Yuck... PGOs...

https://www.full30.com/video/6afd3affeea07031b08c3dcb5cfc3604

What the video really illustrates to me is this...A shotgun is a poor home defense choice.

    1.  A shotgun does not provide a significant extra margin of error at close range.  The shot pattern just hasn't spread enough to help.
    2.  A shotgun is not particularly convenient to keep both safe and accessible, compared to a handgun.
    3.  A shotgun is a low-round count gun compared to a modern pistol.

I think the idea for a shotgun as a good home defense gun came from the era when a the shotgun was the general purpose gun.  Growing up in rural Indiana if you could only have one gun, a shotgun made great sense.  You could take all manner of small game with it, including birds and fowl, rabbits and squirrels.  In addition, with buckshot or slugs you could take up to deer sized game, or put down seriously sick or injured livestock.  And it could be used for close quarters defense in the home.  And #7 shot, back then, was an acceptable non-lethal, though very painful, load to discourage a prowler at some distance.  Doing that today would create serious legal issues.

But for a modern city dweller looking for a single gun to be used for home defense the utility of a shotty melts away.  They won't use it to take game at all.  They likely will have dedicated hunting guns if they hunt.  They don't have livestock to put down, and if a pet falls ill or injured they will pay a vet to heal or euthanize.  Such a person needs a small gun that can be kept accessible but safe, is operator friendly, and has a high round count.  Pick a polymer wonder-gun and it fits that bill great.

Back to the OP, I love me some break action shotgun.  In fact, it is the only kind I have.  All mine are currently singles and are family hand-me downs.  I need to add a double, or two or three.  After all, I have 12, 16 and 20 gauge singles, so I oughta have doubles to go with them.

I love polymer wonder guns, and I think the AR-15 is an excellent self defense tool as well.

BUT to argue that a shotgun is a poor home defense choice AND superseded by a pistol is just completely illogical. The only real negatives of the shotgun is recoil and perhaps low round count.

I carry a Glock or M&P everyday, and I have multiple ARs/combat rifles, BUT if something is coming inside and needs to be met with severe violence. I will pick up the 870. The pure lethality of the shotgun to unarmored animals(including man) is only really eclipsed by military level explosive delivery devices.

Choosing a handgun over a long gun when you have a choice is like choosing a steak knife over a sword for a duel. Sure the steak knife is easy to handle and lethal, but the sword just outclasses it for fighting in every aspect.   

Yeah, I'm thinking nine pellets of 00 buckshot arriving on target simultaneously renders the question of "round count" somewhat irrelevant - at least on the receiving end.  If you choose a slug load for defense and connect with your target you've just hit it with an impact that will flatten most anything that walks.  Then there's the fact that with even a modicum of practice a double gun offers the quickest second shot of anything you can pick up.  If you've fired both barrels and still have a threat advancing down the hallway it even makes a passable impact weapon if you don't have time to reload.  ( frankly, if you've hit the target(s) with your first two shots and still have business to attend to you might have bitten off more than you can chew  -  either that or you've stumbled into a horror movie script      )

At any rate, this particular city dweller finds the shotgun to be an inordinately useful tool whether hunting or just investigating things that go bump in the night.   

I think I wasn't clear...

...Choosing a handgun over a long gun when you have a choice is like choosing a steak knife over a sword for a duel....

I agree with this.

If I have the choice, eg the bad actors send my a nicely penned note with the date and time of their arrival, then I will be all set, and a shotgun is a great choice.  Even if they don't send a note, I will have my handgun and will get to a long gun as quickly as I can.

But for the typical non-gun person who reads this thread and feels validated that they are prepared to defend their home cause they bought a nice Remy 870 5 years ago, this is wrong.  The reality is that gun had a lock put on it to keep it "safe" and may or may not know where the key is. 

That person would be far better off if their one gun was a handgun in a $100 biometric safe.  Actually, they would probably be better off not having a gun as they aren't staying current on how to use it. But, if they want to have a gun, a handgun in a biometric safe is more likely to be accessible and usable to the lay person than a shotgun.  If that person chose a shotgun, then they have effectively chose to have no gun when they actually need it.

I think I wasn't clear...

I agree with this.

If I have the choice, eg the bad actors send my a nicely penned note with the date and time of their arrival, then I will be all set, and a shotgun is a great choice.  Even if they don't send a note, I will have my handgun and will get to a long gun as quickly as I can.

But for the typical non-gun person who reads this thread and feels validated that they are prepared to defend their home cause they bought a nice Remy 870 5 years ago, this is wrong.  The reality is that gun had a lock put on it to keep it "safe" and may or may not know where the key is. 

That person would be far better off if their one gun was a handgun in a $100 biometric safe.  Actually, they would probably be better off not having a gun as they aren't staying current on how to use it. But, if they want to have a gun, a handgun in a biometric safe is more likely to be accessible and usable to the lay person than a shotgun.  If that person chose a shotgun, then they have effectively chose to have no gun when they actually need it.

Ok, now I see what you are saying. I know an individual like this. They keep a can of wasp spray and a pump action shotgun (with bird shot) by the bed with an empty chamber.... While not knowing under ideal conditions where the pump unlock button on the gun is  .

Simple solution, so that we do not go about this in wrong headed fashion. Get training and educate yourself. If someone is not fit to responsibly use a device that has the potential to take life, then do not use it.  Let's up the quality of the wielder, not down grade the standards which we measure safe or appropriate firearm usage.

Regardless of platform, the 4 rules should always be in play anyways. It still remains the general consensus, however, that the shotgun is the finest implement for stopping someone up close. Just because the device is not effective in a few untrained individuals hands, says more about the individuals in question, and less about the device itself.

Simple solution, so that we do not go about this in wrong headed fashion. Get training and educate yourself. If someone is not fit to responsibly use a device that has the potential to take life, then do not use it.  Let's up the quality of the wielder, not down grade the standards which we measure safe or appropriate firearm usage.

Regardless of platform, the 4 rules should always be in play anyways. It still remains the general consensus, however, that the shotgun is the finest implement for stopping someone up close. Just because the device is not effective in a few untrained individuals hands, says more about the individuals in question, and less about the device itself.

Completely agree with this.  I NEVER said the shotgun was not the ideal implement for stopping someone up close.  And I never said a handgun was better at that single task.

This is what I am saying:

In modern urban culture a shotgun is not the best multi-purpose defensive gun if it is the only gun you are going to own.

How are you going to manage a shotgun while dialing the 911 operator on the cell phone? 
What if you need to retreat in tight spaces due to a miss or malfunction?
What if the confines of the area dictate a need to fire one-handed?

The big assumed advantages of the shotgun are:
   1. intimidation (accepted)
   2. power (partially accepted, but potentially compromised if tight spaces and one handed operation make it harder to get hits)
   3. That it is forgiving in terms of accuracy (not accepted as pattern sizes are not large enough at home defense ranges to turn a miss into a hit).

I think a strong case can be made that a handgun, for the modern, urban, one-gun owner is a better defensive pick than a shotgun.  And way better than a rifle.

In modern urban culture a shotgun is not the best multi-purpose defensive gun if it is the only gun you are going to own.

Correct, but only because only owning a shotgun means that there is no way to CCW it.   

  2. power (partially accepted, but potentially compromised if tight spaces and one handed operation make it harder to get hits)
   3. That it is forgiving in terms of accuracy (not accepted as pattern sizes are not large enough at home defense ranges to turn a miss into a hit).

These both fall flat.  Purposely ignoring the factor of power for a moment, the reason a long gun (rifle, shotgun, or PCC) is more effective that a handgun, is a long gun is easier to shoot.  Hand even an unskilled shooter a long gun, and 'Point/Aim' and 'Shoot' come pretty naturally.  Almost intuitively.  A handgun is much harder to learn, let alone master.  As well, with the long gun's four points of contact, keeping it steady on target is going to be much easier than a handgun during a high-stress home defense scenario.

Without quoting and breaking down your post, I now see where we diverge.  You are assuming that the 'one gun' owner is going to be likely to carry - I do not.  You assume that if they do carry, they will be situationally aware - I do not.  You assume that even if they do carry regularly, that they will continue to do so while at home - I sure as hell doubt that. 

We who carry are an interesting sort - we take this whole 'self protection' thing to a different level.  We live it, and make it a part, if not the part of our lives.  If a one-gun shooter is going to be limited to one gun, and he is actually going to behave as you are assuming...  Then yes, he is truly better served with a handgun.  But so very few will behave that way.  Of those that do, a high percentage will soon realize that they will be better served with a long gun as well, and will then cease to be a one-gun owner. 

To sum up my opinion, that whole "Beware the man with one gun..." saying is crock.  Men with one gun are the types who buy it and stick it in the drawer to 'keep them safe.'  Aware and prepared gun owners are the ones who own a gun for each scenario.

The premise that this buyer only has one defensive gun factors heavily into my reasoning.  Careful...you are getting it! 

Need a gun for a car for some reason, or decide that since constitutional carry just happened and you wanna try that new restaurant on the wrong side of town, and all you have is a shotgun.  Thats a real issue.

Challenge

Put it on the timer.  Run three targets with a shotgun on a timer with your cell phone to your ear.  No hands free, no cheating with a headband to hold it there.  Hold it with your weak hand or by scrunching your shoulder up to your ear.

Then run three targets with a handgun of your choice, same way.

I know.  Drop the phone when it is time to shoot.  Except we won't. 

Like detectives in the past who died recovering spent brass cause in training they picked it up, the typical suburbanite is not going to remember to drop the phone when the shooting starts.  They will do what we all do when we have to multi-task on the phone.  Scrunch their head over and try to do the task in that position.  A position that is more easily adapted to a handgun than a shotgun.

I know I am bucking the conventional wisdom here.  But when I sit in church on Sunday and look around the room at my average upper middle class neighbors and ponder this question, I come to this conclusion.  The average person in that room who buys a shotgun for home defense and needs it will die unarmed.  The ones who buy a handgun may still die, but more of them would die armed, and some may get a shot or two off.

And then I  have a wave of pity for the poor drug addled fool that goes to nukmed's house and gets handgun, shotgun, rifle fire.  And perhaps some cannon fire. 

I gotta go install a sink in a laundry room or there will be an offensive shooting at my house in the next 24 hours.

Your scenario is too fictitious to play with.  Under no circumstances will I be hanging onto a phone in the middle of a gunfight.  Is this supposed to challenge shooting skills or phone skills?   Or are you trying to artificially prove that a one handed weapon is better than a two handed weapon when you are trying to juggle a high priority task with a low priority task?
Look at a Pilot's Task List:  1. Aviation. 2. Navigation. 3. Communication.
Talking is the last of the priorities when Flying.
And you want to argue that it's tied with #1?
Come on.

And then I  have a wave of pity for the poor drug addled fool that goes to nukmed's house and gets handgun, shotgun, rifle fire.  And perhaps some cannon fire. 

You assume that they will ever make it past the claymores and that my flamethrower is out of juice. 

It's ok, yes honestly - it's ok!  That is, as long as everyone agrees that classic side by side doubles have exquisite lines, wonderful balance and with instant choke selection are bird guns without reproach!

We now return to our regularly scheduled thread drift!   

Disagree strongly.   There is nothing better for Home Defense than a shotgun.  Nothing.  Save for a good big dog,  a Shotgun and a cutlass.

FIFY

There is always room for sharpened steel.

I disagree. 

The over/under is better in all measures than the side by side. It has all the positives of the side by side AND has both barrels in the same vertical sight picture. The slimmer vertical profile also makes the foregrip conducive to proper handling in the swing.

The O/U may be better, but I find myself using the S/S doubles a lot more for wingshooting that the O/Us.  Lighter, better balanced, and faster handling.  The Ruger Red Label is H**l for stout, and you can't break one with a hammer. (Someone was using the 20 ga. frame to make double rifles, up to .470 caliber) but they will never match the S/S doubles for handling qualities.