Mossberg Shotguns?

[LegumeOfTerror]

IMO
Remington 870 > any Mossberg
But to each his own.

I wouldn't use a pump gun for Home Def though I have my Rem. 1100 rigged with a light and ambidexterous extended bolt pin (it has a larger surface to make it easier to clear the breach with the left hand from the firing position.) it points well and i can put more rounds consistently on target in a shorter period of time. not to mention blind-firing or line of sight shooting is easier when you dont have to jack the forearm after each shot and I can shoot it off handed, one handed or from the hip.

i hate the 870's elevator, which is why i went with the mossberg. the 870 has a little nicer fit and finish, but both guns will outlive your grandkids.

[JesseB]

i hate the 870's elevator, which is why i went with the mossberg. the 870 has a little nicer fit and finish, but both guns will outlive your grandkids.

Yeah and I hate the mossberg's safety. it's just not intuitive to me.
They are sturdy guns though I wouldn't hate on someone if that was their weapon of choice.

[Target Practice]

[kosmo]

Pfft, 1100s are weaksauce.

[CoolHand]

IMO
Remington 870 > any Mossberg

Indeed.

I have an 870 with 00 Buck in it that lives in a corner for instances when the SHTF.

I also have a Mossberg 500 that is several years old.

Both are excellent shotguns, but my Mossberg only has a two round tube. The 870 has a six round tube.

Oh lord, will the idiotic videos of unsafe shooting ever, ever end? We gun owners are practically begging to have our rights taken away...

Doesn't look particularly dangerous to me. Not everyone in the world has to go to a "range" to shoot. If you live out in the sticks where there are hills and no people for a mile in every direction, there's not a reason in the world you can't walk out your back door and touch off a magazine.

It's not the gunowners that we have to worry about, it's the busybodies who want to mind everybody's business but their own.

Go shoot your pistols and have fun. If somebody damages themselves, you can point and laugh.

[Destructo6]

I own a Mossberg 590A1 with a Knoxx stock on it and use a 14" barreled Remington 870 with a pistol grip buttstock at work. The 590 has a 9 shot magazine and the 870 is 5. Both have ghost ring sights.

And both are pretty nice.

For use with a pistol grip, the safety and action release bar are placed better on the 870. For a regular stock, the Mossberg's controls are better placed.

With slugs, I can make a 5-shot cloverleaf with the 870 at 25meters. I haven't tried it with the 590.

[Steelrat]

Doesn't look particularly dangerous to me. Not everyone in the world has to go to a "range" to shoot. If you live out in the sticks where there are hills and no people for a mile in every direction, there's not a reason in the world you can't walk out your back door and touch off a magazine.

It's not the gunowners that we have to worry about, it's the busybodies who want to mind everybody's business but their own.

Go shoot your pistols and have fun. If somebody damages themselves, you can point and laugh.

Eyes and ears. And it is my business to maintain my right to own firearms. We ALL need to work to maintain OUR collective image as gun owners.

And sorry, when something is put on a forum, it becomes fodder for discussion. That hardly makes anyone a "busybody."

[CoolHand]

Eyes and ears. And it is my business to maintain my right to own firearms. We ALL need to work to maintain OUR collective image as gun owners.

And sorry, when something is put on a forum, it becomes fodder for discussion. That hardly makes anyone a "busybody."

I actually didn't mean that you were a busybody, but it's interesting that you took it as such. Freudian slip perhaps?

BTW, if you think that someone shooting without eye and ear protection is "dangerous" and is going to somehow allow a portion of the constitution to be overturned (a bit, I might add, which was recently upheld by a majority of stuffy old people in robes), you are a busybody.

It's not real bright, but stupidity is not a crime. Them deadening their own senses does no one else harm, just like someone shooting a PB gun without goggles on does no one harm (not even themselves).

Now, shooting at someone who's not wearing goggles is a big problem, as is being shot at by someone when you're not wearing goggles.

Go enjoy your hobby, and leave the rest of us to enjoy ours as we see fit. If it's not illegal and not directly endangering you or any bystanders, it's none of your business, end of story.

If you want to be the model of safety, that's fine, you are quite free to do so, but that doesn't give you the right to chase other people around and force them to do as you see fit.

I know freedom is an alien concept to a lot of folks these days, but part and parcel of embracing your own freedom is not infringing on your fellow man's. If the man ain't causing you or anyone else harm (and not in some esoteric "he does the whole sport a disservice" kind of way, but in an actual factual, physical or tangible harm manner), leave him be to do as he pleases.

You'll get used to it eventually.

[Steelrat]

I actually didn't mean that you were a busybody, but it's interesting that you took it as such. Freudian slip perhaps?

BTW, if you think that someone shooting without eye and ear protection is "dangerous" and is going to somehow allow a portion of the constitution to be overturned (a bit, I might add, which was recently upheld by a majority of stuffy old people in robes), you are a busybody.

It's not real bright, but stupidity is not a crime. Them deadening their own senses does no one else harm, just like someone shooting a PB gun without goggles on does no one harm (not even themselves).

Now, shooting at someone who's not wearing goggles is a big problem, as is being shot at by someone when you're not wearing goggles.

Go enjoy your hobby, and leave the rest of us to enjoy ours as we see fit. If it's not illegal and not directly endangering you or any bystanders, it's none of your business, end of story.

If you want to be the model of safety, that's fine, you are quite free to do so, but that doesn't give you the right to chase other people around and force them to do as you see fit.

I know freedom is an alien concept to a lot of folks these days, but part and parcel of embracing your own freedom is not infringing on your fellow man's. If the man ain't causing you or anyone else harm (and not in some esoteric "he does the whole sport a disservice" kind of way, but in an actual factual, physical or tangible harm manner), leave him be to do as he pleases.

You'll get used to it eventually.

Don't be sly, I know that busybody bit was lobbed my way.

Look, you want to go shoot away without eye protection, ear protection, or anything else, blaze away. But when a video is posted on a forum (like this) I'm going to comment on it. As strongly as you feel about calling out "busybodies," I feel equally strong about calling out unsafe shooting habits.

I never chased anyone around, and I never forced anyone to do as I see fit. You're manufacturing actions and ascribing them to me. I merely offered my opinion. If the offering of opinions that run contrary to yours upsets you so greatly, then posting on the internet might not be such a good idea.

And yes, I feel that our rights as gun owners is hanging by a thread. If you think that one decision by the Supreme Court allows us to rest on our laurels, you're sadly mistaken. I think it is important that we put forward the best image in order to ensure the future of our sport. Jumping off the back of a truck and blasting away with a magazine-fed semiautomatic shotgun in an area that doesn't appear to be a range, with no safety gear on, is just the sort of thing that those who want to restrict our rights love to see. If you love giving them ammunition, then go for it. I'd rather we remove any arguments they have before they even get the chance.

[CoolHand]

Don't be sly, I know that busybody bit was lobbed my way.

Look, you want to go shoot away without eye protection, ear protection, or anything else, blaze away. But when a video is posted on a forum (like this) I'm going to comment on it. As strongly as you feel about calling out "busybodies," I feel equally strong about calling out unsafe shooting habits.

I never chased anyone around, and I never forced anyone to do as I see fit. You're manufacturing actions and ascribing them to me. I merely offered my opinion. If the offering of opinions that run contrary to yours upsets you so greatly, then posting on the internet might not be such a good idea.

And yes, I feel that our rights as gun owners is hanging by a thread. If you think that one decision by the Supreme Court allows us to rest on our laurels, you're sadly mistaken. I think it is important that we put forward the best image in order to ensure the future of our sport. Jumping off the back of a truck and blasting away with a magazine-fed semiautomatic shotgun in an area that doesn't appear to be a range, with no safety gear on, is just the sort of thing that those who want to restrict our rights love to see. If you love giving them ammunition, then go for it. I'd rather we remove any arguments they have before they even get the chance.

I really didn't originally aim that busybody comment at you, but you swung right in and fulfilled the role admirably, so I ran with it. Believe it or not, but there it is. If you're so sensitive that being called a busybody bothers you, perhaps posting on the internet is not such a good idea.

You can do as you please, and refrain from taking any action that someone else may not like, but IMO it's pointless to posses a liberty and not exercise it in the manner you wish, simply because people who already dislike you (and this thing you do) may dislike you for doing so.

It's like not racing cars on your property for fear that the noise would prompt ordinances to be made, which would prevent you from racing cars on your property.

In other words, if I must follow the limitations set out by other people, for fear of them enacting limitations, I might as well not have the right at all.

You can have whatever opinion you like about the issue, but by that same token, I can have the opinion that your thinking on the matter is flawed.

[Steelrat]

I really didn't originally aim that busybody comment at you, but you swung right in and fulfilled the role admirably, so I ran with it. Believe it or not, but there it is. If you're so sensitive that being called a busybody bothers you, perhaps posting on the internet is not such a good idea.

You really don't expect anyone to believe that, do you?

You can do as you please, and refrain from taking any action that someone else may not like, but IMO it's pointless to posses a liberty and not exercise it in the manner you wish, simply because people who already dislike you (and this thing you do) may dislike you for doing so.

It's like not racing cars on your property for fear that the noise would prompt ordinances to be made, which would prevent you from racing cars on your property.

In other words, if I must follow the limitations set out by other people, for fear of them enacting limitations, I might as well not have the right at all.

So it's all or nothing? There is something to be said for responsibly exercising your rights. I'm not talking about following limitations set out by other people, but holding ourselves to our own limitations, in the interest of protecting our rights. Just because we CAN do something idiotic doesn't mean we SHOULD do something idiotic. We all know that our rights, as gun owners, have been under fire for quite some time now. Even though we can, as you point out, go out an exercise it as we wish, shouldn't we take some time to consider how our actions might impact the future of those same rights?

You can have whatever opinion you like about the issue, but by that same token, I can have the opinion that your thinking on the matter is flawed.

Sure you can, but I'd ask that you do it without the name-calling and attitude. We might disagree on this subject, but we are both obvious fans of shooting, supporters of gun rights, and (judging by our presence here) fans of paintball. With us having more in common than not, we should be able to carry on a civil discussion, even when our views are polar opposites.

[CoolHand]

Sure you can, but I'd ask that you do it without the name-calling and attitude. We might disagree on this subject, but we are both obvious fans of shooting, supporters of gun rights, and (judging by our presence here) fans of paintball. With us having more in common than not, we should be able to carry on a civil discussion, even when our views are polar opposites.

Indeed.

I apologize that I offended you.

I just grow tired of having this same discussion over and over again. The players change, but the reasoning never gets any better.

My frustration at being unable to either understand their position or dislodge them from it is beginning to show.

Oh well.

[Steelrat]

Well don't look at it like we're diametrically opposed. We both are supporters of gun rights. We both believe in individual freedoms. We just differ on how we believe we should express those freedoms and rights. If you look at it that way, it's not nearly as frustrating. It's not like you are arguing with an anti-gun nut

[LegumeOfTerror]

so, did you end up buying it billybob? you must post pictures when you do.

[billybob_81067]

so, did you end up buying it billybob? you must post pictures when you do.

Not yet, mentioned it to the boss (wife) 4-5 days ago and she said she'd think it over and I haven't brought it back up since because we've both been super busy with other things. She's coming home for lunch here soon and since I've got it on my mind I'll see what the verdict is.

She actually said she might rather have a handgun instead, but I'll try and get her to agree to the shotgun first and then next time I'll get a handgun.