What Do You Use For Home Defense??

I have my father's scoped pre-'64 lever action Winchester model 88 .308. Not ideal for home defence, but a better horse riding and general 'woods' rifle was never made, imo. A "lever operated bolt action," is how I've heard the model 88 described, and that sums it up pretty well. It's a fairly light weight gun too.

If you don't miss, you don't need to carry a lot of ammo, and if you do need to fire a follow up shot, the lever action means you don't need to drop your shooting stance to re-chamber a round. It's an important consideration in states that don't allow semi-auto rifles for hunting.

 

Lighting wasn't the best. Serial number indicates 1960 mfg. date. Has a Lyman All American 4x scope on it. I need to take it out to the range soon.

Edit: The Lyman scope is a steel barrel model, which dates it to about 1960-1962. More than likely, the seals are shot.
Thinking about swapping out the scope for a Leupold VX-1 scope, which would keep the vintage scope "look," but uses more modern optics. The ability to send it in for servicing is just an added bonus.

 

I get, it's a religion thing with some people. Some people have strong feelings about the 1911 too.

I've fired the 7.62×51 out of a Mosin Nagant. I've also put a few thousand rounds of 7.62 NATO out of an M240B. (Long story there).
.223 and 5.56 are basically the same cartridge. Likewise, 7.62 NATO and .308 are also basically the same cartridge. I agree with you that 7.62 NATO is a bit much for most people.

I can't say that either round, other than bullet diameter, is much like the 7.62x39. Which is the caliber I was actually talking about.

There's a lot of wooded country where I live, and the heavier 'AK' round will go through shrubbery and branches that will deflect the smaller AR round. At the same time, the soviet era cartridge doesn't zip around and punch a bunch of holes in soft, squishy, screaming things because it doesn't over penetrate like the 5.56 green tip ammo. As you mentioned, "5.56 is 3200 feet per second at the muzzle... So be aware of target background or use frangible ammo for the sake of your good neighbors."

Let's assume that a person who carries an AR15 wants a carbine for close quarters or home defense. With a 16" barrel length, exit velocity is 2800 fps. At 2500 fps, the 5.56 bullet will no longer create a lethal wound channel.
Source: http://www.sadefensejournal.com/wp/2012/02/08/barrel-length-studies-in-5-56mm-nato-weapons/

Women and even children can be trained on the AR platform. 100% agree. It's a very forgiving rifle, almost infinitely customizable, and with soft nose or frangible ammo is a decent home defense weapon. Heck, chambered in 7.62x39, it's one of my favorite platforms.

Children have in the past carried the AK platform in battle. Children continue to do so.

"The deal is that the Super high speed of the 70 grain round imparts as much kinetic energy inside 450 yards as any 30 Cal. Marksmanship over lead curtain. Guns don't kill people... But hydrostatically induced organ failure and massive internal bleeding surely does."

By 30 Cal., I assume you are talking about the other popular hunting rounds, the .308 and .30-06.

The .308 and .30-06 have the same kinetic energy at 500 yards as the 5.56 does at the muzzle. (Interestingly, the 5.56 has the same kinetic energy at 500 yards as the .45 has at the muzzle, which puts things in perspective. Don't bring a pistol to a rifle fight).

If you were talking about the 7.62x39, the 7.62 still has more kinetic energy than the 5.56 at 450 yards. Not that either round will be remotely close to accurate at that distance. (Edit: Yes, people spend thousands of dollars making both AK and AR's accurate to that distance. Also, some people are naturally extremely good shots. Most rifles and shooters are not that good).

The 5.56 has pros. Flatter trajectory, less recoil and better accuracy than the 7.62x39. I will not argue those points. It still lacks the stopping power of the 7.62. I have my reasons for disliking the 5.56. They might even be the same reasons you prefer the 5.56.

A combat medic wrote an article on the 5.56. Basically said if you get hit by a 5.56 round, you will survive, provided you either get medical help soon and don't get holes punched in vital organs. I'll see if I can dig it up.

Edit: found it.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.th...oot-what-you-can-hit-then-shoot-it-again/amp/

My takeaway from that article is that if I owned a AR15, I would want to carry the heaviest bullet with the heaviest loading I could for it. The last thing I would want to carry is M855 green tip.

 

I remember a quote by an American general in WWII. It went something like this: "the difference between the German, Japanese and American military forces was that every American soldier imagined himself a hero, and acted accordingly."

Americans have an independent streak a mile wide and to such a degree that it baffles people from other countries. Part of that independent streak is our love affair with guns.

 

@Bama Samurai , while I still disagree with some of your bullet points (see what I did there? ), after more digging into the 5.56 vs. 7.62 debate, I've come to the conclusion that the 5.56 is a better personal defense round.

https://thebiggamehuntingblog.com/223-556-vs-762x39/
This article convinced me. The 7.62 is still better at making big holes in things (it kills people deader), but the combination of longer range, flatter trajectory, accuracy, and low recoil of 5.56 make it a better choice for self defense. The primary goal is not to kill an attacker, but to stop the attack, and I feel the 5.56 is better suited to that role.

Of course, something like this is a better home defense weapon than any 5.56 or 7.62 platform, though I'd personally be leery of trusting the reliability of a 12 gauge drum magazine. The one and only time I've seen one at the range, the owner had feed issues.