![]() ![]() Section 5: Shotguns Subject: Maverick HS-12 Shotgun Msg# 826887
|
||||||
your additional comments does illuminate your opinion. I can absolutely see and agree with your concern over the o/u vs. the s/s. the reload is an issue, no way around that. it is an issue with the pump, semi, or the double, especially more so to the beginner. this is aggravated in low light, high pressure, middle of the night scenarios and is another mark in favor of a larger capacity firearm.
while i still believe a double, sxs, is more instintive to handle and shoot to a beginner, that point might be moot as the double cannot be had cheaply. i should have been more clear that this and my argument in general only plays if the gun can be had for $300 or less, as I assume a beginner wont enter the defensive shotgun market with $600 to spend. if your in need of a defensive shotgun for less that $300 there really is only the pump, so my argument is probably theoritical. |
||||||
|
||||||
For reference, the above message is a reply to a message where: Let me try to address your problems with my comments. First, I was reviewing the Mossberg over-under here, and I had no intention of strictly damning all doubles. I think a side by side is a better option than an OU, and I think a lack of ejectors (not extractors as you mentioned, if the Firing Line review is to be believed--TJ didn't address this in his review) takes this particular shotgun out of the game. It seems you spent the majority of your reply reminding me that the double gun was traditional, had been used for self-defense forever, etc., but that wasn't what I was objecting to primarily. I was objecting to an OU, which is more difficult to sight, and is normally less well-regulated, than a side by side, I believe, with no ejectors. You said that the pump action or semi-auto is going to be more difficult for the beginner or non-gun person. A shotgun without ejectors is going to be more problematic yet. Teaching someone to use a pump is going to be much faster and easier than teaching someone to quickly and easily eject two spent shells manually then reload two fresh shells and get back into action. Which leads me to what was probably an unfortunate choice of words on my part--better technology. I should have explained what I meant or used another term. All I meant was that there seems to be no convincing reason to use a two-shooter when you can use a repeater that holds 5-6-7-8 or more rounds without reloading. If we are truly concerned about a shotgun for a beginner or non-gunny individual, then reloading under stress has to be something to consider--they are going to be very poor at accomplishing that task. I won't change my opinion here. A double is not my primary choice for anyone. If someone insists on a double it should be a modern gun with ejectors. The incredible popularity of cowboy action shooting has flooded the market with doubles sans ejectors so the prospective buyer must shop carefully for his self-defense double. And in my opinion, if he is going to spend several hundred dollars for a gimmicky shotgun like the Mossberg Maverick HS-12 OU, he would be smarter to spend the same kind of money on a plain jane 12g pump with a brass bead and a 18.5" cylinder bore barrel. Then he should purchase a case of #7 1/2 birdshot or larger if so inclined, and at least a brick of self-defense ammo. The birdshot is for acclimation and to learn to shoot the pump gun without short-stroking it, the only real issue with a pump. The self-defense ammo is for patterning at various ranges based on measured distances within his own home, the remaining stash for use in the gun and occasional refresher practice. You, Troy, are not a beginner. Use what works for you, but don't transfer your expertise to a beginner because he won't have it. While you can handle the double gun with ease, you shouldn't assume a beginner can as well. And as for your own situation, I only have one comment but it is very important in my mind and I hope you take it to heart. I really believe that anyone who thinks they can analyze the situation--the attack, the home invasion, whatever it is--on the fly, and pick and choose his weaponry based on the feedback he's getting, is mistaken. These events evolve more quickly than we can imagine, far more quickly than we picture them based on what we've read in fiction or seen in movies, where people have time to go to their arms lockers, where the good guys have time to analyze the attack and make plans to respond. If one doesn't have the weapons, the ammunition, and a plan ready the moment something happens, he's not going to have time to get it later. If you start fighting with a particular weapon, the only way you'll get another is to fight your way to it using the weapon you have in your hands--and that is something you should not count on being able to do. That's my piece. For what it's worth. |