Maggie's Farm

If youy guys buy an AR style rifle specifically chambered for the .223 Remington DO NOT use 5.56 MM ammo as the .223 SAAMI spec chambers are too short for that round and can cause dangerous back pressure. 5.56 MM is not the same as .223 Remington. If you have a rifle chambered for 5.56 NATO you can use .223 ammo, though. Be alert, be safe.

I opted for 5.56 NATO as the ammunition costs less than rounds such as the 6.8 spc, 6.5 Grendel or the 7.62. If I was a little more well heeled I'd have picked up a Socom II or Socom 16 as I like the .308 more than the smaller rounds. The money I saved on the gun alone equals a thousand rounds of plinking.

The 5.56 is a little sketchy to me. It's like the 9mm, which for tactical purposes is a marginal manstopper. The conventional wisdom with a 9mm is to double-tap an aggressor. Twice as much ammo with half the firepower.

If the issue is one of suppression versus wallop, wallop wins with me. But what I'm looking for in these times is more bang for my buck, and if plinking is in the picture the 5.56 wins this round.

Jappy, I'll eventually put a red dot sight on the piccatinny rail, I like iron sights though.

I went to the Cabelas the day before it opened to the public with a friend of mine. (They love him because he uses their credit card like crazy)! It's a nice store--a lot of fun. You might want to look to KTP or Riley's though before you drive to Cabelas.

Buy an ugly gun before the government bans 'em for being cosmetically challenged!

A Beretta .380 auto or a Smith and Wesson J frame Lady Smith .38. Both are managable than a big gun. The auto has the benefit of more rounds and quicker loading, but the Smith is simpler and can pack more stopping power in one round while not overwhelming you with recoil.

Anyway, I like those two...

Get her a .380 acp and tell her if she ever has to protect herself with it she should just keep pulling the trigger until it clicks.

Yeah, I'll go with the Walther. I've shot one on several occasions years ago and I liked what it did for me. (I remember a custom job in guns & ammo I used to admire greatly).

Last year I was shooting a Beretta some guy brought to the range and I loved it (even if it was a .380). It had a decocker and the safety was first rate, ergo my first recommendation. But yeah, the Walthers are a good carry/personal defense weapon, too.

Forget about the .25, it's a pop gun.

Good link to officers forum; just overflowing with good information. Regarding the potential banning of 5.56, at least the .223 is a round chambered for hunting rifles and would most likely still be available. I haven't heard ammo banning banter though, just 500% tax on all ammo.

Hahaha, Luther you're funny!

Here's a story about a guy who was whacking away at his attorney with a little gun. He hit him several times including in the head and the victim was walking around and answering questions when the ambulance came.

It's about ballistics. Take a 5.56 NATO M855, which is a 62 grain armor piercing round and hit flesh with it and the round has a tendency to go right through the target. The 9mm had the same sort of reputation, as the round was so zippy it would through and through a body (and clothes) and not even mushroom, which is how the projectile transers its energy to the target and causes more damage. This is why it's policy in some departments to double-tap an assailant. It's about ballistics. Each caliber has its own characteristics, strengths and weaknesses.

Could a .22 kill an attacker? Sure. I'd rather have my .45 though. Here's why:
If I pull it out, the muzzle alone makes a statement.
If I fire off a round and miss, nobody's going to want to be in front of it while I re-aquire my target and squeeze of number two.
If I hit the target well, the target is going to stay down.

A tear duct is pretty small, and that lawyer got one right between the eyes and he was still dancing around. There's video...