[quote]Headhunter wrote:
(1) Sticky This Thread.
(2) Would a 12 gauge be the best weapon for home defense?
Best weapon to keep loaded and under the bed?
(3) Is a .357 the best choice for close quarters, such as
in a bedroom/closet/kitchen, and so forth?[/quote]
No expert, but I prefer a 20g pump shotgun with no. 4 buckshot in the house. If it were just me the 12 would be my choice with some pistols well placed, but the wife and kids prefer the recoil of the 20.
Two guns only for living in the bush survival style, 308 bolt gun and a 357 revolver with alternate 9mm cylinder with a 4 or 6 inch barrel. 357 bullets are easy to cast and handload with smokeless or black powder as long as you have primers.
Two guns for today’s society and no change in gun laws, M1A in 308 and a hammerless 5 shot small frame 357 for carry.
I prefer 357 and revolver actions so the wife and kids can pick up whatever I’m using and not have to much recoil, complex action, or too large of grips. Also, when it was first introduced, the 357 was used to take nearly all types of large game in North America up to Grizzlies.
I just like to keep it simple. That being said, I am currently reloading in 3 pistol cartridges, and 3 rifle cartridges. So much for simple.
[quote]dhickey wrote:
GVkid wrote:
I’m not familiar with the exact wording of the castle doctrine, but I’ve been learning that it is completely illegal to be firing at anyone that is outside your house (unless they are firing in) especially if you are outside your home as well because then you have a place to retreat to.
I would agree with Varq with the 12 gauge, but I would recommend the Taurus judge a .45 long colt 5 shot revolver that chambers a 410 shell.
The judge looks cool, but it must be a handfull with a reasonable 410 load. The interesting part is that is rifled. Not too effective for anything but very short range as you will get quite a spread. I think it was originally designed as a gun for protection in your car.
Something you can point (not aim) out the window and send shot into every pour in the attacker’s face.
I think this would be an interesting concept for a home defense shotgun. With a heavier 12 gauge round and rifled barrel or choke, your aim wouldn’t have to be all that great. You would get quite a spread.
You could also load a slug after a couple of 00 loads. If the attacker is on PCP or wearing light BA the slug will take car of him if the shot loads don’t.
This would also allow you to put a pistol grip on your 12g for easier storage and manuverability, without fear of accuracy loss. Could do a ported barrel or choke to take some of the recoil out.
If I were going to do up a SG for home defense, I would do the following:
Remington 11-87
Pistol Grip
20" Rem Choke barrel
Ported rifled choke
Mag extension for total of 8 rounds.
Additional 6 shots on receiver saddle
2-00 then 1 slug, 2-00 then 1 slug, etc.
The semi-auto and ported choke would make it reasonable to handle with a pistol grip. I actually have most of this but the 11-87 is currently sporting a 26" barrel with 10 shot extended mag and a Choate pistol grip full stock.
20 gauge would be a good choice for this as well. Wife might even be able to handle it and it would probably be a bit quieter.[/quote]
I have a judge but don’t really like it. My Glocks and 1911s are a lot easier to shoot well. I don’t see that a 410 at close range is a whole lot better than a 230 gr hollow point.
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=125906426
This may be the ultimate home defense shotgun. Might be even harder to take this one away than a sidearm.
There are mossbergs that are bit cheaper but not as compact.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
I agree with this post with the exception of “the 357 was used to take nearly all types of large game in North America up to Grizzlies.” Not a chance. .357s out of a Thompson Contender or lever gun on whitetail are about the limit for that cartridge.
[/quote]
http://www.leverguns.com/articles/taylor/357magnum.htm
In particular,since everything on the internet is true…
"1935
Major Douglas Wesson
Antelope - 200 yards (2 shots)
Elk - 130 yards (1 shot)
Moose - 100 yards (1 shot)
Grizzly Bear - 135 yards (1 shot)
The Antelope was hit the first time at 125 yards. It ran, stopped and was shot the second time at 200 yards. The second shot killed it.
The Bull Elk was killed with one shot through the lungs.
The Moose was shot in the chest near the base of the neck. It cut the 2nd rib, passed through both lungs, sheared the 8th rib on the off side and stopped just under the hide. No follow-up shot was required.
These animals were taken on a Fall hunt in Wyoming, near the West entrance of Yellowstone Park. The Grizzly was taken later in Canada.
The above game was taken using factory loads which were a 158 gr. bullet at 1515 fps from an 8 3/4" barreled S&W producing 812 ft. lbs of muzzle energy. (S&W later shortened the barrels to 8 3/8" as we have today)
To those who criticized, the Major replied that they “…had not the slightest conception of what we have accomplished in ballistics…” - a statement that still applies today."
Push, I lived in Palmer for a few years also. I agree with you about handguns being suboptimal on grizzlies. I was trying to make a point regarding their killing ability on 2 legged predators.
Bottom line, to each his own.
[quote]dhickey wrote:
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=125906426
This may be the ultimate home defense shotgun. Might be even harder to take this one away than a sidearm.
[/quote]
http://www.defensereview.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1095
[quote]pushharder wrote:
I agree with this post with the exception of “the 357 was used to take nearly all types of large game in North America up to Grizzlies.” Not a chance. .357s out of a Thompson Contender or lever gun on whitetail are about the limit for that cartridge.
As for grizzlies and handguns, when I used to run a sporting goods store in Wasilla, Alaska we had a standing joke with my customers and me that the only thing a .44 Mag was good for in a grizzly encounter was to stick the barrel in your own mouth and put yourself out of your impending misery.
Even a .454 Casull was considered borderline. A 10 gauge with slugs was the consensus along with big bore centerfires.
[/quote]
Well, a distinction should, I think, be drawn between hunting a grizzly, and stopping an unexpected grizzly charge.
In the 1930s, to prove the “awesome power” of their new .357 Magnum cartridge and the N-Frame revolvers, Smith & Wesson hired expert hunters armed with the hottest loads and heaviest bullets the guns could fire without blowing up. They killed elk, moose, and yes, even grizzlies.
So yes, you can kill a grizzly with a .357 magnum, just like you can kill an elk with a .22 LR, and you can kill a man with a ten-penny nail… if you know where to hit, and are sneaky enough, quick enough, and most of all lucky enough to get him before he realizes you’re there.
This doesn’t mean that .357 Magnum revolvers, .22 rifles, or ten-penny nails would be my choice of weapon in the event of being attacked by bears, elk, or large angry men.
Push, you know why you should always remove the front sight of any handgun you bring with you into bear country, right?
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Varqanir wrote:
Push, you know why you should always remove the front sight of any handgun you bring with you into bear country, right?
I think I answered that already. Ha![/quote]
Well, you said to stick the barrel in your mouth and put yourself out of the impending misery.
What I was told was this: “so that after your gun’s empty, and the bear takes it away from you and shoves it up your ass, it won’t hurt as much!”
[quote]dhickey wrote:
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=125906426
This may be the ultimate home defense shotgun. Might be even harder to take this one away than a sidearm.
There are mossbergs that are bit cheaper but not as compact.[/quote]
Damn that’s a beautiful weapon! Cool site too. Many thanks!
[quote]pushharder wrote:
pwilliams wrote:
pushharder wrote:
I agree with this post with the exception of “the 357 was used to take nearly all types of large game in North America up to Grizzlies.” Not a chance. .357s out of a Thompson Contender or lever gun on whitetail are about the limit for that cartridge.
http://www.leverguns.com/articles/taylor/357magnum.htm
In particular,since everything on the internet is true…
"1935
Major Douglas Wesson…
I have no doubt all this occurred. However, forgive me for being skeptical in that the many, many stories of inadequacy on big game with the .357 might just NOT be reported by an individual who was responsible for the development and marketing of that particular cartridge.
pwilliams wrote:
I was trying to make a point regarding their killing ability on 2 legged predators.
I have no doubts on this. I own four Pythons, btw.
[/quote]
You both can correct me if I’m wrong, but I think Elmer Keith had the 357 loaded a little hotter back in the day. I still wouldn’t trust my life with it to a grizzly, but I could see a good shot killing one with it.
Even my 500 is not something I would be comfortable with, since it’s basically a 308 at close range.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
pushharder wrote:
I agree with this post with the exception of “the 357 was used to take nearly all types of large game in North America up to Grizzlies.” Not a chance. .357s out of a Thompson Contender or lever gun on whitetail are about the limit for that cartridge.
As for grizzlies and handguns, when I used to run a sporting goods store in Wasilla, Alaska we had a standing joke with my customers and me that the only thing a .44 Mag was good for in a grizzly encounter was to stick the barrel in your own mouth and put yourself out of your impending misery.
Even a .454 Casull was considered borderline. A 10 gauge with slugs was the consensus along with big bore centerfires.
Well, a distinction should, I think, be drawn between hunting a grizzly, and stopping an unexpected grizzly charge.
In the 1930s, to prove the “awesome power” of their new .357 Magnum cartridge and the N-Frame revolvers, Smith & Wesson hired expert hunters armed with the hottest loads and heaviest bullets the guns could fire without blowing up. They killed elk, moose, and yes, even grizzlies.
So yes, you can kill a grizzly with a .357 magnum, just like you can kill an elk with a .22 LR, and you can kill a man with a ten-penny nail… if you know where to hit, and are sneaky enough, quick enough, and most of all lucky enough to get him before he realizes you’re there.
This doesn’t mean that .357 Magnum revolvers, .22 rifles, or ten-penny nails would be my choice of weapon in the event of being attacked by bears, elk, or large angry men.[/quote]
Exactly waht I was getting at.
I’ve heard rumors through my dad (who lives in northwestern Montana) that there have been .357 mag bullets that bounce off a grizzly bear’s skull. Whether it’s true or not it still makes me want something heavier if I’m in grizzly country.
As for the Judge, I actually like mine for home defense. I feel the spread on it is large enough that for close range (within 3 yds or so) I pretty much can’t miss. That being said, I also keep my Glock 33 with two extra mags at my bedside as well unless I’m carrying it or going someplace where my CPL says I can’t carry it. In which case it is safely locked away.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
It should be unnecessary to point out that the shield is useless without the sword, and that neither is of value without the brain.[/quote]
Unless you have a Cheytac M-200, the Chuck Norris of firearms.
This is my response to this…the right to bear arms!