Firearm Forums - Arms Locker banner
1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,482 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
before he can hit you with a rifle, are ridiculously poor. If all he's got is a bolt action, you MIGHT be able to move laterally to cover before he can hit you, and then just stop him from outflanking your cover, until you can escape in the darkness. If it's 25m and he's got a shotgun, your odds are even worse. If all he has is a pistol, his chances of hitting you as you move laterally to cover are very low. So much for practicing beyond 10m, on stationary targers, eh? Once they or you get to moving, about all that's likely to happen is a lot of noisy missing, blowing your ears out, making you flinch when you DO have a better shot later. Keep the majority of your pistol practice inside 10 ft, inside of 3 shots. Some can be 10-15 ft, more shots, say 4-5, then 15-20 ft, moving to cover as you do so, Maybe some 30 ft stuff, while using cover, or a light at night. Anything else is a waste of precious range time and ammo. A helluva lot of this can be done with airsoft and.22lr conversion units. Better lots of practice with those and very little with centerfire, than a bit more with centerfire and no practice with the .22 or the airsoft. I seriously doubt that ANYBODY is shooting the 100k rds per year that the top hands used to do., casting their own bullets and reloading their own ammo, cause they can't get primers these days.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,483 Posts
Some of us can actually hit a Man sized target more than thirty feet away. Try 75 feet. Ever hear of auditory exclusion? With bullets flying and adrenaline pumping your likely not going to focus on noise. Air Soft I've never tried, but .22 units are used in both my Glock 21 and CZ 9 MM. They are pretty good for practice, but again it's best to use the real thing. The last LEOSA qualification included moving to barricade cover and shooting five rounds at 25 yards. You need four hit's in the Central Nervous System to qualify. Every one did. 75 feet with a quality handgun is just not that difficult if you are trained.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,744 Posts
...the odds of hitting a man at 50m with pistol, before he can hit you with a rifle, are ridiculously poor.
True. In that situation I'd much rather be the one with the rifle. Did someone say otherwise?

..If it's 25m and he's got a shotgun, your odds are even worse.
Interesting. You realize you just said that in your scenario, the shotgun has the advantage over a rifle?

...So much for practicing beyond 10m, on stationary targers, eh?
Not really. IMO (and I've said this many times) it's not just about the odds, it's about the stakes. The odds are against me needing to shoot defensively more than 10 meters, but it absolutely does happen. Active shooters down a store aisle, across a school or church or such, etc. I can name examples where people (including cops) have justifiably taken out perps at well over a hundred yards with a pistol, much less ten yards.

Fwiw, I agree with all the above. At 50 yards I prefer a rifle over a shotgun, and at 25 yards I prefer a shotgun over a pistol. I suspect that most people would agree, but if they don't it really doesn't matter. Any one of the three can be used effectively with training and practice.

What's odd is that you're saying here that at 25 yards the shotgun is better than the rifle AND the pistol. How do you reconcile saying that the shotgun has superiority over the rifle (in your own scenario above) with your often-expressed claim that the shotgun is a pointless waste..?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,376 Posts
Melvin, if a catastrophic event ever happens your complete inability to acknowledge, respect or consider the abilities of an opponent will get you dead in a very short period of time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigEd

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,744 Posts
Melvin, if a catastrophic event ever happens your complete inability to acknowledge, respect or consider the abilities of an opponent will get you dead in a very short period of time.
True, unless his ability to engage in the real world is somehow much greater than his ability to engage in his own discussions on the internet, and that's obviously very doubtful. There is no risk in internet conversations, and he lacks the self-confidence to engage even in those. Even in risk-free forum conversations there is no true 'engaging' or discussion to be had from him; just self-praise and empty (and often self-contradicting) pontifications.

True discussion would be welcome, but to paraphrase Yoda: "the fear is strong with this one". It really is a shame, but after all these years I don't expect maturity to suddenly present itself. It would be nice to see, but it would be illogical to expect it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Garand

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,744 Posts
John - Something I didn't register initially, that just occurred to me. You claim here that out to 25 yards, the shotgun has the advantage over the rifle:
the odds of hitting a man at 50m with pistol, before he can hit you with a rifle, are ridiculously poor.
...If it's 25m and he's got a shotgun, your odds are even worse.
And if at 25 yards the pistol-user's chances are "even worse" against a shotgun than against a rifle, that can only mean that out to 25 yards the shotgun is better than the rifle. Your statement, not mine.

And since 25 yards covers ANY home-defense situation, most building-security situations, and most real-life situations in general, your stated argument in this thread is that for all those situations the shotgun is superior to the rifle. That's literally what you say here. And that's intriguing, as often as you bash shotguns.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,483 Posts
Yeah, Melvin contradicted himself again. "The Shotgun is too loud, kicks too much, and has too short a range." Now it's better than rifle or a pistol at 25 yards. It was "useless" but now it's definitely better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigEd
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top