Protecta

[corriedewilde]

I differ from you guys. If you want to do clay target get a double, and they handle well and point naturally. Most of them are reasonably finished with the weight distribution between your hands.

You can use a pump to hunt pigs with slugs, but it is worth little for wing shooting. Compared with a double they are in no way elegant with rough factory fitting and zero style, therefore they have no ivestment value. With a pistolgrip and 18" barrel it can be used for home defense.

But none of the above can beat a Striker or Protecta for home defense. I can hit man size targets every time with it at 20m from the hip. Ever tried to turn around in a hallway with a proper shotgun after you used it in one direction or try handling it in a vehicle?

They are ugly and nobody will never be mistaken them for investments. So do not try to compare it with a English shotgun. But it is very cleverly designed with a clockwork action and are really effective tools for close defence. If an attacker is further than 10m there is technically no attack and no reason to defend yourself. If you can not solve the security problem with three shots, you probably not going to.

The CFR sees the Protecta as a semi-auto so it is very difficult to license.

[Davidc]

The CFR sees the Protecta as a semi-auto so it is very difficult to license.

Why would the CFR see them as semi auto? Unless you have one of the original design that you wind up like a clock and fires and loads semi auto? That was the reason for the redesign so that it could be licenced as a manually operated shotgun.

[Porramedic]

I can hit man size targets every time with it at 20m from the hip.

The CFR sees the Protecta as a semi-auto...

Ummm. No

Ever tried to turn around in a hallway with a proper shotgun after you used it in one direction or try handling it in a vehicle?

No problem with this

[BigT]

Shot this is like an episode of mythbusters.

You can hit from the hip everytime at 20m? Every pellet? As you stop into position? While moving? On a moving target?

Past 10m it's not an attack? Oh shit look I'm taking fire but he's 12m away best I holster up cos it ain't an attack. What are you talking about?

If you are going to solve it in three shots your not going to solve it? BOLLOCKS. Ive come across some problems that required more than three shots. Plus why then push a 12 shot shotgun over a 3-5 shot one if you only need three? Misses happen and some people take more than one shot even with a shotgun. Home invasions have on average four orcs. The maths doesn't add up.

By the look of your location your next post needs to be in the fair disclosure thread.

[ikor]

Mucho WTF in the above post!
1236090210351yx1.jpg

[farmer-el]

The CFR sees the Protecta as a semi-auto so it is very difficult to license.

On his website it states... "Due to the difficulties in licensing a self loading shotgun in the RSA, the design was changed to a twist grip action and the Protecta was born" and... "The lock work now functioned mechanically and not self loading anymore. "

Wierd?!?!?

[corriedewilde]

On his website it states... "Due to the difficulties in licensing a self loading shotgun in the RSA, the design was changed to a twist grip action and the Protecta was born" and... "The lock work now functioned mechanically and not self loading anymore. "

Wierd?!?!?

The factory changed the Strikers (where you just pull the trigger(semi-auto) mechanism so that you have to twist the forward grip to set the mechanism for the next trigger pull. Much like the slide on a pump action, only a spring does the work after the twist. Technically the Protecta is not a semi-auto as you have to cock it between shots. But for some unknown reason the CFR treat it as a semi and this will probably stay like that until somebody take them to court. I was not handicapped by this as I am classed as a cat B collector which is good for semi-auto rifles and I have both of the models. My shotguns (and handguns) are selected according to the differing mechanisms.

No I am no wizard, any practical pistol shooter can hit a moving (walking) man by instinctive shooting (looking over the sights not using them) at 10 m. Similarly it can be done with the Protecta, easier really, with say 50 pellet spread over 600mm from a 12" barrel.(1200mm at 20m) One pellet is a hit, do you think a clay target shooter hits the 'bird with all the pellets'.

If 1 or 2 attackers approach you they will believe they are the intimidators, if you start shooting in defense they will die or leave in a hurry. In the last ten years gangs of say six attackers would clamp down while you have a barbeque. Not even a champ practical pistol shooter can take out six enemy out before he gets hurt. You can decide it is bollocks but nobody will outdraw a guy with a gun already aimed at him. So I repeat my statement, If you can not solve the problem in three shots, you are not going to. The modern crook will not easily give you the oppertunity to empty you magazine and start again with the next.

The law states there must a ongoing attack for you to legally be able to defend yourself with a firearm. If you are a factory owner and the months wages is taken from you at gunpoint. Then the robber turn around and walk away, you now can not shoot him, the attack is over. If you do and one bullet entry is in his back you can not prove that you were under attack when you used your firearm. At a distance say more than 10 m away, he will have to have an assault rifle before you will be able to prove life-threatening danger.

[BigT]

I will bear that in mind if I'm ever attacked by a clay pigeon. One pellet may break a clay but we don't rely on that to stop a person. We need all the pellets to hit so as to stop the attacker and so as to reduce the risk to innocents from stray pellets.

What self defence shell contains 50 pellets? IIRC AAA which is already smaller than recommended for self defence only contains 44. Most as ammo will have 8-15 pellets. All of which must be accounted for.

The two attackers may not decide to run. And sometimes people need a lot of convincing before they die. And if I understand it you plan on giving in if outnumbered. That to me isn't an option.

I repeat I have outdrawn a drawn pistol. It is doable. Defensive technique has come a long way since the 70's.

There are numerous incidence where a shot behind centre midline could be explained.

And many incidence would require shots past 10m. Someone engaging you with a handgun at 100m is a threat never mind 10.

I sugget researching a lot more about the topic and concepts.

---------- Post added at 14:53 ---------- Previous post was at 14:52 ----------

There is no such thing as instinctive shooting.

[Socrates]

No I am no wizard, any practical pistol shooter can hit a moving (Um, no) (walking) man by instinctive shooting (looking over the sights not using them) at 10 m.

If 1 or 2 attackers approach you they will believe they are the intimidators, if you start shooting in defense they will die or leave in a hurry. In the last ten years gangs of say six attackers would clamp down while you have a barbeque. Not even a champ practical pistol shooter can take out six enemy out before he gets hurt. (Its probably because he is not shooting instinctive enought) You can decide it is bollocks but nobody will outdraw a guy with a gun already aimed at him (Scientific test actaully show the opposite). So I repeat my statement, If you can not solve the problem in three shots (Do you have French decendants by any chance?), you are not going to. The modern crook will not easily give you the oppertunity to empty you magazine and start again with the next.

The law states there must a ongoing attack for you to legally be able to defend yourself with a firearm. If you are a factory owner and the months wages is taken from you at gunpoint. Then the robber turn around and walk away, you now can not shoot him, the attack is over. If you do and one bullet entry is in his back you can not prove that you were under attack when you used your firearm. At a distance say more than 10 m away, he will have to have an assault rifle before you will be able to prove life-threatening danger (Un less the attacker is a practical pistol shooter who is an expert at instinctive pistol shooting.

Mate, I'm calling your bluff. You are makeing waaaaaaaay to many assumptions to have any idea what you are talking about. Better read a couple of the threats and get back to us.

[Thorkind]

If you can not solve the problem in three shots, you are not going to.

So what you're saying is when in a fight for your life, if you fire three shots and haven't won the fight yet, you should give up cause you're not going to? Wow.