A change of heart regarding self-defense

[bene505]

My wife asked me if we were going to have a gun on board. Depending on where we go, the answer will be "yes". (Long guns that is. I don't mind handguns but they are harder to be safe with. Long guns seem safer to me.)

The Mossberg sounds excellent, but I'd want something that could damage the bad guys before they had a chance to damage me. An M1A would be a great choice, not sure it's available in stainless though, so it would need to be well cared for.

Why the M1A? It's semi-automatic so no cycling a bolt after each shot - doing so would make it harder, and I'd want the attackers to feel multiple rounds whizzing by them and into their boat. That's a great deterrent! [It's not a machine gun, which have restrictive rules in some places. (A few of our CF members will remember when you could buy machine guns in hardware stores.) Machine guns also tend to waste ammunition too, IMHO.] You don't need the extra accuracy that comes from a bolt action target rifle. An M1A is accurate out to about 600 years on land. If you practice and get some training, you might be accurate to a good portion of that distance on the ocean. That's better than a AK47's shorter range. Having a few pre-loaded 20 round magazine would make a statement. Even if you never hit any of them, they would know you have "teeth" and would leave you alone. Sadly, they know there's more boats in the ocean and would probably just go after a "softer" target. At least they'd leave you and your family alone.

No sideways-thread attempt or name calling here. This is what I'd do. Other's will certainly do differently, or similar, depending on their world experiences and mental model of the world.

[Tellie]

With all due respect Mark, unless the Marines and thier training have changed since I remember, any weapon is better than no weapon against an AK47. Unless human nature has changed, being on the receiving end of a shotgun even beyond 50 yards is no laughing matter and raises the worry index quite effectively.

[SV Someday Came]

Originally Posted by MarkJ

Did I ever tell you that I have played with the odd shotgun as well as some nice sub machine guns and propper machine guns.........

a 12GA shotgun.... is a serious mismatch against an AK 47



So you guys think thundering away with a rabbit blaster will worry some Somali firing mags of 30 rounds at 600 rounds per minuite at 300 meters(328 yards)?

The US Marines say a 12 GA that they use: Maximum effective range: 50 yards (45.7 meters) with "00" buckshot load
Marine Corps Fact File - 12 Gauge Shotgun


You'll be laughed out of Africa.

Mark

Both Mark's and Saltseasailor are right on the money. And Celestialsailor, things do not have to go sideways if people stick to the points at hand and to the assumptions and rationale that drive that assumption.

In other words, genuine curiosity steeped in respect, driven by the desire to learn rather than the desire to squash usually can trump bad manners and be the oil that can allow any debate to move forward.

The shotgun has a mystical allure for many homeowners -- and of course that allure generalizes to owning shotguns on boats. We treat the boat we own as an extension of our home. All the mental schematics that go along with home defense are naturally going to find their way into our assumptive thinking about self-defense at sea. I know that many of you have spent a lifetime learning the needs and wants and behaviors of the sea. And you adapt accordingly. However, defensive posturing at home or at sea is a rare event, and I think it is a harder to prepare for the rare event when it occurs in an unfamiliar environment

I do not have much water experience, but self-defense on a boat has to be different than self defense at home. There are different gun laws by states and different types of defense. Fundamentally, determining the response to a threat in or close to your home has to be different than it is at sea. For example, if someone brandishes an AK-47 at your home from the sidewalk, you are likely not going to shoot the person. And if he does shoot, odds are you will take cover, call for help, or maybe even leave through the backdoor. You shoot back and you are instantly responsible for where your bullet lands. Additionally, proving that your life as in danger will be hard given the sheer number of escape options open to you.

One of the reasons many homeowners opt for the shotgun is that its ballistics lend itself to controlled close encounters. Conversely, a round from a bolt action rifle or from an AK 47 or an AR 15 has a much better chance of penetrating the body of the assailant -- as well as the wall behind him and likely enter someone else's wall across the way. And of course there is a purely hormone driven assumption fueled by the media and internet chartrooms inherent in the shotgun: You hear an intruder in your home and your ratchet your shotgun and then revel in how the sound from a shell being chambered will make weak-kneed your opponent. Personally, I do not subscribe to the strategy of deterrence by acoustic displays of testosterone.

As I look around my cabin, I know intuitively that if I have to reach for my shotgun to repel an intruder it is all over. Game done. It is too late. Saltseasailor is correct: if I manage to get a shell fired, given the enclosed space -- which is totally unlike the acoustics in a house in an open room, I will blow my ear drums out. And if you have your loved ones with you, you will likely blow their ears out. And if you have young children, the odds very high that they will suffer greatly. The pressure wave from a shotgun discharge will travel outwards no more than 2-8 feet in all directions and reflect off the numerous close walls and ceilings in your boat. Your ears and everyone else's will become oatmeal. And it is highly possible, depending on the severity of the reflected newton force pressure, you will sustain damage to your vestibular system. You might have a hard time walking or keeping your balance for some seconds after the blast. Look around your cabin. The concussive force from that explosion has nowhere to go to dissipate. It will reflect back to you. For the home, I have always been a proponent of a shotgun/ pistol combination but I would never, ever bring a shotgun on board. I would not want that tool as an option for the reasons above and for those to follow. The only person who would survive the use of a shotgun would have to chuck his iPod and find an SSB receiver that could be linked into a TTY receiver.

Mark is right in his own points: Use of shotgun against an AK 47 or an AR 15 is a lost cause. It is simply either a case of your silly ignorance or using the only tool you have handy. You are by analogy bringing a knife to a rifle party. True, you can do exceptionally serious damage at close quarters, but it is highly unlikely you will get that close; moreover, you will damage your ability to fight. I think it inaccurate to use the incident of the flare gun to justify the use of a shotgun as primary weapon for self-defense at sea. The skipper used the flare gun cause he had too and because it was the only thing he had. He did not use the flaregun cause it was the best tool for the job. The skipper did a good job at throwing "knives" at the pirates. And it worked, but that does not mean it was the best tool for the job. I do not know enough about firearms and the critcally important attendant ballistics to know what would have been the best tool for the job in that incident. I suspect it would have been a carbine or decent pistol. But I am not sure.

On a side, note, I would never bring an AR or an Ak on board -- but that is a different topic. I made my defense selection based on my analysis of the continuum of a threat. I believe I can respond accordingly and have the greatest range of options.

What I am sure is this: If boarders are either grappling or are on your boat, it is too late for a shotgun and if the encounter turns lethal inside your boat, and you use a shotgun you will destroy yours and others hearing and you will possibly loose the ability to remain standing for a few seconds. A pistol or a knife would be a far better choice inside a cabin. So Christian, I suggest you re-visit your earnestly held prejudice against handguns.

To me, a very important question I would like an answer to is this: At what point does a sailor decide that an external threat is a lethal threat? The point of determining a threat is easier on land and in your home. I do not think it is as easy at sea. At home, if someone comes up to your door or wall and either stays there or tries to get in, in our collective experience, we can safely say that person is a threat. But in the open sea -- or perhaps at port -- if a dinghy comes up either slowly or at high speed, I would imagine we are not as sure about the level of threat.

That is the key: At what point would you determine to use lethal force? Based on that decision, it would seem easier to select which type of firearm you would keep on board. If you are going to use lethal force when fired upon, then make sure what you use can be effective in that general environment. If fired upon at 50 yards, and you use a shotgun, well, I think that will get you killed. An AR or an AK can easily snipe you and sink your boat. You are fish in a barrel. You likely cannot escape and you cannot return effective fire.

If as Seasaltsailor says "... you're the kind a person that will only shoot as a last resort (bad guys on your boat and kicking in the cabin door)" then I suggest NOT a shotgun, but learning how to use a pistol or a machete. There is good reason why swords and machetes and knives have been used in close quarters for as long as humans have fought: They are effective tools. Look at the post on Guatemala. Machetes are deadly in close encounters. They work.

Anyways..... PLEASE: My point is to carefully consider the whens and ifs of responding. What makes a threat worthy of lethal response? I think then you can make defensive preparations accordingly. You cannot bring a knife to a rifle party but it may not be in your survival interests to bring a rifle to knife party.

It is best to have a good understanding of when a threat is about to become lethal, then set the parameters for the party.

Michael

[tager]

BOOM!

[Celestialsailor]

Originally Posted by cabo_sailor

I personally carry a Mossberg Marine 12 ga with the pistol grip stock on the boat. I have no plans in getting into a spitting contest with anyone at a distance but for an anti-boarding weapon I consider it excellent. They used to have an accessory line launcher but I'm not sure if it has been discontinued or not.

O.F. Mossberg & Sons, Inc. - Firearms, Shotguns, Rifles, Accessories, and Precision Machining

Rich

Interesting...This was the set up recommended to me from a friend of mine who did 2 tours of VN and 1 of Air AM.

[Just a Tinch]

Having spent 10 years in green...2 and a half in-country (RVN) I can tell you that I have little or no problem with self defense.... I have no problem using a 12 gauge with OO buck or a rifled slug...my hearing is less of a concern than my life or the lives of my loved ones.

The trick though is not to get caught off-guard. Vigilance is paramount, but then so is discretion.... If you go where you have to worry about your safety in general...you had best be running good radar and have an eye on it constantly in order to take evasive action when necessary.

I own handguns, one revolver that is a 38 snub nose, and one 25 caliber automatic. Don't snicker...a 25 caliber automatic is far deadlier than one might expect..especially in close quarters, and is a marvelous pocket gun. Its a Beretta 950BS...25ACP...and its my favorite.

But as far as someone getting close I would prefer to keep them at bay with a good 30-06, or a 30-30.... Just because someone is using an AK-47 doesn't mean they can hit what they are aiming at..... A man holding and properly aiming a high quality weapon can accomplish more with one or two rounds than a jackass burning clip after clip.... "Gun control" really means hitting what you aim at.....

But there is a serious "caveat" that goes with firearms..... If you expose it to the bad guy....you only have about 1 to 2 seconds to put it to use.... and if you aren't prepared to actually use it with deadly force....DO NOT buy one or even think about it. The old adage: "Discretion is the better part of valor"....is very true.

[drew.ward]

Originally Posted by Celestialsailor

Did you know shot guns are responsible for most of the deaths in the US?

Damn and we've had it wrong all these years. We've wasted all those billions of dollars putting bad people in jail when in fact it was those dastardly winchesters!

[MarkJ]

Originally Posted by Just a Tinch

A man holding and properly aiming a high quality weapon can accomplish more with one or two rounds than a jackass burning clip after clip.... .

Yes, but remember, don't underestimate the enemy. These Somalis have been at war constantly for a generation. These people grow up with these weapons literally in bed together.
They are in a multi million dollar business extorting $20 MILION dollars per ship. They won't send the village idiot.

[drew.ward]

I think the shotgun can be a good PART of a shipboard arsenal, but it shouldn't be the only gun.

A shotgun has a few benefits. One it's design makes it pretty rugged and you can limit its lethality based on the shot used (quail shot from a distance would put some hole in their skin and let them know you mean business, but not kill them). At the same time a full load of buck at a fairly close distance could put a hole in the attacking boat (something bullet rounds won't do to an extent that affect the structure). And finally, if someone does get into your companionway a single shotgun blast will end it for them as long as you can even come close to aiming.

But, the shotgun is also unwieldy in tight situations. It is nowhere near as accurate as a rifle, and you can't use it in a precise way if the attackers ever got on board.

A good rifle such as the AR-15 is a good choice as if you don't scare away the attackers (which should be the goal) you can hunker down and take one of them out before they get on board.

However, a pistol as a sidearm is still one of the most logical weapons. Even in military training pistols are treated as weapons of last resort. But, they are the most mobile, they are easy to conceal, easy to access, and if well maintained they are very stable. They won't just go off or any of the random other nonsense people tend to spout off about.

But, they are small, lightweight, trustworthy, and there when and if you need them. Hopefully you never will...

[Bash]

Originally Posted by drew.ward

However, a pistol as a sidearm is still one of the most logical weapons. Even in military training pistols are treated as weapons of last resort. But, they are the most mobile, they are easy to conceal, easy to access, and if well maintained they are very stable. They won't just go off or any of the random other nonsense people tend to spout off about.

The point, well taken, seems to be "weapons of last resort." I can't imagine ever opening fire until the intruder's first step was taken from cockpit to companionway, but at that point a stainless .357 magnum ought to be fairly persuasive.

[drew.ward]

Someone on here years ago had what I still think is one of the best ideas I've ever seen:

He had a punch through built into his helm where a compartment was hidden beneath a thin level of veneer (thus invisible). Inside he kept a pistol packed with grease and sealed in a plastic bag.

In the case of need he could punch though the surface and the gun was cocked and ready and would deliver the needed emergency shots.

[Mule]

I personally have a mossberg marine version pump and an officers model Springfield 1911 45 acp. 8 shots should be enough, and the clips change fast. That bing said, my next accusition will be a AK action chambered for either 308 or 223 made by Russian Amoerican Firearms.

Russian - American Armory Company

All of the firearms mentions like the AR15 and so forth are excellent but they cost over a thousand dollars each. The 223 RAA is less than $400 and the 308 less than $600. The action is tough, they are plenty acurate, (being off an inch when shooting frm a boat ain't a big deal). They can throw a lot of lead in a hurry, and especially the 308 though I think the 22 would do it they will disable an outboard if you hit the powerhead.

So there you have it.

[SaltSeaSailor]

Just a note while I am thinking about some a-hole running up on my boat shooting an AK47....

1- A pristine AK47 is at very best a 3 MOA (minute of angle) weapon, an average one is probably closer to 5 MOA. Add a moving boat and a nervous would be attacker= not going to hit what he is aiming at but will be lobbing lead in my direction. Read- no reason fear instant and inevitable death from 300 yards away.

2- If a fight is inevitable I would want to make the fact that full resistance would be met known as early as possible.

My solution- Call general quarters and run up the colors. Is there a anti-pirate flag I could run up? How do write ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ in somali, and I guess because of these new developments spanish as well. What about running up a big yellow smiley face, combined with all able hands on deck with semi-auto assault rifles. Maybe that is spanish for come get your ass handed to you.

(forgive me I am a few beers into a sunday BBQ, reminds me, I gotta go check the beer in the butt chicken)

[Ziggy]

Personally, I favor a layered defense system consisting of SM-3 missile launcher augmented by a 20mm M61 Gatling Autocannon for closer range self-defense.

[Bash]

Originally Posted by Ziggy

Personally, I favor a layered defense system consisting of SM-3 missile launcher augmented by a 20mm M61 Gatling Autocannon for closer range self-defense.

...is that a Contessa 32's PHRF handicap would take a fairly huge hit with that sort of layering.