PERSONAL SECURITY IN YOUR R.V.:

O.k., just one true story, but I was not on the scene. Harriet, a reserve p.o., had stopped at an ATM for some cash. Would be robber sticks hand with gun inside window. Without hesitation, she pushes the gun away from her with one hand and cranks up the window as hard as she could with the other. Gun falls to floor. Starts to drive away a few feet, but realizes he's hopelessly caught and being dragged. Stops car and speed-dials dispatcher direct line. Cop shack is less than a block away and within a minute, he's surrounded by armed officers. No shots fired; one broken wrist.   

Detroit Police officer goes grocery shopping, arriving home at her apartment she is confronted by a gunman who demands the groceries.. She gives him both bags,  Now that his hands are full she reaches in her purse and removing a couple of items from therein advises him of his new situtation.  (Great thinking on the crooks part, Very intelegent on the officer's)

Ray D said:

John sez:

?I wouldn?t consider it for RV home defense. It is too long, and unwieldy. The rooms, doorways, and hallways are just too small, too narrow. You do need some room, if you are to use a shotgun effectively, even one designed and built as a specialty close quarters weapon. My opinion is ?handgun, only.?

Click to expand...

I use to work at a job where we had to qualify under the state guidelines, and the federal guidelines for handguns.  If I remember correctly, the hadgun had to be at least .354 bore size, 3 inch bbl, able to hold 5 rounds, and you must be able to reach a score of 215 out of 300, all shots from the 25 yard line.  We were pulled off the line every 3 months for the 40 hours of classroom and range time.  And, we were required to, when requested from a "government person" to go out to the range and qualify on the spot. 

I do use a shotgun in my RV.  Stoger makes what I like to call a coach gun.  Short, double barrel 12gauge.  I also have a Taurus .380 in the trailer.  While most people don't like a .380, I do.  I have see what they can do while I was overseas.  The .380 overseas is just like our 38 revolvers.  They are the standard. 

Regards,
Grumpy
This is a very interesting thread.  I'm surprised that you have not gotten a bunch of flame on this subject.

Grumpy: Reading between the lines in your post, you've had quite a bit of training and have some considerable knowledge of firearm types and uses. (Hope I said that delicately enough.)

I have other reasons to not use a shotgun in self defense. I sold the only shotgun I had, a "goose gun," totally unsuitable for personal defense, and have no other shotguns. Nothing against them, for their purposes, just personal preference. If I were going to use a shotgun, however, it would be a "coach gun." Nothing else makes sense in quarters that tight.

Similarly, I have a "car gun," that I carry in the trunk of my car. (Just habit left over from when I needed it. It is a Winchester 94, "Trapper." It's short, of course, and chambered for .357, the same as my "car pistol." The rifle barrel, short as it is, adds some velocity to the .357 projectile, for fighting from a car, in a street attack. I would not use it in my house, nor my RV. For that matter, neither would I use the .357 handgun, unless I had it loaded with .38 specials. Make sense?

So, the question. Would you recommend a "coach gun" to a beginner that wants to improve his or her safety in an RV? Would you recommend it to someone who is willing to take the training necessary for handling a .38 special revolver, and not willing to do more?

I, too, have a .380. Over objections of many friends, I consider it adequate, properly used, for personal defense in a situration where larger is a problem. Mine is a Colt Pony, PocketLight. I absolutely love it! It is almost always in my right front pocket. I would not, however, recommend it for someone with minimum training for several reasons.

First, it is a semi-auto. If you are well trained, that of course is superior to a revolver. If not well trained, and/or not properly cared for, that gun will turn on you. It will jam or fail to feed, just when you need it. I can handle a malfunction, on the fly. A lot of cops, I know, carry one for "back up." A beginner is dead.

Finally, "stopping power" on a .380 is completely dependent upon shot placement. Close is not good enough! That is asking too much, in my opinion, for someone not seriously well trained.

Yes, I know, all guns are dependent upon shot placement, but - - - - as long as you get a hit, at all, a .38, a .357 or a .44 is likely, effective, at least long enough to get off a second round. Even a miss is likely to jar an opponent sufficiently to get the second shot off. The .380 is not an effective gun, if the hit is in a non-vital zone.

Having said that, I have seen effective defense with a .22! Go figure!

Ray D

Ray D said:

Yes, I know, all guns are dependent upon shot placement, but - - - - as long as you get a hit, at all, a .38, a .357 or a .44 is likely, effective, at least long enough to get off a second round. Even a miss is likely to jar an opponent sufficiently to get the second shot off. The .380 is not an effective gun, if the hit is in a non-vital zone.

Having said that, I have seen effective defense with a .22! Go figure!

Ray D

Click to expand...

A .380 with hydra-shocks makes a good carry gun, however, I agree with you 100% about shot placement.  I would rather have a .380 in a knife fight, then a knife ;D ;DI have one of those Makerovs (sp) in .380, and it is a very accurate gun.  Hitting bang plates, about the size of a bowling pin at 75 yards with factory 95 gn ammo is not hard to do.  I've even set up some clay pigions at the 25 yard line, and hitting them isn't that hard.  I've got a .45 that won't do that.  The Springfield XD40 that I have is almost as good as the Glock in 9MM, as far as putting rounds down range.  I have a very old Ruger Police/Security 6.  That is my favorite wheel gun.  I have always been able to take it out of the gun locker, put 6 round in it, and hit whatever I wanted.  When I worked in the "gun world" that was my choice to carry. 

I like the coach gun that I have because it is hammerless.  When you break it open, put shells in, and close it, the safety automatically goes on.  I don't like 00 or even 0 buckshot.  #4 or #6 is what I use.  #4 at 15 yards will really mess up a B-27 target.  The down side, you only get two shots.  The up side, you  really can't miss.  It is small, easy to manage, and if you want, can order it in 20GA.  In training, we were taught how to keep 3 rounds between your fingers to reload the single shots if needed. 

I have "saddle" guns to go with all my hand guns.  I have the Marlin 9MM carbine, a .357 and a .44 lever action carbine.  If I can find a Marlin Camp 45 carbine, I would be happy. 

I don't and never will keep a .357 loaded with full loads .357 in my trailer.  If you have to touch a round off, and if you miss, it can go a long way before it stops.  You can't recall the bullet once it leaves the barrel.  The .40 has the same problem.  A .357 with .38 wadcutters, or a .380 is my choice.  I do have a S&W 469 "mini gun" that my wife bought for me to carry that is in the trailer most of the time.  It is another oldie.  12 shot 9MM with a 3 1/2 bbl.  Any 59 series S&W magizine will fit in this weapon, and the magazines will also fit the camp 9 carbine.  A 9MM hardball has the same problem as a .357, they will travel a good distance.  I perfer some type of hydra shocks, or silver tips, something like that. 

Now, I got to share this.  A local gas station was putting in bullet proof glass in one of their stations.  So, with permission, it was brought out to our training range.  Oh, this rep was a good sales man.  Going on and on about how it would some this type of round and the such.  So, I fired a .22, .32, .38, .380, .357, .45 and even a .44 into his test panels.  Oh, he was so proud, and just getting a bit to cocky for this redneck, so, on one of his test panels, the trusty M-1 Garrand came out.  Needless to say, it went right through it.  Like an egg though a chicken.  Shut him up.  I told the owner of this chain account that his clerks would be safe, as long as nobody was running around with a 30.06. 

Regards,
Grumpy

I use Federal Hydroshocks in all my guns. Like to be consistent and know what to expect. And, they won't travel too far. They eventually slow down. Most any caliber, right down to a .22, I think, would go through an RV, just about any RV, end to end, in careless shooting. Something to think about if you use a gun for personal defense.

On a trip to Tacoma, Wa, planning to visit a friend, I stopped at a gas station in the evening, near his home. He lives in a gated community. It had several islands and no overhead, Shell, I think. So, I decided to gas up, there. Well, it was pay and then pump, so I went in to pay. As I entered the door, I noticed that the clerk was enclosed in bullet proof glass, with a small hole. I had noticed some seedy looking characters wandering around, outside. Seeing the glass, I looked outside, again. Yep! Those were seedy characters.

In earlier posts on this thread, several have mentioned checking your surroundings, and leaving if you are uncomfortable. Bullet proof glass does it for me! Makes me uncomfortable. Decided I didn't need gas!

In Topeka, I was running low, and decided to stop and buy gas on the way to visit my Brother, about 30 miles southeast of there. I saw a billboard for - I think it was Shell, again - and decided to pull off there. Waiting at the light, on the ramp, I got a good look at the station. There were bars on the door, a thick glass window with a little hole - - - -.? I didn't know they had rattle snakes in Kansas, but I heard one rattling! Went up the on ramp, across the street, without stopping for gas.

Made a policy, for myself. I fill up at truck stops, when approaching major metropolitan areas, from some distance away. I figure the locals know the score, and if they need bullet? proof glass, I need to shop somewhere else!

Need to edit for clarity: Actually, I use Federal PDA - "Personal Defense Ammo." That is a hydroshock bullet designed for Personal Defense. Several manufacturers make this kind of ammo. It's a lighter weight bullet and when the projectile hits a liquid or soft tissue, it expands, immediately. This slows the bullet down, presumably to stop it in a target. In theory, this allows for fewer shots, stopping an attacker, and perhaps a better chance at medical care and survival. It reduces the liklihood of "over-penetration." Many of the legal gurus believe this type of ammo is easier to defend in court, in the aftermath of a shooting. Both the criminal and the civil case may be helped, in view of the ammo having been designed for the purpose. It goes to the intent of the defensive shooter, a big issue in both courts.


Ray D

Duplicate Post. Sorry

Ray D said:

I use Federal Hydroshocks in all my guns. Like to be consistent and know what to expect. And, they won't travel too far. They eventually slow down. Most any caliber, right down to a .22, I think, would go through an RV, just about any RV, end to end, in careless shooting. Something to think about if you use a gun for personal defense.

Ray D

Click to expand...

The word "hollow points" was a big no-no when I was in the gun world.  We used the word "controled expansion".  During a Q&A, one college boy asked how do we control the expansion?  The guy who was suppose to be answering the questions looked at me because...well.....I'm Grumpy, and I told him it depends if I have to shoot him in the head, or the belly.  Wonder away from the group, and he will get a demo.  He didn't even crack a smile the rest of the day.  Some people have no sense of humor. 

And I wonder why I never did make it in public relations!!!!!!!!!  Oh well, glad I'm still able to drive those trucks. 

Grumpy

IMHO, the best and safest in-house weapon would be a .357 magnum loaded with shot-shells. The gun is intimidating all by itself, and if you do have to fire it, you won't have to worry about it piercing your walls and endangering your neighbors. Also little chance of it killing an intruder, but it will sure stop him/her in their tracks.

Karl said:

IMHO, the best and safest in-house weapon would be a .357 magnum loaded with shot-shells. The gun is intimidating all by itself, and if you do have to fire it, you won't have to worry about it piercing your walls and endangering your neighbors. Also little chance of it killing an intruder, but it will sure stop him/her in their tracks.

Click to expand...

The biggest problem with shot shell is that if the bad guy is wearing a heavy coat, like a parka, shot shell will not penetrate it.  You may, or may not know of the .30 carbine the army used.  During the Korean war, a lot of officers complained that the .30 wouldn't penetrate the heavy coats of the North Korean Army.  Same problem with shot shell.

And, I'm going to have to be honest, if the bad guy comes in my house with his{...hummm, this is a family forum, so how do I put it.........}tallywacker in one hand, and a knife in the other, I don't think he is there to invite me to an ice cream social, or my wife to a nice dinner someplace, so it really don't care if he dies. 

Grumpy

Karl:

I have to say that I have been finding  it difficult to disagree with you. I suspect you know what you?re talking about, and I suspect that you are in Law Enforcement. You?re making it easier, however, to disagree with you, now.

Oh, I don?t find anything wrong with what you said, technically. But I will take issue with your point, above.

First, you said, ?IMHO, the best and safest in-house weapon would be a .357 magnum loaded with shot-shells.? Remember who we?re talking to, here, and I think you would change that opinion.

You went on, ?The gun is intimidating all by itself, and if you do have to fire it, you won't have to worry about it piercing your walls and endangering your neighbors. Also little chance of it killing an intruder,? I agree, completely. I?ll take issue with your strategy, shortly.

Finally, you said, ?but it will sure stop him/her in their tracks.? Disagree! Change ?will sure? to ?might,? and I will agree.

Here?s my argument, and I can back it up, statistically, if necessary. I doubt that an RV forum is the proper place to do that. However, it is a proper place to explore the issue.

Most confrontations are solved by the potential victim simply becoming aware that there is a threat. BG backs off, with little provocation. Most of what?s left will retreat in the face of any overt defensive move. That leaves us with substantially less than a quarter of initial threats, that have to be dealt with harshly.

The bulk of all remaining threats will retreat if a gun or other lethal weapon is presented. You only have to show it. You, yourself, said that, when you said, ? The gun is intimidating all by itself,?  (Or, as John mentioned, Make the 12 gauge racking sound.) Rarely, will you face a threat, after that. Few, on this forum, will ever see things go beyond that, very few!

At that point, you and I part company. Anyone, still there, is extremely dangerous and loaded either with narcotics or bullets, and you want to pepper him with bird shot! ??? Say it isn?t true!

No, there is no likelihood that such a shot will be fatal. Very likely he will retreat at that point. Some won?t, and when your bird shot runs dry, I hope you have a black belt in ?pistol whipping,? as it?s all you have left!

OK, I have a friend who loads one shot shell into his .357. The other 5 are ?real.? He keeps the wheel with the bird shot, first in line. I think it?s a mistake, but don?t argue with him, anymore. He?s competent.
**********************
Stupid Cop story: I had a friend who had his backup gun on him, when an intruder, with a knife, entered his workshop. He ran the .380 dry, quite rapidly, without hitting anything, and then threw the gun at the BG. Didn?t hit anything with the gun, either! Said he did that to distract the BG, while he dug a 9mm out of a drawer. He did fine, and the intruder retreated from the thrown gun, before the 9mm came into play.

He told me, ?My first thought, when I saw slide lock, was to just toss the gun to him and say, ?Here. See if you can do anything with this!??

It?s my .380, now. Nice Colt, PocketLite! I got it cheap!

John: Did you know that there are ?Stupid Cop? stories?
************************
Grumpy: No argument, except for your language.  

Ray D

Ray D,

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. Any intruder stupid enough to continue advancing after two shots to the body, injurious or not, will not continue after the third hits his head/face area. The exception would be one wearing full body armor and a Lexan face shield - highly unlikely for this type of hit-and-run crime.

That said, police often load 3 slugs first followed by 2 regular shot shells into their shotguns - just as you described for the handgun, but I still wouldn't recommend it. The majority of non-law enforcement people don't have the necessary skills or training to put that third regular bullet exactly on target, and it still poses a major threat to the safety of those other than the intruder.

I agree that the sound of a shotgun being racked is a strong deterent, but you'd do well to have something to back it up. A regular shotgun is less than ideal because of accessibility and storage issues, and precious little time and room to swing it into position. A pistol-grip shotgun is better (shorter), but still not good.

I completely agree on the shotgun issue. It's not a good gun, as I've said before, for RV use. Too long, as you said, even with a pistol grip. Too little time to maneuver. Too confining to bring it up to its full potential. And, to top it off, a pistol grip shotgun is downright unfriendly, to an untrained shooter.  You'll have to argue that point with others, here, that have posted, advocating shotguns.

An issue aside to the short shotgun advocates: Do you want to go into court, either criminal or civil, and have the other side show the jury a short shotgun, as the weapon you used? Not me, thank you!

Birdshot .357? Agree to disagree, and note that while you are describing the third shot to the head, a "Mozambique," not many can pull it off, without professional training and continuing practice. You have to fire a pretty heavy (.357 in this case) handgun three times, accurately, in a few seconds. I suppose you could just keep on shooting, until you get it right, but you only have six, to start with.

Ray D

My RV security system consists of a cell phone with a fully charged battery and a Remington 870 with plenty of training and expereince to go with it.  It is equipped with a folding stock and extended magazine.  It is loaded with 00 buck but I keep slugs on hand in case I need to "reach out and touch someone".  Most of my camping is in the desert and I figure it will be a long time before help can arrive. 

I truely hope I never have to handle it in anger and if it comes to that I hope the sound of my chambering a round will be eough to send the badguy away.

Having been involved in a real life or death shootout with a bad guy at night, I know from personal expereince how stressfull this type of situation can be and how difficult it is to get a clean site picture after you or your assailant has fired the first shot and you are momentarily blinded by the flash. Add to this the fact that you will most likely be defending your loved ones and quiet possible have multiple assailants.  While it is still important to aim the shotgun, I believe it will be less critical in this type of close quarters gun fight.

Finally, I have determined that the MH itself provides little to no ballistic protection and drastically limits your field of fire.  My "plan" should an attack occur is to exit and take the battle to them and away form my family.  But that is just me.

I thought it appropriate to split Ray's "Fire!Fire!" message and associated replies into its own topic here. The discussion could take on a life of its own. It's a scary scenario that could happen to any of us with a fixed home.

Thanks Tom.

I had a developing idea to corral that thing, and get it back on track. Hadn't figured it all out, quite yet. Then you waved your magic wand. Easiest way to do it.

Starting from here, it is an easier job to push some bulges back into place. The first, I anticipated. This is a personal Security thread, and some discussion of firearms is appropriate. Those would be very general, generic information, and safety issues. Firearms are not the only Personal Security tools nor are they absolutely necessary. There are a lot of other issues, methods, practices, techniques, all valid and useful.

It is not intended to be a technical firearms thread. There is no chance that such a track can be beneficial, here. A techical discussion of firearms issues is appropriate in a Firearms Forum. There are several such forums on the internet and they are appropriate for intensely tecnnical and political issues, related to firearms. That is the place to go, for that level of discussion.

The second side track is the personal stories - the stupid crooks stories. It is a side issue, but I like humor. I enjoy them. So, I don't mind and in fact encourage them. If I am off base, there, I will stand corrected.

Well, lets see if I corralled this thing, or killed it - - -  ? !

Ray D.

Ray,

Understand your comments re firearms and they naturally come up in any discussion on security and physical threats to one's saftey. Unfortunately, like discussions on politics and religion, such discussions can go downhill in a hurry and I'm sure you've seen that in many forums.

FWIW that's one reason that a number of long-time forum members here stay out of such discussions; They came to an unwritten understanding among themselves that they'd prefer to maintain harmony rather than beat each other up over differing views. I think it's one reason many of the folks get along with each other so well, including when they meet in person (at rallies or at each others' homes), and have stuck together when the forum has gone through some tough times.

As you can imagine, the forum staff sometimes walks a fine line between maintaining harmony and being considered heavy handed. Personally, I don't always get it right no matter how hard I try.

Gonna break a personal rule, here, and wing it live rather than compose, off line.

Yes, Tom, I have seen a lot of political firearms discussions. Some of them are all heat, and no light. Boils down to "flaming" when no one has anything of value left to say.

A moral objection to killing is a valid reason to stay away from firearms. It is a personal decision and should be respected. It can be articulated, politely. Problem is, both sides tend to get heated. In firearms forums, the best, such discussions are usually relegated to a "Political" forum, separately. There, personal attacks are usually prohibited. Works well, if the moderators are on the ball. Has no place, here.

Shortly afte joining this forum, I saw a post re: firearms. So, I did a search. Wow! Some were good. Some didn't impress me. A few were offensive. That is why I started this thread. I hope to avoid the heat, and shine just bit of lilght on the subject, calmly. Frankly, up to lately, I have been pleased with the thread.

The price of fuel should generate enough heat for the whole R.V. forum!

Ray D

Hi folks. Gonna violate my own standards, briefly, for a ?technical? post. (Not really, it goes to the issue of safety.)

I hope you don?t mind if I talk while I?m eating. I?m having some crow. Glad to share if you?re interested.

Karl:

I?ve rethought your .357 birdshot idea. I think it has a use. I have noticed a couple of posts, elsewhere, on other threads, where some were concerned about personal security but wanted to avoid a lethal encounter. Two suggestions.

First, Karl?s birdshot idea is a chance to use a very effective weapon in a ?non-lethal? mode. I qualify that with a warning that it could prove lethal, in spite of the odds. But, it goes to a ?non-lethal? intention.

And, a .357 is astonishing bright and loud! The flash and noise, alone, border on lethal! You have the opportunity, then, to move to fisticuffs with a badly stunned intruder. Hey, it could work!

I still insist that it might prove ineffective. Chances are - the way to bet - it will be effective. That is, it will terminate the threat in a BG retreat. It?s a winner if it works, and it is very likely to do just exactly that! If it doesn?t work, you are back to where you were, no worse off, really.

There is no likelihood that it will penetrate any wall, for that matter even a curtain. Your neighbors and family are more than reasonably safe. You avoid a homicide, and even a justifiable homicide is worth avoiding by any reasonable person?s standards, if you can accomplish your personal security objectives.

Second, there is an ?in-between.? Karl, here?s your chance! I?d be interested in your thoughts.

I think all ammo manufacturers make a ?Frangible,? ammunition. ?Frangible? means, it breaks apart on impact. It is really spendy, and? ?I wouldn?t think of practicing with it. It is available in almost all calibers. Pick the gun you like.

If it hits a wall, glass, metal, the side wall or window of an airplane, it fractures into little pieces, almost dust, harmlessly. (Nice way of saying ?poor shooting. You missed!?) The energy is dissipated over a large area, unlikely to do serious damage. It won?t go through the walls of an R.V.

Again, your loved ones and your neighbors are reasonably safe. Actually, your windshield is safe, although I wouldn?t guarantee that.

It is required of Federal Marshall?s, on airliners. That is what they use. That is why they use it. I think it is two or three bucks a shot. Practice with some 25 cents a shot stuff. Load the frangible into your defensive, R.V. handgun. Sleep well.

It has a down-side. Unlike the birdshot, this stuff is thoroughly lethal. Upon hitting soft tissue, it gradually breaks apart, spreads out, and it stops in that tissue with a few inches of penetration. It dumps the full load of foot-pounds of energy, unlike even ordinary hunting ammo. The shock, alone, is potentially lethal, never mind the bullet hole! About as safe as getting hit by a fast moving pick-up truck!

If avoiding a fatality is an issue, this is not for you. It is legal to own, in most states, legal to use. Some manufacturers call it ?Safety Ammo.?? It?s another alternative. I don?t know how it goes over, in court. Seems like ?Safety Ammo? should be quite acceptable. (No worse than a shotgun, for sure!)

OK, I finished it off. No crow left.

Ray D.

Ray,

That's not eating crow; that's merely doing some rethinking

Your idea about using frangible ammunition is a very good one. Yes, it's expensive, but we're (hopefully) not talking about tapping off round after round. Almost all of the good weapons training schools use it; not as the primary ammo, but after the student has become adept at weapons handling, and has developed the proper mental attitude to make a split-second shoot/don't shoot decision. Quite honestly, the idea of an Air Marshall blowing a hole in the side of a plane at 35k feet doesn't appeal to me very much ;D

And, a .357 is astonishing bright and loud!

Click to expand...

Absolutely right! Depending on the situation, most tactical squads will use flash-bangs for that very reason - the sound and flash is very disorienting, and can help avoid the use of lethal force in many cases.