These are my first words as a Freeper:
I’m only 32 years old, but I’m seeing my late teens logic in this kid:
Replacement improved cylinder shotgun barrels of 18-21 inches are readily available for popular models. If not, a competent gunsmith can shorten a barrel for a modest price.
Within effective range, the spread of shot from a shotgun barrel is not that extreme, fist to softball sized spread.
A break/comp does make it more controllable, and obnoxious. Imagine firing that thing indoors, possibly w/o ear-pro. Additionally, the recoil on an AR based platform is minimal, as the barrel/bolt-carrier/receiver extension are all in line. The recoil impulse goes directly into the shoulder.
Yes, AR pattern weapons are awesome platforms, but for home def, I resort to my old 500 ATP Mossberg with the 18” barrel. I don’t believe in chambering a round to let someone know you have a shotgun, that may or may not embolden in intruder.
If a 5-8 round magazine tube of #4 or 00 buck isn’t sufficient for the job at hand, if there is enough of a threat to merit high capacity magazines especially in an HD situation, you REALLY need to think about why there are/were so many people coming into your home in the middle of the night.
I used to believe that a shotgun with wooden furniture would not be seen as an assault weapon, now I’m not so sure.
Finally, granted I see things differently than this kid, I sure do appreciate that he’s not cowering down as a gun owner. We need more like him.
Good first words... I also applaud this young fire fighter for speaking out and we need more like these youngsters stepping up and calling out these liberal pukes.
I have an Eotech mounted to my Mossberg 590 Breecher loaded to the gills with #4 Buck and a bandelero on station next to it.
I sleep well at night.
I’m a trapshooter, at our club the pattern boards have to be changed often and were using 12ga 1oz low brass 7s or 8s from about 13 - 15 yards and the boards are 1/2 inch exterior plywood.
I’m ok with them protecting the inside of my house
Welcome to Free Republic. I hope your stay here is an informative and productive one.
A Mossberg 500 is a great weapon for home defense. However, the threat is increasing of home invasions with multiple attackers, heavily armed gangs and cartels, and the increasing use of technology like Obamaphones that can gather a large mob of attackers quickly and at a target simultaneously, etc. There is also the probability that some shots you fire either miss or not stop an attacker. You will may well need more capacity than the Mossberg holds. A high capacity magazine fed rifle or pistol gives you not only more immediate firepower but quick reload capability. That is crucial in a fight to help even the already lop-sided odds against you. Remember, the attackers are always going to attack when they feel they have the advantage, not you.
I used to believe that a shotgun with wooden furniture would not be seen as an assault weapon, now Im not so sure
The British (who have been doing an outstanding job of turning their honest population into helpless rabbits in a barrel) think so. There is no need to assume the people demanding gun control in this country would not go just as far as they and prohibit all firearms in the hands of the free citizenry if they can get away with it.
As fine a weapon as the Mossberg 500 is - and the fact the shotgun has seen effective military use for over 600 years - it does not diminish the fact it is a limited range weapon, not much improved than the British smoothbore muskets used by British regulars during our Revolution. Military technology has moved on. There is little doubt the Founding Fathers intended civilians to be armed with weapons at least as powerful and effective as those carried by a regular military force whom they may have fight and to have the ability to organize and mount an effective resistance to battle any potential tyranny.
As important as the defense of the home is, the Founders were concerned about larger threats, both foreign and domestic, which could enslave our people again if we did not have the means to resist. As the saying goes, the 2nd Amendment is not just about hunting deer. It is also not just about protecting an individual in his private space. It is about keeping our very lives and liberties secure from really BIG threats.
Therefore, modern, military pattern weapons widespread and accessible in the hands of the people is paramount to the survival of the Republic. Today, that would include semi-auto weaponry with high capacity magazines, as well as longer range rifles, first class optics, and even individual body armor. To not have "the best" puts the citizenry at an immediate disadvantage to predatory tyrants with regular armies, trained paramilitary forces, and even armed irregular gangs on their side.
That, of course, is the reason these tyrants want all guns not in their hands or those of their friends banned. It's not about "gun safety" - except insofar as it keeps them safe from effective resistance by an outraged citizenry as they proceed to loot our lives, our liberties, our rights, our property, and put us in the shackles of their own choosing.
That is the elephant in the room both sides are dancing around to avoid mentioning, yet is the main purpose for the 2nd Amendment.
"In a man-to-man fight, the winner is he who has one more round in his magazine" - Erwin Rommel
Meh. I'll leave the speculation to you, and keep my 30 (and 60) round mags.
What Special operations units use 12ga shotguns for CQB?