Practical Self Defense Use for Rifles?

W

WheelGunRealGun

New member
I've been toying with the idea of getting an AR15 for fun, but I want a better reason than that to get one.


Besides some sort of SHTF scenario (I don't buy into the doomsday stuff), what would be a practical self defense use for an AR? I'm not saying we shouldn't own them at all, I just want a good excuse to buy one besides plinking.

I guess it'd be good for Home Defense, but most felonious attacks occur outside the home. So what self defense use would call for an AR15? If someone's far enough away to where I'd need a rifle I'd rather just run.

But the AR would certainly have a big advantage over a pistol in a close self defense scenario: 30 rounds, more stopping power, less recoil, faster follow up shots, etc... But when would the chance of you even being able to have your AR near in case of such a thing ever occur? At least a pistol you can always have on you.



Please, convince me!
 
Home defense is very plausible. I have one by my bed loaded up with 75gr TAP BTHP rounds. I also keep handguns and a 870 near me. I suppose it just depends on the threat. If there was a break in and I heard multiple voices and I had to go help/protect my family members, I'd take the AR or AK. If my family members came in my room (part of our plan), I'd just hunker down with the 870 and let the cops deal with it; that's what they get paid for.

There's no right answer for HD/SD scenarios but there is a wrong answer (i.e. not having a firearm when the criminals do) A good pistol can serve you well but I like options :D
 
I guess you pretty much have to figure the odds for a home invasion. Are you quite well-to-do, or rich, and your home shows that? Or, are you involved in the trade of illegal drugs? If so, you might find a home-defense use for an AR--if you keep it handy for use at the first noise.
 
Please, convince me!
Click to expand...

Lots of people keep long guns for home defense, be they rifles or shotguns. Quite a number of folks actually end up using them for HD each year. This is because not all HD situations involve instant home penetration. Often is the case that people do have time to do all sorts of things like calling 911, getting a long gun, and even barricading in a portion of the house.

Having a pistol is good and maybe that is all that you will have time to utilize. Of course if you do have time, wouldn't you rather have a long gun?

One thing is for certain, if you don't have a long gun for home defense, then you don't have the option of using it for home defense.
 
I never felt the need to "justify" any of my guns but if I did, my ARs would be the easiest to justify, not because I use them for self defense, but because I use them in competition.

So it would be as easy for my to justify my ARs as it would for some golf player to justify his golf clubs.

What would be hard to justify would be self defense at a range where you need a rifle.
 
Folks have been using shotguns for that purpose for a very, very long time. With the development of rifles like AR's they are just as good, in fact proving to be a better choice than a shotgun.

I'd still keep a handgun. At home defense ranges where you will likely need to have 1 hand free, using a gun that can be used with 1 hand makes a lot of sense. But a small carbine such as an AR makes just as much sense as a shotgun. (An AR is not the only choice, but all things considered is the best choice in my opinion). In fact a short barreld carbine does everything a shotgun does, only better. Smaller, lighter, carries much more ammo with far, far less recoil. It is just as effective at stopping an attacker is cheaper to practice with and can do double duty as a target or hunting rifle.

The only downside is the cost of a quality rifle is about double the cost of a quality pump shotgun. That is not a small factor.

A lot is made about a shotgun shooting a pattern, making hits easier. Not at home defense ranges. A shotguns pattern doesn't get big enough to be an advantage until ranges get over 10-15 yards, much farther than typical home defense ranges. Inside a home the shotgun is still shooting rifle size patterns.

In a nutshell, I'd want a quality handgun first. A good shotgun or carbine would be secondary,but I'd just as soon have an AR, or some other carbine, as a shotgun.
 
Just remember that HD or not, you are responsible for every projectile that does not hit the target. Wall penetration is a big consideration if there are family members in adjacent rooms or neighbors nearby.
 
I guess you pretty much have to figure the odds for a home invasion. Are you quite well-to-do, or rich, and your home shows that? Or, are you involved in the trade of illegal drugs? If so, you might find a home-defense use for an AR--if you keep it handy for use at the first noise.
Click to expand...

I think you are wrong on many counts, but if you are one of those who don't mind taking the chance on being a victim that is your business not mine

http://www.heraldonline.com/2011/10/25/3470647/5-year-old-girl-dad-shot-in-sc.html

http://www.postandcourier.com/news/2011/nov/12/jury-convicts-2-in-home-invasion/

http://www.live5news.com/story/16413232/dorchester-county

http://www.live5news.com/story/16139431/neighborhood-concerned-following-attempted-home-invasion

these are just a few. I keep a shotgun by my side after dark night, just me but I find it a better choice than a rifle. Since the houses are fairly close in my area I keep #8 shot in the tube, figure a load of that in the crotch or face will deter most would home invaders
 
But the AR would certainly have a big advantage over a pistol in a close self defense scenario: 30 rounds, more stopping power, less recoil, faster follow up shots, etc
Click to expand...

I have to disagree with this. And yes I do own both.

1. In a non-LE SD situation 5 to 10 seconds is all you have, no more than 5 rounds will be fired. If you need 30 rounds then you need more help than a rifle.

2. More stopping power yes, but more of a chance that a bystander will be shot and killed.

3. Less Recoil, not on this planet, Jupiter maybe. 25 grains of gunpowder produces more recoil than 4 or 5 grains.

4. Faster followup shots, only in full auto mode. 9mm will have the fastest follow-up times due to the short cartrage. Takes an AR longer to eject the case than I can fire 3 9mm shots.

Jim
 
Take note of what EVERY army from EVERY country arms its infantry soldiers with. Rifles or handguns?

When used in EITHER defensive positions or offensive movements, rifles (or shotguns) will always have an advantage over handguns.

A handguns #1 advantage over any longarm is that it can be WORN instead of being carried. It can be with you at all times and ending a confrontation within the first few seconds is an advantage in about 90% of all combat.

For "home defense" a handgun is ALWAYS a worse choice than a rifle.

What rifle to use?
Anyone you like.

Some are better then others for combat, but ANY rifle is a real danger to a home invader if the person with that rile can (and will) use it well.

If I had to grab my 270 bolt action hunting rifle OR my 1911 45 ACP because I heard the glass on my front room breaking, I would not ever think of grabbing the handgun.

I teach combat classes occasionally (I used to teach them to earn my living as a Marine and later working for DOD) I have been consulted by doctors in a major city for "office security", and by 5 different churches in 4 different cities. I have to stick my neck out here because I am recommending some weapons I know of no other instructor recommending, but I am sure of myself when I make this recommendation

I am recommending Ruger 10/22 mounted with red dot sights and/or Willlams peep sights and zeroed at 15 yards for such use. Low noise, no recoil, extreme ease of use, good accuracy very low danger of over penetration. Everything we want in a crowd scenario but good "stopping power".
However, I have friends in the FBI and also from 4 large city police agencies and I have some access to their files. Chest hits with 22 LR rounds are very often fatal, and nearly always “Turn Off" a criminal, even when that criminal is not killed.
Remember, this is not a military scenario. A criminal can surrender and be taken right to a hospital and cared for, and they all know it. So their motivation to keep fighting when hit in the body is not as great as they might be in open war. Not always, -----but mostly.

Anyway..... My point is simple.

Get a rifle because you want a rifle. If you need to fight, grab your rifle if you have time and proximity to do so.

If you can't grab a rifle, then use your handgun------- and use it well.
 
Do you have any training with AR's? I'm a former Army infantryman, so for me, the AR platform is familiar, one that I'm good with, one that I've been trained on. I don't own a shotgun, and I'm not quite good enough with a pistol (yet) that I would stake my life to it, so the AR makes sense to me. Just be mindful of things such as wall penetration and bullet selection. Also, in case I haven't gotten my point across yet...

Train. Train. Train. Train. Train. Train. Train. Train.
 
Also, in case I haven't gotten my point across yet...

Train. Train. Train. Train. Train. Train. Train. Train.
__________________
Good equipment will never be a substitute for good training.
Click to expand...

best post on this thread

Also keep in mind there is no one best gun for every situation. If I lived in a rural area I might consider a rifle as first line of defense. However in a urban close quarters situation I prefer the shotgun for its stopping power, intimidation factor and reduced possibility of collateral damage to innocents with the proper load. In my opinion the pistol comes in a poor third behind the shotgun or rifle. Pistols are good for portability and CCW other than that........
 
Last edited:
but is there a situation other than home defense where I would have the AR in close proximity and be able to use it to defend myself? Such as a truck gun?
 
Do you hunt at all? That would be a good justification for buying if you need one. They are great for dispatching varmints, some even use them for deer hunting.
 
kraigwy, for home defense, the AR advantage isn't limited to range.

With an EOTech on my AR, I can put 30 rounds of 5.56 on target much faster than I could put a similar number of 9mm or .40 or .45 rounds from a handgun on target.

Even just looking over the sights, I can probably score hits faster with the AR than with any pistol.

For a hostage type shot, or any other situation that might require a head shot or a hit on a very small, exposed critical area, the rifle has an advantage.

For penetration of armor (in case the BG decided to buy some Second Chance, etc), the AR will also beat most handguns.

And, based on published data, there are several loadings of 5.56 that will defeat a Kevlar vest, while still penetrating less layers of drywall than will most centerfire handgun rounds (or, depending on distance, shotgun loads).

But, going back to the range thing... if I'm in range of the BG, then I have a pretty legitimate SD argument - since ability and opportunity are there (I'm in his range), all I need to complete the triangle is jeopardy. If he's trying to harm me, and I'm in range, there we go...
 
1. In a non-LE SD situation 5 to 10 seconds is all you have, no more than 5 rounds will be fired. If you need 30 rounds then you need more help than a rifle.
Click to expand...

You can't playing the odds on something that is statistically unlikely to begin with.

4. Faster followup shots, only in full auto mode. 9mm will have the fastest follow-up times due to the short cartrage. Takes an AR longer to eject the case than I can fire 3 9mm shots.
Click to expand...

BS
 
Rates of Fire: Cyclic or Follow Up

While I would not disparage the use of rifles in defense against bipeds, when I think of them for self-defense, I generally think of defense against wild animals when I'm hunting or camping. In Wymoing, Idaho and Montana with the reemergence of wolves and grizzly bears, SD against these apex predators is probably the job of a rifle if its available. During hunting season, the report of a rifle in these areas now often equates to the ringing of the dinner bell for some of our furry friends.

I guess another use for rifles in defense would be in those communities that forbid pistol ownership. A good carbine might work out well there, but I think that I would opt for a shotgun instead. Of course I certainly would never opt voluntarily to live in such a place, many may not have a say in the matter.

Bedlamite,

Back in my LE days, the average officer (per FBI stats) fired 4 to 5 shots in just a couple of seconds during the hours of darkness at a distance of 4 to 7 feet. I'm not sure what it is since the turn of the century, but you're pretty close.

On the other hand, follow up shot speed is not fully dependent on a cartridge's length, although it can be part of the equation, particularly when determining the cyclic rate of fire of a weapons. Your example of cartridge length affecting repeat fire really refered more to cyclic rates of fire as I read it.

If my assumtion is correct, then several more important factors than overal length of a round come into play as to determining cyclic rates of fire (maximum mechanical firing rate not considering belt or magazine changes):

1. Slide or bolt weight
2. Amount of gas allowed to impinge the piston in a gas operated weapon (some are variable and some are self venting to even out pressure spreads in different ammo)
3. Pounds of force required to compress or expand the operating rod spring
5. Gas cups to enhance recoil on recoil operated weaons (MG 34 or MG 42)
6. Cleanliness or degree of fowling in the weapon
7. Lubricants used

Examples:

A. The German MG 42 of WWII had a very high cyclic rate (1200 RPM and higher), yet a fairly long cartridge (7.92 X 57mm)

B. The US Model 1917 and 1919 machine guns had much slower rates of fire (550 to 600 or so), yet the overall length of their US Cal 30 round (30/06) was only something like 5mm longer than the 7.92 X 57mm.

C. The US M3 Greese Gun sub-machine gun has a very low cyclic rate of fire (450-500 rpm), yet a very short cartridge (45 ACP)

D. The M1 Thompson, firing the same cartridge as the M3 has a fairly high rate of fire (700 rpm or so)

E. The current German GP machine gun is the G-3, basically a WWII MG 42, yet in its heavier bolt version, its cyclic rate is only about half of the WWII version's rate

F. The original UZI had a moderate rate of fire, but its smaller offspring (Mini and Micro Uzis) firing the same 9mm have horribly high rates of fire due to the lighter bolts.

For me, fast follow up shots or double taps, depend more on the amount of recoil, trigger mechanism, weight of the weapon, the grip design of the weapon and the degree of accuracy that I need on the second or third shots instead of the actual cyclic rate or length of the cartridge.

Other than in full auto weapons, most of us cannot take advantage of cyclic rates of fire in self-loading weapons and cartridge lenth does not really impact the speed of repeat shots.

So, after that rather lengthy diatribe, what would I choose for a home SD rifle? My choice would be what I've known and used at work for the last 20 years or so. While I can't bring my M4A1 home, I could easily mimic it with a similar AR-15 with a 16" barrel, flat top and an Eotech sight. Yep, that would be it.
 
Last edited:
hounddawg, there are excellent alternatives to rifles for home defense. I don't see where an AR is necessarily a better weapon for the purpose than many other choices--and the OP is trying to justify an AR over any other choice.

And, I guess I could have used a smiley but this is about the gazillionth thread on the subject where folks seem to have given little thought to the subject...
 
While I own a shotgun suitable for HD, I much prefer a handy semi auto carbine.
For the AR, I prefer the short 20rd mags.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top