Untrue. Lot's of recoil and disorienting noise. Ronstar, you need to read up on modern offerings in the world of .223 and 5.56 ammunition.
Still untrue. A 12ga. shotgun loaded with birdshot even if properly placed tightly against the shoulder has considerable felt recoil. That recoil in magnified many times over if the stock is without a recoil pad or held loosely by the shooter. Those that think the removal of a buttstock and replacement with a pistol grip are in for a even greater surprise.
You are debating someone who an very anti-gun, particularly against poor people having guns and especially poor black people, who generally gets facts exactly wrong about firearms. It is simply a matter of how much powder and the total weight of the shot. With the same amount of powder and same total weight of the shot, the recoil will be identical. Rather simplistic to understand. But simple science is difficult for some people when lost in ideological dogma. In practice, pre-loaded bird shot shells sold have less powder and less total shot weight than buck shot. That is the only practical reason for any difference in recoil.
I understand. I am in the firearms business. I struggle with misinformation being put out as fact. Topics like this invite the under-informed and trolls of which there is no shortage..
wow, race baiting a thread about home defense? that's really pathetic bro and btw, I am a gun owner and NOT "anti-gun"
Not always. There is a great variety of birdshot, from light recoiling trap or dove loads, to heavy recoiling pheasant or waterfowl loads. To put it in old-fashioned terms, birdshot can be high brass or low brass. In the old days of paper shells with brass bases (different from our current plastic shells with brass bases), hot loaded birdshot was loaded in cartridges that had the brass come up the sides of the paper higher. This was because it was burning more powder. Light loaded birdshot was loaded in cartridges that had the brass come up low on the sides of the paper. They still pretty much do that, but it's not necessary.
The following video demonstrates that a common nine millimeter handgun round of ammunition will penetrate ten sheets of drywall. Thus meaning a handgun is no less likely to cause collateral damage if the intruder is missed, than a rifle. Under such facts, there is little reason to not go with the superior platform, since the risk is the exact same.
The AR has never been used in any military. As for the rest of your statement, I can say the same thing about fire extinguishers and car insurance. It's the same thing.
Home loaded .300 blackout rounds through a pistol variant Build I brewed together with a buddy. Only used about 1/2 of the total recommended grain and could easily be adapted to a carbine. It's really more of a fun time gun now. I went back to the Polytech legend, some thing's you just feel more comfortable with.
Depending on if it's low-brass (lover velocity) or high-brass (velocity) birdshot and the amount of shot the shell contains. A high-brass 1 oz birdshot will have the exact same recoil as a high-brass 1 oz buckshot (basic physics). Now, yes, it is easier to find low-brass birdshot than low-brass buckshot, but physics is physics.
