Home Forums Hunting & Shooting AR and Tactical Rifles just playing devil's advocate about shotguns...

...When I've seen people shoot buckshot out of a shotgun, whether it's a cut down 870 or a Benelli M4, the pattern is about 6 inches or so at 25 yards. Granted it has lots of killing power, but it still requires reasonably precise aiming. And you're limited to 8 shots or so, unless you go for one of the semi-autos that take a box or drum mag. An AR with a 30+ round mag is at least a couple of inches shorter overall, holds more ammo, and may arguably be easier to shoot rapidly. Granted, the bullpup shotguns are shorter than even an AR.

When there are so many good AR's around, what advantages does the tactical shotgun still have, in a defensive scenario?

"When the bad guys hear you rack it they'll get scared and give up."
"You don't even have to aim them."
"It'll knock the bad guy right over."

Of course none of those are accurate, but they're still reasons I hear in favor of shotguns all the time. I've spent ten years with a shotgun in my car at work and have never taken one out of the rack.

They're rarely sighted for the slugs or buckshot issued with them, nobody carries more than the four rounds in the tube, almost none of them have slings (so you're stuck with both hands perpetually occupied), low mag capacity, slow to reload, heavy, limited range....I'm not sure why so many departments still issue them.

I was gonna mention shotgun breaching, which is a great asset. But it's also a very specific skillset, consumes a lot of ammo and is certainly not defensive.

It's an advantage of a shotgun, but of limited use to the vast majority of folks.

Less over-penetration with shot, unless frangible is used in the AR. And it'll make Goofy Uncle Joe happy.

Buckshot will penetrate less, but I found this test where most buckshot loads penetrated the equivalent of 3 interior walls before stopping. In most houses you can shoot from one end to the other without hitting four walls.

It's less, but still dangerous.

http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot3.htm

I don't really want to hose down the neighbors with .223 when something is hassling us or the chickens. Don't need 30 rounds, either. I'm anticipating Hilary Clinton as a Victoria's secret model before I have to fight off a squad sized coordinated attack.

I have a friend of mine who was accidentally shot by his sister shooting a deer that had ran between them. She was using #1 buck. She hit the deer, but one shot hit his forarm and broke his bone. Another hit the stock on his gun and broke the stock. Measured the distance and it was 72 yards. Buck shot is dangerous. However even with cylinder bore, it really doesn't start to scatter until over 20 yards unless you are using bird shot. Then a cylinder bore only does about 30" with birdshot at 20 yards to be effective. For home self defence, Turkey or goose loads would be more effective inside the home. Buckshot only makes a machine gun out of a shot gun at between 20-50 yards. Under 20 yards bird shot or slugs are more effective. So, like he said a 223 with 30 round mags have got you covered from 5-300 yards. Up close under 20 yards, a good handgun is probably more effective than a shotgun, because of its small size.

It is just a different option

Is it best?

I don't know

Is it good

I think so

Snake

I cannot see any situation in my HD needs where a handgun would be
More effective than a shotgun.

I guess there's an intimidation factor with a shotgun, but is it any more than a pistol, or a black rifle? Beats me.

I'm not interested in intimidation. This isn't TV.

If I'm pointing a weapon at a 2 or 4 legged threat, its to kill it, not scare it.

You just scared the chit out of me. Oh and made me throw up. The shotgun is loaded and ready!

That right there is the god's honest truth.

I dunno, I still have one in the bedroom, and its first rounds are birdshot.

Yes you still have to point it correctly, but its so handy, can take out snakes in the yard etc.. without having to so precisely aim with the AR.

It will or should handily kill whomever may be in my bedroom or house with #8 loads.

Nope it doesn't carry tha tmuch ammo, but then thats what hte fall back to the AR is for.

And yep, I have the AR handy too, because if you get much outside our large yard fence the shotgun doesn't work so much for yotes and the like.

Of course we also have a 22 handy.. with super colibri, to handle cow birds, snakes, varmints in teh yard too... nice and quite, doesn't scare the one stupid dog, doesn't wake up the neighbors and so on.

IMHO each gun you have can sorta be considered a speciality one...

If I had to go with a do all survival gun I'd likely pick the shotgun over the AR.

If I had to go with a do all defense gun, I'd have to pick the AR.

Neither is best in every instance.

Could be a joy though.. at least its an excuse to have a few more guns!

Now that's funny! And scary!

A legitimate question indeed. I am just in the process of putting together an 870 for home defense. Magazine capacity doesn't concern me. Maybe I'm being a bit naive, but I just don't anticipate getting into and extended gunfight. That's more for the T.V. shows than for real life. I figure if anything's going to happen in the house, it's going to be over quick-one way or the other. I like the shotgun for this, and can't imagine anything more scary than looking down the business end of an 870.

I just hope they never get to see the gun... I want em dead long before they see it, realize its coming. If you are in my house, you've made a deadly mistake. The way I see it.

But I digress.

I don't believe the typical homeowner pump shotgun at 10 feet is as good as a 223 at 10 feet. Provided the 223 has a light and an aimpoint on it.

I fail to see any advantage at 10 for the AR with or without a light

+1