break collar bones with a jet comp equipped AR should a retention issue arise. No bayonet required but it would've been nice.

It's always going to come down to your training.

[Joe Ford]

In my and I bet most houses a handgun may be better, But an interesting thought your post brings to mind. If I was to make a post about using reloaded ammo in my carry/defensive gun alot of forum posters would have a coniption. Claiming I am opening myself to all kinds of prosecution and liability issues. If you follow that school of thought can you imagine the can of worms opened by using a Class whatever it is SBR ?

[John Badertscher]

Claiming I am opening myself to all kinds of prosecution and liability issues. If you follow that school of thought can you imagine the can of worms opened by using a Class whatever it is SBR ?

I've never really understood that logic. I can imagine it being a liability issue if you as a shooter are claiming a shooting was accidental.

However if the shooting is justified and you say "yep I meant to shoot, a-hole shouldn't have been in my house" what difference does it make...he's still dead/wounded.

I think the SBR was primarily so you could use a can. Putting a suppressor on a 16" barrel might be a bit too long.

In terms of retention, since Paul mentioned a jet comp:

What would the muzzle flash from the jet comp do to someone who wasn't standing in front of the muzzle but off to the side trying to grab the barrel gun?

[Rick Simes]

A legal gun is a legal gun. I don't see how you would raise any eyebrows with an SBR. An evil "machine gun" maybe, an SBR I just don't see it. Its pretty easy to articulate your reasoning for an SBR. With full auto you'd have a hard time. Not that either one is wrong. It's all about perception...

Handloads and defensive ammo are a no no. I listed several cases on the previous forum where it was an issue. With all the excellent ammo out there why bother? Ayoob lists a bunch of potential pitfalls and issues with using reloads for defense and backs it up with numerous cases in his, Judicious Use of Deadly Force class. If you carry a gun you need to take that class.

For me I still prefer a handgun all things considered. I have a bunch of kids I would have to grab if something happened. Not to mention all the other issues we've talked about numerous times.

As far as comps go, I like them on fun guns only. I've tried them indoors and just found that they kick up a lot of dust and knock debris off the ceiling. Not to mention flash and blast issues. However, I've not had a chance to try the Jet Comp.

[Kevin Apland]

In my and I bet most houses a handgun may be better, But an interesting thought your post brings to mind. If I was to make a post about using reloaded ammo in my carry/defensive gun alot of forum posters would have a coniption. Claiming I am opening myself to all kinds of prosecution and liability issues. If you follow that school of thought can you imagine the can of worms opened by using a Class whatever it is SBR ?

Several years ago, there was a home invastion robbery in Albuquerque, NM. The person living there was an IPSC shooter who had his racegun out. Don't remember exactly what he was doing, be he lit up the bad guy several, quickly.

Prosecutor pressed charges, something about the nature of the gun being what it was. I can't find info on it at the moment, but that story has always stuck in my mind.

[Kevin Apland]

A legal gun is a legal gun. I don't see how you would raise any eyebrows with an SBR. An evil "machine gun" maybe, an SBR I just don't see it. Its pretty easy to articulate your reasoning for an SBR. With full auto you'd have a hard time. Not that either one is wrong. It's all about perception...

Handloads and defensive ammo are a no no. I listed several cases on the previous forum where it was an issue. With all the excellent ammo out there why bother? Ayoob lists a bunch of potential pitfalls and issues with using reloads for defense and backs it up with numerous cases in his, Judicious Use of Deadly Force class. If you carry a gun you need to take that class.

For me I still prefer a handgun all things considered. I have a bunch of kids I would have to grab if something happened. Not to mention all the other issues we've talked about numerous times.

As far as comps go, I like them on fun guns only. I've tried them indoors and just found that they kick up a lot of dust and knock debris off the ceiling. Not to mention flash and blast issues. However, I've not had a chance to try the Jet Comp.

I remember Jew for Preservation for Firearms Ownership looked into this. They could not find a single case of anyone ever being prosecuted for using handloaded ammo to defend themselves.

[Rick Simes]

No one is going to get prosecuted strictly on the basis of using reloads! What we're talking about here is a situation where you've shot someone. While you're on trial for that the prosecutor can conjure up a really negative image in the jurors minds about why you felt the need to craft your own super-lethal man-killing arounds. Granted most of the time when a citizen uses a gun it's a clean shoot and no charges are filed. However, sometimes all does not go that well. It's not the reloaded ammo alone that will get you in trouble but it is one more thing that can be twisted and used to make you look like some kind of vigilante wacko.

I do have one case in my notes concerning handloads: NJ vs Lynn Bais.
If you have any doubt, or need more cases call Lethal Force Institute and talk to one of their instructors.

[Joe Ford]

"It's not the reloaded ammo alone that will get you in trouble but it is one more thing that can be twisted and used to make you look like some kind of vigilante wacko".
Simes

And that was the point I was making, The reloaded ammo issue has been hshed out many times some feal it may matter others dont and no going back and forth will ever change that. My point was if you follow the above logic (which I dont) that same effect would happen if you used some kinda SBR class weapon. Just substitute your evil homemade ammo with the term "Sawed Off"