Armory, Self Defense, And EDC > Firearm Self Defense

Whole Bunch of Input Requested: AR Pistols as EDC Questions

<< < (3/4) > >>

Alan Georges:
All 100% factually true, Professor.  I have a different legal risk tolerance on the issue, but we live different lives in different places.

FWIW, I've been in a couple of classes shooting next to guys with these shorties, and of course they all had muzzle brakes.  It was brutal, both from the blast and (in one night class) the flashes too.  I'd look at a can, or at least a birdcage.  It'd still be bad enough inside a car with either of those, but with a brake, ugh.

Chemsoldier:
I dont have a lot of experience with .300 BLK, but I do know shorty ARs in .223 are beyond brutal in a vehicle.  We are talking single round permanent hearing damage brutal.  ARs in vehicles are why God invented rifle cans. If you dont want to run a can (and I see why), I highly recommend stashing active hearing protection for all potential occupants in the vehicle. Eye protection also.  Auto glass fragments can bounce around the interior.

The tactics of being in a soft skin vehicle are considerably different from an armored one. Once there is a ballistic threat, if you get blocked, you need to think hard about bailing and moving to a building immediately. Stopped thin skins are a death trap. So your procedures and crew drills are probably the biggest rep you can do. Two people, working together decisively and practiced may be better than optimal weapons.

All that said, I would say that most likely occurance is theft of you vehicle long arms. The most secure way of holding them doesn't allow easy access. True pistols are way easier to genuinely secure in a vehicle.  Perhaps a pistol optimized for trouble such as a Roland Special style firearm would provide more of what you are looking for with the capability to place it in a more secure pistol box completely under a seat and secured to the seat post. A Glock 17 with 140mm magazines and an RDS would give you over 20 rounds with the ability to hit at greater distance.

The Professor:

--- Quote from: Chemsoldier on July 25, 2018, 06:35:13 AM ---I dont have a lot of experience with .300 BLK, but I do know shorty ARs in .223 are beyond brutal in a vehicle.  We are talking single round permanent hearing damage brutal.  ARs in vehicles are why God invented rifle cans. If you dont want to run a can (and I see why), I highly recommend stashing active hearing protection for all potential occupants in the vehicle. Eye protection also.  Auto glass fragments can bounce around the interior.
--- End quote ---

I'm one of THOSE survivalists.  All of our eyewear meet ANSI Z specifications, they have for many years.

And yeah, I know all about shooting from, and in, vehicles. Not one of my favorite things.  Sadly, I no longer drive either an up-armored HMMWV or a Ford F350 with hillbilly armor around town.  Not that I wouldn't, mind you, but the wife feels that the Insurance company might consider some of my modifications outside the scope of their protection. 

"Um. . .sir. . .are you really serious about calling this a "Recreation Vehicle?". . ."


--- Quote ---The tactics of being in a soft skin vehicle are considerably different from an armored one. Once there is a ballistic threat, if you get blocked, you need to think hard about bailing and moving to a building immediately. Stopped thin skins are a death trap. So your procedures and crew drills are probably the biggest rep you can do. Two people, working together decisively and practiced may be better than optimal weapons.

--- End quote ---

At this point, I'm leaning on the negative side of taking incoming fire. . .for now.  I'm more worried about going over, under, around or through obstacles.  There was a time and a place that going THROUGH a wall of PO'd people wouldn't make me bat an eye.  Here?  In my home town?  In my home state?  Sadly, that's what I'm afraid of facing.

Here's one of the more recent videos, this one following a soccer match in Birmingham, UK:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l4mQg0qVBng

Mods: I can't remember if we can post video links here, anymore.  I understand if you have to remove it.

Readers: use the words "People attack car public property" to find the above-mentioned video.

I could also pull any of the riot or flash-mob videos from here in the states as examples.



--- Quote ---
All that said, I would say that most likely occurance is theft of you vehicle long arms. The most secure way of holding them doesn't allow easy access. True pistols are way easier to genuinely secure in a vehicle.  Perhaps a pistol optimized for trouble such as a Roland Special style firearm would provide more of what you are looking for with the capability to place it in a more secure pistol box completely under a seat and secured to the seat post. A Glock 17 with 140mm magazines and an RDS would give you over 20 rounds with the ability to hit at greater distance.

--- End quote ---

I considered a similar set of mods to a spare standard carry handgun (in my case either a USP45 or a VP9), but am wanting the enhanced capability of the more powerful cartridge. 

I wrote a longer explanation as to why I am considering this route the other night, but then accidentally clicked back a screen and lost it (!!!).

To review that: My wife and I have changed our primary defensive weapon from AR Carbines in .223 to a pair of legally-stamped AAC PDW 9.5" carbines in .300 BLK.  The reasons are many, but primarily revolve around portability and a much smaller engagement sphere plus reduced sound signature with a legally-licensed supressor affixed.

We've been shooting them in competitions for about a year and a half and have become both quite familiar and comfortable with the round after adjusting to it's peculiarities.

Unlike many others, I'm not enamored with pistol-caliber carbines considering them to be the worst of both worlds (larger, heavier and more difficult to maneuver than a pistol without the penetration or enhanced power of a rifle).  The .300 BLK fits a very interesting niche, though.   One that I think I can exploit as I get older.

As yet, though, the whole AR Pistol is still a Thought Exercise, at this point.  I haven't yet decided either way.  I did have one other consideration. . .that of the Remington 870 Tac 14, but that's another area where a lot of legal concerns come into play.

The Professor

Chemsoldier:
I think for a shorty (well pistoly) AR for use in a vehicle without a suppressor, you are definitely barking up the right tree with .300 BLK.  My understanding is that the subsonics are no worse than shooting a 10mm auto inside a closed vehicle  ;D which is a significant improvement over a .223.

David Fortier has an article in the latest Be Prepared, the once or twice a year preparedness focused glossy from the same brand as Firearms (formerly Shotgun) News, on using a shorty .300 BLK with a brace.  His was based around the new SIG Rattler AR pistol. 

I am a little more sanguine than some on the brace and legal pitfalls.  Assuming we are all good preppers and carrying pistols greater than mouse guns, I am assuming the "give a d*mn" factor is going to be pretty low if we think it prudent to dig around for the AR pistol rather than going directly to the holstered pistol where you know its exact position, orientation and status.

As I said, the thing that gives me the most pause is theft. Otherwise, right on.  I am kind of amused at the thought of the average car thief trying to find ammo for .300 BLK. 

You are a firearms nut (I mean that fondly), so your firearms loadout should be kind of over the top for a prepper. Enthusiasts can make concepts sing that would be a silly waste for "normal" preppers.  For instance, I should (and do) have a ham radio in my vehicles.  However, I do not need a 7,000 ICOM mobile rig.  Carl or Smurfie on the other hand could probably talk to the ISS with it and it makes sense.  For me a  $350 dual bander is working just fine and pushing my limits.

Carl:
  The weapon one should have is one that is accurate,powerful,reliable and can be utilized for the task. I don't find a good carbine cut down to a unwieldy handgun as a suitable weapon. Kind od like the JUDGE pistol in .410...many rave about the shotgun/pistol and yet few would call it acceptable for rabbit or squirrel yet give it ATOMIC capability as a self defense handgun...makes no sense to me. A 300 BLK AR in sub-sonic is not quite the equal to a 357 magnum or even 357 SIG and yet is far heavier and over-sized piece of hardware.For vehicle carry,I would stick to a good fitting and sighted carbine as more capable of accurate fire. Just my opinion

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version