# Firearms Appreciation



## Scotch&Cigars (Dec 27, 2009)

I began this thread to continue the conversation--started as a tangent to another thread (seen here)--regarding firearms ownership.

I myself have been contemplating the purchase of Para 2009 Special Edition 1911 in .38, seen at https://www.para-usa.com/new/product_pistol.php?id=42

Gideon, to answer your follow-up questions:

*Have you ANY handgun experience, at all?*
Yes. One of my good friends' brothers is a firearm instructor, and we spent a few sessions on safety, mechanics, maintenance, etc... before even hitting the range. I have shot at the range for probably a combined total of around 10-15 hours.

*What is your honest and best considered skill level? 
From Zero to Ten, with ten being the best.*
I would modestly put myself at a four or five, simply because I do not have much to compare myself to.

*Also what geographic region are you located in.(for suggestions for appropriate safety/training classes. *
I am in the Chicagoland area.


----------



## JAGMAJ (Feb 10, 2005)

The next question is what you want the pistol for? I'm assuming that it's primarily for home defense. If so, the follow up questions would be whether you have any children (or other people living in the house) and whether you have any neighbors close by. In addition to issues such as accuracy and knock-down power, you also have to consider whether you have to worry about bullets travelling through walls and hitting somebody else. That's one of the reasons I don't like 9mms for home defense.


----------



## Scotch&Cigars (Dec 27, 2009)

JAGMAJ said:


> The next question is what you want the pistol for? I'm assuming that it's primarily for home defense. If so, the follow up questions would be whether you have any children (or other people living in the house) and whether you have any neighbors close by. In addition to issues such as accuracy and knock-down power, you also have to consider whether you have to worry about bullets travelling through walls and hitting somebody else. That's one of the reasons I don't like 9mms for home defense.


The pistol would be for a combination of home defense and for going to the range for recreational shooting. I'm not (yet) looking to enter marksmanship contests, though I suppose some day in the future that is a real possibility.

I have no children living with me, only a dog. I do live in a multi-residence building, the walls of which are fairly thick (I once had my neighbor pound on the walls and I couldn't hear or feel it on the other side).


----------



## Relayer (Nov 9, 2005)

Why the .38 Super instead of 9MM? 

Unless you plan on reloading (which is not that difficult to do) you'll spend a lot more money on ammo with the .38 Super and the stopping power is not really significantly better.

I am a big fan of the 1911-style and really regret having to sell my old .45 Colt Ser. 70 MKIV.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Scotch&Cigars said:


> The pistol would be for a combination of home defense and for going to the range for recreational shooting. I'm not (yet) looking to enter marksmanship contests, though I suppose some day in the future that is a real possibility.
> 
> I have no children living with me, only a dog. I do live in a multi-residence building, the walls of which are fairly thick (I once had my neighbor pound on the walls and I couldn't hear or feel it on the other side).


Do you reload?

38 super is not super cheap to feed out-of-the-box. You aren't going to find many deals on surplus like you do 9mm and 45 ACP. Although not even that is a sure bet in this war era. I think it's about $0.50 a round for 'red box' Federal AE which is the same as 45 ACP. There are a lot more runs of 45 ACP than 38 Super too; which is something to think about. Georgia Arms or someone may make cans of decent 38 Super - I wouldn't know about that.

Paras are nice. I'm partial to ramped barrels and I think most of their models come with them. An expensive item to add after-the-fact and would void a warranty usually.


----------



## Gideon Reader (Aug 14, 2008)

*Skill level and other stuff*

Scotch & Cigars
With the greatest respect for your sensibilities and level of training, what you have described is a skill level of about a *Two*.
Most (I say again; MOST not ALL) policemen are at the *Five* level.
The majority of shooters who are into the grand game are around a *Seven* or *Eight*. Current folks that train every week and are professionally equiped/trained are at an *Eight* to *Ten*. Those are some Baaaaad Mama Scratchers. Folks like me who carried professionally but are currently restricted by age or previous physical limitations, but who still shoot a lot and who have many, MANY years of training and experience, are between *Seven* and *Nine*.

Age does creep up on all of us, at some point.

Depending on your circumstances, call or drop in on a local *IDPA* weekend shoot in your area. That is the *International Defensive Pistol Association*
(they have an excellent website with links to located affiliated clubs).
There you will find a collegial group of experienced shooters/carriers, in your area or region, all of whom are extremely familiar with the subject.

I am not knocking the Para. It is just *not* my personal choice for a custom job and I do *not* consider it "business ready" in it's out of the box configuration.

Depending on your finances, an *HK* in .45acp is pricey but the top of the line; or one of the *Glocks* (Model-30 or 36) will *meet your needs*. Not a bank breaker as far as the Tupperware go.
Selection of a *Sig-Sauer* will not bring tears either. The Sig is a fine handgun. All three are *"out of the box"* reliable and trustworthy.

I am *NOT* seeking to downplay the .38 Super. Just *very expensive to shoot*.
I am unaware of any el cheapo rounds available, like there is in 9mm or .45acp.
As for* meeting your wants*? *That* is a horse of a different flavor.

Now as for holsters,.....? A directly related subject. We will talk.

Warmest regards, (to all who may read this)

Gideon Reader
The kindly elder gentleman with the dents, scars and dings
in his coachwork.


----------



## Scotch&Cigars (Dec 27, 2009)

Relayer said:


> Why the .38 Super instead of 9MM?
> 
> Unless you plan on reloading (which is not that difficult to do) you'll spend a lot more money on ammo with the .38 Super and the stopping power is not really significantly better.
> 
> I am a big fan of the 1911-style and really regret having to sell my old .45 Colt Ser. 70 MKIV.


I prefer the platform, and from what I've heard and read, 9mm cartridges are more prone to feed issues in 1911s.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

If I was just getting into shooting I'd get a decent, but not great 1911 like a Springfield-Armory and a S&W 625 ... you could have a lot of fun shooting limited classes in auto and revolver sharing the 45 ACP caliber.

I didn't know, so I checked and there is not a 38 Super 'canned heat'


----------



## Scotch&Cigars (Dec 27, 2009)

Gideon Reader said:


> Scotch & Cigars
> With the greatest respect for your sensibilities and level of training, what you have described is a skill level of about a *Two*.
> Most (I say again; MOST not ALL) policemen are at the *Five* level.
> The majority of shooters who are into the grand game are around a *Seven* or *Eight*. Current folks that train every week and are professionally equiped/trained are at an *Eight* to *Ten*. Those are some Baaaaad Mama Scratchers. Folks like me who carried professionally but are currently restricted by age or previous physical limitations, but who still shoot a lot and who have many, MANY years of training and experience, are between *Seven* and *Nine*.


I suppose I was unclear on your rubric (gotta love the vague 1-10 scale :icon_smile_wink, so I shall defer to your experienced assessment.



Gideon Reader said:


> Depending on your circumstances, call or drop in on a local *IDPA* weekend shoot in your area. That is the *International Defensive Pistol Association*
> (they have an excellent website with links to located affiliated clubs).
> There you will find a collegial group of experienced shooters/carriers, in your area or region, all of whom are extremely familiar with the subject.


I shall do so; that sounds like a great idea.



Gideon Reader said:


> I am not knocking the Para. It is just *not* my personal choice for a custom job and I do *not* consider it "business ready" in it's out of the box configuration.
> 
> Depending on your finances, an *HK* in .45acp is pricey but the top of the line; or one of the *Glocks* (Model-30 or 36) will *meet your needs*. Not a bank breaker as far as the Tupperware go.
> Selection of a *Sig-Sauer* will not bring tears either. The Sig is a fine handgun. All three are *"out of the box"* reliable and trustworthy.
> ...


As I am sure most are, I am constantly torn between the "need" and the "want." I've been eyeballing the Para primarily because I've handled it, and shot it, and I rather liked it. However, I will make it a point to check out your suggestions as well, as due to my limited knowledge, it's difficult for me to say that I would absolutely prefer what I've felt over one of those.

I do realize that the .38 super is expensive to shoot, and that's something I've considered. Some more soul-searching may be in order to determine whether I appreciate a particular firearm enough that it outweighs the cost of rounds.


----------



## Relayer (Nov 9, 2005)

I wouldn't begin to try and talk you out of the 1911 platform, because, as I said, I love it too.

However, though there are anecdotal feeding issue reports, I don't think they are generally any more unreliable than .38 Super, .45, etc. They can all have problems related to specific cartridges, magazines, loads, etc etc. Just get a good gun from a good manufacturer and you'll be fine in most any case.


----------



## JAGMAJ (Feb 10, 2005)

In my opinion, the 9mm just has too much penetration. This negatively affects both knock-down power and risks more collateral damage by going through walls. This is especially true if you use a P+ round. In any caliber, for home defense you're better off with a specialty hollowpoint--hydra-shoks are my personal favorite. In a .45 or .40, a hydra-shok packs quite a punch and usually will not go through a wall. .45s are pretty good for home defense, but in my experience, they are not as accurate as other calibers and you're limited in your magazine capacity. That's why I recommended the .40. It has almost as much knock down power as a .45, is more accurate, and allows for a reasonable magazine capacity. If you don't want to get too fancy, a Glock 23 is a nice home defense pistol. I also recommend getting tritium night sights on your pistol. If you've ever tried to line up a pistol shot in a dark room without tritium sights, you'll know what I'm talking about.

Just my thoughts.


----------



## Gideon Reader (Aug 14, 2008)

JAGMAJ said:


> In my opinion, the 9mm just has too much penetration. This negatively affects both knock-down power and risks more collateral damage by going through walls. This is especially true if you use a P+ round. In any caliber, for home defense you're better off with a specialty hollowpoint--hydra-shoks are my personal favorite. In a .45 or .40, a hydra-shok packs quite a punch and usually will not go through a wall. .45s are pretty good for home defense, but in my experience, they are not as accurate as other calibers and you're limited in your magazine capacity. That's why I recommended the .40. It has almost as much knock down power as a .45, is more accurate, and allows for a reasonable magazine capacity. If you don't want to get too fancy, a Glock 23 is a nice home defense pistol. I also recommend getting tritium night sights on your pistol. If you've ever tried to line up a pistol shot in a dark room without tritium sights, you'll know what I'm talking about.
> 
> Just my thoughts.


I was going to nit pick, but nothing would be served. 
Suffice it to say that a wall (in an apartment that is not made of cement, or block, or other such material) will penetrated by any .40 cal or .45acp, etc., round.

Feeding or extraction is not a platform problem but specific to a particular handgun. Accuracy? The comment sent me into near hysteria. No. NO. NO that is not quite correct. 
Except for 1911's that have been abused through purposeful neglect or battle damage, I have *NEVER* experienced one that could not be accurately operated better than the operator. It is a "pilot failure" problem it the platform is not responding properly.

However, I do agree that the Glock Model 23 (.40cal) is a very wise and decent selection for a one gun family. Not too big. Not too small. 
"Just right", said Goldilocks.

Scotch & Cigars (S&C),
I checked. IDPA has twelve affiliated clubs in your state. Check the website for the one nearest you.

Warm regards from:
Gideon Reader,

...who will be away until after the fluttering and dropping of the leafs
of the calendar, signifying the change of the year.
HAPPY NEW YEAR, and to all a good night.


----------



## JohnRov (Sep 3, 2008)

Find a local NRA instructor, take some courses. Trying to get usable firearms advice on the internet is a crapshoot. Everyone has strong opinions on what gun is best, which caliber is best, etc. A lot of indoor ranges let you rent guns. Go and blow some money and find out which one fits your hand best. Glocks have different ergos than 1911s which have different ergos than Sigs etc. Not better, just different.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

The .40 is a good recommendation. That Springfield-Armory XD-40 is a good alternative to the Glock for a lot of people. I know several friends that like them that came from 1911 backgrounds.


----------



## Pr B (Jan 8, 2009)

*Chuck Hawks*

I suggest reading up on what Chuck Hawks has to say about home defense weapons:

https://www.chuckhawks.com/self_defense.htm
https://www.chuckhawks.com/guns_home_defense.htm 
https://www.chuckhawks.com/home_security.htm 
https://www.chuckhawks.com/handgun_home_defense.htm
https://www.chuckhawks.com/g-s_online_self-defense_handguns.htm
https://www.chuckhawks.com/self_defense_pistol.htm 
https://www.chuckhawks.com/home_defense_shotgun_ammo.htm

Interesting quote, to keep things in perspective: FBI statistics about police shootings indicate that most engagements occur within seven FEET, with no more than five rounds exchanged in total....


----------



## JAGMAJ (Feb 10, 2005)

Gideon Reader said:


> I was going to nit pick, but nothing would be served.
> Suffice it to say that a wall (in an apartment that is not made of cement, or block, or other such material) will penetrated by any .40 cal or .45acp, etc., round.
> 
> Feeding or extraction is not a platform problem but specific to a particular handgun. Accuracy? The comment sent me into near hysteria. No. NO. NO that is not quite correct.
> ...


Your comment about any .45 or .40 penetrating a single wall is probably true of any standard round, but the way a hydra-shok mushrooms, I would think that there is a good chance of it not making it through the second layer of drywall--or if it did, it would definitely be slowed down significantly. A 9mm P++, however, was designed to go through a metal car door, so it could probably penetrate several interior walls. Either way, my point is that a 9mm will go a lot further through the interior of a house than a .45 or .40, which usually have greater mass but slower velocity.

As for the issue of .45 accuracy, this may just be a matter of my own personal experience. I have no doubt that a high-end .45 may have pretty good accuracy, but I cut my teeth on standard Colts and I had to practice a lot and use excellent form to be accurate. When I started shooting 9mms, however, I found that I could have slightly sloppy form and still shoot better than with my .45s. Indeed, I have never not shot Expert on an Army marksmanship test using a 9mm even when I've not really concentrated. So while I agree with you that a .45 is fully capable of being accurate if the shooter is good enough, I've found that the 9mms are more forgiving. Again, other people's experiences may differ from mine.


----------



## JohnRov (Sep 3, 2008)

JAGMAJ said:


> Your comment about any .45 or .40 penetrating a single wall is probably true of any standard round, but the way a hydra-shok mushrooms, I would think that there is a good chance of it not making it through the second layer of drywall--or if it did, it would definitely be slowed down significantly. A 9mm P++, however, was designed to go through a metal car door, so it could probably penetrate several interior walls. Either way, my point is that a 9mm will go a lot further through the interior of a house than a .45 or .40, which usually have greater mass but slower velocity.


Dunno, drywall's not that tough. I would be interested in some tests. Maybe I'll actually do that this summer.


----------



## JAGMAJ (Feb 10, 2005)

JohnRov said:


> Dunno, drywall's not that tough. I would be interested in some tests. Maybe I'll actually do that this summer.


That could be fun. You'd have to set up two sheets a few inches apart to simulate a single interior wall. My theory about a .40 or .45 caliber hydra-shok is that they would mushroom after passing through the first sheet of drywall so that they would have trouble penetrating the second sheet. One of the reasons a hyrdo-shok (or any good specialty hollowpoint) is so lethal is that they're designed to stop within a human body rather than passing straight through so that the bullet delivers its full kinetic energy to the body. An even better test would be to line up several sheets of drywall and test different kinds of ammo in different calibers to see which travel through the most sheets.


----------



## JohnRov (Sep 3, 2008)

JAGMAJ said:


> That could be fun. You'd have to set up two sheets a few inches apart to simulate a single interior wall. My theory about a .40 or .45 caliber hydra-shok is that they would mushroom after passing through the first sheet of drywall so that they would have trouble penetrating the second sheet. One of the reasons a hyrdo-shok (or any good specialty hollowpoint) is so lethal is that they're designed to stop within a human body rather than passing straight through so that the bullet delivers its full kinetic energy to the body. An even better test would be to line up several sheets of drywall and test different kinds of ammo in different calibers to see which travel through the most sheets.


What would be nice is to have some ballistic gel on the other side and/or a chrono. Someone just did something similar with a shotgun and posted YouTube vids.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

https://ammo.ar15.com/project/Self_Defense_Ammo_FAQ/index.htm#OVERPENETRATION

The thing about hydrashoks to recommend is they are designed to maintain very consistent powder loadings while producing a low flash for low-light, self-defense type shooting likely to be encountered by inexperienced or occassional shooters like homeowners/civilians and regular LEOs.


----------



## JAGMAJ (Feb 10, 2005)

That's a great link, ksinc. It makes one rethink some of the accepted wisdom on handgun ammo. It also seems like the quality of hydra-shoks may have dropped off over the years. About 15 years ago, I shot .45 hydra-shoks through a milk jug filled with water, with a soft mud embankment behind it. You usually didn't have to dig but a couple of inches to recover the bullets and all of the bullets had very scary looking expansion. In fact, I think I still have one of those bullets tucked away in a box somewhere. And then, about a decade or so ago, one of the big gun magazines (I can't remember which) had an article where they tested bullet lethality and concluded that the lower grain .40 hydra-shok was the most lethal bullet. It might have been about that European study where they shot goats, but my memory is too fuzzy. In any event, it appears that there is even better ammo out there now--or that Federal got complacent and let their standards for the hyrda-shoks slip. I'll have to do some more research and try to find the best current hollow-point for my 40.

I'd still like to see a good drywall test, though. I note that the one test they did regarding inerior penetration speculated that some of the hollow-points tested must not have expanded properly. It would be nice if they had said exactly what ammo they used for that test.


----------



## smujd (Mar 18, 2008)

JohnRov said:


> Dunno, drywall's not that tough. I would be interested in some tests. Maybe I'll actually do that this summer.


----------



## Scotch&Cigars (Dec 27, 2009)

ksinc said:


> https://ammo.ar15.com/project/Self_Defense_Ammo_FAQ/index.htm#OVERPENETRATION
> 
> The thing about hydrashoks to recommend is they are designed to maintain very consistent powder loadings while producing a low flash for low-light, self-defense type shooting likely to be encountered by inexperienced or occassional shooters like homeowners/civilians and regular LEOs.


That touches on what one of my next questions would be. I could see muzzle flash and noise as potential debilitating factors at close range in the dark at some ungodly hour of the morning. I'd imagine that shooting off a .357 magnum in the dark in close quarters might give you one shot, after which you might be blind and deaf for a good 30 seconds or so...


----------



## JAGMAJ (Feb 10, 2005)

An even better link--you have to love the internet. Of course, I guess the moral of this story is that most any gun will shoot easily through interior walls.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

I've never owned any firearms and never will.


----------



## JohnRov (Sep 3, 2008)

Howard said:


> I've never owned any firearms and never will.


Not sure how your post in any way contributes to the quality of this thread. I'm glad we all have the freedom to choose.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Scotch&Cigars said:


> That touches on what one of my next questions would be. I could see muzzle flash and noise as potential debilitating factors at close range in the dark at some ungodly hour of the morning. I'd imagine that shooting off a .357 magnum in the dark in close quarters might give you one shot, after which you might be blind and deaf for a good 30 seconds or so...


That's why I said before I would highly recommend a 1911 variant paired with one of the best revolvers, a double-action, S&W Model 25 in 45 ACP that you load with moon clips. I carry one something like this https://gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=151402868

That way you only have one caliber of ammo to keep. The "rule of two" doesn't bite you so hard. And they are pretty cheap to feed and not a magnum powder. It's not really typical advice that you would get from a cop or many former Army Ranger types, but civilian shooter requirements are somewhat different I find. YMMV

Check into them and see if you find something you like. The modern Stainless models are called 625 and a 625-3 would probably make you very, very happy and you can usually find them used pretty cheaply.

A lot of the competitive shooters use them including Jerry Miculek (if not the best ever, certainly one of a very small handful.)

They even make a JM Special Edition https://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=151608543


----------



## cecil47 (Oct 25, 2009)

I'm a competitive shooter and shoot 1911 variants almost exclusively. With some good gunsmithing, they have the best single action triggers, period. However, without some serious gunsmithing, I've seen many problems with people shooting shorter cartridges, such as 9mm and even .40S&W, as the gun was designed around the .45ACP (this generally does not apply to high-end guns like the STI/SV variants or custom shop guns like Wilson, etc. which run like a top). To alleviate such problems, we often handload .40 or 9 longer than spec. Ramped barrels also help, and better support the higher pressure of those cartridges.

For these reasons, .38 super might be a better choice than 40 or 9 in an off the shelf 1911 due to its longer length. However, the 38 super is a semi-rimmed, rather than rimless, case and that sometimes lead to magazine feeding problems. Ammo is also more expensive and harder to find. For the casual shooter who wants a 1911, I would stick to 45.

For the more casual shooter, though, there are several guns I would suggest before the 1911 - either a glock or Springfield Armory XD are simpler more foolproof designs for the casual shooter, as is almost any revolver. HKs and SIGs are great, but generally more expensive. 1911 shooters will favor the XD for its grip angle, but its all really up to personal preference. Go to the range and try several. Its worth the investment to get something you really like.

Then, practice, practice, practice. Its fun and good for you!

Don't even get me started on shotguns or ARs, we'll be here all night!


----------



## Scotch&Cigars (Dec 27, 2009)

Cecil,

Great, informative post--thanks! I'm loving all this input from people who have "been there, done that." It's so helpful, and I now am aware of how much more thinking I'm going to have to do. Luckily, I love thinking about this stuff.

I haven't had a chance to shoot the XD yet, but you certainly aren't the first person to suggest it. I'll have to take a look. I'm also going to have to seriously consider going .45 if I do choose the 1911, based on yours and others' advice


----------



## cecil47 (Oct 25, 2009)

@S&C, the XD comes in a "base" variant, and the upgraded XDM version, which is very nice. Worth the added $ IMO.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Sounds like a fellow Arfcom'r to me :icon_smile_big: 

:aportnoy:


----------



## thunderw21 (Sep 21, 2008)

ksinc said:


> Sounds like a fellow Arfcom'r to me :icon_smile_big:
> 
> :aportnoy:


Just don't let the Prof get hold of your goose or he'll use the drawer on it. :icon_smile_wink:

Good to see other Arfcom'rs about.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

That has to be the largest pay membership forum on the internet; doesn't it?


----------



## thunderw21 (Sep 21, 2008)

Has to be, or close.


----------



## Musick (Oct 5, 2009)

JAGMAJ said:


> In my opinion, the 9mm just has too much penetration...


A VERY valid point that can be argued aganist ANY psitol caliber.

Many questions come up as to home defense. Apartment or house is the most important IMO. Do you share walls w/ a neighbor?

A possible life changing question that deserve a responsible, well thought out answer.

If home defense is the only consideration, consider a 12G. Shotguns are generally considered to be the most effective short ranged firearm. Rather than shooting a single bullet with each pull of the trigger as a rifle or handgun would do, shotguns shoot multiple pellets. These multiple pellets are more likely to stop an attacker but less likely to pass through the exterior walls of your home and injure your neighbors (note that I say "less" likely - there is always a risk to bystanders depending on load choice).

IMO, if you are new to firearms, STRONGLY consider a shotgun if your only consideration is GENERAL home defense. Pistols require more practice than a SG. If you choose a handgun over a SG be prepared to spend more time perfecting the art.


----------



## Musick (Oct 5, 2009)

dbl post


----------



## Liberty Ship (Jan 26, 2006)

Scotch&Cigars said:


> That touches on what one of my next questions would be. I could see muzzle flash and noise as potential debilitating factors at close range in the dark at some ungodly hour of the morning. I'd imagine that shooting off a .357 magnum in the dark in close quarters might give you one shot, after which you might be blind and deaf for a good 30 seconds or so...


Just catching up from the original thread wherein I posted an item I keep on my bedside along with the G21 with a tactical light. These allow you to hear normal noises while suppressing loud, damaging noises:










They are cheap, light, no moving parts, non-electrical. And, as I said, the Arfcom logo alone will cause the intruders to surrender immediately, or the terrorists to convert to Christianity.

Don't use a magnum load for home defense. And a tac light will help with recovering from the flash from a non-magnum handgun round.


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

cecil47 said:


> For the more casual shooter, though, there are several guns I would suggest before the 1911 - either a glock or Springfield Armory XD are simpler more foolproof designs for the casual shooter, as is almost any revolver.


Many say that for the casual shooter the revolver is the only handgun that they recommend. There is almost no chance for failure and in the rare instance that there is a misfire you merely pull the trigger again. Compared to a semi, revolver maintenance is a piece of cake.

Cruiser


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

JohnRov said:


> Not sure how your post in any way contributes to the quality of this thread. I'm glad we all have the freedom to choose.


Sorry,I thought this was about appreciating firearms or owning one,I apologize if I didn't read further.


----------



## JAGMAJ (Feb 10, 2005)

Musick said:


> A VERY valid point that can be argued aganist ANY psitol caliber.
> 
> Many questions come up as to home defense. Apartment or house is the most important IMO. Do you share walls w/ a neighbor?
> 
> ...


I strongly agree that a good shotgun is the best home defense firearm. I've got a modifed 12-gauge Mossberg with a Surefire attachment in my closet. If an intruder hears a shotgun rack and doesn't go running from the house, you know that you're dealing with a crazy individual who will have to be killed.

As for the penetration issue, I was like you and assumed that shotgun pellets would have less penetration through walls, but if you look at the sites linked above, you'll see that the shotgun pellets had greater penetration.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

Having completed two careers in which armament/various firearms were but, one of the tools of my trade; and being an avid hunter for much of my life, I have developed a long term interest in the shooting arts and accumulated a reasonably sized personal collection of pistols, revolvers, rifles and shotguns. Brands include Colt and Smith and Wesson (revolvers), Beretta, Sig-Sauer and Walther (pistols), Browning and Colt Sauer (rifles), and Browning and Stephens (shotguns). The Stephens was my first firearm...acquired when I was 12 years old!

As an adult but much younger and arguably less wise man, I slept with a sidearm kept within reach of my bed. I not sure if an actual, existing threat or the elevated testosterone levels of a twenty-something male, coursing through my veins, convinced me of the necessity. Well, time passed, I married, had kids and realized the best way I could protect my home and family from harm would be to properly secure my thunder sticks in a locked gun safe and locked display cases and install proper locks on my doors and windows and, in two of our homes, install comprehensive security systems in the home. Reading this thread and selected posts in the "What do you keep in your bedside table" thread, I can only conclude that many of you must live in some extremely dangerous neighborhoods. I do hope and will pray that your precautions don't contribute to some future and unimaginably horrible accidents.

See y'all at the range now!


----------



## Scotch&Cigars (Dec 27, 2009)

JAGMAJ said:


> If an intruder hears a shotgun rack and doesn't go running from the house, you know that you're dealing with a crazy individual who will have to be killed.


:icon_smile_big: Well put.


----------



## norton (Dec 18, 2008)

Howard said:


> I've never owned any firearms and never will.


Considering your location (New York City) that's a pretty safe bet, but what does it add to the discussion? That would be like me saying "I've never owned a tie clip and never will." in response to a thread requesting information on tie clips.


----------



## beherethen (Jun 6, 2009)

If your going to go the shotgun route, I'd like to suggest the Shorty. It requires a $5 AOW stamp from the ATF, but is uber cool. One of the problems of a shotgun or rifle is you don't want to scare the hell out of the person knocking on your door at 3am if it's a neighbor or relative or the increasingly infrequent booty call. The Shorty gives you all the advantages of a handgun and the safety of a shotgun. :icon_smile:


----------



## norton (Dec 18, 2008)

When I started shooting I standardized on a few calibers, like .22, .380 and .45. I really like the 1911 platform and have been happiest with my Dan Wessons. I don't think you can beat the quality at that price point. I also have a couple XD's in .45 and agree that they would be a great auto for someone starting out that wanted to keep it simple.

And I would second kcinc's recommendation of a .45 ACP revolver. I have S&W model 22 that I like, but I always return to the 1911's.

Since the OP is in the Chicago area check out GAT guns near the tollway in Dundee, they have a web site. They've got a good selection, a range and they offer classes. I took my Utah concealed carry class there but I've never bought anything there.


----------



## norton (Dec 18, 2008)

beherethen said:


> If your going to go the shotgun route, I'd like to suggest the Shorty. It requires a $5 AOW stamp from the ATF, but is uber cool. One of the problems of a shotgun or rifle is you don't want to scare the hell out of the person knocking on your door at 3am if it's a neighbor or relative or the increasingly infrequent booty call. The Shorty gives you all the advantages of a handgun and the safety of a shotgun. :icon_smile:


AOW's are not allowed to anyone in Illinois.


----------



## beherethen (Jun 6, 2009)

norton said:


> AOW's are not allowed to anyone in Illinois.


God, I hate this state.


----------



## dwebber18 (Jun 5, 2008)

On the subject of a 1911 platform, I would stick with it chambered in .45 or maybe .38 super. As said before it was made for the .45 so anything smaller may have feed or extraction issues. Personally I'm comfortable carrying and shooting my Walther P99 in .40. It gives me 13 rounds and packs a better punch than 9mm. I recently moved from an apartment and purchased a house and while I kept my gun on the night stand there it was a constant thought about penetration through the walls. Whatever you get I would get some good hollow points that expand well to minimize that possibility. Also, you may want to look in to training with your gun. There are courses that do low light training and shooting from multiple positions that will allow you to safely prepare for anything. A local range may offer this type of training; I know they do around Knoxville, TN. On the topic of people having a gun handy must be testosterone charged or live in a bad area, I don't believe thats entirely fair. I live in a safe area, but you never know what might happen and I don't want to be a statistic. My home and my family is too important for me to trust a door lock or a slow security company. Now to a shotgun racking scaring someone, please if you use a shotgun just keep 1 in the chamber and shoot, don't try to rack it at 3am when you are asleep. And its nice to see other Arfcommers on here, I find it ammusing that some of us have the same passion for fine guns and fine clothes!


----------



## Ekphrastic (Oct 4, 2009)

Good folks,

There have been many good ideas posted here. Allow me to add my $0.02:

1. Some gun ranges have firearms available to rent. Try firing several different handgun cartridges and several different firearms and see what suits you best. While I, personally, would strongly recommend the .45 ACP over 9x19, .38 Super, and .40 S&W, you need to shoot the caliber (and pistol) that you can actually shoot. The aforementioned comments on over-penetration are well-grounded and logical; however, the first step toward avoiding over-penetration is to not miss, and this means you have to shoot your firearm well. (Of course, at 3:00am, you're not shooting at your best, so I'm not discounting the previous comments on over-penetration at all.) Shooting a .22 LR accurately, with proper shot placement, is better than shooting a .454 Casull wildly. (Not that I'm saying you'd be shooting wildly, but you get my point.)

2. If you can shoot everything equally well, and you want a 1911-style pistol, I'd recommend .45 ACP.

3. I agree with the comments regarding a shotgun--I'd choose it before a handgun for home defense.

4. As a corollary to #3, I would choose a carbine for home defense after the shotgun, and then a pistol. Relatively speaking, shotguns and rifles are much better for home defense.

5. .38 Super was largely designed to be a foreign version of the 9x19, because many foreign countries have laws that prohibit civilians from owning firearms which use "military" cartridges (that is, any cartridge used by the country's military). The concerns about using it in a 1911-style pistol are valid, but I'd still go with the 9x19.

6. If you want to keep your pistol by your bedside (or other easily accessible place), there are firearm safes designed for holding a single pistol. They have four large piano-style keys on top, and they open with a quickly-entered code. You can keep your firearm safe and secure, but it can open quickly when you're awakened.

7. If you're considering _carrying_ the pistol, then we have a whole 'nother can of worms to deal with.

All the best, friend.


----------



## JAGMAJ (Feb 10, 2005)

dwebber18 said:


> Now to a shotgun racking scaring someone, please if you use a shotgun just keep 1 in the chamber and shoot, don't try to rack it at 3am when you are asleep.


Having young children, I have trigger locks (electronic combination locks that light up) on all of my firearms and I don't keep a round in the chamber. As was also noted, there are excellent night-stand gun safes available that allow for quick access. Specifically with respect to shotguns, I do think that the racking serves as an effective deterrent--unless you just want to kill somebody. Also, if I'm not awake enough to rack a shotgun, I probably shouldn't be shooting a gun yet.


----------



## Liberty Ship (Jan 26, 2006)

I disagree about the shotgun as "first responder" for a home defense situation. A shotgun takes two hands to shoot effectively and to retain control.

I like a handgun with a tac light that can be flashed on and off with the trigger finger outside the trigger guard. With that in one hand, it leaves the other hand free to 1) use a phone; 2) manipulate door knobs and locks; 3) restrain children or pets; 4) hold a flashlight if you don't have a light mounted on your firearm. Try doing any of that while keeping a shotgun in a ready position. Try racking a pump gun for a second shot under those circumstances. You can't do it safely in such a way that you can be sure that a bad guy doesn't grab the barrel and seize control of it. (Note: If you have or use a shotgun for defense, get a sling.)

Also, a handgun makes it possible for you to appear unarmed by throwing a towel or magazine over it. This is good for answering the door when you don't know who's knocking. A shotgun is, well, obvious; and upon seeing it, a determined adversary might just shoot you right off the bat. An argument for concealment is that it buys you time to spin your OODA loop*, and surprise.

* https://www.adjunct.diodon349.com/Attack_on_USA/ooda_loop__combat_mindset.htm


----------



## smujd (Mar 18, 2008)

Racking a shotgun simply alerts the bad guy(s) to your general location. A dog will do well for auditory deterrence.

I do not buy the theory that the bad guy(s) will be so alarmed by the sound of a weapon (shotgun or otherwise) being racked that they will flee. Any bad guy(s) who has entered an occupied dwelling is likely willing to deal with the occupants--retain the benefit of surprise.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

*I'm sure this will surprise the people who know how liberal I am...*

*Have you ANY handgun experience, at all?*
Yep. I've been on the range a few times to shoot a Kimber 1911 and Glock 19. I think I prefer the 1911. Something about the feel of it is just, well, _right_. I do not own, much less conceal, any arms as I am not prepared to take a human life.

*What is your honest and best considered skill level? *
*From Zero to Ten, with ten being the best.*
5. I was okay, but not great. Surprising how hard it was to hit close targets. Still had a blast (no pun intended) though.

*Also what geographic region are you located in.*
North Central Florida



Howard said:


> I've never owned any firearms and never will.





JohnRov said:


> Not sure how your post in any way contributes to the quality of this thread. I'm glad we all have the freedom to choose.


My thoughts exactly.



norton said:


> Considering your location (New York City) that's a pretty safe bet, but what does it add to the discussion? That would be like me saying "I've never owned a tie clip and never will." in response to a thread requesting information on tie clips.


Considering his location, I'm surprised he hasn't at least thought about it!


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

norton said:


> Considering your location (New York City) that's a pretty safe bet, but what does it add to the discussion? That would be like me saying "I've never owned a tie clip and never will." in response to a thread requesting information on tie clips.


Sorry norton,I thought this discussion was about owning a gun or appreciating it.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Jovan said:


> *Have you ANY handgun experience, at all?*
> Yep. I've been on the range a few times to shoot a Kimber 1911 and Glock 19. I think I prefer the 1911. Something about the feel of it is just, well, _right_. I do not own, much less conceal, any arms as I am not prepared to take a human life.
> 
> *What is your honest and best considered skill level? *
> ...


I don't want to think about it,I don't believe in gun violence.


----------



## Scotch&Cigars (Dec 27, 2009)

Howard said:


> I don't want to think about it,I don't believe in gun violence.


Self defense =/= violence. I would find that a rather obvious distinction.


----------



## Scotch&Cigars (Dec 27, 2009)

And Jovan, I don't think that liberalism is inconsistent with gun ownership/appreciation, *necessarily. *I guess it depends on your particular brand of liberalism. I know several self-styled liberals who keep guns, are members of the NRA, and damn proud of it.


----------



## smujd (Mar 18, 2008)

Scotch&Cigars said:


> I Gideon, to answer your follow-up questions:
> 
> *What is your honest and best considered skill level? *
> *From Zero to Ten, with ten being the best.*


To be fair, this question is almost impossible for a novice handgunner to answer.

Many novice shooters (who are probably at a 1-2 level) will rank themselves in the 4-6 range since they don't have much on which to appreciate the difficulty involved in the serious use of handguns.

There was a time in my life when I was shooting well over 20,000 rounds annually with handguns. At my peak, I was probably a level 7-8 with a handgun. I shoot less now and have probably dropped to a solid 6.

Handguns are difficult--particularly when you get into multiple targets, moving targets, shooting while moving, low light, weak hand shooting, reloading (changing magazines with your offhand takes some practice), and malfunction clearing, etc.

Handguns are a demanding and, consequently, very rewarding discipline. New shooters should not be surprised or disheartened by the difficulty.


----------



## norton (Dec 18, 2008)

Howard said:


> I don't want to think about it,I don't believe in gun violence.


I think violence should be safe, rare and government funded..... No, that's not right. 

I think violence should be rare, overwhelming, and directed at the bad guy.:idea:


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Yes; carbine. I also think the M4 is better than a shotgun, but clearly everyone will have a differing view.

In my calculation: my wife can shoot the M4, but not a shotgun - particularly a shortie. And regarding over-penetration the M4 is just about perfect if the right ammo is selected. 

And as they say, the M4 is so simple even the Air Force uses it. :icon_smile_wink:


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

Who needs a gun for home defense? I just yell and charge 'em with a warhammer...VALHALLA!!!!!

On a serious note, I really like the Springfield XD .40


----------



## JAGMAJ (Feb 10, 2005)

smujd said:


> I do not buy the theory that the bad guy(s) will be so alarmed by the sound of a weapon (shotgun or otherwise) being racked that they will flee. Any bad guy(s) who has entered an occupied dwelling is likely willing to deal with the occupants--retain the benefit of surprise.


I disagree here. Many burglars are cowards who don't expect to encounter armed resistance and will leave once they realize that they're facing an armed and awake homeowner. As for the sound of a shotgun, I know that if I were to break into a house armed with a pistol and I knew that the person in the other room also had a pistol, I might still think that I could take them. If I knew that the person in the other room had a loaded shotgun, however, I would be far more nervous about going through that doorway. I can't imagine that your average burglar would knowingly take on a person with a shotgun. Looking at it from the other perspective, if I were the homeowner facing an armed intruder who was willing to keep coming even knowing that I was armed, I'd rather have the tactical shotgun. As I indicated before, though, I have a pistol as my closest weapon and a shotgun in the closet. If I had the time under the situation, I'd definitely get the shotgun out.


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

*Have you ANY handgun experience, at all?*
Some, but not an extensive amount. As a medical corpsman in the service I was trained in the use and maintenance of the military .45. I also had a two day training course in order to obtain my handgun carry permit. I take my S&W .357 to the range about once a year where I practice with .38 Special +P ammo, the only ammo I use.

*What is your honest and best considered skill level? 
From Zero to Ten, with ten being the best.*
Maybe a four.

*Also what geographic region are you located in.(for suggestions for appropriate safety/training classes. *
Southeastern U.S.

I contend that a short barreled shotgun is a much better home defense weapon than a handgun, but not necessarily a .12 gauge. If you've ever fired a .12 gauge in a confined space you know why I say this, that is if you don't suffer from hearing loss and a traumatic brain injury from a concussion. :icon_smile_big:

A small .410 is every bit as effective for this purpose without the concussive effect of the .12 gauge. After all it's equivalent to firing five .357 rounds at once. Not only that but without the hard recoil of the .12 gauge it's easier to get off multiple shots with greater accuracy and it can be easily handled with a pistol grip. Finally, it sounds just like a .12 gauge when you rack it.

At one time both Mossberg and Remington made short .410s designed specifically for home defense.

Cruiser


----------



## JAGMAJ (Feb 10, 2005)

It is true that a 12-gauge can be excessive, but they now make tactical loads which have less recoil and flash.


----------



## Bermuda (Aug 16, 2009)

I would enjoy purchasing a classic revolver


----------



## PetroLandman (Apr 21, 2006)

*Lots of great information in this thread.*

I notice a few mentions of the use of a shotgun in home defense and I agree. My wife has in her bedside table what I think is the perfect compromise between knock down power and the spread of the shotgun which eliminates the need to aim precisely. It is made by Taurus Arms and is called The Judge. Fires either .410 shotgun shells (2.75") or .45s. Kay's is loaded with both in alternate chambers. The gun is beautiful for home defense I think and is fun to shoot at the range or out at the farm. The .410s are horrifically loud indoors without the muffling effect of the long barrel of a shotgun.

She also has a 9mm Glock in the bedside table though we have a highly trained protection dog in the house. (We had two break-in attempts while I was out of town and the grandkids were with her, hence, the obvious overkill in protection.)


----------



## cecil47 (Oct 25, 2009)

smujd said:


> To be fair, this question is almost impossible for a novice handgunner to answer.
> 
> Many novice shooters (who are probably at a 1-2 level) will rank themselves in the 4-6 range since they don't have much on which to appreciate the difficulty involved in the serious use of handguns.
> 
> ...


Well said. It is impossible to know how amazing really good shooters are without seeing them in person. Then I realize what a novice I still am. The difficulty of shooting really well is what makes it so rewarding.


----------



## smujd (Mar 18, 2008)

Cruiser said:


> A small .410 is every bit as effective for this purpose without the concussive effect of the .12 gauge. After all it's equivalent to firing five .357 rounds at once. Not only that but without the hard recoil of the .12 gauge it's easier to get off multiple shots with greater accuracy and it can be easily handled with a pistol grip. Finally, it sounds just like a .12 gauge when you rack it.
> 
> At one time both Mossberg and Remington made short .410s designed specifically for home defense.
> 
> Cruiser


That is dangerous advice. .410 is insufficient for personal defense purposes. See, e.g., https://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot41.htm


----------



## JohnRov (Sep 3, 2008)

To OP: Now you see first hand how many opinions you will get to firearm questions 

Bottom line, get out there and shoot as many guns as you can, read as much as you can (and learn to filter good advice from bad). If using a firearm for self-defense in the home or on your person, get more than proficient with it. Punching paper isn't the same as handling a firearm in a stressful (to say the least) situation. A shotgun isn't better than a pistol if you aren't good with a shotgun (an no, they don't spread out at self-defense distances like you see in a movie) and vice versa.

Enjoy the learning experience.

As for the comment about "not believing in gun violence", I don't know how to respond to that. Sometimes situations arise that are beyond your control and it pays to be prepared. Millions and millions more shots are fired for recreation than for violence, so the correlation between firearm ownership and the endorsement of their violent use is minuscule at best.


----------



## Scotch&Cigars (Dec 27, 2009)

JohnRov said:


> To OP: Now you see first hand how many opinions you will get to firearm questions
> 
> Bottom line, get out there and shoot as many guns as you can, read as much as you can (and learn to filter good advice from bad). If using a firearm for self-defense in the home or on your person, get more than proficient with it. Punching paper isn't the same as handling a firearm in a stressful (to say the least) situation. A shotgun isn't better than a pistol if you aren't good with a shotgun (an no, they don't spread out at self-defense distances like you see in a movie) and vice versa.
> 
> ...


Yes, I have certainly come to realize it, and I love it. It is great to hear so many perspectives, all well-founded and legitimate. While it obviously does come down to personal preference (amongst other concerns), and while I now realize that I want to try many more variations before I make a decision, it helps to have a starting point based off of the ideas of others.

Also, it is really fun to talk about this stuff with people who are so knowledgeable. I have learned a lot just from this thread and the research it has inspired.

I'm not sure if I've ever been so excited to have my work cut out for me.


----------



## Musick (Oct 5, 2009)

JAGMAJ said:


> I strongly agree that a good shotgun is the best home defense firearm. I've got a modifed 12-gauge Mossberg with a Surefire attachment in my closet. If an intruder hears a shotgun rack and doesn't go running from the house, you know that you're dealing with a crazy individual who will have to be killed.
> 
> As for the penetration issue, *I was like you and assumed that shotgun pellets would have less penetration through walls*, *but if you look at the sites linked above, you'll see that the shotgun pellets had greater penetration.*


Not sure what you are trying to say. A pistol or rifle cartridge of HD value will always penetrate more than #4 shot. Even the link says so:

*"Lessons learned:*
1. Notice that the *#4 and #1 Buck penetrated 6 boards*. In previous tests, *9mm, .45 ACP, and M-193 out of an AR all penetrated all 12 boards.*

So, it seems that these loads do not "over-penetrate" as much as some have led us to believe.

The 00 Buck penetrated 8 boards, but was stopped by the 9th.* Still not as much penetration as the pistol or rifle loads."*
https://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot3_2.htm

To the OP: your best bet is to go to a range and rent a number of firearms and try them out for yourself.

Regardless of what anyone says, there is no "best" gun for every person. The "best" gun for *you* is one you can accurately shoot and are comfortable with.


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

smujd said:


> That is dangerous advice. .410 is insufficient for personal defense purposes. See, e.g., https://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot41.htm


OK, if we are going to reference blogs and websites, here's one that takes the opposite point of view.

https://www.endtimesreport.com/homedefense.html

My opinions on the .410 didn't originate in my head. They came from much research a few years ago on this subject. While the opinions varied among the so called experts, personally I found the rationale for the smaller bore to be based more on science and common sense than on the typical male macho approach of bigger is always better.

Cruiser


----------



## JAGMAJ (Feb 10, 2005)

Musick said:


> Not sure what you are trying to say. A pistol or rifle cartridge of HD value will always penetrate more than #4 shot. Even the link says so:
> 
> *"Lessons learned:*
> 1. Notice that the *#4 and #1 Buck penetrated 6 boards*. In previous tests, *9mm, .45 ACP, and M-193 out of an AR all penetrated all 12 boards.*
> ...


I was actually referring to the test where he simulated two interior walls, then had a jug of water and a brick exterior wall.

https://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot2.htm

In that test, all rounds made it through both interior walls and to the brick, but the handgun rounds bounced off the brick and the .00 buck broke the brick. In my opinion, this is the most realistic of the tests he did. Either way, it shows that all of the rounds are likely to go right through interior walls.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

norton said:


> I think violence should be safe, rare and government funded..... No, that's not right.
> 
> I think violence should be rare, overwhelming, and directed at the bad guy.:idea:


If they want to see violence they can talk to my 2 fists staring right at them.


----------



## Scotch&Cigars (Dec 27, 2009)

Howard said:


> If they want to see violence they can talk to my 2 fists staring right at them.


Fat lotta good that'll do ya when you're staring at a bad guy with a gun, or any other weapon for that matter.

Like I said, self/home defense =/= violence


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

JAGMAJ said:


> I disagree here. Many burglars are cowards who don't expect to encounter armed resistance and will leave once they realize that they're facing an armed and awake homeowner.....


Please, don't count on your burglar being a coward or being less comfortable in a confrontation than you might be. They are the professional in this type of situation and in all probability, functionally more comfortable. While I have heard of such confrontations coming out well for the homeowner, the more frequent outcome leaves the homeowner (or members of their family) injured or worse. Don't become a 'Heroic' statistic. An audible alarm or a large dog barking will drive most intruders off and leave you and your family healthy!


----------



## smujd (Mar 18, 2008)

Cruiser said:


> OK, if we are going to reference blogs and websites, here's one that takes the opposite point of view.
> 
> https://www.endtimesreport.com/homedefense.html
> 
> ...


Interesting website. It's advice, however, is muddled, at best. One important note which the website admits is that the .410 "does not generally penetrate a wall" (while the site doesn't state which type of wall, my assumption is that the referrence is to an interior wall since the article is titled "Home Defense") Any caliber or load which will not dependably penetrate an interior wall is insufficient for personal defense purposes.

I am not advocating "the typical male macho approach of bigger is always better" (a characterization, by the way, I dispute). If the 12 guage is too much to handle, I would suggest an AR or a carbine (I have found that many people with reduced strength can easily and effectively employ a carbine).

I maintain that .410 is insufficient for personal defense purposes.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

About 12 years ago, I went over to my parents house and we went in their car out to dinner. 

They live on a lake with alligators and we had a small dog. When we came home around 9PM one of the "duties" is to escort my Mom and the dog out back with a spotlight to make sure an alligator isn't laying in the backyard. We have had 12 footers back there regularly. Since I was there (but obviously not living there) my Dad naturally still said "Son, take your Mom out back with the dog." Like he had for 20 years ... "YES SIR!" :salute:

So, we go out on the porch and I flip on the flood lights and I have the spotlight in my hand and my Mom shouts "HEY! WHAT ARE YOU DOING!" and I look up and there's about a 6' 250# black guy in the previously dark corner behind our house by our screen door. He's wearing navy sweats and white cotton gloves and has a knife in his hand. Of course, he froze for a second then he took off, but he could only run one way, out front unless he wanted to swim the lake. 

My Mom was screaming and ran back in the house. I went out the screen door to chase him, noticing that the screen was cut out and the lock was undone. My Dad who was getting undressed came out the front door in just his boxers. We chased him across the street, across a golf course and into the woods where we lost him. It was pitch black and it's overgrown, swamp basically. Even with the spotlight we would never have found him if he was on the ground.

By this time, my Mom had called 911 and we heard the cops sirens coming to our house. So, my Dad says let's go get the cops and with the dogs and the helipcopter we will find him. 

So, we run back to our house and these people from the down the road come running to our house too. And they are screaming at the cops "you're at the wrong house!" And we're like "no, they aren't. we just called 911." And the people say "So did we. We were just robbed by a big black guy." 

We did catch the guy, but the important part of the story is this: What he had done. He had crawled into an open bedroom window in the back of their house and robbed them while they were home - in the living room watching TV. Someone had gotten up to go to the refrigerator and seen him in the house. He had run and jumped out the window to ran away and had only come behind two backyards. Knowing they had seen him and would call 911, this guy stopped and tried to cut his way into our house to rob us too and/or maybe just to hide. 

He had been on parole for about 8 days for robbery. They are not scared.


----------



## thunderw21 (Sep 21, 2008)

You need at least 12" of penetration. A .410 will not do that. It's better than nothing, but I wouldn't use it as my main gun.


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

thunderw21 said:


> You need at least 12" of penetration. A .410 will not do that.


When a gun is being used for personal defense you aren't looking for penetration. You want stopping power. That's why you put hollow points in a handgun. I'm not denying that a .12 won't stop someone, but so will a .410. And if I'm in the confined spaces of a home fending off home invaders a short, lightweight gun like the Mossberg Persuader in .410 bore is up to the task.

An average person can rip off more shots, more accurately with the smaller gun than they ever could with the .12 gauge. Go to the range and try it sometime in a side by side comparison. And if you put a smaller load in the .12 gauge to decrease the concussion from firing such a gun in a confined space you have defeated part of the purpose of having the big gun to start with. The .12 gauge is much better suited for the big outdoors instead of the hallway of your house.

Cruiser


----------



## Ekphrastic (Oct 4, 2009)

Cruiser's points are logical and important to consider. As I stated in my previous post, shooting a .22 LR accurately is better than lighting off something huge that one can't control as well. Shoot what you can handle property--and muzzle blast/noise is a serious factor in this.

Respectfully, though, I must side with those in favor of a larger caliber. If someone can handle a larger caliber (and I realize that's a big "if"), it would be a great advantage over the .410.

However, if the OP (or anyone) decides to go with the .410, this might be an interesting option: https://gunblast.com/ATI-T14.htm.


----------



## beherethen (Jun 6, 2009)

The ATI T14 looks awesome. Any idea of what it sells for?


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Consider this; a .410 slug is basically a .45 LC with an 88gr bullet. Leaving a full length shotgun barrel at about 1800 fps and delivering 650 ft lbs of energy.

A personal defense load in a .45 long colt usually has a 225gr bullet leaving a 5" barrel at 900 fps and delivering 400 ft lbs of energy. Is anyone going to argue that a .45 Colt is not an effective man-stopper?

Unless you are going to shoot someone at point blank range you would certainly worry about the retained energy downrange with the 88gr 'bullet.' But you would also worry about over-penetration in a home with a .45 LC. If you were a cop or an FBI agent and were likely to be in a shootout at 25-50 feet you would certainly not want a .410 in any variant.

.410 shot is pretty much useless for big angry people, but slugs have reported effectiveness up to 21 feet. A more reasonable recommendation is for 9-12 feet. While this is awful. In fact, this is terrible. The average room in a home is about 10-12 feet across and if I were to only shoot people 'threatening me' in the 'same room' then I can almost never be more than 8 feet max from someone I want to shoot. Usually, more like 4 or 5. BOOM! You're dead.

There are a lot of .410/45LC derringers for personal defense. Like the Bond Arms Derringer https://www.bondarms.com/ - yes; they are mostly for snakes, but a blast to the face of someone who wants your wallet from 3 feet is not going to "just piss them off more."

Cruiser, please, just use slugs and we won't worry about you; happy shooting!


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

ksinc said:


> Cruiser, please, just use slugs and we won't worry about you; happy shooting!


Please don't misunderstand, I don't own a .410 and I'm not saying that is what someone should get. I am merely saying that if I had to choose between a .12 gauge and a short barreled pump .410 for a gunfight in the confined space of my home, I would choose the .410.

Personally my choice overall would be a short barreled .20 guage which I think would be a good compromise for this purpose.

As for using slugs, my choice for the .410 would be a 3" shell with 000 buckshot. This would release 5 pellets at 1,000-1,200 fps from an 18" barrel, each of which would impact at the close range we are talking about with the approximate force of a .38 special round. This will put an attacker on his butt and generally ruin his day.

Let me be clear, I'm not saying that overall a small bore like the .410 or .20 gauges are superior to a .12 gauge. That would be silly. I'm just saying that for a gunfight in a confined space the lighter, more maneuverable smaller gun would likely have a distinct advantage. Not only would the recoil of the .12 slow one's ability to get off an accurate second shot, much less a third, fourth, or fifth; but the concussion from the muzzle blast in a confined area is going to have a greater effect on the shooter than the attackers, except for the one hit by the first shot of course. :icon_smile_big: It's the subsequent shots where the .410 will shine.

Heck, you can even put a pistol grip on a .410 or .20 and still be able to retain effective control of the gun. Put one of these on a .12 gauge and unless you are an NFL lineman you'll be lucky to hold on to the thing.

My only gun at this time is a S&W Model 60 .357 revolver with a 2 1/8" barrel. From about 25-30' I'm pretty good with it and I might even hit an attacker at 50' if he will stand still.

Cruiser


----------



## thunderw21 (Sep 21, 2008)

Cruiser said:


> When a gun is being used for personal defense you aren't looking for penetration. You want stopping power...


Penetration = stopping power. You won't hit much that's vital unless you get at least 12". A shot to the brain, spine, heart will pretty much stop anyone dead or at least end the threat. Anything else will allow the threat to continue, even if the wound is fatal. The more penetration the more stuff you'll damage and the more likely you'll take the critter out of action.

A wounded crackhead is still a threat. He may run away, he may drop dead. I'd rather stack the chances on my side with a larger caliber firearm.

.410 would be my last choice unless it was loaded with slugs. Even then it would not be my first. A 12 gauge wouldn't be my first either unless it was a Saiga 12 that can be reloaded quickly with a fresh mag. A Saiga 12 with a cut down barrel (legally, of course), a folding stock, 10 round mag (or better, a 20 round drum), red dot sight and flashlight would do very well in the tight confines of a house or apartment.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

The 12" of penetration is only what in ballistic gelatin equates to the 'minimal stopping power' approved by the FBI for carry by their agents based on their study of real life one-stop shots.

To say one can't kill someone with far less than the FBI approves for carry by their agents, especially in a typically legal civilian, self-defense situation is not accurate IMHO. 

It may be a standard you choose to adopt as your own, but it's not a real minimum requirement for lethality.


----------



## 46L (Jan 8, 2009)

thunderw21 said:


> A 12 gauge wouldn't be my first either unless it was a Saiga 12 that can be reloaded quickly with a fresh mag. A Saiga 12 with a cut down barrel (legally, of course), a folding stock, 10 round mag (or better, a 20 round drum), red dot sight and flashlight would do very well in the tight confines of a house or apartment.


Thunder, aside from the Saiga 12 at the specs listed above, what is your first choice for home protection (assuming a one gun household)?


----------



## thunderw21 (Sep 21, 2008)

ksinc said:


> The 12" of penetration is only what in ballistic gelatin equates to the 'minimal stopping power' approved by the FBI for carry by their agents based on their study of real life one-stop shots.
> 
> To say one can't kill someone with far less than the FBI approves for carry by their agents, especially in a typically legal civilian, self-defense situation is not accurate IMHO.
> 
> It may be a standard you choose to adopt as your own, but it's not a real minimum requirement for lethality.


Agreed. The '12 inch Rule' is used as a measuring stick to compare calibers against.
A .22 doesn't reach 12" but it's still been known to end a fight.


----------



## thunderw21 (Sep 21, 2008)

46L said:


> Thunder, aside from the Saiga 12 at the specs listed above, what is your first choice for home protection (assuming a one gun household)?


My second choice would probably have to be an AR-15 SBR with a red dot sight and flashlight.
Or a .45 conversion at the specs above.

Bayonet lug optional. :icon_smile_wink:

At the moment my 'go to gun' is a 9mm handgun since it's always on me. The other gun that's in the room at the moment is a 9mm carbine.


----------



## Ekphrastic (Oct 4, 2009)

> The ATI T14 looks awesome. Any idea of what it sells for?


Afraid not. It's not even up on the manufacturer's website yet.



> Put one of these on a .12 gauge and unless you are an NFL lineman you'll be lucky to hold on to the thing.


Seriously--shotguns without a buttstock are very difficult to use. I think Mossberg even puts velcro straps on the foregrips of their buttstock-less shotguns so you can strap your hand to it. (Otherwise, it might fly out of your grip!)



> The 12" of penetration is only what in ballistic gelatin equates to the 'minimal stopping power' approved by the FBI for carry by their agents based on their study of real life one-stop shots.
> 
> To say one can't kill someone with far less than the FBI approves for carry by their agents, especially in a typically legal civilian, self-defense situation is not accurate IMHO.
> 
> It may be a standard you choose to adopt as your own, but it's not a real minimum requirement for lethality.


Bear in mind, also, that the FBI chooses ammunition that can shoot through vehicle glass, barriers, etc. So, yes, you're right, but I'd still aim for about that much penetration, just to be on the safe side.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

If you want to improve your chances of success in threat encounter of the worst kind, rather than going with a shotgun in any gauge, why not alternate hollow point rounds with bird shot in your magazine or cylinder...provides a much greater potential for hitting your target in a high stress, low light situation, at least with every other round fired! As long as you stop him, drive him off, etc, does it really matter if your rounds are potent enough to maximize the potential of a one shot kill? Also, have you considered living in the aftermath of your decisions in such a situation?


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

eagle2250 said:


> As long as you stop him, drive him off, etc, does it really matter if your rounds are potent enough to maximize the potential of a one shot kill?


I was going to say something about a prior comment about having enough penetration to hit something vital. Killing in a self defense situation should not be one's objective. All you should want to do is to stop them. If someone is coming after me with a knife or gun I would much rather knock them on their butt with a non-lethal shot than to kill them with something that took ten minutes to accomplish that goal while they continued their attack in the meantime.

There is this misconception out there that if you shoot someone with a big enough gun they will fall down and die instantly. It doesn't always turn out that way. I saw a police video of a gunfight between a State Trooper and a person he had pulled over. The trooper put five .357 rounds into the guy's chest. The bad guy hit the trooper once in the thigh with a .22 derringer. The trooper died on the scene while the bad guy fully recovered and is now serving a life sentence.

This discussion reminds me of a story from World War II. During a tank battle a U.S. Sherman tank and a German Tiger tank collided and became locked together unable to pull apart. The Tiger swung it's big 88mm gun around but it was so long that it hit the turret of the Sherman tank. The Sherman then swung it's smaller 76mm gun around, cleared the Tiger's turret, and proceeded to pump several armor piercing shells into the German tank. I'm sure that the U.S. tank crew would agree that sometimes smaller is better. :icon_smile_big:

Cruiser


----------



## Orsini (Apr 24, 2007)

Why Howard, I do believe you are trying to pick a fight.


----------



## thunderw21 (Sep 21, 2008)

Cruiser said:


> I was going to say something about a prior comment about having enough penetration to hit something vital. Killing in a self defense situation should not be one's objective...


I disagree greatly. If all options have been exhausted (make distance, de-escalate the situation, etc) and one decides to fire a gun in self defense it should be to kill and only kill. No "shoot to wound" business. Wounded perps can still be threats, especially if they are drugged up or have made up their mind to kill you. Mindset is a great advantage to whomever has it. If he has the mindset to kill and you have the mindset to just "knock them on their butt", who do you think is going to come out alive?

A dead threat is a threat no more.


----------



## dwebber18 (Jun 5, 2008)

I also agree about not wounding someone. In boyscouts we were taught to only remove our knife from the case if we intended to use it. My father(a retired police officer) also taught me when I started carrying a gun that if I unholster my firearm I better be prepared to kill someone with it. If I'm not prepared to kill someone in defense of myself or another its better to not even unholster it. I think a shotgun would be quite useful for defense, but it would not be my first choice. I keep my Walther P99 .40 on me or on my night stand, and I leave it at home when my wife has the day off. She doesn't like shooting it, but can and has. She can not shoot a shotgun so it would be useless for me to have one there for her. My P99 is my go to as its easily accessible and I shoot it well. If I had the opportunity to get to my AR-15 it would be my first choice. Also, criminals are gutsy and determined. Only 2 weeks ago I heard a 911 call about a man breaking in to a womans house with her standing there looking at him. She went and got her shotgun and racked it while he watched through the door. He proceeded to break through the door and get shot in the chest. So don't trust that racking a shotgun will save you, it will just give away your position. Ammo is key also, make sure you have high quality hollow point ammo in anything you use for defense. It will allow you to have good penetration and do max damage. I keep Speer Gold Dots in my P99 and Hornady TAP in my AR-15. Both are more than adequate for stopping a crazy bad guy. I also agree that you need to rent and shoot as many different guns as you can and then determine what you can shoot the best, and afford of course


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

thunderw21 said:


> I disagree greatly. If all options have been exhausted (make distance, de-escalate the situation, etc) and one decides to fire a gun in self defense it should be to kill and only kill. No "shoot to wound" business.


I never said that one should "shoot to wound." I said that one's primary objective should be to stop the attack, not kill. If you do kill in the process, so be it; but again the goal is to stop the threat immediately. The term "stopping power" isn't the same as killing.

For example, I could put wadcutters in my .357 and put bullets in one side and out the other of a person tearing through more than one vital organ in the process; but there is no guarantee that my shot, which might well kill the person, is going to drop him right then and there. If he's ten feet away with a knife he might still get to me before he falls and dies.

This is the very reason that I load hollow points in my gun. I want the round to open up and hit with an impact rather than slice through the body. I want to knock the attacker backwards if I can.

But this really isn't the point of my selection of a smaller shotgun. If you only have to fire once then the bigger shotgun is a better choice, but if you are faced with multiple home invaders and need to fire multiple times (or you miss the first time), it's the smaller guns ability to carry out rapid, yet accurate, second, third, and fourth shots that give it an advantage.

Like I said before, try this yourself. Go to the range with a .12 gauge and a .410 or .20 gauge and see how quickly you can fire multiple shots with accuracy with each gun.

Then if you really want to see a difference replace the stocks with pistol grips. Now you have a really short, maneuverable gun that you can manipulate within the confines of a room full of furniture, like you will find in your home. The difference is that with the smaller gun you still have something that you can actually hit the target with on follow up shots.

Cruiser


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

^^
This conversation is getting more than just a little silly. I too never said any one's intention in a gunfight should be to shoot to wound, rather than kill. Always aim for center mass...that is how I was trained and that is what I recommend you do. The point I have been trying to get across is that, regardless of how well you may shoot, killing paper targets at the range, things are always going to be a lot more chaotic in a real confrontation. I really don't care how brave you might think you are, you are going to be scared sh*tless (I type this as I rub some slight residual scarring on the right side of my neck, caused by bone fragments from the person standing next to me, whose lower jaw was shot off in the exchange)...in all probability the lighting will be poor or non-existent and things will not go as smoothly as you might hope they would and your accuracy of fire is going to deteriorate. Alternating bird shot rounds with your hollow points, simply improves your chances of possibly hitting your target but, does not guarantee a hit. I am familiar with at least one instance in which a well intended homeowner fired multiple rounds into the flooring at his feet...never raising his sidearm to point it at the intruder. Fortunately, the intruder must have thought his adversary was crazy enough to be dangerous, because he/she took off running! Humorous perhaps but also, instructive. 

Finally, I will say one last time, if you are ever unfortunate enough to be responsible for the loss/taking of an other's life, regardless of the circumstance, it will haunt you for the rest of your life!


----------



## JAGMAJ (Feb 10, 2005)

dwebber18 said:


> Also, criminals are gutsy and determined. Only 2 weeks ago I heard a 911 call about a man breaking in to a womans house with her standing there looking at him. She went and got her shotgun and racked it while he watched through the door. He proceeded to break through the door and get shot in the chest. So don't trust that racking a shotgun will save you, it will just give away your position.


For the record, I didn't say that racking a shotgun would guarantee that the intruder would run away, but I said that if he didn't run away, you would know that he was a bit crazy and would have to be killed. In the situation you described, that intruder was clearly both--or he didn't think that a woman would have the guts to pull the trigger.

I still maintain that most intruders will be far more likely to retreat if they know there's a shotgun waiting for them behind a door--I know I would be. I started off my Army career as an infantryman, and then went to law school to become a JAG. I've been both a military prosecutor and criminal defense attorney and I even did a short stint doing public defender-type work in Washington, D.C. In my experience, burglars (even those with military training) are usually not overly brave and will avoid an armed confrontation. One of the reasons I like a 12-gauge shotgun, though, is for the intruders who do keep coming, a 12-gauge will put them down very quickly. In 2003-4, I served in Afghanistan with Army Special Forces and I went on several missions with ODAs where we knocked down doors and captured Taliban. A 12-gauge shotgun is a favorite among "professionals", as it is with many civilian SWAT team members and other military units that routinely knock down doors. I carried an M-16, with a M1911A1 Colt (WW II vintage) as my sidearm, and I would have traded it for a shotgun going into those rooms. Now, an AR-15 would also be effective in holding off an intruder, but they're more expensive, harder to manuever in close quarters, and really do have over penetration issues. Unlike a handgun or shotgun, an AR-15 can penetrate an exterior brick wall. As for lethality, a good .00 buckshot will kill somebody much better than a .223. We need to remember that in most home defense situations, the homeowner will be in a defensive position, such as a bedroom. In such a situation, giving away one's general position is less of an issue. Plus, a good shotgun will effectively cover a doorway as well as anything else, if not better.

On a separate issue, I definitely think that you have to choose a weapon that is more likely to deliver a lethal shot. If an intruder is crazy or high on drugs, you need to make sure that they can't keep coming.


----------



## beherethen (Jun 6, 2009)

There is an excellent book on this subject by Massad Ayoob, titled In The Gravest Extreme. In this work he explores your legal rights in using deadly force. In the US one has a legal right to use deadly force to stop a serious threat to life or injury. In some states this may include a threat to another. In some states this will also include felony theft or arson, car jacking or even trespassing.
About ten years ago, the NRA published that the average legal costs in defending a legal killing was *$50,000.* Considering this the price of the book is nothing.


----------



## JAGMAJ (Feb 10, 2005)

beherethen said:


> There is an excellent book on this subject by Massad Ayoob, titled In The Gravest Extreme. In this work he explores your legal rights in using deadly force. In the US one has a legal right to use deadly force to stop a serious threat to life or injury. In some states this may include a threat to another. In some states this will also include felony theft or arson, car jacking or even trespassing.
> About ten years ago, the NRA published that the average legal costs in defending a legal killing was *$50,000.* Considering this the price of the book is nothing.


As far as I know, you can use deadly force to defend yourself or another person against a threat of death or serious injury in all states. The issue of whether you can shoot somebody who is merely trespassing or just stealing property without threatening you is more complicated. Because of this, and for moral reasons, I wouldn't shoot somebody unless they were actually threatening me or somebody else. I'm not going to kill somebody who's just walking out my door with a stereo.


----------



## beherethen (Jun 6, 2009)

JAGMAJ said:


> As far as I know, you can use deadly force to defend yourself or another person against a threat of death or serious injury in all states. The issue of whether you can shoot somebody who is merely trespassing or just stealing property without threatening you is more complicated. Because of this, and for moral reasons, I wouldn't shoot somebody unless they were actually threatening me or somebody else. I'm not going to kill somebody who's just walking out my door with a stereo.


I agree with you, but the law does vary from state to state. A few years ago a Japanese student in Louisiana , approached a homeowner trying to get directions. The homeowner said get off my property. The student didn't understand and the homeowner killed him. Under La law he was not charged. The Japanese government was furious. In another state he would have been charged, so it makes sense to research your laws.


----------



## JAGMAJ (Feb 10, 2005)

beherethen said:


> I agree with you, but the law does vary from state to state. A few years ago a Japanese student in Louisiana , approached a homeowner trying to get directions. The homeowner said get off my property. The student didn't understand and the homeowner killed him. Under La law he was not charged. The Japanese government was furious. In another state he would have been charged, so it makes sense to research your laws.


It is a good idea to research the laws, although it's difficult to always stay completely up-to-date with changing laws in all states. My point, though, is that if you stick to my rule of only shooting people who actually pose a threat, you should always be safe in all 50 states.


----------



## beherethen (Jun 6, 2009)

JAGMAJ said:


> It is a good idea to research the laws, although it's difficult to always stay completely up-to-date with changing laws in all states. My point, though, is that if you stick to my rule of only shooting people who actually pose a threat, you should always be safe in all 50 states.


Once again I agree with you, but in at least a couple of states, you are required to retreat before using force. I'm not saying it's correct, but just that finding out whats legal in your state is a good idea, considering the aftermath.


----------



## norton (Dec 18, 2008)

JAGMAJ said:


> It is a good idea to research the laws, although it's difficult to always stay completely up-to-date with changing laws in all states. My point, though, is that if you stick to my rule of only shooting people who actually pose a threat, you should always be safe in all 50 states.


In Illinois I'm told that the rule above is true but only in your home. If you shoot him in the yard you'd better drag him inside before you call 911.:icon_smile:


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Orsini said:


> Why Howard, I do believe you are trying to pick a fight.


No,I'm not trying to pick a fight,I come in peace.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Scotch&Cigars said:


> Fat lotta good that'll do ya when you're staring at a bad guy with a gun, or any other weapon for that matter.
> 
> Like I said, self/home defense =/= violence


So I guess there's nothing that I can do.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

^^
Sure there is...you can do everything possible to minimize your chances of becoming involved in such a confrontation. Make your home and yourself less attractive and less vulnerable targets, than the houses next door and your neighbors. Install good locks and exterior lighting. Remove excessive /overgrowth of shrubs, etc, around your house. Install a good alarm system, equipped to provide audio/visual alerting when your secure perimeter is violated (horns blowing and lights flashing). When you are walking those 'mean streets', stand tall, square your shoulders, look around you (at everything within a block and preferably a two block area) and, perhaps most importantly, look people in the eyes. 

The bad guys are generally looking for the least threatening victim they can find and everything you do to make yourself less vulnerable, reduces the probability of your becoming their next victim!


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Get some of the pepper spray with the marking dye in it. If you 'mark' them it helps, even if (in the worst case) you are unable to identify them yourself.


----------



## MarkfromMD (Nov 5, 2008)

I've only read the first and last pages of this thread so far since I am at work but I'm waiting on a 9mm Sig P226 with night sights :icon_smile_big:


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)




----------



## beherethen (Jun 6, 2009)

This is a site I sometimes visit to droll over pocket guns. You can click and sort by weight-caliber-height ETC.

https://www.smallestguns.com/?order=weight

The one I covet most is the single shot Stinger pen gun, even though I've never seen one in real life. It just seems so cool-in a James Bond sort of way.


----------



## mbebeau (Feb 6, 2009)

While a great novelty, I am not sure how practical a pen gun would be....

That said, I just added something to my wishlist! Gooooooold finger....


----------



## Orsini (Apr 24, 2007)

Howard said:


> No,I'm not trying to pick a fight,I come in peace.


I am glad to hear that.


----------



## boatshoe (Oct 30, 2008)

*Have you ANY handgun experience, at all?*
Yes, but only limited experience. I live in New York and don't have a pistol permit. But due to a recent change in the law in my county, I have been able to shoot while supervised. I've shot S&W .38 special revolver (awesome), S&W .380 (garbage), Ruger .22 (fun). Since I don't have a permit, and it is a pain to get, I generally shoot a Henry Golden Boy .22.

*What is your honest and best considered skill level? 
From Zero to Ten, with ten being the best.*
1

*Also what geographic region are you located in.(for suggestions for appropriate safety/training classes.

*New York


----------

