Neanderthal that I am I would have a bayonet mounted on an AR-15. I received bayonet training when I went through BCT at Fort Dix 50 years ago, at close range cold steel....one of the arguments against using a long gun at close range is that the enemy might grab the barrel, a nice forward thrust with an M-7 would discourage that. Also a sling. Jeff Cooper advocated a lanyard, noting it's very tough to take a firearm away when it's attached to the user. There was an article in a recent American Rifleman by a retired SF E-9 on use of the AR for home defense.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
AR-15 Suitable For Home Defense
- Thread starter tacstar
- Start date
Pretty much any gun has the potential to penetrate walls and injure others. Likewise pretty much any gun can damage your hearing when discharged in a confined room without ear protection, and any gun can stop a threat with good shot placement. So to me the most important factor in home defense is magazine capacity.
I want enough rounds to deal with the worse case scenario, i.e. dealing with three armed home invaders. Since the average police officer misses three out of four shots in a fire fight, I have to assume I will also miss many shots, especially when scared in the dark shooting at moving targets.
For this reason I keep a semi-auto pistol (CZ 75BD) at bedside loaded and chambered with 17 rounds, and a spare magazine with 16 rounds next to it. To me the worse thing that can happen is to run out of ammunition when fighting for your life. An AR-15 would also be quite suitable and save a magazine change, but is too big for me to keep at bedside.
Tom
I want enough rounds to deal with the worse case scenario, i.e. dealing with three armed home invaders. Since the average police officer misses three out of four shots in a fire fight, I have to assume I will also miss many shots, especially when scared in the dark shooting at moving targets.
For this reason I keep a semi-auto pistol (CZ 75BD) at bedside loaded and chambered with 17 rounds, and a spare magazine with 16 rounds next to it. To me the worse thing that can happen is to run out of ammunition when fighting for your life. An AR-15 would also be quite suitable and save a magazine change, but is too big for me to keep at bedside.
Tom
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
That is a misunderstanding. While prolonged exposure (as found in industrial settings or around aircraft) is bad, we know that a single sharp exposure to gunfire has caused significant problems for folks.
Many will disagree but I don't favor any long gun inside the home unless you have a very spacious and open home. Too much chance of an intruder getting in your face and wrestling for control of the weapon. Again, I have heard from many he men who swear it could never happen to them. I am no he man. I want a gun I can keep close to my body. Also a center fire rifle round has too much penetration for my comfort. Outside? Heck yeah.
Theohazard
New member
Not this again. This myth has been debunked already several times in this thread. And it has been debunked in countless other threads here on TFL and on other gun forums.SaxonPig said:Also a center fire rifle round has too much penetration for my comfort.
If you're using defensive 5.56/.223 ammo, your rounds will tend to penetrate far less through walls than defensive pistol or shotgun loads.
Don Fischer
New member
I can think of as bad a choice as an AR 15, any other rifle! Penetration is a major problem. You start penetrating through the bad guy and a wall won't stop the bullet, you have no idea what is on the other side of the wall. A shotgun will work, maybe be the best for no other reason than there is something about the sound of a pump slide charging the chamber that most people can hear. hand guns are fine if your not using something that is gonna over penetrate. If you miss with your 45, the bullet just might enter and exit a wall hitting who knows what on the other side.
If I were to keep a shotgun around for home defense, it would be a pump, the stoch cut off at the hand grip and the barrel shortened to as short as legal. The advantage being maneuverability inside the house. But a gun like that is a special tool!
If the bad guy takes your hand gun from you, you can bet he'll also take your shotgun. You can get a handgun ready to fire and into position much faster than a shotgun!
I think most people think they need a cartridge that will simply over power the bad guy. Not so, you need one that will stop him either with a solid hit or more likely the gun going off in the first place.
If I were to keep a shotgun around for home defense, it would be a pump, the stoch cut off at the hand grip and the barrel shortened to as short as legal. The advantage being maneuverability inside the house. But a gun like that is a special tool!
If the bad guy takes your hand gun from you, you can bet he'll also take your shotgun. You can get a handgun ready to fire and into position much faster than a shotgun!
I think most people think they need a cartridge that will simply over power the bad guy. Not so, you need one that will stop him either with a solid hit or more likely the gun going off in the first place.
ShootistPRS
New member
Here is a side by side by side test of 5.56, 9mm Critical defense, and 12 gauge with 00 buck through typical interior walls:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXOIQgfvVlE
The 5.56 penetrated 7.5 walls
The 9mm "Critical Defense" penetrated 7 walls
And the 12 ga. 00 buck penetrated 7 walls
The 5.56 penetrated farther than the pistol or shotgun in this test.
If a slug had been used in the shotgun it would have penetrated farther than the 5.56
If bird shot had been used it would have penetrated 2 or 3 walls
The 223/5.56 is not ideal for use in most home defense situations where homes are in close proximity or there are friendlies in other rooms. The fact that the 223 is a small bullet is more than made up fore by its 3000 fps velocity.
Here is a test with different shotgun rounds:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C29mEJFFIvo
The 1300 fps #8 shot was stopped inside the second wall. (penetrated 1.5)
The 1400 fps #8 shot penetrated both walls but did not penetrate the paper beyond the walls.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXOIQgfvVlE
The 5.56 penetrated 7.5 walls
The 9mm "Critical Defense" penetrated 7 walls
And the 12 ga. 00 buck penetrated 7 walls
The 5.56 penetrated farther than the pistol or shotgun in this test.
If a slug had been used in the shotgun it would have penetrated farther than the 5.56
If bird shot had been used it would have penetrated 2 or 3 walls
The 223/5.56 is not ideal for use in most home defense situations where homes are in close proximity or there are friendlies in other rooms. The fact that the 223 is a small bullet is more than made up fore by its 3000 fps velocity.
Here is a test with different shotgun rounds:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C29mEJFFIvo
The 1300 fps #8 shot was stopped inside the second wall. (penetrated 1.5)
The 1400 fps #8 shot penetrated both walls but did not penetrate the paper beyond the walls.
Last edited:
Bartholomew Roberts
Moderator
You know, it is disappointing to see so much misunderstanding regarding facts that have been well understood for a decade now.
ShootistPRS, there are a couple of issues with the video you reference. First of all, you have to understand the mechanism where rifles penetrate less than handguns. WHEN this happens, it is because the rifle bullet has broken up due to the higher velocity. The smaller, irregular fragments of the rifle bullet lose energy very quickly.
The test you link to basically recreates the now 10-yr old "Box O' Truth" setup - which the author of that site rarely uses any more and for good reason. If a bullet has to yaw and fragment to offer reduced penetration, setting pine boards or drywall spaced just inches a part is going to overstate how many layers the bullet will penetrate because at 3000 or so fps, the round will pass through multiple layers even before it fragments. As you can see, spacing the drywall more realistically, produces different results with handgun, shotgun, and rifle ammo.
Second, the shooter is using a short barrelled rifle (less velocity = more penetration in this case; because the velocity is used to break the rifle bullet apart - which is what causes the reduced penetration).
Third, the shooter is using a 55gr hollowpoint Hornady Superperformance round with a full jacket. That would appear to be a 55gr GMX - which is an all copper round DESIGNED to provide superior barrier penetration by not breaking up and retaining its weight.
And yet, despite this, it ended up penetrating half a wall more than 9mm or 12ga. Although as a useful measurement, that is still kind of pointless since it doesn't tell us much about the potential for lethal injury if we miss our target entirely or the potential for overpenetration if we hit our target.
A key thing to remember when evaluating .223 for lower penetration is that bullet selection is very important. While even FMJ 55gr M193 ammo can show reduced penetration and less likelihood of injuring bystanders, about 25% of the time, it doesn't yaw - and when it doesn't yaw, it doesn't break up or penetrate less.
Not ideal? I'd be interested in hearing what you think is ideal then. A .223 is a low-recoil round with a high-probability of stopping a target that even a novice can use accurately and a miss (assuming proper ammo selection) is less likely to offer lethal injury to someone in another room of a typical modern house than either 9mm JHP or buckshot.
Now, having said all that - the number one way to reduce the risk of overpenetration is "DON'T MISS" - simple advice; but complicated to put into practice in a life or death situation. At the end of the day, you are usually better off with a firearm where you know and understand your limitations than the most highly recommended Internet bangstick that you are unfamiliar with or can't use well.
All other things being equal - a long gun goes a long way in making sure you make good hits at household distances, and it usually offers increased effectiveness on target when it does hit as well. The whole point of a handgun is to sacrifice power and accuracy for convenience and easy access. It drives me nuts when I see people who won't make use of the convenience or easy access of a handgun; but then refuse to consider a long gun for HD.
ShootistPRS, there are a couple of issues with the video you reference. First of all, you have to understand the mechanism where rifles penetrate less than handguns. WHEN this happens, it is because the rifle bullet has broken up due to the higher velocity. The smaller, irregular fragments of the rifle bullet lose energy very quickly.
The test you link to basically recreates the now 10-yr old "Box O' Truth" setup - which the author of that site rarely uses any more and for good reason. If a bullet has to yaw and fragment to offer reduced penetration, setting pine boards or drywall spaced just inches a part is going to overstate how many layers the bullet will penetrate because at 3000 or so fps, the round will pass through multiple layers even before it fragments. As you can see, spacing the drywall more realistically, produces different results with handgun, shotgun, and rifle ammo.
Second, the shooter is using a short barrelled rifle (less velocity = more penetration in this case; because the velocity is used to break the rifle bullet apart - which is what causes the reduced penetration).
Third, the shooter is using a 55gr hollowpoint Hornady Superperformance round with a full jacket. That would appear to be a 55gr GMX - which is an all copper round DESIGNED to provide superior barrier penetration by not breaking up and retaining its weight.
And yet, despite this, it ended up penetrating half a wall more than 9mm or 12ga. Although as a useful measurement, that is still kind of pointless since it doesn't tell us much about the potential for lethal injury if we miss our target entirely or the potential for overpenetration if we hit our target.
A key thing to remember when evaluating .223 for lower penetration is that bullet selection is very important. While even FMJ 55gr M193 ammo can show reduced penetration and less likelihood of injuring bystanders, about 25% of the time, it doesn't yaw - and when it doesn't yaw, it doesn't break up or penetrate less.
ShootistPRS said:The 223/5.56 is not ideal for use in most home defense situations where homes are in close proximity or there are friendlies in other rooms.
Not ideal? I'd be interested in hearing what you think is ideal then. A .223 is a low-recoil round with a high-probability of stopping a target that even a novice can use accurately and a miss (assuming proper ammo selection) is less likely to offer lethal injury to someone in another room of a typical modern house than either 9mm JHP or buckshot.
Now, having said all that - the number one way to reduce the risk of overpenetration is "DON'T MISS" - simple advice; but complicated to put into practice in a life or death situation. At the end of the day, you are usually better off with a firearm where you know and understand your limitations than the most highly recommended Internet bangstick that you are unfamiliar with or can't use well.
All other things being equal - a long gun goes a long way in making sure you make good hits at household distances, and it usually offers increased effectiveness on target when it does hit as well. The whole point of a handgun is to sacrifice power and accuracy for convenience and easy access. It drives me nuts when I see people who won't make use of the convenience or easy access of a handgun; but then refuse to consider a long gun for HD.
https://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=336409The 1300 fps #8 shot was stopped inside the second wall. (penetrated 1.5)
The 1400 fps #8 shot penetrated both walls but did not penetrate the paper beyond the walls.
Theohazard
New member
I already posted a link to a well-done test several posts before yours.SIGSHR said:I would like to see some actual tests on building materials and overpenetration.
The test that ShootistPRS linked to was not indicative of the actual real-life situations we're referring to; they didn't use defensive ammo and they didn't construct actual walls with realistic spacing between them. If you use actual defensive ammo and shoot at actual wall sections that are spaced the way real walls are, you'll see that shotguns and handguns over penetrate compared to the .223 rounds.
It's starting to amaze me how so many people refuse to believe this despite a preponderance of evidence. And it's very easy to replicate this yourself by simply setting up realistically-spaced drywall sections and shooting at them.
There are several reasons why most law enforcement agencies around the country are ditching shotguns and pistol-caliber carbines and switching to AR-15s chambered in 5.56/.223, and one of those reasons is that with proper defensive ammo, an AR will tend to penetrate FAR less through drywall than any defensive handgun or shotgun load. (That's the second time I've posted that test, and the third time it's been posted in this thread. Please, people; start actually reading this thread before you respond with the same tired myths.)
ShootistPRS
New member
We aren't talking about the same thing.
You are talking about penetration in a living body and we are discussing what happens if you miss the person. How many walls will a bullet go through is completely different than whether it will over-penetrate through a person.
I will agree whole heartedly that a 223/5.56 round is likely to stop in a person and if it doesn't stop most of its energy and momentum will be spent. I will also agree that a 9mm is likely to penetrate about the same in a human body given a solid hit. The same can be said for buck-shot loads from a shotgun. A slug will not stop after one person unless he is wearing armor. The Seattle police tested slugs through a car with two ballistic gel dummies and it went through the "I" beam in the door, the driver and the passenger and exited the other door. In tests with Lexan it took a full foot of Lexan to stop a slug while 6 inches stopped a 308 and 2 inches stopped the pistol rounds.
So, what do we discuss - the penetration through walls, bodies or Lexan?
You are talking about penetration in a living body and we are discussing what happens if you miss the person. How many walls will a bullet go through is completely different than whether it will over-penetrate through a person.
I will agree whole heartedly that a 223/5.56 round is likely to stop in a person and if it doesn't stop most of its energy and momentum will be spent. I will also agree that a 9mm is likely to penetrate about the same in a human body given a solid hit. The same can be said for buck-shot loads from a shotgun. A slug will not stop after one person unless he is wearing armor. The Seattle police tested slugs through a car with two ballistic gel dummies and it went through the "I" beam in the door, the driver and the passenger and exited the other door. In tests with Lexan it took a full foot of Lexan to stop a slug while 6 inches stopped a 308 and 2 inches stopped the pistol rounds.
So, what do we discuss - the penetration through walls, bodies or Lexan?
Last edited:
Theohazard
New member
Both Bartholomew Roberts and I are discussing what happens if you miss the person. And if you're worried about your round missing and causing collateral damage through walls, you're better off with a .223 rifle than you are with a shotgun or a handgun, provided you're using proper defensive ammo.ShootistPRS said:We aren't talking about the same thing.
You are talking about penetration in a living body and we are discussing what happens if you miss the person.
Bartholomew Roberts
Moderator
No, I'm talking about making sure non-combatants aren't injured by either bullets that miss their target or bullets that hit their target. Regardless of what you use, hitting your target goes a long way to reduce that risk.
If you should miss, you have to deal with the reality that any bullet that meets the FBI criteria for defensive use is going to penetrate multiple interior walls (assuming typical drywall and stud construction). Any round that can't punch through two layers of 1/2" powdered gypsum backed with paper is going to be iffy on 200lb mammals at best.
So the question is, what round meets FBI criteria for defensive use; but presents the least risk to bystanders if you miss? There is no perfect answer for that. If you sail a .223 out your big picture window, that has a lot more injury potential than 00 buck. If you drill a .223 softpoint through the wall into your child's room, they may still be injured; but a .223 gives them better odds than 00 buck or 9mm JHP.
This is a situation where you make compromises; but the thing is, a .223 can be a very good blend of the various needs and very suitable for use by novices. The thing is, people need to understand that drywall is not a substantial barrier. You can have an effective home defense round, or you can have a round that stops in 1-2 layers of drywall. You can't have both.
If you should miss, you have to deal with the reality that any bullet that meets the FBI criteria for defensive use is going to penetrate multiple interior walls (assuming typical drywall and stud construction). Any round that can't punch through two layers of 1/2" powdered gypsum backed with paper is going to be iffy on 200lb mammals at best.
So the question is, what round meets FBI criteria for defensive use; but presents the least risk to bystanders if you miss? There is no perfect answer for that. If you sail a .223 out your big picture window, that has a lot more injury potential than 00 buck. If you drill a .223 softpoint through the wall into your child's room, they may still be injured; but a .223 gives them better odds than 00 buck or 9mm JHP.
This is a situation where you make compromises; but the thing is, a .223 can be a very good blend of the various needs and very suitable for use by novices. The thing is, people need to understand that drywall is not a substantial barrier. You can have an effective home defense round, or you can have a round that stops in 1-2 layers of drywall. You can't have both.
ShootistPRS
New member
Perhaps you could define "proper defense ammo"?
Theohazard
New member
Most hollow- or soft-point ammo that's not specifically designed for extra penetration will break up in drywall, but the rounds purposely designed for defensive use tend to work best in the human body and also tend to penetrate the least through walls.ShootistPRS said:Perhaps you could define "proper defense ammo"?
Yes, if you use FMJ or M855, a .223 will often penetrate more than many shotgun or handgun loads through walls. But if you use a defensive .223 round like Hornady TAP or Winchester PDX Defender, your rounds will not only be more effective than FMJ or M855, but they will also penetrate far less on average though drywall than a handgun or shotgun load.
Bartholomew Roberts
Moderator
Well, the example you offered was an all-copper round designed to retain 95% of its weight and not break up, whether fired through glass, steel, wood, etc. It penetrated 0.5" more of powdered gypsum than buck or a JHP weighing three times as much. Even the "barrier-blind" round was still very comparable...
Should you gear down to a 45gr varmint round*, a 55gr. VMX, a 55gr softpoint, etc., you'll do OK. Heck, even with a 55gr FMJ or 62gr steel penetrator, the probability still favors you but performance is uh, less consistent.
*This round actually has the same issue as birdshot in that it fails to meet the minimum FBI criteria except in one or two "ideal" scenarios.
Should you gear down to a 45gr varmint round*, a 55gr. VMX, a 55gr softpoint, etc., you'll do OK. Heck, even with a 55gr FMJ or 62gr steel penetrator, the probability still favors you but performance is uh, less consistent.
*This round actually has the same issue as birdshot in that it fails to meet the minimum FBI criteria except in one or two "ideal" scenarios.
ShootistPRS
New member
The consistency of drywall will prevent most hollow point ammunition from expanding. The drywall compresses around the outside of the bullet as the bullet passes through it. Green wood does much the same thing as it splits around the bullet forcing it to stay in the shape it started.
One of the videos showed Hornady Critical Defense rounds not only failing to expand in drywall but actually collapsing inward making the bullet more "spitzer" shaped. It showed penetration, from a 9mm, through 7.5 walls. The walls were 2x4 frame with 1/2" drywall on each side spaced about 12 inches from one wall to the next.
One of the videos showed Hornady Critical Defense rounds not only failing to expand in drywall but actually collapsing inward making the bullet more "spitzer" shaped. It showed penetration, from a 9mm, through 7.5 walls. The walls were 2x4 frame with 1/2" drywall on each side spaced about 12 inches from one wall to the next.