independant thinker,
first off, thanks for having a screen name that is all lower case!! second, 7mm rifles shoot far and will stop people but hit a blade of grass between you and your intended target and it will mess up your trajectory!

If I were to pick a rifle as my primary or even secondary home defence gun I would choose the SKS. Power wise it is roughly equivelent to the 30-30, it is very compact, has reasonable accuracy, and as you say the ammunition is very reasonable so you can to afford to practice more. While I have not priced 30-06 ammo your comments about it are logical except surplus ammo is rarely if ever available in a soft point or hollow point that is more suitable for home defence and must be used for hunting in most if not all places you can hunt with it. There is reasonable priced 06 commercial ammo available though if you look for it.

Have you seen the 9mm HiPoint carbine? It is nice for a house gun.

45, I’ve been checking them out too…so cool…but I’ll keep my Sig P226 and my 12ga for my home defense.

None of the Big Game rifles would be good for home defense, unless you plan on shooting through the walls or want to take out 2 people with one shot. They kick like a mule, thus you pretty much can’t shoot from the hip unless you want your thumb damn near torn off (been there). And since they can easily go through walls, you wouldn’t dare use them in crowded locations (unless you don’t like your neighbors anyway). The most practical home defense weapons are both targeted by Big Government for extinction. Those are pistols and sawed-off shotguns.

While I do not recomend them for home defence the SKS and the 30-30 can be fired from the hip. As stated above my recomendations for home defence are a pump shotgun or a pistol. In either one you should choose the largest caliber/gauge you can handle and shoot with reasonable accuracy.

A good friend of mine recently turned me on to the “.17 HMR”, which I have fallen in love with. It is a great all around rifle in that it is light weight, inexpensive ammunition, great for hunting (I watched him take down a wild boar with one shot) and great for home protection.Go to you tube and check out some of the videos of this rifle in action. For a .17 caliber it does extreme damage.

45caliber, gotta disagree with you on the .223/5.56 comment. They’re effective killers up to 600yds in capable hands and were developed to do just that. It’s an “old wives tale” that they were meant to wound and disable…the bullets and loads are designed to start “tumbling” on entry, which causes tremendous damage.

I’m going by what I was told in the US Army. The instructor stated that “if you kill someone you take one enemy out of the battle. If you wound someone, you will take at least three out of the battle – the wounded man and two more to carry him back for treatment.”

According to the US Army, the M-16 was designed to wound.

It will certainly kill – but a heavy bullet kills far quicker and at once. The .223 bullet will kill IF you hit the right spot but generally not instantly – and most times it takes several shots to kill – even if the bullet does tumble.

I certainly won’t argue the point as you were and I wasn’t there. I agree with the bigger is better as the Garand was a major game changer with the 30.06 cartridge. I’ll give you some of the history on the M-16/5.56/.223.

“The subsequent DARPA report, documenting the lethality of the AR-15, was instrumental in motivating the Secretary of Defense to reconsider the Army’s decision and eventually adopt a modified AR-15 as the US military individual weapon of choice. Although opposed by the Ordnance Corps, the Armalite AR-15 was adopted by the Secretary of Defense as the 5.56mm M16 rifle.

Soon reports began appearing of the lethality of the new rifle. Unofficial reports said the AR-15′s light bullet, travelling at 3,300 feet per second, did cartwheels as it penetrates living flesh, causing a highly lethal wound that looks like anything but a caliber .22 hole, the US magazine Army reported in August 1963. Two US Army doctors who evaluated AR-15 wounds at an Army hospital in South Vietnam in 1966 reported that while wounds inflicted at close range had small entrance and exit holes, those at larger ranges exhibited small entrance holes whereas the exit wound is a gaping, devastated area of soft tissue and even bone, often with loss of large amounts of tissue, with disintegration of the bullet and minute splattering of lead.”

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/m16-history.htm

45caliber, I respect your word and wanted you to know that I’m not trying to start an arguement with you. I was under the same impression but as I thought of an injured enemy that could live to fight another day it didn’t compute vs a dead enemy. Thus I did a lot of research because I was going to build an AR and was debating whether it would be a 5.56/.223 or a .308…I chose the Nato 5.56/.223 based on lethality and cost…I’m far from rich, but I’ve got a nice CMMG/Del-Ton 20″ flat top with a 2.8-10 X 50 scope. 4″ groups out to 200 yards on 55gr fmjbt. I’ve also invested in some M855 62gr. green tip penetrators. I hope to get on some varmint coyotes before the year is out.

Jeff &45,
I was entering the service at the switch over from the M-14 to the M16. The M14 at 7.62 is a lot better stopping round, especially at 600 yards! you hit a man in the hand and it will knock him off his feet. I know he will get back up, but another dead center will put him down permanent! I never liked the M-16 as it seemed to jam under combat conditions. You had to keep it spotless and under combat conditions you can’t always do that. I did like the AK47 as you can pick it up pout of the mud and fire three full clips through it!!! I didn’t like the fact that they could use a nato round but we couldn’t use a commie round! the lip on the commie round was slightly larger in diameter thus it wouldn’t fit a 16 but the smaller rim on a nato round would fit the 47!

“Now THAT is Gun Control!”

Exactly, Exactly. Had not heard this one. I am sure it will show up in some of my non PC readings soon though.

Outstanding. Patricia is a hero (and nice shooting too!)

REPOST***
I checked at “snopes” also, and found they concluded the story about this young girl was false.

They did find a similar incident from 1988 that they certify as true. An 11 year old boy shot and killed two burglars with his .22 rifle when they broke into his home while he was watching cartoons on TV.

I wonder what the source is of these fictional stories. It is certainly not necessary to justify the RKBA by inventing such fictions. There are enough true incidents to prove the value of armed preparedness.

Could it be that some who oppose the 2 A. are having a laugh by inventing and spreading such rumors, then suggesting that all similar incidents are the inventions of “gun nuts” ?

This was a REPOST of a previous comment, which was posted — and then “disappeared”. The original post was in support of another post by someone who checked the “snopes” site, and found they had not found any verification of the claims about this incident, and did not think it was any more than a fiction.

That comment, which my comment was supporting, ALSO “disappeared”. Why? I hope we are not expected to submit to the “thought police” to post here.

Check it out at:

http://www.snopes.com/politics//crime/homeinvasion.asp

They have already banned the carrying of knives in England. Now they are trying to figure out how they can ban them at home. It is also illegal to carry an umbrella with a point on it or a cane that is sturdy enough to swing at someone. Lots of good this is doing as far as crime reduction.

45 caliber,
No a short man that can slam dunk!!!

Dennis, you are absolutely right. My dog has the rights ‘I’ grant her. Her only rights are to be treated well, fed and watered, taken to the vet when necessaary, and be protected. She is all I have in this world, and I will honor her ‘rights.’

no sir or mam in todays time every one has a rightthat means the so called slaves, and animals, you will hit a nerve whe you say slaves in my heart all are created equal, its just that some act stupid.

and u only have room for one.

“Trespassers will be shot, survivors will be sodomized”

sign on door says, never mind the owner watch out for mr, fortyfive and his friends, true………..

Dagney………………You are wrong. I do not know how many I have heard the following in these or similar words.

“My daddy voted democrat and I have always voted democrat and I am not going to change now.”

Back in the 50s when I was a kid people said the Dems were for the working man and the Reps for the rich.

I remember hearing that back then as well (we are dating ourselves aren’t we Bob)and it might have had some truth to it at that time but now it seems neither party truely represents the working man

They were right then, Bob. About 1965 the Dems discovered that the black minority basically voted as a block. They went after the black vote by promising all sorts of things to be paid for by the “rich”. The workers in the South, at least, soon learned that they were considered the “rich” by the Dems and switched to the GOP because they were more conservative – not because they liked the GOP. The Dems have never admitted that they basically scammed the workers for more votes. The unions, in the north, however, preferred the Dems because the Dems were willing to cut them deals so they insured that their people stayed Dem for the most part. You can see the deals going on now in fact.

The Dems said they were for the “working man”. But almost everything they do screws the “working man”. What they are for is Big Government. And they have effectively labeled the Republicans’ affinity for Free Markets as being “for the rich” when in reality less regulations (Free Markets) makes for more competition which the Rich do not want. The Rich much prefer to be protected from competition with regulations that are too expensive for smaller competitors to remain in business.
In reality, the bigger the Government gets, the more money gets sucked into that bottomless pit and wasted. That definitely does not help the working man whose labor pays for the largess.
Who do the Super Rich prefer?
http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2008/10/13/the-rich-support-mccain-the-super-rich-support-obama/

yes sir i heard that allso when i was a kid,but when i became a tean i found it to be the other way around,so there for iam not a dem or rep, i dont vote for any one in office, you cant win.

Many of the union members in the NE do vote a straight ticket as they are told by their leaders. Most minority groups also vote as per orders. I’ve voted a straight ticket once – when the other party didn’t have a single good person running. Most here in the South vote a mixed ticket.

I forgot to add from the common man on the street.

Seems to me that it was only property owners who could vote. It’s still not a bad way of going…

For sure, the people who pay no income taxes should not be allowed to vote how our money is going to be spent.

Robin, common sense used to be and should always be the ‘gold standard’ in reaching decisions. When lawyers, political parties, a warped Congress and the ACLU team up to view pc as a universal religion and reset priorities, common sense gets tossed out the door like a bag of old trash.
That should help explain America’s two major political parties, the current denizens of the White House, Congress, Eric Holder and the ACLU, and put America’s ‘mental asylum’ in a clearer light.

SC you had said it so well

It is a better thing to have the (gun) and not need it, than to need it and not have it.

And it’s better to be judged by 12, than to be carried by 6.

Independant T, As used here “apprehended” is a secondary meaning of the verb “apprehend,” it means a “perceived danger.” Perceived means an “at hand” present danger as opposed to some possible future danger. If one had to prove his danger was ‘at hand’ before being allowed to purchase a firearm, he probably would have been killed or harmed before he got to the gun store. Hence the silliness of the requirement.

The 2nd Amendment is our Liberty Teeth. The only thing that we have to fight back with and the government knows this. This is probably the main reason they would love to disarm us. What is it that they fear about us remaining armed???

If we remain armed, they can’t do what they would really like to do – make slaves of us all. So the guns MUST go.

Let ‘em try that one, and see where it gets them.

They are already stepping all over our freedom. Can you imagine what they would do to us if we were disarmed?

I’m embarressed to say I joined the NRA some years ago and the organization has moved to the obama side after they made a deal with him.Charlston Heston is turning over in his grave.I have since relinquished my membership.

Join GOA (Gun Owners of America):
http://gunowners.org/

Get ready for the day. Arm yourself now. Guns with a lot of ammunitions. Knifes,bows and arrows,rocks. Train everybody in your
family, children, grandchildrens,grandparents males and females.No choice freedom or detentions camps? Sacrifice,sacrifice. I go without
food to be able to get more ammunitions. I prefer freedoom than having a ful stomach. DON`T BE TOO SOFT WITH YOURSELF IF YOU DO YOU WILL BE A LOSER. BE STRONG AND BE A GOOD COURAGE. DON`T BE AFRAID OF
THEIRS FACES.DON`T BE AFRAID OF MEN=DEVIL. Be like King David who was afraid of God. King Saul was afraid of men.God can do more to us than
the Whole world. http://www.obamacrimes.com/ Impeach marxist Obama now.

Al, As long as we have Marxists in government we will be constantly fighting for our Constitutional rights, my friend!

But you don’t understand! The only “right” you have is the right to obey when they tell you what to do.

They always seem to get hung up on the militia part while having absolutely no idea what it actualy refers to.

A while back my daughter and son-in-law took me to a historic site in North Carolina(Fort Dobbs). I learned something quite interesting and it dealt with the militia. The regular army in those days were the British (This is French & Indian War times), They got paid as they should have. The Proventials came from nearby communities and were made up of Americans. They got paid if there was money in the ’till.’ The militia were strictly voluntary, and these folks didn’t get paid. So people today that equate the militia with the National Guard are completely off base. The National Guard most likely was more equivalant to the Provintials.
I am in the militia according the the Constitution.

It is as 45caliber says, they know what the 2 A. says, and what the militia clause is about, but they do not admit it. The ACLU is ***STILL*** trying to maintain the “collective right” interpretation of the 2A., even after it was so totally demolished in Heller, and again in McDonald. That “interpretation” of 2 A. is a pile of rubble.

I came across one of these rationalizers who claimed the Founding Fathers said – right in the second amendment – they wanted “well-regulated guns”. He could not explain how the phrase “well regulated “ (meaning “properly functioning” in 1776) did not modify the word “militia”, but traveled through both space and time to become a “well-regulated” ( in the modern sense of ‘lots of rules and regulations’) “right of the People to keep and bear arms”.

There is no limit to their excess. The will “put language and logic on the rack” and stretch it and twist it until it comes out the way they wish it was.

They understand what it says as well as you do. But they don’t trust you – or anyone else except them – with a gun. So their entire rigamaroll is to come up with a way to deprive you of your gun despite what it says. So far the conservatives on the SCOTUS have agreed that they don’t have that right, but they are trying hard. And too many judges including four on the SC are willing to let them.

The RIGHT OF FREE PEOPLE is the phrase they will be attacking next,freedom,which we will Not have soon if we don’t fight back in November and vote this administration out of office.

The left reads into the Constitution what they wants to read. For example, they read “freedom of religion” as “freedom from religion”. I understand that there are altered versions of the U. S. Constitution being distributed around the country. One version has added the “separation of church and state” clause to the first amendment that has only ever appeared in the constitution of the USSR, which is defended by the ACLU and which is why I believe they are distributing some of these altered constitutions. The left considers the Constitution to be an illegal document and I’ve been waiting for some years now for some idiot activist judge to declare that the U. S. Constitution is unconstitutional.

I do know of people who have been arrested and jailed for teaching what your rights are in the Constitution.

Lev,
You were correct with your second presumtion. The Liberals know damn well what the 2nd Amendment says. They don’t care. They want the guns out of our hands because they want complete control of us and they can’t have that with an armed population.

Lev, Well said! I would correct your quote, though, by changing “a free” to “the,” and before government I would add “federal.” State constitutions have similar restrictions placed upon them, but the Bill of Rights are restrictions on the federal government.

Define valid reason.