For many years I’ve warned students that because AR15 rifles – and, by association, those who use them for self-defense – have been so demonized by the anti-gun press and an anti-gun political party, they could expect to be demonized in court should they have to use one to shoot a criminal.   I have often cited the work of my friend and graduate Dr. Glenn Meyer in that regard.

YouTube gun personality James Reeves has picked up on that recently, here:

or watch video here.

James states that he’s not going to give up his AR15 because of this factor. Good for him! Neither am I.

The strategy isn’t to trade in your AR for a Joe Biden Signature Model double barrel shotgun. The strategy is to be able to articulate and authenticate why you chose the AR.  My take on that is here:

Or watch video here.

I tell my students that “CYA” shouldn’t stand for “cover your ass,” but instead for “can you articulate” and “can you authenticate.”  Can we explain to twelve jurors selected by the other side in part for their lack of knowledge of guns and self-defense as to why we chose as we did and did as we did, and demonstrate to them why what we did constitutes best practices for dealing with the crisis in question?

The above is offered in hopes of providing that information. I thank Mr. Reeves for bringing it to his audience’s attention.

44 COMMENTS

  1. I’ve got a daughter-in-law who maybe comes up to my collar bone. Her reaction to firing a properly adjusted AR for the first time: “This is FUN!” The one down side of a half century of product improvement, mission creep and gadget mania is that the original 6 lb light rifle is very hard to come by.

    Those of us who dwell in rural areas have some additional concerns. Highly variable emergency response being one. Another is wild life of the non-Disney persuasion. Coyotes are a problem locally, less frequently, feral dogs are another. While the ‘yotes generally depart readily-but not always-feral dogs don’t have the fear of man the ‘yotes do. They also can view humans as much easier to catch than whatever livestock they were chasing.

    I find the TLR-1 HPL an outstanding addition to the “what’s going on in the pasture” tool.

  2. That is a great video Mas, along with the one you did also with Ken Hackathorn. I’ve shared those videos publicly on my social media pages, and also in the comments on every single gun story run by FOX News. Great job Mas. Keep up the great work!

  3. Both were great videos. Reed is a hoot and very bright young fella. I am encouraged to see that he also struggles with reloads. Having carried both the AR and M-14 a few years back, I would have no trouble using the Mini-14 for home defense, just to offset some of the ignorance prejudice of certain members of a jury. At 30 feet or less, either would be as effective.

  4. A lightweight AR-15 in 300 AAC is my go to defensive long gun. An Aimpoint that is always on and a 1000 lumen light make it good for day or night use. Its light weight, low recoil and adjustable stock make it much more use friendly for my wife than even a 20g shotgun. The copper hollow points I feed it do for predators, deer or other things. There is a reason the US military has used M-16s and M-4s for 60 years and it’s operation and maintenance is so ingrained in me that I will probably never change to another defensive rifle platform.

    • Mark,

      Many people love their AR-15s. I believe they must be decent weapons for our military to use them for 60 years, also. However, for the sake of discussion, allow me to be the Devil’s lawyer, and try to find other reasons for the US military hanging on to them for so long.

      Could one reason be cost? Certainly the ammo for the M-16 costs less than the ammo for the M-14.

      Could it be stubborn pride, the idea that an American gun must be better than a foreign gun? Many nations armed their militaries with FN-FALs. We all know the main competitor to the M-16 is the AK-47. Is the M-16 really better for combat than the AK-47, or is it because we just can’t see ourselves using that foreign gun that is used by all the bad guys? If we used AK-47s, we could shoot captured ammunition. That would save money. The 7.62mm x 39mm Soviet round hits harder, and the AK-47 can take more abuse than an M-16.

      My purpose is not to disparage America’s favorite rifle. I am not a gun expert, and I have never been in combat. I only make the above arguments in order to provoke thoughts.

      Here’s the really beautiful thing. I don’t have to decide between the AR-15, AR-10, AK-47, FN-FAL or the M1A. I CAN OWN THEM ALL!!! WOO! HOO!

      • “Could it be stubborn pride, the idea that an American gun must be better than a foreign gun? Many nations armed their militaries with FN-FALs.”

        There is certainly some truth to your point. In the 1950’s, the U.S. was looking to replace the M1 rifle and it’s 30-06 cartridge. There was also a desire for NATO to standardize upon a single cartridge.

        The FN-FAL was a very promising design that, ultimately, ended up being adopted by numerous countries. It was a contender for the replacement rifle.

        In addition, the British had been working on a 7mm intermediate (.280 British) cartridge for possible adoption by NATO. See this link:

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.280_British

        This is only my opinion but I think that the U.S. would have been very wise to throw their support behind the British effort and get NATO to standardize on a 7mm NATO round. I also think it would have been very wise for the U.S. to then adopt a version of the FN-FAL chambered for this new NATO cartridge.

        However, the arrogance and pride of the U.S. Military would not allow any such thing to happen. Neither of those items was “invented here” and, thus, neither was acceptable to the U.S.

        At that time, the U.S. was the “800 lb. Gorilla” of NATO. So, the U.S. rejected the British design and insisted on the adoption of the 7.62×51 NATO (.308) round instead. A cartridge that was overpowered for the purpose. In fact, a cartridge that produced about the same ballistics as the 30-06 round except in a slightly shorter case.

        It makes one wonder why the U.S. replaced the 30-06 at all since they basically came back with a 30-06 shorty!

        Instead of the functional FN-FAL, they came out with the M-14. Basically, a select fire, magazine fed, version of the old M1. Again, why change if you are going to just keep more of the same?

        The result? NATO was stuck with the overpowered 7.62 round instead of the (probably better for the purpose) British round. And the U.S. was stuck with the M-14 instead of the more modern FN-FAL.

        The U.S. soon found the flaws in this decision that they crammed down everyone’s throats. The M-14 was too heavy and had too much recoil when used for automatic fire. Move forward a decade and the U.S. was already working upon a replacement. In this case, the M-16 and the 5.56 NATO round.

        So, after decades of mucking around with the overpowered 7.62 NATO and the underpowered 5.56 NATO, where are we today? Why we have arrived at a new “modern” 6.8 MM cartridge. See this link:

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.277_Fury

        I guess that the U.S. still can’t take a 7mm (.280 British) round (can’t eat that much crow!) but the 6.8 (.277 Fury) is pretty close in my book!

        Stubborn pride? Yep! We have it, in spades!

      • TN_MAN,

        You and the other readers probably know that John Garand originally designed his rifle for the .276 Pederson cartridge. His clips could hold ten of these rounds, but eight of .30-’06 Springfield rounds. General MacArthur said from his experience in WWI, he knew you often had to shoot through barriers. Also, we had a stockpile of .30-’06 ammo, so why not use it? So, Garand re-designed his rifle for the older cartridge. I guess we went down this road more than once.

        Looking at the other side of the argument, I kind of want something that is described as “over-powered.” I think Jeff Cooper might even argue that the M-14 doesn’t need full-auto capability. If you need more bullets, just pull the trigger a lot.

      • “…Looking at the other side of the argument…”

        Yes, I know about the .276 Pederson cartridge. What this history outlines is the tendency of the Army ordinance folks to stick with “old and proven” technology while resisting progress. Just like, during the Civil War, they resisted cartridge firing breechloaders in favor of the old “tried and true” rifled musket. It took the personal pressure of President Lincoln to move them out of their “stuck in the past” mindset on that one!

        To be a counter-devil’s advocate, if the 30-06 and semi-auto rifle fire is “Good Enough” then why change at all. Why not just keep the old M1 and be happy? Why not just force NATO to adopt the 30-06 cartridge? That would really be a cost savings since no change in rifle and ammo would be needed. Existing stocks of rifles and ammo could continue to be used.

        The fact is that to (a) undertake the decision to adopt a new rifle/ammo system, yet (b) do everything in your power to make the “new” system mimic the “old” system (with only minor improvements), shows a muddled mindset. It shows the tension between the “old timers” who don’t want change against the “newbies” who do want change. So, you compromise and just change “a little bit”. Like every compromise, it leaves EVERYONE unhappy.

        Quote of the Day:

        “Do or do not. There is no try.” – Master Yoda from ‘Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back’

  5. Great video! I don’t own an Armalite Rifle Fifteen, but if I did, it would be all pink.

    So, from this video we learn that, to a jury, a wood-stocked, lever action rifle in .45-70 Government is less fearsome-looking than those evil black guns. And, some evil black guns are chambered for .22 long rifle.

    Tee hee hee! “What fools these mortals be!” No wonder they vote for Democrats.

    • I think it’s actually better for home defense. The traditional style stock of the Mini-14 (Ranch Rifle style) is easier to retain in a struggle for the gun than the AR’s configuration. A Mini-14 was actually the “other gun” in the Meyer study, I’m told, the one that got more sympathy from the jury.

      • I remember the Ayoob File where our guy used a select fire Ruger 5.56 rifle against a biker type who, with others of the same kind, had pursued him and his lady friend all the way to his then place of employment. You brought us a number of lessons with that one Mas, and I listened.

  7. “AR15 rifles …. have been so demonized by the anti-gun press and an anti-gun political party, they could expect to be demonized in court…”

    In my view, this is just one of the problems of the AR platform when used as a home-defense firearm. Additional problems include:

    1) Loud muzzle blast associated with the high-pressure 5.56 / .223 round. In the enclosed space of the home environment, this blast is fully capable of inflicting permanent hearing damage upon any defender who uses it without proper hearing protection. The problem is that, in the emergency of a home invasion, there is likely to be no time to grab and install hearing protection as one responds to the crisis. So, if you blaze off a full magazine of 5.56 NATO with an unsuppressed AR indoors, expect the “ringing in your ears” to be permanent!

    2) Very often, home invasions occur at night. In a darkened home, the 5.56 / .223 round is also capable of generating a blinding flash. While this might be helpful and blind the invader, it could also cut the other way and suppress the night vision of the defender. Possibly, fatally.

    Of course, it is possible to put a suppressor on the AR platform to mitigate these effects. Since the 5.56 / .223 round is supersonic, it won’t truly quiet the weapon, but a “can” could certainly help mitigate much of the blast and flash. However, AR suppressor and expensive and the paperwork and red tape takes a long time. In some States and/or cities, they are not even legal to buy and own.

    So, when one considers the downsides (blast, flash, the “Assault Rifle” smears, etc.), an AR is (IMHO) far, far, far from being the “dream home defense firearm” as painted by so many people.

    So, what would be a “dream home defense firearm”? This gets my vote:

    https://www.henryusa.com/rifles/homesteader-9mm/

    This firearm has it all:

    1) Handy size: – 35.75 inches length by 6.6 lbs. weight.
    2) High quality fit and materials.
    3) Models available to take common magazines (Glock, SIG, S&W) with various capacities. Magazines may be cross compatible with home defense handguns.
    4) Chambered for 9mm Luger. Ammo is readily available, inexpensive, available as advanced defensive rounds, etc.
    5) The 9mm, when fired in a carbine length barrel, has very low muzzle blast and flash. Plus, suppressors and subsonic ammo are available. Note that this carbine has a threaded muzzle to accept a suppressor although unsuppressed blast and flash would be tolerable even indoors. Unlike an AR chambered for 5.56 / .223.
    6) This carbine looks like a sporting firearm. It would not draw an “assault rifle” stigma. It would be much harder to “demonize” it (and the defender) in court.
    7) As a carbine, it would be very easy to shoot well and place rounds on target. Recoil would be very mild. Much better than the recoil of a typical shotgun. Less even, than the recoil of the 5.56 / .223 round in an AR.

    In my view, there is no fault to be found here. The Henry carbine is a “dream home defense” weapon. I would take it, any day, over the AR platform for this purpose.

    • If you’re only going to have the power of a 9mm why not just stick with a pistol? I used to have a Steyr SPP. It was lots of fun, but I’d never carry it since I could pretty much get the same effect from my Sig 365.

      • “…why not just stick with a pistol?”

        There are several advantages to be gained by using a 9mm carbine versus a 9mm pistol:

        1) While it depends upon the actual type ammo selected, the longer barrel of a carbine can increase the muzzle velocity of the 9mm round. For example, a typical 124 grain 9mm load might generate 1300 fps from a carbine versus only about 1100 fps from a short barrelled handgun. This could result in about 40% more muzzle energy. So, your assumption that the power is about the same may not be true for certain types of ammo. The carbine may be, in fact, more powerful due to its longer barrel giving a better powder “burn”.

        2) As noted above, the longer barrel reduces blast and flash. From a 4 inch barrel, the 9mm typically generates about 5,000+ PSI muzzle pressure. The longer, carbine barrel will usually reduce muzzle pressures to less than 1,000 PSI. The result? Much less muzzle blast and flash versus a 5.56 NATO carbine (10,000 + PSI muzzle pressure) and even less than with the same round in a handgun. So, much.less “wear and tear” on your eyeballs and eardrums with the 9mm carbine which is a positive for indoor work.

        3) Most people find the carbine much easier to shoot. I have a friend who is a terrible shot with a handgun. I have tried to coach him to just “squeeze” the trigger but he can’t seem to stop jerking it. He (typically) pulls his shots low and left with ANY handgun. In desperation, I suggested that he get a Ruger 9mm carbine to use for home defense. He got one and put a red dot sight on it. With it, he can easily group his shots into a paper plate at 15 yards. With his handgun, he (often) could not even hit the target stand at that range. Believe me, he is much better off using that carbine as his home defense firearm versus his 9mm SIG P210.

        So, a carbine is not just the same as the pistol. For a lot of folks, it is better!

      • Get up to 10-16 inches of barrel and ye standard 9mm has velocity and energy comparable to a .357 magnum.
        You’ll be hard pressed to find any complaint of the terminal effectiveness of .357 on bad actors.

      • I’m finding out for myself, at my age, and given my strength to work the slide on some of my handguns can be difficult.

        It’s a tuff reality check.

        The ruger carbine is the next choice for myself.

    • TN_MAN, you have proven (again) that there is always something I don’t have, that I’m going to have to take a serious look at getting. My only reservation would be the length of pull. Is that listed anywhere? Having numerous Glock Mags of various sizes and capacities, that are interchangeable with the pistol normally in my waistband is a big plus. I’m curious as to what performance we would see with +P+ ammo, such as the Winchester 127 gr and BPLE9 115 grain. It’s pretty hot out of 4-4.5″ barrels. I will definitely have to check this out. It sounds like a better deal for home use than the M1 carbine that we grew up with (and my brother sold without giving me first right of refusal 🤬). The MSRP is about the same as M1’s today, if you can find one. I don’t see a down side. Thanks for sharing this!

  9. I have yet to rind a Armalite that I found comfortable to hold and fire. I have long wanted something t fire the 5.56 round asked a friend he said “I dont like the AR;s either, so I bought a Mini 14, Love it. I was sceptical of the lniger range capabilities of the 5.56, but helped out with a “known distance” shoot where most of the participants had brought AR pattern rifles. I watched as a number of them were grouping in small circles at 400 yards. OK I was convinced. That same weeend I went to a gin show and fund a mint new in box eary Mini 14 wood stock ling barrel and stainless. Bought it for about new cost back when. THAT is a fine tool. Feels like a “real rifle”, lightweight handy, delayed too long to legally buy 30 round mags in my stupid state, but might be able to find something…. somehow.

    Another option I had been cinsidering is the military M q Carbine, the .30 cal cylinder cartridge. I’ve fired them. I also heaviy regret that I was too ignorant to buy a few of them bac when no one valued them and discount gun and milsurp outlets would bring them in by the pallet load and flog them out the door for fifty bucks the piece. Sigh.. hoodathunlk they’d ever get to several hundred bucks the piece.? Sigh……

    It certainly IS beyond ridiculous that any jury would consder the style of defensive weapon the victim would employ to defend their HOME against fools that go thunk in the night.
    Either MY home has been breached in the night criminally and I have the RIGHT to defend it, or it was not. Whether I elect to deploy a howitzer or a water balloon is of NO concern to the jury. But sadly, what is right and what is reality are all too often NOT the same thing. WHich makes my Mini all the more practical.

  10. The best home defense tool is where you live. It’s not foolproof but nothing is. Where you live also has implications for your backup device and any legal implications associated with its use.

  11. The contrast between a wood-stock Mini-14 versus the AR platform was made above. However, there are lots of other options.

    What about the AK platform? My guess is that it would share the exact same downsides as the AR. It would also be smeared as an “assault weapon of war that is only good for killing people”.

    M1 Carbine? With wood-stock it is close to the Mini-14 in appearance. However, it might also be attacked as a “weapon of war” since it was designed and used as such in WW II.

    What about something truly different? Say a FN P90? See this link:

    https://fnamerica.com/products/rifles/fn-ps90-standard/?utm_source=meganav_by-series

    What on earth would a jury think of this firearm? Or something equally strange like a Steyr AUG?

    I still say that the Henry 9mm carbine represents about the most perfect choice, all things considered, on the current market for home or business defense in free America. I noted that the Henry cannot be sold in NY. Possibly other places as well. However, the AR is not available in those places either. In the deep Blue wastelands, one might well have to fall back upon a good old pump shotgun as best. Perhaps in 20 gauge (with #3 Buck) for those who are recoil shy.

    For personal protection, on the street or in an automobile, one would need to go to the handgun, as best, due to its ease in concealment and for use in tight spaces.

    Clearly, there is no “one size fits all” solution here. One would need to weigh many factors, both personal and legal, to come up with the best fit for one’s individual situation. If a truly perfect self-defense firearm was available, that is the only one that would be manufactured and sold. The thousand of models being sold on the American Arms Market puts the lie to that! 🙂

  12. BTW, I don’t know how they’re selling but there’s some ads out there for a different stock/lower for the AR that presents as pretty much as standard sporting stock. You do have to also change the bolt carrier (the system pretty much mimics the Remington 1100/11-87 etc.) to match with the recoil spring design. MSRP was in the $1K range.

    Ten or so years ago under previous management/ownership the local paper interviewed a slew of locals on home defense and the answers pretty much could be summed up as “You don’t need no A-salt rifle to defend yo’ home. Git you a shotgun.” I fear that’s a tough nut to crack, but the attitude of the local prosecutor might make it irrelevant. That all the Deputies tote them doesn’t hurt. FWIW, I usually prefer the 20 round magazines.

    But, the law enforcement community isn’t monolithic either in attitude or in their ability to convey the many real advantages of the AR. When the local “university” police adopted the evil AR, the comments by the Chief in the local paper scared the dickens out of us in the local training community.

    I think the pistol caliber carbine has a lot going for it……..IF you can find one that doesn’t look as militaristic as an AR. I don’t understand the need to have one that folds up.

    The moot court study results really don’t bode well for results in civil trial. Admittedly, the situation posed does seem a bit problematic.

  13. Doesn’t using any firearm for home defence constitute failure?
    You have total control of the environment. The strength of doors and windows are all up to you.
    You want to have a gunfght with me? Get through that armoured door first….

    njk

    • “Doesn’t using any firearm for home defense constitute failure?”

      No, I disagree. In effect, you are saying that a strong defense ought to defeat any attempt to breach the home. That is a passive mindset that is simply not realistic. No defense is so strong that it is impenetrable. Most people can’t afford defenses that would offer such heavy levels of safety.

      My own home is protected by locked doors and an alarm system. Nevertheless, that did not stop thieves from smashing their way inside. I was away on a business trip, at the time. The alarm did summon the police (they arrived in 8 minutes – which is a good response time) but, still, the thieves escaped and were never caught. The thieves had limited time to grab loot, but they still did a lot of damage in a short time. My insurance only covered part of the repair cost. The loot, including a stolen handgun, was never recovered.

      Let’s face it, defense alone is not enough. There is a reason for the old proverb that says:

      “The best defense is a good offense.”

      Even banks, with their alarms and heavy vaults, have been violated. Consider these historical examples:

      https://www.history.com/news/daring-bank-robbery-heists

      If banks, with all of their resources, are not secure, how is a simple, private home-owner, with limited resources, supposed to be secure?

      No, passive defense is not enough to give security against a determined home invader. One must also be prepared to “repel boarders”. In the old days, this meant unloading grape shot and musket fire upon them. In modern times, we use buckshot and semi-automatic gunfire! 🙂

  14. Any door, window or wall can be breached given enough time, the right tools and enough motivation. I would opine that having one’s family murdered while cowering in fear defines failure. Thankfully, those living in a majority of the United States have other options.

  15. I have an M1A Tanker for home defense. This firearm has it all:
    1) Handy size.
    2) Heavy (wood and steel), great for butt stroking.
    3) Magazines are cross compatible with all M1As.
    4) Chambered for the 308 Winchester, not the ‘Poodle shooter’ rounds.
    5) A large muzzle blast and kicks like a real rifle.
    6) This rifle looks like a battle rifle, not a plastic, sissy “assault rifles.”
    7) It shoots well, does not jam, easy to clean, and places rounds on target.
    What more could you ask for?

    • “4) Chambered for the 308 Winchester, not the ‘Poodle shooter’ rounds.
      5) A large muzzle blast and kicks like a real rifle.”

      Holy-Moley! I hope that you sleep with earplugs preinstalled. I also hope that you live in a remote location where the nearest neighbor is located five miles away. If I fired off a .308 in my home, it would penetrate the interior and exterior walls and not stop until it also breached two or three other houses in my subdivision.

      I do admire your enthusiasm, though! 🙂

  16. About the only long-arm I’d see using for home defense, i.e., defense INSIDE the home from a burglar or “home invader”, would be a shotgun with the shortest possible (16-1/4″?) barrel and folding stock. A long gun is just too darned difficult to maneuver inside our house, with tight turns and extremely short hallways. My antique post-fire-recovered Mossberg 500 is set up with an 18″ barrel with rifle sights and a bottom-folder and is still too long to use inside. Heck, I hit the walls with the handle of the Swiffer when cleaning the floors between the bedrooms and the living room.

    My bedside gun is in a locking slide-type safe with a spring-loaded pop-up lid, bolted to the nightstand; I unlock it every night and slide it open a couple of inches, and slap it shut and lock it every morning. Inside is a .45 with tritium night sights (cocked, locked, one up the spout, thumb safety on) and two spare magazines. Next to the nightstand is a 2-D Maglite, but I’m planning on turning on the lights unless the power has been cut. I don’t have to worry about maneuvering around tight corners, and keeping it in a low-ready position makes retention a lot easier than a long gun.

    I’m trying hard to imagine a scenario other than total social collapse where I need to respond with potentially lethal force to a threat from OUTSIDE the house; about the only one I can think of is some deranged maniac or tweaker shooting at the house. In my little subdivision I’ve got zero safe directions in which to point a weapon from the house towards the outside. That would be about the only time a long gun would be more useful than a handgun for our location, and I’d have to be very desperate to survive to start shooting outside towards said whack-job.

    Inside the house I’d just hope that my pistol rounds would hit my center-of-mass target, and that any interior walls, plus two exterior walls (our house and the 100-feet-away neighbors) would stop the relatively low-velocity .45 HP’s before doing any more damage to innocent persons. Yes, I’ve seen the testing where pistol bullets (supposedly) go through walls darned near as well as rifle rounds, but I’m not sure I believe either the testing protocols or the results. I’m guessing that a layer of: drywall, 6″ of insulation, exterior sheathing and then wood siding (and then the same thing again in reverse order) will significantly affect a pistol bullet.

    I’m gonna stick with my 1911 in .45 for inside-the-house and avoid the whole “evil black rifle” issue afterwards.

    • The “shortest possible” barrel on a shotgun without being a NFA item is 18 inches. Most you find are 18 1/2″, with the extra half-inch as a buffer to keep overzealous BATFE agents from using the longest “18-inch” tape measure on Earth to nail you.

      In general, though, I agree with you. In an emergency home defense scenario, I’m more likely to reach for the quick-access lock-box that holds my carry pistol and a good handheld light, than I am to get out a long gun.

      Even so, shotgun and rifle skills are good to have. Especially if you live rurally and the “bump in the night” turns out to be a four-legged predator going after your livestock 100 yards away, rather than a two-legged predator going after your home.

  17. Look at the sad situation in which we find ourselves. The AR-15 has been demonized since at least 1994, only because of its looks, and the fact that school/mass shooters like it. In that time, our side has been unable to change the image of this carbine (varmint rifle) in the minds of many Americans. These Americans have instant access to YouTube, where they could learn all about America’s favorite rifle, yet they remain ignorant.

    Clearly, for some people, education does not work. Thankfully there are many people on our side, and gun accidents with children, and adults, have reduced significantly.

    Look at the incredible power of the media to deceive people. The brainwashed idiots are dragging us down, weakening our country. America suffers fools gladly, and is a great place for criminals to live and prosper. SMH.

    • “You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink.”

      In the same vein, you can lead an American voter to good information about anything you like, but you can’t make him/her watch/read/learn it.

      That’s why scholastic rifle teams and in-school programs like NRA’s “Eddie Eagle” are so valuable to our side … so much so that the Democrats are de-funding and dis-banding such programs as fast as they can, with the help of Republicans who voted for the horrendously-misnamed “Bipartisan Safer Communities Act” which includes language that de-funds hunting, shooting, and archery programs in public schools.

      We need more safe ways to pass “gun culture” to the next generations, so of course collectivist and/or clueless legislators are strangling them.

  18. Agree with Mas on his overall take. These are typical obstacles brought on by ignorance. I’m sure we don’t want nuclear power plant operators and commercial aircraft crew compromising on vital decisions about life and death based off of public ignorance either. Despite living with PENNDOT i still don’t yell at the workers thru my car window, not only because its rude, but I don’t really know how to fix a bridge, so i just politely defer since the 5 minute delay is less of an inconvenience than fjording the river on horseback. Also agree with Mas about the mini-14 being much more ergo in an enclosed space like a residential home, a rifle isn’t just a gun, its also a stick. Mas, any experience with later production mini-14’s? I hear they’re manufactured better. And any updated recommendations on magpul pmag for glock 19?

    • Dennis, it’s my experience that the later Mini-14s are in fact more accurate. Lots of people bring Glock P-mags to our classes and they seem to work fine.

  19. I bought a mini-14 in .223 Remington years ago, and it was too inaccurate to make me happy. I traded it for a semiauto Remington .30-06 that I later sold because I found out that Canada would not let me through with it. I could actually go with a pump-action carbine now with a 20 inch barrel in 6.8×51, the new military round, especially if somebody made the rifle with a buttstock that slants down radically like the old flintlocks, giving a lower head height when shooting from prone. I have a nice pair of hearing protectors for shooting that double as sound amplifiers.

    • Shooting from defillade (bulletproof cover) generally beats in-the-open. Defillade and concealment generally beat simple cover. Sometimes a lot of penetration is called for. What the 6.8×51 is all about. A choice of low penetration bullets could be desirable. Maineprepper used to post old military videos of combat shooting which are of great benefit. Probably findable. If possible, your defillade should not give your position away. Foxholes and parapets are very handy. Bullpup platforms are useful for tight surroundings like vehicles and confining rooms.

  20. Having had the AR as my primary issue firearm from 1992-late 2015 (Mini-14 prior to that) and being a certified instructor for the platform during that time, I’ll offer the following. As I’ve noted before, you’re still fighting massive prejudice in many areas. I’ll also point out that quality electronic protective ear muffs are a much cheaper and more useful alternative to the often touted sound suppressors that will further add to your Rambo image to many. Much of what follows applies to other self loading/semi-automatic rifles.

    1. The AR/MR had about half the recoil of commonly used defensive handguns. MUCH less than that of shotguns. This makes errant shots that potentially endanger the innocent much less likely. You’ll see this again.

    2. Three points of body contact vs two with handguns (each hand plus the shoulder). Again, reduces potential risk to the innocent.

    3. As cited, properly selected ammunition is less of a threat to the innocent than many service/defensive handgun ammunition choices. Despite internet jabber this does NOT include FMJ/Ball ammunition.

    We’ll now move on the features that have been used to demonize the platform. It’s rather interesting that more recent legislation make these features objectionable only if they are on a self loading/semi-automatic firearm. Tacit recognition that the “issues” are fictional.

    4. Detachable magazines are actually a safety aid. It’s much easier to safely unload a firearm with the feature than one with a tube type mag (most shotguns). This is particularly true under stress. The standard capacity magazine also minimizes your need to reload. You probably wouldn’t want to mention this in court, but the 20 round magazine can be used to indicate self defense ammunition and be recognized in the dark.

    5. The adjustable stock length allows adaption to clothing that suits the weather as well as adapting to family members of different sizes. We had folks ranging in size from NFL linemen to one referred to as “the garden gnome”. Also aided adaption to different sighting systems.

    6. These days many common place items from tooth brushes to snow shovels have been redesigned to better fit the motions of the human body. The non-traditional pistol grip/stock design is simply another example.

    7. Self loading/semi-automatic operation. While running a tactical shotgun course with the issue pump shotguns, I was struck by the large number of experienced personnel who didn’t have the habit pattern of chambering a fresh round during recoil recovery. This left them facing the next simulated deadly threat with an unloaded gun. This is a training issue that requires time, money and individual dedication to correct and under the stress of actual threat might happen again. The firearm that reloads itself solves this issue along with that of being in positions where working a manually cycled firearm isn’t possible. I’ll note that the after action report of the LAPD SWAT encounter with the Symbionese Liberation Army came to the same conclusion decades before.

    The AR/MSR platform has largely replaced the shotgun in many law enforcement agencies. Why? We aren’t LEOs, but the reasoning and underlying factors do transfer. In particular, the reasons apply to many of us, including those of us of “advanced age” who might not be as able as we used to be. This includes a possible, if unlikely, need to reload.

    Simply put, the platform allows safe, effective use by a wide variety of people. It also launches one discreet bullet with much greater control and precision, rather than the shotguns projectile cloud directed largely by random chance. This reduces potential injury to the innocent. It’s much more simple-and safer- to use and train with.

  21. WR Moore,

    Agree, especially about magazine capacity. In the past, I thought the lower ammunition supply of revolvers was not a big problem. Especially because I was taught that if I empty a magazine into a bad guy, a judge may view that as overkill. Better to shoot only once, twice, or maybe three times. However, lately I read of more home invasions with as many as six attackers. Yeah, I want at least a 20-round magazine if I have to defend against six attackers in motion.

  23. We love variety without discrimination, so handguns, sn AR15 and LTT Berreta 1301T are all available, to be used as circumstances require. For a 12 gauge, the LTT Berretta 1301T recoil is very manageable, with Federal Flyte Control 8 pellet shells. Ernest Langdon equips them to where the length of pull can be shortened for quick mounting and length of pull challenged family members. In addition, our Early Warning System of two Rottweilers usually discourage even welcomed, expected visitors from coming in without our assistance.

  24. 1: my .223 AR is loaded with lightweight high velocity rounds. These pose less threat to bystanders because they lose energy and stability very quickly on impact with either an unwanted antisocial or an unfortunate wall, and thus pose less threat to those who are immediately threatening.
    2: when the flag goes up you have to fight with what you’re carrying. That means the fight will be over before you can reload, one way or the other. I want to stack that deck in my favor.
    3: A shotgun throws more randomness into an already out of control situation. Though devastating, you’re responsible for every projectile that you touch off, and that’s a lot going on. A handgun is simply not accurate or powerful enough to reliably and quickly stop a threat. Can it? Sure, but usually after more shots than you might have thought. Its sole utility is to be the gun you have with you at the moment.

  25. The comments about the Henry Homesteader 9mm carbine made me smile.

    I bought a Marlin Camp 9 decades ago for many of the same reasons.

    Innocuous in appearance, I had a police officer argue with me that it was a .22!!
    Until he looked at the bore.

    I had (stolen later) a KelTec P11, which could use S&W 59 series magazines, as could the little Camp 9. After it was stolen, I replaced it with a seldom fired, but daily carried S&W 5906 police trade-in, so still retaining magazine compatibility with the Camp 9.

    It sports a red dot optic and an old Nebo light in a Protec barrel mount.
    Mec-Gar 20 rd magazines.

    When I go home, it’s usually the long gun I pull out of the safe for propping by the nightstand.

    Ballastics-by-the-inch.com lists my preferred Federal B9P (115gr JHP that I’ve been using since the 1980’s) @ 1094 fps from a 4″ barrel (like the 5906); 1166 fps from a 5″ barrel (like my Beretta) and 1295 fps from a 16″ barrel (Camp 9).
    So an increase of 201 fps for the carbine.

    I prefer the Garand/M-14 safety it has.

    Plus a solid wood stock for whacking in a tussle.

Comments are closed.