Pity you can’t stick around, SouthernStyle. I might have enjoyed discussing that point with you. Oh, well. Bye.
Gee, SouthernStyle and fnord, wouldn’t it be amazing if we could set around discussing the relative merits of the 1990 Chateau Yquem, or the subtle flavorings in a 1963 Grahams without some guy jumping in and telling us all about how alcohol kills this many brain cells per ounce and drunk driving is bad?
What’s that? We can? Well, I guess I just don’t understand what’s happened here then. 
I apologise for spoiling the thread, and I was going to leave it alone, and Tymp should do so too. (tymp, if you want to fight for the right to not own a gun, then you lose if you allow other people to own guns. In order to defend your home in a society with relaxed gun laws, you basically need a gun. It is the same principle as with those range rover type cars [which I am also against, you know the ones, the ones that are 4 wheel drive and cattle guards that people buy and never take off road and never come in contact with cattle with.] Because they are so heavy and strong, they plough through any other smaller car, and so to safely survive a crash with a range rover you need another range rover)
bdgr, I would use a sawed off shotgun. 18" is not that unwieldy.
As for glazers, I am taking my info from “Lethal Weapons II”. When testing the impact of various slugs, tehy used a gelatin which is about the same consistency as flesh. The theory of the glazer was that it would expend 100% of its energy in the body thus causing increased dmamge through hydrostatic shock. The tests I watched showed no such damage. But it is entirely possible that the test was wrong. I will look up your link.
one thing to remember when looking for a good self defense gun is that almost no round is goijng to stop someone dead every time.
Mr.Zambezi wrote:
… and a cylinder choke. Don’t forget about the cylinder choke! You don’t want a concentrated, long-range, full-choke beam of buckshot to come out and cover such a small pattern that it’ll miss your adversary entirely.
I also recommend a pump-action shotgun over a semi-automatic, because [paranoia] all semi-automatics might become illegal in the next 10 years [/paranoia].
I have to take some time and find the web pages that referenced bullet impact data but before I left I wanted to share some thoughts.
Yes, I’m aware that I’m probably picking nits and getting away from the intent of the OP but…
I always thought that guns were designed to accurately ‘throw’ a projectile. If they were designed to kill people how come you never (or I never) saw a pistol with a bayonet mount? That would make them better designed to kill.
It’s the projectile that is designed to kill. How else do explain wadcutter bullets (flat top designed to punch a nice round hole in paper targets) or rubber bullets that are designed to cause pain but not kill?
(Donning flame retardant suit) I await your replies. 
Uh, yeah. See, unlike you, I was not attacking the ownership of guns in the United States. I never would. Rather, I was reacting to a particular idea expressed by a specific poster that had little to do with the ethics of bearing arms and a lot to do with addressing the nature of arms. I don’t appreciate you telling me what I should and should not do and ask that you kindly shove your instructions for me into the orifice from which your opinions seem to be streaming.
(insert obligatory ROFTLMAO comment here)
Thanks, that was pretty good. 
tracer, why would a semi-automatic shotgun become illegal?
just wondered
Its quite obvious why pistols dont have a bayonet mount tiglon. Rifles had bayonet mounts because it turns them into a glorified spear (in the first world war, the rifles werent loaded to stop the men shooting one another in the back) With a pistol, a bayonet mount would give negligable advantage of length and weight - it would be difficult to stab someone holding a pistol wouldn’t it? its easier just to hold the knife. I see your point but it really doesnt make sense.
I have mentioned rubber bullets before - why not use them for home defence instead of real ones? The police manage with unarmed protesters dont they? It has been said that you only have to threaten the burglar normally anyway, so why not use rubber bullets?
I use a Colt 1991A1 Compact as my CCW. It’s a bit heavy, but you can use 7 round clips in it. I think the default clip was 6…but why settle for only 6?
I use 135 grain Gold Dot rounds as my standard load. Those are some mean looking rounds… Anyone know if there are actually worth a damn? I use them because they are the standard load of the Sheriff’s dept. here. It sounds like glazers are the way to go, though…
I am kind of irritated that I found this thread after it had been polluted by ignorance. Sigh.
SouthernStyle, if you happen to read this, I just wanted to comment on one thing you said earlier in the thread:
**
I have to say that in the US, you are right. However, in the enlightened land of the UK, almost half of the burglaries are committed in occupied homes.
I wonder why?
Nukeman, Sorry, I gave the first example that came off the top of my head and it was a bad one. I was just trying to illustrate that the guns aren’t designed to be leathal the ammo is.
Now trying to get back on track. If you want some good information, check out this site:
Firearms Tactical Institute
http://www.firearmstactical.com/index.html
“FIREARMSTACTICAL™ is an electronic magazine that’s aimed at private citizens who keep a firearm for home defense…”
It is a very extensive and informative site. The first article I read ‘Wound Ballistics’ http://www.firearmstactical.com/wound.htm had this to say in the introduction:
“Our objective is to provide you the knowledge tools you need to fully understand the qualities a bullet must have in order to be effective in stopping a determined homicidal atttacker.”
I forget who mentioned the Glaser Safety Slugs previously. I too thought that they were a great idea until I visited this site. Here are the links to the articles with excerpts.
Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness
http://www.firearmstactical.com/hwfe.htm
Since the highest handgun velocities generally do not exceed 1400-1500 feet per second (fps) at the muzzle, reliable fragmentation could only be achieved by constructing a bullet so frangible as to eliminate any reasonable penetration. Unfortunately, such a bullet will break up too fast to penetrate to vital organs. The best example is the Glaser Safety Slug, a projectile designed to break up on impact and generate a large but shallow temporary cavity. Fackler, when asked to estimate the survival time of someone shot in the front mid-abdomen with a Glaser slug, responded, “About three days, and the cause of death would be peritonitis.”
Prefragmented Bullets: Dangerously Inadequate for Personal Defense
http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs5.htm
PFBs are less hazardous to bystanders than JHP bullets in theory only. However, if you keep a handgun for home defense and you’re concerned about wall penetration, then the MagSafe SWAT cartridge is the only choice that meets your requirements for limited wall penetration. None of the other cartridges discussed in this article are designed to fragment as they pass through wallboard. The tradeoff for this limited penetration of interior walls is significantly lessened wounding effectiveness.
Nukeman wrote:
Because semi-automatic anythings are at the top of the anti-gun groups’ hit list nowadays. The theory is that semi-autos are a lot easier to rapid-fire than pump-action, lever-action, bolt-action, or revolver-based firearms, and that if you rapid-fire you’re, uh, evil or something.
Of course, as any good frothing-at-the-mouth paranoid gun freak (like myself on some days) will tell you, the “real” reason the anti-gun crowd is going after semi-autos is that they’re easier to demonize, and once they’re illegal it’ll be easier to make other guns illegal, and pretty soon all firearms will be illegal and Bill Klinton (with a K) will send his stormtroopers into your home to set up a Nazi-like socialist government in which you’re all his slaves. Um, and the Antichrist will take over the Earth. Or something.
18 is the barrel length, it has to be 26 overall if I remember correctly, which in a hallway walking past a darkened dorway, is bad. I used to do security for an apartment complex in a really bad part of town. I had to search vacent, dark apartments nightly, usually with a riot gun(most of my patrol was outdoors, so it was more practicall, I also carried a sidearm). You start to really think about this when doing a room to room search in the dark. try walking through your place at night with the lights off and your shotgun, and think about all the places someone could dive out of hiding directly into you. The best thing is a handgun, held close against the body, untill your in the open room. If you need to point it up or down, (like if there are other people in the house, and you are not sure who you might run into, alsways point it down. If someone gets right up on you, at least you can get a shot to the lower part of thier body/legs. if its up, they can go under it.
**
one thing to remember when looking for a good self defense gun is that almost no round is goijng to stop someone dead every time. **
[/QUOTE]
True. But you wan’t what is most likely to render them unconsious quickly. Glasers and Magsafe(my favorite), generate the most shock to internals, and stand a greater chance of incapacitating quickly. and they dont go through walls.
IN the strasburg test, they shot live goats with the same chest cavity size as a human. Its the closest thing to a real world stopping power test that can be done, unless someone finds a way to shoot real people. In these test, the glaser and the magsafe rounds won in almost every catagory. I have a copy of the test results somewhere, and I will try to find them. A lot of people got really pissed at the results, since their favorite round didn’t do so hot, so you see a lot of complaining. One guy said that this info is only usefull if you are attacted by goats. Thats like saying the geliten tests are only usefull if attacked by gelitan. Ever since then, I have kept magsafe in my guns(I used to use starfire). Luckily, I have never had to put them to the test.
I know nothing about guns. I just know the bigger the better when it comes to scaring the hell out of someone that is trying to break into my house. I would say go with the biggest available I know I have a double barell 12 gauge. I cant shoot it for fun it knocks me on my hiney. But , I am sure if someone came through my door and I pulled that sucker out I could shoot and it would do enough damage that all I would have to do is nick’em. I wish you luck and I do agree get a trigger lock if you have kids you never know what they will do.
My Amusing Glock Story:
Back when I was in the army, my company sergeant got into a friendly argument with this captain (not mine). The sergeant, you see, had recently purchased a pistol - the ever-popular Beretta 92something, 9mm, 15 rounds. He had just bought it himself, and he was quite proud of it. Now, this officer had just bought a pistol himself, a Glock 17 (these guys didn’t have much imagination when it came to buying guns, but you have to admit, those were two solid choices). After the usual discussions of weight, accuracy and reliability, the argument turned to safety latches.
In case you are unfamiliar with pistol construction, this is a major difference between the two guns. While the Beretta has a standard, thumb-operated switch (which many claim is too high up on the side), the Glock is rather unique, with its saftey constructed into the trigger itself. From a military point of view, the gun *has * no safety latch. Never really saw the point of it, myself.
So the argument heated up, each man refusing to give an inch. It reached a point when the captain - who, I should mention, was not the brightest round in the magazine - shouted in a typically condescending tone:
“What do I need a safety for? I draw, I cock, I shoot!”
A valid argument, to be sure, but spoiled by a regrettable character trait: the captain had a tendency to “speak with his hands”. Thus, my beloved sergeant found himself with a hole through the top of his boot, his left foot, the sole of his boot, and about an inch of asphalt beneath him. I was told it took them a full four seconds before the sgt. fell to the ground, screaming and the capt. really registered the fact that he had actually drawn his pistol and shot a fellow soldier.
We were laughing for weeks
What can we learn from that?
- Jerks shouldn’t be allowed handguns, or a commission.
- Just because you know how to use an M-16, it doesn’t mean you should handle a handgun without the proper training.
- Think carefully about safety latches before you get a gun. While the Glock is a superior weapon, I’d go with something a bit safer. Having the safety in the trigger doesn’t really add much - if you train hard enough, flicking that switch will be so instinctive you’ll have it open before you can level your weapon.
I used to prefer a gun with a safety when carried in a visible holster, like while working security in a public place. If someone ever managed to grab your gun, it might take them just enough time to figure out the saftey for you to get it back. A guy I worked with had a vagrant grab his .45 gov, from behind while working in a grocery store. Before the guy could figure out the safety, he knocked the guys teeth out with a mag lite, and got his gun back. Thats one reason I liked S&W handguns for duty use(I wouldn’t own one now), becuse in a test a lot people hit the mag release thinking it was the saftey. The mag would drop, and a smith won’t fire without the magazine. I did practice an awful lot with it to ensure that releasing the safety was second nature. for a concealed gun, or a home defense gun, this is not as big an issue.
thanks tracer. whoever it was who said that most crimes occur in occupied homes in the UK - yes youre right but it usually happens so that people never wake up and only discover that they have been burgled in the morning when they find the TV missing. A gun is no use if you dont wake up is it?
Arent sawed off shotguns illegal? or at least, very dangerous?
**
Why is it so hard for people to figure out who said what? My freakin’ name is on the post.
Do you have a cite for this, or is this something that you gleaned from playing Counter-Strike again?
It is illegal in the US to have a shotgun with a barrel length of less than 18 inches. Dangerous? Of course, it is a firearm. Is it more dangerous than any other firearm? Not at all. It pretty damn ridiculous that it was made illegal in the first place.
I have posted earlier that I have a .44 Magnum Super Redhawk - what I have not mentioned is that I would only use it as a self defense weapon in a last resort. This is due to the fact that I have tried firing it ONCE without ear protection, in an outdoor setting. It felt like my eardrum had exploded (it didn’t) and I had extreme ear pain for several hours afterwards. In the enclosed setting of a house, I would hesitate greatly to fire it. I can only imagine how loud it sounds on the “wrong end” of it.
So my home defense weapon is my Ruger Mini-14 with folding stock (easy to manuever around the house) and 30-round clip.