View Full Version : Good Old Joe...
Joe Biden on home protection. Even the guys at The Onion don't know what to do with this one (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrzyRXSxuAg). Of course the VP does have a history (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lm96bIIM-9A) of this kind of thing.
catherine
2-20-13, 11:21am
Ya gotta love him.
iris lily
2-20-13, 11:26am
Joe Biden on home protection. Even the guys at The Onion don't know what to do with this one (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrzyRXSxuAg). Of course the VP does have a history (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lm96bIIM-9A) of this kind of thing.
In the interest of fairness the context of his talk was: get rid of your high powered automatic super dooper whatever gun and get a simple double barreled shotgun.
Even then, when I was listening, it gave me pause because he DID seem to love his gun.
Even then, when I was listening, it gave me pause because he DID seem to love his gun.
$10 says he has a feminine name for it.
Well, he is right. Two blasts from a double barrel will deter all but the most determined home invader. !Splat!
True that, but I especially liked the part about going out on the porch and blasting a couple rounds into the air as a deterrent to someone rummaging around in your house. Most folks realize that would leave you with an empty gun (if you start with a double barrel). Of course a larger magazine would solve that problem...
The Storyteller
2-20-13, 2:33pm
Well, he is right. Two blasts from a double barrel will deter all but the most determined home invader. !Splat!
Except he should have said pump action. But yeah, he is.
Foolishness.
Politics, same difference.
Foolishness.
There are others, but Joe is probably the single biggest reason I hope the President's heart keeps beating.
Except he should have said pump action. But yeah, he is.
Or a semi-automatic.
The Storyteller
2-20-13, 5:12pm
Or a semi-automatic.
Pump action IS semi-automatic. ;)
Pump action IS semi-automatic. ;)
I love semantics. Pump action requires user interaction, therefore is not automatic, semi or otherwise, although the distinction is certainly lost on the target.
Pump action IS semi-automatic. ;)
By that standard, a double-barrel shotgun is semi-automatic, as is a revolver.
The Storyteller
2-20-13, 6:28pm
I love semantics. Pump action requires user interaction, therefore is not automatic, semi or otherwise, although the distinction is certainly lost on the target.
Then there is no such thing as an automatic, since all guns require user interaction. ;) But fair enough, I get what you mean. Stand corrected. I just love the action of a pump action.
There was actually a study done where they hooked people up and tested the effect of the seating of a shotgun round. It engendered more fear than the actual round going off. I'm not big on home protection, I own my guns for critter predators. But I wouldn't trade a good shotgun for either type of protection.
I still love Joe no matter what comes out of his mouth!
There was actually a study done where they hooked people up and tested the effect of the seating of a shotgun round. It engendered more fear than the actual round going off. .My favorite scenes in movies is when someone (always the "good" guy) is walking around with a pump action shotgun and continuially racks it every few minutes - without ever firing! Dude, you just racked out all your ammo :-)! But I guess they need the sound effect to instill fear into the "bad" guy they are looking for.
Well, he is right. Two blasts from a double barrel will deter all but the most determined home invader. !Splat! Unless 1) you miss and 2) there are more then 2 people. Of course the sound will deter most people as long as they can't see you only have a 2-shot shotgun. I live in gangland home invasionville and they come enmass with some serious firepower.
Not to start up the gun debate again but I recently saw this on another forum: And yes I am a democrat and even, on some issues, a liberal and love crazy old Joey B!!
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/02/missouri-democrats-intruduce-legislation-to-confiscate-firearms-gives-gunowners-90-days-to-turn-in-guns/
There was actually a study done where they hooked people up and tested the effect of the seating of a shotgun round. It engendered more fear than the actual round going off.
I suspect this is pretty much an urban legend applicable to inexperienced people who watch too many movies.
If I am in a scenario and hear someone racking the action of a shotgun, I know:
- they weren't smart enough to already have it loaded...
- they have a shotgun, a weapon of limited range and slow rate of fire
- where they are...
I always have a shell chambered in my shotgun - no racking just silently flip off the safety. Which is pretty much what every law enforcement/military person does so I don't know why they always depict it in movies as having to be racked. Same with a pistol - they always have to chamber a round. Umm...doesn't happen like that IRL for most people.
ToomuchStuff
2-21-13, 5:08pm
Nothing is going to cover all possibilities. I did have a friend who heard someone trying to pick the lock of his apartment. He was able to quietly go to the door, and one pump of the shotgun and he heard running, up the stairs and could tell which apartment they went back into. Bae, you know sounds can have a multitude of effects, good and bad.
Biden wasn't talking about intruders IN the house, he mentioned if they were trying to get in. In a secluded area, where your neighbors can HEAR the shotgun blast, this tells them your armed (it doesn't say it is your only weapon) and may alert your neighbors. (to call LEO's as this is assuming your phone line was cut and no handy cell, which should have been dialed at the same time).
But you will never hear a complete story from a politician, any more then common sense is really common. Kind of like saying the law and morality or the law and justice are the same things; no they are not.
"Warning shots" are moronic, sorry.
Firing off a gun hoping to alert neighbors, instead of calling 911 is moronic. If your phone line is cut like in the movies, you have bigger problems to deal with, immediately... And you probably don't want to be wasting your ammo.
Firing off a gun with no clear target is moronic.
Firing off a gun inside your home when you don't have to is moronic, and tactically unsound. Your vision and hearing will now be significantly impaired (really, fire off a 12 gauge in your home in a small room or hallway, let me know how that works for you...), and your foe will know where you are.
It's failsauce all around.
Looks cool in movies though I bet.
I had a fellow a few years ago try to break into my home. He could see through the window of my back door. Where my huge Newfoundland was growling at him, waiting to eat him. He continued to break in. He continued when he saw me there, with a shotgun in my hand. He continued when I raised the shotgun and pointed it at the door, intent upon firing. A little light went on in his head about 100 milliseconds before I discharged the weapon, and he fled. I'd already taken the slack out of the trigger, he came very very close, the only thing that saved him was that I had to move a little bit so as not to injure my dog.
The sight of the large dog, the shotgun, and all the noise didn't deter him. Nor did the police station that adjoined my back yard just a few feet away from the door. What I think finally caused him to reconsider was that I *was* going to shoot him that very moment. I wasn't dorking around with racking the action, or warning shots, or verbal threats, or wavering in my resolve.
Hey a short barreled shotgun was our weapon of choice. The little Rossi could make a 6 foot wide hole if pointed at a spot. Plus the sound of the action and a yell should be enough. Now I am not going to go running after someone but if I am holed up and they are coming in, well, the shotgun is good when you are nervous.
Got shotgun shells when our neighbor had a breakin at 8am.
Hey a short barreled shotgun was our weapon of choice. The little Rossi could make a 6 foot wide hole if pointed at a spot.
You might want to actually pattern that shotgun with your ammunition of choice.
It is a common misconception that shotgun patterns are huge, and that you don't need to accurately aim/point them. This can lead to trouble.
Example: at 10 yards, using 00 buckshot, with an improved cylinder choke vs a full choke, a pattern size of 3 1/4" vs 1 3/4" was observed:
http://www.theboxotruth.com/images3/44-6.jpg
My only home defense weapon is a short barrel 12 ga. pump with a pistol grip. Joe isn't the most articulate on the matter, but I agree with him in principle. I enjoyed this photo of some early gun rights advocates demonstrating at Mulford Act debates back in the day. The story was featured in a recent PBS special. They seemed to favor shotguns, too. (I met Bobby Seale years ago, but after his Panther years. He was a nice and articulate man and we had a good discussion.)
http://www.simplelivingforum.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=1139&d=1361467279 (http://www.simplelivingforum.net/album.php?albumid=61&attachmentid=1138)
Example: at 10 yards, using 00 buckshot, with an improved cylinder choke vs a full choke, a pattern size of 3 1/4" vs 1 3/4" was observed:
I always thought IC, or even cylinder choke in the case of a home shortened barrel, would definitely be preferable in a home defense situation. The idea of 00 buck is something I really hadn't given much thought to. My personal choice would be something along the lines of #4 shot. In truth that is mostly because I keep some of that around anyway for the occasional duck hunt. I like the the balance of having a lot of pellets, but still ones of significant size to do critical damage (like you bae, if I'm forced into the situation where I'm aiming it won't be at the sky for a warning shot). A quick Google tells me there are ~10 pellets of 00 buck in a 2 3/4" shell (12 gauge). A guess on my part would put the #4 shot somewhere around 150 pellets in the same shell (please feel free to correct if anyone has a more accurate figure). I understand the concept of penetration and have no doubt that the 00 buck is very effective in that way, but I'm just wondering if there would be any advantage to a denser pattern using smaller shot. I'm assuming the spread won't be much, if any, different at least until you get to ranges that would be far beyond anything encountered in a home defense situation.
My opinion has been at the close ranges within or very near the house any of the larger sized shot would work, especially in my shorted barrel open choke. I have shied away from steel waterfowl shot. I don't know how it works with people, but it is definitely not as effective as lead on waterfowl. I've also not wanted large buckshot due to the lesser number of pellets.
I think my home defense gun has two shot in the magazine. Unlike other opinions, I do not believe in having a shell in the chamber. I guess all of my gun safety knowledge, for what it is worth, says this is an invitation for an accident. I've considered getting an extended magazine. I think they are available to 7 or 8 shell capacity.
Actually, a shortened barrel pump seems like the simple living solution to home defense. Used Mossberg 500s or Remington 870s are common and inexpensive used and can be modified to match personal preference with a little gunsmithing or additional accessories.
The Storyteller
2-22-13, 11:14am
"Warning shots" are moronic, sorry.
Firing off a gun hoping to alert neighbors, instead of calling 911 is moronic. If your phone line is cut like in the movies, you have bigger problems to deal with, immediately... And you probably don't want to be wasting your ammo.
Firing off a gun with no clear target is moronic.
Firing off a gun inside your home when you don't have to is moronic, and tactically unsound. Your vision and hearing will now be significantly impaired (really, fire off a 12 gauge in your home in a small room or hallway, let me know how that works for you...), and your foe will know where you are.
It's failsauce all around.
Looks cool in movies though I bet.
I had a fellow a few years ago try to break into my home. He could see through the window of my back door. Where my huge Newfoundland was growling at him, waiting to eat him. He continued to break in. He continued when he saw me there, with a shotgun in my hand. He continued when I raised the shotgun and pointed it at the door, intent upon firing. A little light went on in his head about 100 milliseconds before I discharged the weapon, and he fled. I'd already taken the slack out of the trigger, he came very very close, the only thing that saved him was that I had to move a little bit so as not to injure my dog.
The sight of the large dog, the shotgun, and all the noise didn't deter him. Nor did the police station that adjoined my back yard just a few feet away from the door. What I think finally caused him to reconsider was that I *was* going to shoot him that very moment. I wasn't dorking around with racking the action, or warning shots, or verbal threats, or wavering in my resolve.
So you're saying the shotgun as a home protection weapon worked?
It is amusing to me that the pro-gun anti-gun control crowd are suddenly anti-shotgun, just because Joe Biden sings its praises.
When I first entered the Corps, one of my first duty stations housed tactical nukes, and I was one of the people who guarded those nukes. When on site, whether in the tower or walking the perimeter, we used M14s for their range and accuracy. Because you may need to pick off assailants at a great distance, I assume. When we were back at the barracks on standby and there was an alarm or we went out on a drill, we were armed with pump action shotguns. There has to be a reason for that. When it comes to protecting high security items like nuclear weapons, the US military does not screw around with half-measures.
It is also quizzical that so many cop cars are armed with shotguns, and not assault rifles, considering they are so ineffective.
A shotgun is loud, it is powerful, and if it hits someone anywhere on their body, it is going to do a great deal of damage. You are more likely to disable an intruder with one shotgun round than with a single shot any other weapon, and that is the preferred course.
One of the demonstrations I did with my kids to give them an idea what they were dealing with was to shoot a gallon milk jug, filled with water, from 10 or 15 feet. This was always done while teaching them to trap shoot so would have been with small, #7 1/2 or #8, shot. The jug exploding always got a round of cheers. The impression of telling them that's what would happen to their baby sister's mid-section if they mishandled the gun was more impressive. Anyway, from an inside the house range of 10 or 15 feet I'm not sure it really makes a difference what size the shot is.
So you're saying the shotgun as a home protection weapon worked?
It is amusing to me that the pro-gun anti-gun control crowd are suddenly anti-shotgun, just because Joe Biden sings its praises.
When I first entered the Corps, one of my first duty stations housed tactical nukes, and I was one of the people who guarded those nukes. When on site, whether in the tower or walking the perimeter, we used M14s for their range and accuracy. Because you may need to pick off assailants at a great distance, I assume. When we were back at the barracks on standby and there was an alarm or we went out on a drill, we were armed with pump action shotguns. There has to be a reason for that. When it comes to protecting high security items like nuclear weapons, the US military does not screw around with half-measures.
It is also quizzical that so many cop cars are armed with shotguns, and not assault rifles, considering they are so ineffective.
A shotgun is loud, it is powerful, and if it hits someone anywhere on their body, it is going to do a great deal of damage. You are more likely to disable an intruder with one shotgun round than with a single shot any other weapon, and that is the preferred course. I agree Storyteller. When we boarded a vessel we always had 3 people on a boarding team - one person with a M-16 and another with a .12 gauge riot or combat shotgun and a third with one or the other and all with handguns (pistols) as well and one or 2 people on "the Mother Ship" with M-60's or .50's. The riot shotgun was used for close-in situations in all those tight spaces aboard ships. I feel the same about those close-in tight situations oin my house although my home defense wepon of choice (i.e. the one I grab if I hear a noise) is a .357 Magnum 6 shot revolver because it's usually the closest thing to me and.
But on the other hand, for my sister's job - security officer for a defense contractor - she and all the other officer's were required to carry a pistol (Glock 9 mm) and an AR-15 but no one had to carry a shotgun. It was a huge site (few thousand acres) abutting Camp Pentalton and they had to patrol the perimeter as well as go into closed buildings in remote areas (alone). So apparently the defense dept (who mandated the weapons for officers) felt a shotgun wasn't needed. So I guess what choices of firearms needed for defensive purposes, at home and on the job, is just in the eye of the beholder. I likea handgun myself - and a pistol preferably - but think a shotgun is best for most people unless they have lots of handgun firering experience.
The shotgun was a fine choice for me, in that particular location. I was also shooting 500+ rounds through that shotgun every week in practice, so I was more than familiar with it.
It would however not be the first tool I would recommend for many circumstances and people. I've mentioned some of the reasons above.
Nowadays, I choose a rifle and/or handgun, my shotguns have been demoted to sporting and hunting activities.
joe can i use a saiga-12 instead of a double?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.