I think we all understand that the VP can't be pre-scripted. He's a stream of consciousness kind of guy.
His actual point, however well camouflaged, was that anyone can defend their hearth and home without resorting to Squad Automatic Weapons, grenade launchers, and interlocking fields of fire. Some previous contributors to KOS have theorized that anyone using an old fashioned weapon (revolver) would be immediately disadvantaged because any respectably armed criminal would be have a Glock/Berretta which have not only higher rates of fire but also more ammo capacity. That KOS contributor in question postulated that a revolver would fire once in the time it takes a semiauto to fire three rounds. Hmmm. Maybe so.
Forgetting, for the moment, that you may be fighting a running gun-battle in the dystopian streets, the more likely scenario is a home invasion where you, the defender, have the home field advantage and probably were alerted by the noise of the "breaking" part of breaking and entering. Point being, if you keep a home defense weapon you probably have thought about how to use it (assuming you are not unable to respond...in which case ANY weapon is useless), e.g., where to make the "stand" for the most lethal effect upon the intruder (perhaps at the top of a stairwell).
So, there you are with your revolver, not feeling terribly sanguine. That is where Joe's advice comes in...the shot gun. A shotgun with # 1 "Buckshot" contains eleven .30 cal projectiles PER SHELL. Fired from an "skeet" barrel (improved cylinder), those eleven simultaneously fired bullets (think 30.06 or AK47 bullets) would travel 30 feet in a pattern about the size of a basketball...shredding whatever they hit. Thats quicker than firing an 11-round burst, on full auto, from an AK47, because it is instantaneous!! You have at least three, or as many as five, shots before reloading (which is quick and simple to do). Of course, the intruder will not know what armament you have until the first shot. That shot will not be the characteristic "pop" of a handgun. More like an F'ing BOOM. Assuming the intruder is not looking at a bloody stump (or worse), he/she may review the tactical situation and consider alternative courses of action (flee?). Or freeze and be captured by those unreliable police (you did call 911?). Or die ,if you continue firing.
Like pistol and rifle calibers, buckshot can penetrate walls and endanger the people you are trying to protect. If your intention is not to engage the intruder BY shooting through walls, then consider using a smaller shot size like #4, turkey shot. With that shell, you would have the same size shot diameter (basketball) but a much denser pattern (170 x .13 caliber projectiles) which are more than adequate to break bones, etc.
Of course, any home defense weapon should be secured when the adult(s) are not immediately present. Trigger lock with combo, fast and easy to use (by the adult).
All of this can be accomplished without high rate-of-fire weapons or high capacity magazines. I think that is what the VP meant to say. Your thoughts?
Tue Mar 12, 2013 at 11:25 AM PT: Thanks for the discussion. One last note for Patrick C. regarding why people "who do this for a living" fire so many rounds during an engagement. I think Patrick was making the case for large magazines due to the frequent need to fire multi[le rounds. In the following case, two "pros" fired at a single target on a city street.
"New York Police Commissioner Ray Kelly said all nine bystanders wounded in Friday's Empire State Building shooting had been hit with police gunfire, CNN reported Saturday morning."
So, a barrage does not guarantee success.