Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

benEzra

(12,148 posts)
85. Thoughts...
Fri May 3, 2013, 12:08 PM
May 2013

First, you do realize Glasers come in .223 too, right? If you're that attached to the concept. They're redundant, but they sell 'em.

But your information is about twenty years out of date; the fact that .223 JHP penetrates less than pistol JHP and shotgun buckshot has been known since the early 1990s. For a primer (from 15 years ago, no less), I'd suggest Roberts G.K., "Law Enforcement General Purpose Shoulder Fired Weapons: the Wounding Effects of 5.56mm/.223 Carbines Compared with 12 ga. Shotguns and Pistol Caliber Weapons Using 10% Ordnance Gelatin as a Tissue Simulant", Police Marksman, Jul/Aug 1998, pp. 38-45. Or if you need something a little less academic, look at the pics here.

To quote the Roberts article, "When used with effective ammunition, the 5.56mm/.223 carbine simultaneously offers both greater effective range and less potential downrange hazard to bystanders than a 12 ga. shotgun, handgun, pistol caliber carbine, or SMG" (emphasis added).

I believe the most popular amongst ar15 owners is the 55gr, are they begging to 'be like swat' now too?

*I'm* an AR-15 owner, and 55gr JHP (my own choice) penetrates less than the loads SWAT typically uses. LE/SWAT seems to be trending toward the heavier 62-77gr loads for more barrier penetration, since LE use goes beyond sheltering-in-place, but even that is less prone to overpenetration than handgun JHP. But for suburban civilian use other than in law enforcement, I think 55gr JHP/SP strikes a good balance; more effective than the fragile 40gr loads, but with less wall penetration than heavier-bullet loads.

who really cares which one outperforms the other? the ar15 .223 can & does penetrate drywall & typical house walls & body armor & steel & can kill family in the next room, no doubt about it. That other self defense firearms can do so better is beside the point & a moot one as well to the point that was made - we're considering the 'most popular rifle in america', it's liability in home defense. A handgun has less chance of doing this, especially with glaser slugs.

AR-15's. Penetrate. Less. Than. Handguns.

Again---because it seems this is having trouble sinking in----a handgun has more chance of penetrating multiple walls and hitting an innocent than a .223 carbine using comparable ammunition, even though the absolute risk of both is quite low. Yes, if you shoot recklessly at an interior wall with *any* gun (even with Glasers), you can mortally wound someone on the other side of the first wall. But that is less likely with .223 loads than with almost any other caliber.

Re: Glasers, they were all the rage in late 1980's/early 1990's, but the consensus in the wound ballistics community seems to be that there are better choices now. I notice that even the Federal Air Marshals Service has now switched from Glasers to lightweight JHP for on-aircraft use. In 9mm, you're talking about a 75gr or 80gr capsule of very small birdshot at 1500 ft/sec, with neither the mass of a typical pistol round nor the velocity of a carbine. At $45 to $60 per magazine of Glasers, you can't exactly practice with them much, either.

Your shotgun with double aught is gonna have a hefty recoil if it penetrates that extent, & if you go lower recoil buck you're not gonna get such penetration.

Buckshot is buckshot; the lower recoil loads have a lower pellet count but roughly the same velocity and penetration, AFAIK. The shotgun still penetrates more walls than an AR unless you go down to birdshot, and birdshot isn't very effective at stopping a determined assailant beyond near-contact distance.

the ar15 might shoot 5 times more bullets in the same period gaining more 'unintentional' penetration overall.

Huh? An AR shoots at exactly the same rate as a handgun; it fires once and only once when you pull the trigger, and will not fire another round until you release the trigger and pull it a second time. You don't seriously think Title 1 AR's "spray fire," do you?

In a regular home-invasion scenario, it's most likely going to be a close quarter type of situation, and an AR-15 type gun would be unwieldy around corners/doorways/hallways.. the average house has a length of under 21 yards, that's still well within the range of what a handgun could handle.

In your hypothetical "regular home invasion scenario", I would be sheltering in place with 911 on speaker, not opening doors and moving down hallways. And in that scenario, an AR is just as handy as a shotgun, while offering more precision than a handgun or shotgun, more energy than a handgun, and less wall penetration than either. I have a 9mm if I need it, but if someone is trying to get in, I'll choose a long gun, thanks.

If your home layout is such that you'd need one hand to carry a child to the safe room, open doors to get to your child's room, hold a phone, etc. then sure, a handgun of decent capacity might be a better choice for you. But that's not my situation.

So you know where I'm coming from, I shoot USPSA matches with my HD guns (my AR and a S&W 9mm); stages are typically multiple targets from 2 to 20 yards, often with barriers or from cover, so yeah, I know how to run both at across-the-room distances. The handgun reloads faster, the carbine offers more precision.

handgun is also much easier to store securely in a bedroom but also have ready in a jiffy..

It's not either/or. In your "jiffy," I have a handgun; in a couple more seconds, I have the carbine. With the carbine stored in a quick-access safe, it's at hand if I'm in the room.

ARs sucks for inside the home defense. It over penetrates through walls and its too long to handle well in a small hallway. Shotgun or handguns are better.

An AR penetrates less than a handgun and is the same length as a shotgun. Pretending otherwise doesn't help your case.

The biggest problem with using a rifle in home defense is the velocity of the round, under stress if you miss and it goes through a wall and into your neighbors house and hits someone you are F*%#ed.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. With lightly constructed, relatively long-for-width JHP like .223, velocity across different loads is inversely correlated with drywall penetration, while mass is directly correlated. A 40gr .223 at 3600 ft/sec might penetrate one interior wall; a 55gr JHP at 3000 ft/sec might penetrate two; a .45 ACP 230gr JHP at 830 ft/sec will penetrate three or four. Head over to the Box o'Truth and check out the sections on shotgun slugs and .45-70; *those* penetrate like nobody's business because of their mass.

The reason that fast .223 penetrates so little is that when you take a lightly constructed .22-caliber JHP spinning at 300,000 RPM and whack it with a couple slabs of drywall at Mach 3, it tends to destabilize, tumble, and fragment because the centrifugal forces exceed the tensile strength of the materials from which it is constructed. The same is not true of most handgun JHP, since handgun bullets are less long-for-caliber, are traveling far slower, and are less likely to fragment when transitioning from an axial spin to a tumble.

A 12ga with 00 buck might not penetrate a IIIA vest but it will sure as hell knock them on their ass.

No. The momentum delivered to the target is equal to or less than the momentum delivered to the shooter's shoulder. If the 12-gauge doesn't knock the shooter on his/her ass, it won't knock a vest wearer down either. It could cause blunt trauma to someone not wearing a plate, or knock the wind out of them and drop them that way, but the main danger to the person wearing armor is from pellets that miss the armor.

That point is academic, though, since home invasions by people wearing armor aren't common.
We have state flowers, state mottos, and state mascots. Chipper Chat Apr 2013 #1
One step ahead of you Pullo Apr 2013 #2
a couple of states do gejohnston Apr 2013 #4
What's not to love about the AR platform... ileus Apr 2013 #3
Uhhh.. Dead children? tridim Apr 2013 #8
The same could be said for any gun. hack89 Apr 2013 #13
True, and AR-15s are the new death machine of choice for mass murderers. tridim Apr 2013 #18
Not really hack89 Apr 2013 #20
Actually, it's the new "death machine of choice" sylvi Apr 2013 #23
Mine are the new life saving machine of choice for home defense. ileus Apr 2013 #24
You're going to protect life by killing someone..... lastlib Apr 2013 #35
I'm not going to volunteer to die... ileus Apr 2013 #36
then keep the guns away from the killers who use them. lastlib Apr 2013 #37
then keep the drugs away from the people who use them. clffrdjk May 2013 #65
fine by me. With your help we can do it. lastlib May 2013 #66
The statistically-likely criminal wouldn't need a gun to murder me. Lizzie Poppet May 2013 #73
So use the second most-effective method. Killing is NOT acceptable! lastlib May 2013 #74
You want me to significantly increase my risk? Sorry, but no. Lizzie Poppet May 2013 #75
And what is the"second most-effective method". We would all like to know. oneshooter May 2013 #86
Yes, it IS rational! norge May 2013 #67
You need to find Jesus lastlib May 2013 #68
You need to find a new hobby. CokeMachine May 2013 #69
You are calling someone else a troll? AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #78
Explain this please? Howzit May 2013 #89
Don't shoot kids... ileus Apr 2013 #26
But dead children are the result. lastlib Apr 2013 #38
I don't. ileus Apr 2013 #43
Message auto-removed Name removed Apr 2013 #62
Speeding automobiles kill more children then AR-15s. AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #77
Yes, that is gun nuttery 101. tridim May 2013 #79
Drones kill more children then AR-15s. AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #81
Sounds like you're content with all the dead children killed by AR15's tridim May 2013 #82
Sounds like you don't know what you're talking about. AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #83
So why does Diane Feinstein think that owning AR15s is perfectly fine? hack89 May 2013 #90
the gun that killed Marines! Ernesto Apr 2013 #5
that's why I have been iffy about gejohnston Apr 2013 #6
What an interesting and comprehensive post. AnotherMcIntosh Apr 2013 #29
I watched it. It was completely fair.. tridim Apr 2013 #7
There is no such thing as a benign bullet. nt rrneck Apr 2013 #10
which is why they need to be regulated, too. lastlib Apr 2013 #39
That's not really doable. ntt rrneck Apr 2013 #40
yes it is. the bullet-heads just don't want to do it. lastlib Apr 2013 #42
Billions of rounds of ammunition are manufactured rrneck Apr 2013 #44
Ok, let's try both, and see which works better. lastlib Apr 2013 #45
we did the show ID and keep a list for ammo gejohnston Apr 2013 #46
which only proves we didn't do enough. lastlib Apr 2013 #47
no, gejohnston Apr 2013 #48
Who is "we", and where did "we" do this? I was buying my own ammo for my .22 when I was 14-15... Ghost in the Machine Apr 2013 #59
where I bought ammo in Wyoming, gejohnston Apr 2013 #61
Legislation doesn't work that way. Sorry. rrneck Apr 2013 #49
they are? gejohnston Apr 2013 #11
They were based on the M16 and manufacturered for returning Vietnam vets... tridim Apr 2013 #12
no it wasn't designed to tumble and shred flesh gejohnston Apr 2013 #14
We already know AR15's kill large numbers of people very quickly and effectively. tridim Apr 2013 #16
i did and gejohnston Apr 2013 #17
Wrong, wrong and wrong. AtheistCrusader Apr 2013 #22
I have 5 or 6 different types of 223/556. ileus Apr 2013 #25
A deer round will do MUCH more damage than standard AR-15 ammo Pullo Apr 2013 #19
No. supernaut Apr 2013 #51
It was not based on the M16. The M16 was based on the AR-15. mwrguy Apr 2013 #58
"their predecessor was better at it." lastlib Apr 2013 #41
I'd love for you to compare .223 Remington to .270 Winchester or .30-06 Springfield (deer calibers). benEzra Apr 2013 #15
"whereas hunting bullets and civilian self-defense loads tend to expand" Pullo Apr 2013 #21
So, to clarify... krispos42 Apr 2013 #30
Is there a way to watch it online? nt Deep13 Apr 2013 #9
Waiting for the sequel: lastlib Apr 2013 #27
during the rise of the AUG? gejohnston Apr 2013 #28
Actually the rise of the AK dookers Apr 2013 #31
Just ordered a Bulgarian AK-74, it should arrive in a few days. Joseph Ledger Apr 2013 #56
yes virginia, there is a comparison jimmy the one Apr 2013 #32
the rest of the story gejohnston Apr 2013 #33
A 270 with a hunting bullet will cause MUCH more devastation than standard .223 ammo Pullo Apr 2013 #34
Expanding bullets commonly used in hunting are illegal for warfare hack89 Apr 2013 #50
pound for pound of flesh jimmy the one Apr 2013 #52
assault rifles are select fire gejohnston Apr 2013 #53
So you have no problems with AR-15s in different calibers? hack89 Apr 2013 #54
An AR-15 is a "liability" in home defense? Joseph Ledger Apr 2013 #55
ar15 liability in the home jimmy the one Apr 2013 #57
Yes, Glaser does make a .223 round. N/T GreenStormCloud Apr 2013 #63
oxymoronic jimmy the one May 2013 #64
A Glaser in .223 would be kind of redundant benEzra May 2013 #71
Ummm, .223 JHP penetrates *less* in building materials than 00 buckshot or most pistol JHP. benEzra May 2013 #70
aught notta jimmy the one May 2013 #72
Thoughts... benEzra May 2013 #85
I still need a complete BCG. ileus Apr 2013 #60
A number? Like 1? geckosfeet May 2013 #76
Why in the hell do Americans need a military type assault weapon? nt ladjf May 2013 #80
"Why in the hell do Americans need a military type" sniper rifle? AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #84
Adam Lanza agreed. nt geek tragedy May 2013 #87
Adam Lanza owned a .22LR squirrel rifle, not an AR. benEzra May 2013 #88
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»America's Gun: The Rise o...»Reply #85