NFA Weapons for Home Defense

[crackback 135]

I think the Tromix shorty SBS would be just perfect for HD. Also along those lines I think an MP5SD would be just swell too given the old adage of bringing overwhelming force (Chicagoese translation "Don't bring a knife to a gunfight"). However, across the net I have read many counter arguments as well to this usually focusing on the appearances of using one thereby putting the victim (you) on the defensive and cost and possible irreplaceable nature of the weapon(FA's) if they were taken for evidence.

 

I wanted all of your take on the issue.

Edited May 15, 2010 by 690gr

[bigj480 203]

I think the Tromix shorty SBS would be just perfect for HD. Also along those lines I think an MP5SD would be just swell too given the old adage of bringing overwhelming force (Chicagoese translation "Don't bring a knife to a gunfight"). However, across the net I have read many counter arguments as well to this usually focusing on the appearances of using one thereby putting the victim (you) on the defensive and cost and possible irreplaceable nature of the weapon(FA's) if they were taken for evidence.

 

I wanted all of your take on the issue.

 

I would not recommend it unless it offers you a definite advantage. An automatic gun would be about my last choice for HD,but a SBS would fit the bill fine.I would also have no problem using a suppressor to save my hearing in suck a situation. My HD gun right now is pump action shotgun and it will undoubtedly do the job. It also comes down to where you live because of physical and legal reasons. For instance, I would never use an automatic gun for HD, but in an apartment it is an especially bad decision. I also would not use any title 2 item if I lived in an area where I could easily be charged with a crime, even if I had done nothing wrong. I'm in Texas, people have shot others in the back that were robing their neighbors house and gotten away with it, so no worries.

[KC913 324]

That goes without saying for any "evil" looking home defense weapon. I'm sure the jury would look at you completely different if you used a converted Saiga 12 and it was taken as evidence as apposed to a standard Mossberg 500 pump. People fear what they don't understand. To the average Joe, an AK is thought of as a machine gun only used by terrorists and criminals. Any tactical looking weapon is going to be viewed differently than a common pistol, shotgun or hunting rifle that everyone is used to seeing, whether it's an SBS or factory length barrel.

[DogMan 2,343]

Don't get too caught up in the "what ifs" of the aftermath. Your job is to keep yourself and your family alive. Use whatever you think you will need. Nothing more, nothing less. The legal details afterward will get sorted out. You have to make sure that you have the legal hassles and the bad guy is in a grave, not the other way around. Make sure it is a justifiable shooting and it won't really mean squat what type of gun you used.

[garandman 11]

SBS? Yes

 

MG? Definitely no.

 

SBR? Probably no.

 

Here's my reasons:

 

MG's : Too easy for a civil criminal attorney make you look like a psychotic homicidal maniac to a jury. Accurate? No. Fair? No. Probable? Yes. Also, ANY gun you use in a shooting WILL be going to police lockup for an undetermined period of time. I wouldn't want to lose the use of my MG or have it in the property clerks hands for years, and too great a probability it goes "missing." I wouldn't want $5,000 - $15,000 cash sitting in their hands either. Further, you are responsible for every shot fired. The adrenaline of a self defense scneario is TRULY intense. Not a good idea, unless you have some SERIOUS training in your background. I'm talking special forces / Navy seals type trigger time.

 

SBR's: Probably no, because its too easy for them to call them machine guns. Kinda depends on the SBR. A short Marlin or Winchester is a different animal than a short AR15 "machine gun."

 

A short shotty or a handgun is the best option, in my opinion, bth from a functional standpoint, and a courtroom standpoint.

[crackback 135]

Don't get too caught up in the "what ifs" of the aftermath. Your job is to keep yourself and your family alive. Use whatever you think you will need. Nothing more, nothing less. The legal details afterward will get sorted out. You have to make sure that you have the legal hassles and the bad guy is in a grave, not the other way around. Make sure it is a justifiable shooting and it won't really mean squat what type of gun you used.

 

I completely agree with your statement as I have 2 very evil looking items for Estate/Home defense with the wife instead taking the plain jane 1911A1. However, the SBS would be an improvement over what I use now in the attribute of handiness (currently 18.5") and a suppressor would be great for the rifle for the hearing aspects. As for FA stuff, I would only consider baseball bat reliable and controllable suppressed SMG's such as the MP5SD or a similar Sterling (if the wife cuts the big toy ahem..er..cough...investment budget in half)

[BobAsh 582]

The type of gun you use, IF LEGALLY POSSESSED, will have zero bearing on the legality of the shoot. The parameters of the legalities of self-defense are very well defined.

[bobsolla 7]

in my opinion,fuck the bad guy everytime!my life or their`s,it will be mine ,and i`ll

explain that to anyone that doesn`t understand self defence.fuck all those pussy`s in kalifornication!sorry to those forced to live there in good will!

[BobAsh 582]

Don't forget that NFA weapons must be secured in such a way that they are not able to be possesed by other (non-authorized) persons.

 

So probably that is a bigger factor in an NFA gun being ready and available for use in a home defense situation.

[crackback 135]

in my opinion,fuck the bad guy everytime!my life or their`s,it will be mine ,and i`ll

explain that to anyone that doesn`t understand self defence.fuck all those pussy`s in kalifornication!sorry to those forced to live there in good will!

 

So I take you'd select the amnestied M1928 Thompson over the 1911 in your safe then, hypothetically speaking?

[crackback 135]

Don't forget that NFA weapons must be secured in such a way that they are not able to be possesed by other (non-authorized) persons.

 

So probably that is a bigger factor in an NFA gun being ready and available for use in a home defense situation.

 

Ah, that is actually a huge problem I forgot about. Well, an NFA trust can ameliorate that if I am not mistaken right i.e put the wife and whomever in the family that might use it?

 

Well damn... that rule really seems to decease the utility by restricting the ability to keep the weapon in question in the ready.

Edited May 15, 2010 by 690gr

[BobAsh 582]

It's definetly possible to have it stored in a ready state legally; just make sure that you do.

 

Any illegalities will work against you big time after the fact.

[bigj480 203]

Well, an NFA trust can ameliorate that if I am not mistaken right i.e put the wife and whomever in the family that might use it?

 

Yep.

[22_Shooter 1,560]

There have been incidents where people have used NFA weapons for legitimate self defense and were not sent to prison in the end. But they still went through lengthy, expensive court battles. Choose wisely and be ready for the consequences, in any case.

 

My personal opinion? I would never plan to use an NFA weapon for SD/HD. I mean, if it came down to it, I'd use anything to stop a threat. But as far as specifically picking a weapon to use for SD/HS duty, I won't be using any NFA items.

 

 

Here's some stories about NFA goodies being used in legit SD scenarios. Granted, both stories involve FA, but just SBR/SBS, but both are still a very interesting read.

 

http://www.afn.org/~guns/ayoob.html

 

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BTT/is_168_28/ai_112685749/?tag=content;col1

 

 

Both stories are quite old. I wonder if those same exact situations would have played out the same in court, now in 2010, as they did back then.

[MCASgt New River 10,036]

Personally I'd say no. I have been told, by a high ranking LAPD officer, that even your choice of ammo makes a differance in the court case. I.E. hollow-points VS ball ammo. Those that use JHP rounds are said to have "intent" to kill rather then using ROE and the minimal force required to stop the situation.

 

Now for my situation, I do run NATO BALL AMMO in my bedside pistol. All 17 rounds if, and I foresee it happening, required will be placed 2 in the chest and 1 in the T-Box.

 

If this doesnt stop the perp the repeat of the above drill until all movement ceases.

[DogMan 2,343]

Personally I'd say no. I have been told, by a high ranking LAPD officer, that even your choice of ammo makes a differance in the court case. I.E. hollow-points VS ball ammo. Those that use JHP rounds are said to have "intent" to kill rather then using ROE and the minimal force required to stop the situation.

 

 

 

Well, a prosecutor can "say" anything he wants but he will never prove that in a million years. If that were true then police would never use hollowpoints because police are ONLY in the business of stopping a threat, and not executing people. I think in any court case where they are getting into what type of ammo he used they are having some serious doubt about whether the shooting was justified at all.

Edited May 17, 2010 by DogMan

[GeorgiaPD 408]

Personally I'd say no. I have been told, by a high ranking LAPD officer, that even your choice of ammo makes a differance in the court case. I.E. hollow-points VS ball ammo. Those that use JHP rounds are said to have "intent" to kill rather then using ROE and the minimal force required to stop the situation.

 

 

 

Well, a prosecutor can "say" anything he wants but he will never prove that in a million years. If that were true then police would never use hollowpoints because police are ONLY in the business of stopping a threat, and not executing people. I think in any court case where they are getting into what type of ammo he used they are having some serious doubt about whether the shooting was justified at all.

 

This from Dogman is correct^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Besides, if a prosecutor is involved, then there are already serious doubts about the validity of the shooting.

[MCASgt New River 10,036]

I NEVER said anything about if it was justified or not. The reason was for "intent." Meaning the shooter had intent to kill and not simply stop the situation with minimal force.

 

But this is a subject left to lawyers & judges...I was just providing info I received from a law enforcement officer. Since I'm neither and have been trained in the ROE of battle my mindset if different.

[garandman 11]

Don't forget that NFA weapons must be secured in such a way that they are not able to be possesed by other (non-authorized) persons.

 

So probably that is a bigger factor in an NFA gun being ready and available for use in a home defense situation.

 

 

That's prolly the best issue raised in this thread yet.

 

Can you specify futher? For instance, could my wife legally use my SBS in self defense? There's a sense to which all guns have to be inaccesible to unauthorized users (according to the laws of my home state.) . Not sure I could explain how NFA firearms are different.

 

Thanx.

Edited May 17, 2010 by garandman

[garandman 11]

Personally I'd say no. I have been told, by a high ranking LAPD officer, that even your choice of ammo makes a differance in the court case. I.E. hollow-points VS ball ammo. Those that use JHP rounds are said to have "intent" to kill rather then using ROE and the minimal force required to stop the situation.

 

 

 

That's true. Tho the attitude of an LAPD officer is quite different than those of my home state. Round here, the police would ask me "Dude, why were you using a handgun in self defense when you own rifles?"

 

And my answer to the LAPD officer would be "Yer darn right I intended to kill the intruder who came into my home with a gun."

 

Thankfully, my home state has the "Castle Doctrine" that takes care of all that. Basically if an intruder enters my home, he's forfeited his right to life.

[crackback 135]

Personally I'd say no. I have been told, by a high ranking LAPD officer, that even your choice of ammo makes a differance in the court case. I.E. hollow-points VS ball ammo. Those that use JHP rounds are said to have "intent" to kill rather then using ROE and the minimal force required to stop the situation.

 

Now for my situation, I do run NATO BALL AMMO in my bedside pistol. All 17 rounds if, and I foresee it happening, required will be placed 2 in the chest and 1 in the T-Box.

 

If this doesnt stop the perp the repeat of the above drill until all movement ceases.

 

 

Now if I was running a MP5SD I would only use FMJ for reliability, but that is incidental. The 1911A1 has +P JHP 185gr in it. I follow your point though but as garandman pointed out, LA county is a vastly different animal as far as jurisdictional/prosecutional mindset for many of us.

 

I would estimate that a fair number of users have a registered SBS as their primary means of HD. The big question, given the law regarding access of others to NFA items, is how you store it so it's readily available if the situation arises requiring its deployment?

[Raoul_Duke 113]

The big question, given the law regarding access of others to NFA items, is how you store it so it's readily available if the situation arises requiring its deployment?

 

My wife is on/in the trust so I just leave mine sitting out like I would any other gun.

 

Otherwise, I guess the best you could do would be to leave it loaded and locked up. You would just have to get to it . . .

[elia.jon1 1]

my 2 cents.....

 

if your looking at your hd weapon be sure and choose something your willing to give up.....

 

it might only be for a few hours or days, but do you want the leos to have to look at your sbs, or would you rather hand them a mossy 500.....

 

i had a buddy (made the front page of the gilmer paper) with a methhead neighbor they had a little shootout in the living room, while everyone was safe, it showed me how things like this go down, it was my friends cousin who did the return fire, the p gripped 500 was taken for a little while until the owner reminded the local chief he had a crazy methhead who had just kicked down his door, on the loose....the leo's gave the shotgun back at that point......

[BuzzNectar 35]

I NEVER said anything about if it was justified or not. The reason was for "intent." Meaning the shooter had intent to kill and not simply stop the situation with minimal force.

 

But this is a subject left to lawyers & judges...I was just providing info I received from a law enforcement officer. Since I'm neither and have been trained in the ROE of battle my mindset if different.

 

this stopping a threat thing with minimal force using your issued/duty weapon is blowing my mind.my dad who has an FBI firearms instructor liscense and trained the the sherrifs deputys in his 20+ years of law enforcement was taught and instructed that if a situation calls for you to actually fire your weapon then you shoot to kill.you DO NOT use your firearm to wound.this case presents more chance of liability and things to go wrong.one example is im sure alot of you have seen the video of the suicidal guy with a handgun sitting in chair while police try to talk him down and the sniper takes a shot at the gun and blows it out of his hand(nice shot by the way)but what if he had missed....it could have sent the man into a shooting frenzy,maybe even causing him to pull the trigger accidently shooting another officer from tensing up in a scary situation.ALOT can go wrong.so once again if you are in a position where you must use your firearm SHOOT TO KILL,as it is the only way to 100% make everything stop.also in a self defense condition,the bottom line is that if you feel that your life or the lives of others are in danger of death or serious injury than it does not matter if you used poison tipped arrows or the most lethal designed bullets in the world.

Edited May 17, 2010 by BuzzNectar

[garandman 11]

this stopping a threat thing with minimal force using your issued/duty weapon is blowing my mind.

 

 

I concur.

 

If I ever come to the point I beleive I have justification to take a crimnal's life in defense of innocent life, you can bet I will do so "with extreme prejudice."

 

That can be defined as "to slide lock" and / or "with the largest hollow point or diameter projectile I can reasonably employ."

 

I will not use ball ammo, intentionally. Fact is, per the Geneva Convention, ball ammo is a military ordnance. HP is the civilian tool of choice.

[DogMan 2,343]

I NEVER said anything about if it was justified or not. The reason was for "intent." Meaning the shooter had intent to kill and not simply stop the situation with minimal force.

 

But this is a subject left to lawyers & judges...I was just providing info I received from a law enforcement officer. Since I'm neither and have been trained in the ROE of battle my mindset if different.

 

I would want to ask that LEO what type of ammo he uses on duty, at home, and while carrying off duty, and if he intends to kill everyone he shoots. You can't read people's mind with regard to intent. In a murder case I doubt if anyone would ever bother to argue in court that they didn't intend to kill the person because he shot him with FMJs. Many people buy bullets for their nightstand gun and don't even have a clue what they are buying. All they know is these are 38 cal bullets and they fit in their 38 cal gun. FMJs and HPs both stop people and kill people. But don't get me wrong, I am not surprised if this is the way they think in So Cal. I'm just saying their thinking is very flawed.

[crackback 135]

The big question, given the law regarding access of others to NFA items, is how you store it so it's readily available if the situation arises requiring its deployment?

 

My wife is on/in the trust so I just leave mine sitting out like I would any other gun.

 

Otherwise, I guess the best you could do would be to leave it loaded and locked up. You would just have to get to it . . .

 

Thanks for the reply. I would follow your lead on this one when I buy my own Tromix shorty. I do think that SMG/FA stuff is a different matter. My argument was mostly hypothetical regarding those as the optimal incident to use them is extremely unlikely ( e.g. you have to clear your house/estate of a team of intruders with training that wont bolt at the first shot or sight of a fallen comrade, which would require both a defensive and offensive/assault posture on your part requiring maximum firepower from 1 shortrange platform = MP5 family), unless you A. write novels like Tom Clancy or B. were Ollie North in the late 80's. However, I would like to equip with a supressed SBR for the obvious advantages that would entail.

Edited May 17, 2010 by 690gr

[Raoul_Duke 113]

The big question, given the law regarding access of others to NFA items, is how you store it so it's readily available if the situation arises requiring its deployment?

 

My wife is on/in the trust so I just leave mine sitting out like I would any other gun.

 

Otherwise, I guess the best you could do would be to leave it loaded and locked up. You would just have to get to it . . .

 

Thanks for the reply . . . I do think that SMG/FA stuff is a different matter . . .

 

No problem. And I don't KNOW, but I assume FA would be treated the same as the other Title II items far as handling and storage requirements. Why not? They're all registered and in/on the trust.

[cellsworth 21]

The type of gun you use, IF LEGALLY POSSESSED, will have zero bearing on the legality of the shoot. The parameters of the legalities of self-defense are very well defined.

 

+1! From the standpoint of criminal charges specifically relating to a defensive shooting, the type of gun used to defend yourself or your family is irrelevant. The type of ammunition used would also be irrelevant. No mention of either factor is made in the pertinent criminal statutes.

 

A civil suit may be another matter altogether, though. You never know what is going to happen in those. Completely irrational judgments are not unknown.

[vbrtrmn 167]

Many people ask me what kind of pistol they should get for home defense, I always say a pump action shotgun. They of course always ask, "Why not a pistol?" To which my response is, "Okay it is 2AM, you wake up to someone routing around your house, you're half asleep, how good is your aim going to be? Crappy. Get a fucking shotgun, if the person doesn't run when you rack the slide, you're going to have to shoot them if they attack you (VA doesn't have a castle law). Which would you rather have a gun which you can point in their general direction or something which you have to take careful aim with?"

 

Pump action shotguns are fairly inexpensive and can be used by anyone with very little training, why wouldn't you use one? I don't want to pop-out of a closet with a super expensive SBS; I want a big black pump gun, which is going to literally scare the shit out of some douche bag and make them run for the hills, because I don't actually want to shoot anyone. Big guns are scary