Bwhahahaahahaa!!! That’s a lot of work.
The ultimate answer to your question, Squire.
I was thinking about this thread at work today and had an epiphany (of sorts). I remembered a program on the tube about these divers “protecting” themselves from sharks using a thing called a bang stick. So I did a search and found lots of stuff. Here’s one;
http://www.motiondigital.com/pccs/Bangst12.htm
That sucker should do it for the close in stuff. A lot of people were way ahead of me.
.
.
.
.
.
WHAT?
Sorry, Ex Tank, I think you’re not gonna like this one. 
Peace,
mangeorga
I think it might be overly enthuastic to say these experts recommend the shotgun as the weapon of choice for home defense.
From: http://www.aware.org/rshotgun.htm
The rest of the article is written from the perspective that you have recieved such training and choosing the shotgun.
http://www.findarticles.com/m0BQY/5_46/60897642/p1/article.jhtml
Is to only a brief to draw any conclusions from. It is written by Massad Ayoob, and his perspectives have been covered already.
http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs10.htm
Is largely about choosing the right ammunition. He makes the claim at the start that the shotgun is better than the handgun by provides no evidence to back it up. He mentions a couple of the advantages of the shotgun (mentioned by Ayoob in his book) but covers none of the disadvantages and makes no comparision to the handgun itself.
http://users.erols.com/dsmjd/tech/home_defense.htm
Has numerous errors. I cannot get into them now. I’ll post more later. (very sorry didn’t notice the time).
Would you recommend someone get a .45 without training? The only gun someone might try to escape familiarity training is too small (IMO). Also, I think that there are more evils besides intruders that threaten the home. For instance: large rabid dogs, fleeing criminals passing through, outdoor car thieves you want to scare off, drive-by gang-bangers who sprayed your house with bullets and are driving away (I’d shoot at them with the right gun), bad cops who surround your house unjustly in the future because you wouldn’t go to church. Oh, and then there’s the prison gang who escaped from jail who are in your backyard hiding. All of these are outdoor adventures, and even discounting the large-weapon threat factor of a shotgun (which matters more here), blasting ten rounds from a handgun or rifle straight at your neighbors is asking for major trouble, few of those rounds will hit target moving over ten yards. Also, camping is to be considered.
This “vicious” recoil stuff sounds like dissuasion. No one is holding a teacup and saucer during a criminal incident.
Go to: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/firearms.htm then click on one fo the links that will open a pdf (Adobe) format document that answers those questions. The age group most likely to be killed accidentally by gunfire is 15-19 years. The age group most likely to be killed by deliberate gunfire (homicide, legal or illegal) is 20-24 years.
For all ages and genders, suicide by firearm is more common than homicide or accident.
I am not by any stretch saying that a shotgun is useless for home defense, but I do have my doubts that most experts let alone all experts would recommend it head over heels superior to the handgun (in fact, easily disprovable since Massad Ayoob does not generally recommend the shotgun over the handgun). The shotgun has some serious drawbacks (practically and difficulty under stress being the two biggest), as does the handgun (generally lower stopping power).
I agree with this statement. Although there is one caveat. Under adrenal stress a pump action shotgun can be more difficult to operate. However, auto-loaders have a far higher chance of jamming, especially if poorly maintained.
Simply isn’t true. In fact, under adrenal stress the shotgun, being a more difficult instrument to operate, is less accurate than a handgun. The shotgun must be operated with more expertise than a pistol. Any one of numerous errors, all easily commited when under adrenal stress, decreases the accuracy of the shotgun especially for repeated shots. And in order to have what one would call reasonable self protection you must be prepared that you will have to fire more than once.
Lets assume a pistol and shotgun both unloaded. Are you saying that it is quicker to slide shells into a shotgun then to slide a single magazine into a pistol? I find this hard to believe, and having had the distinct pleasure of having to speed load at the police academy I can say with certainty that it is not true. Now if you happen to have a clip feed shotgun one would figure they would be equal.
Also, with the individually shell feed shotgun, we must again return to adrenal stress. Having personally witnessed gun experts fumble with magazine while a fake intruder with a fake (but real looking knife) charge them. I have also experienced this having attended and taught scenario based training courses for many years.
True, oh so very very true. 
This is mainly, but not completely true. Although reduced by using birdshot make no mistake that it can go through sheetrock. It is important that people realize that using birdshot does not mean that they can fire with due consideration of where their shot may go.
Now, the problems with that link
The rifle has go to be the worst kind of self defense firearm one could imagine. It has all of the disadvatages of a shotgun, plus some.
Here we go. The so-called intimidation factor. As a general rule, felony surveys and police reports have demonstrated one thing. Criminals are deterred by demeanour by far more than anything else. As Ayoob puts, for example,
Nothing can be further from the truth.
In a felon survey (might have been “Survey of Felons” mentioned before), numerous felons said something to the effect of “If a guy has a gun on me, I can tell if he plans to shoot. And if he isn’t I’ll just off him.” Although nobody is quite sure why (there are numerous theories) most criminals definitely have a refined sense of picking up on non-verbal language. This cannot be discounted or underestimated.
The guy is frankly dreaming. Again, under adrenal stress you cannot remotely count on one or two shots being sufficient. There is a very distinct possibility of missing with both shots.
So, to reiterate, my whole point is not that shotguns are bad or useless. They have some serious drawbacks. They certainly are not for everybody, trained or not. Most women probably want to avoid them like the plague. There is a reason that police officers consider the shotgun to be a more advanced weapon … it is. Shotgun certification is a real prize in the police force, because many jurisdictions only allow shotgun certified officers to ride with the patrol sergeant. It is not something easily obtained because again there are some complexities with using it in a real gunfight.
To quote the knight from Indiana Jones: The Last Crusade.
Be very sure, if you choose a shotgun, that you are well versed in its shortcomings and have had requisite training and practice to overcome them.
I do not aim the comment here when I have stated “you” as being directed towards Brian Bunnyhurt. Rather, all “you”'s are the general you (i.e. the interested reader) and should not be taken as disparaging Brian’s ability to use weapons, since I have no knowledge of any training he may or may not have. I post this last paragraph to prevent any misunderstandings imposed by the medium where normally it would be plain what I mean.
And I see this thread just re-confirms what I’ve long believed:
Most Americans place little value on human life, except for their own or that of their loved ones.
There are times when I love my country very much and there are times when it embarrasses me and I begin to think it needs SERIOUS changing. This is one of the latter.
Jab, that post really surprises me.
Placing your life above that of someone who would kill you or your family is not an indicator about the value you place on human life in general.
If you want to go there, I suggest you open up a new thread. That is too important of a statement to bury at the end of a long gun thread.
Freedom say’s;
Me too. I’ve read all the posts on this thread, and found most of them to be pretty balanced and well thought out.
There have a couple, though, where the poster did seem to relish the thought of a deadly confrontation.
I won’t be specific because I could very well be wrong.
So, jab, please do start another thread. Sounds interesting.
This one is getting way too long. One of the better gun threads IMO.
Peace,
mangeorge
George, Freedom, Jab1: it may also be that some people are tossing off flippant answers w/o considering (or caring) exactly who their audiences are. Like George’s friend from work he mentioned in the “Flying Bullets Are My Responsibility?” thread, who recanted?
A lot of context gets lost in the written word (body language, tone of voice, use of language), making misunderstanding an ever greater possibility as emotions become vested in the argument.
Then again, maybe some folks just have a natural propensity for inserting their foot into their mouths (don’t look at me in that tone of voice! ).
I’m working on it. But I have to do a little of what I call “house-cleaning,” taking care of other threads where I’ve already posted on this board and on others.
I always take Sundays off; I may be ready by next week.
but I don’t care.
To myself and my wife, the greatest danger any of us in our family faces comes from gun owners. My son has been instructed that if he’s visiting a friend and finds out that that house has a gun in it, he is to leave. Period. No questions asked.
Myself and my wife would do the same, if the situation came up.
Not a plausible way to live? Well, I don’t ask, but I can honestly say that, except for friends and relatives who are police officers (for whom I make an exception, since in their case I know that they’ve been properly trained in the use of the weapon), I’ve never been in the house of anyone I knew kept a gun. Which I know doesn’t mean that I’ve never been in such a house, before anyone comes up with that one.
We have both, by the way, been crime victims. Having been a victim is no excuse, IMO, for endangering yourself and your friends and family.
There are precautions you can easily take to minimize your risk from the situation in the OP (alarms, light timers, dogs, keeping one car in the driveway as often as you can, letting the local police know when you’re going away for a vacation to minimize the burglaries that happen when you’re not home), and if that situation does happen, then the best advice I’ve seen offered here is to avoid confrontation with the intruder. I agree with others who have posted that if the person has entered knowing that you’re there then he is prepared to deal with you in whatever way he sees fit. Deliberately confronting such a person is a recipe for disaster.
pantom
I’m quite surprised at a statement like yours.
Excuse me but you are overreacting. It would be a better idea to forbid your family to never go near a car. There are undoubtably more car pedestrian accidents than gun accidents. You surely don’t drive a car do you? Do you let your children ride with you?
Next time you are at an intersection notice the car facing you. He is aimed in your direction and will miss hitting you by a mere 8 feet.
Kinda silly Huh.
who use their weapons illegally and or irresponsibly. At least you sem to recognize that people kill people not guns.
AAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGHHHHH!!! Say that in the pit, I dare you.
Ex-millitary? Gun qualified guards? Competition shooters? Correctional officers? Fire Investigators?
Barney Fife is ok, but a retired SEAL dosent make the cut huh? The world is FULL of people with weapons training.
I believe I speak for all gun owners when I say, if I would have been there I would have been more than willing to use my gun to stop your assailant if the opportunity arose.
most of these have been proven minimal deterrents, read many earlier posts
At least here we agree
[li] Undress your wife[/li][li] Ducktape her to the bed[/li][li] Crawl under your bed[/li][li] Whimper as quietly as possible[/li][li] Crawl out on your belly if requested by the robber[/li][li] Stay on your knees[/li][li] Keep your eyes averted to the floor[/li][li] Feel free to cry[/li][li] Beg for your life[/li] Wonder what he is going to do to your children when he is done with your wife.
Hmmmm… Gun owner porn. Sort of like fundamentalist Christian porn (thanks, Ben!, wherein the fundie imagines all kinds of terrible things happening to Those Who Dare Not To Believe As He.
Ok, Freedom, I just looked up disingenuous in Websters. Just to be sure I understood what the word meant. It said “See Freedom’s last reply in the ‘An Intruder Breaks Into Your Home’ thread”.
To imply that a non gun owner is offering up his wife and kids, and that he is in all ways a coward, is silly.
Anyway, an intruder would have likely been in more peril from my ex-wife than from me.
I don’t know for sure, but I’d bet that more people are injured by irresponsible gun ownership then by home invasion.
And in case you’re not familiar with my stance, I am not anti-gun.
Peace,
mangeorge
The world is full of people with weapon training, but it’s not full of people who are required by their job to keep current with that training so as to be able to use the weapon on the job should the need arise. Former vets, for instance, may have had plenty of weapons training, but they, like anyone else, can get rusty.
For the record, obviously corrections officers and the like are cops, just like the regular guys.
I’ve been utterly fascinated by how the cool-headed gun owners like dropzone get attacked en masse by you guys for advocating the simple, stupid measures that can prevent home intrusions. Makes me think you guys have some kind of agenda here, other than preventing and reacting to home intrusions in a way that will actually manage to keep your family safe in a real-life situation.
Which is why we have that automatic policy. I’m not willing to play 20 questions with a gun owner to find out whether he’s practicing safe gun ownership or not. As this thread abundantly proves, there are far too many who are not for me to take the chance. My life, and my loved ones’ lives, are too precious for me to chance it with someone who loves a mere thing as much as so many of you seem to.
**
As can police officers. An officer I know in the San Francisco area was almost shot when his superior accidentally discharged his firearm in the station.
**
So why attribute them with some supernatural responsibility that the rest of us mere mortals do not posess? And even if you attribute them with that responsibility are they all single officers? After all they might have spouses or children that aren’t as responsible as they are. And even responsible people have accidents.
**
I don’t believe that there are any ways to prevent a determined individual from breaking into your home short of making it a fort. I do believe that there are plenty of things one can do to deter those who are less determined.
If I hear a strange noise in the night I’m not going to just call 911. I’m going to get up and check and see what it was. Maybe the cat knocked some glasses off the counter. That means I’ve got to get up and check out the source of the noise to make sure that everything is ok. And if it is suspicous noise perhaps I’ll take my pistol with me just in case. I see nothing wrong with this policy.
**
And what agenda would that be? If you’re going to accuse us of something then just spit it out instead of walking on egg shells.
That’s fine I suppose but I find it hard to believe that any rational person would react the way you do. I don’t understand the basis of your fear. You say that you’re worried about the responsibility of the gun owner. So I’ll assume that you’re not afraid that someone you know is just going to go on a homicidal rampage. So that must mean you’re afraid of an accidental shooting.
Any ideas how unlikely it is for you or your child to be shot by accident?
Marc
mangeorge