self defense vs 'tactical'? what are your thoughts?
OK I admit this is a little esoteric and out there and I'm probably in the mood for more of a discussion around the campfire than a nuts and bolts search for any true advice but I wondered if any of you see any difference between an armed citizen wanting to protect him/herself and family vs a police officer or soldier and how that difference can effect their choice of weapons etc?
I guess what I am getting at is I have gotten the impression over the years that manufactures will market a firearm for police use and will boast of all it's 'tactical' advantages and market how it will benifit the officer in performing his role whether it be street patrol, undercover, SWAT etc. Then when the police buy-off on it then it spreads throughout the civilian market.
Same is somewhat true of the military. Look at the rise in popularity of the AR platform and how much the M4 has entered the civilian market.
Now don't get me wrong, I own and enjoy a variety of guns and have a Saiga (AK platform) SKS, have had several wonder-9s over the years and I do have an AR stripped receiver and parts kit - just haven't put it together yet.
But now that I have been making a commitment to carry whenever I leave the house and have a loaded defensive firearm on every level of the house, I am wondering if law enforcement/military "tactical" really applies or is relevant to an armed citizen defending his castle or his person? I am not a police officer apprehending felons or raiding a drug house. I am not a soldier in combat. I am just a common Joe protecting his home, family and self. should armed citizens be following law enforcement/military's lead when it comes to self defense or are our needs better served by a completely different paradigm?
Do I need an M4 or tactical this or that to defend my home and castle or it is even wise to do so?? I have the feeling that in reality more home invasions have been stopped and more muggings and rapes and assaults have been prevented with harsh language and pissed off demeanor than everything else combined (not that I want to bank on that or have that as my only option)
Case in point, I am soon to inherit my father's 50+ year old Colt Detective Special. I am planning on teaching my wife to shoot it (she does like to shoot) and putting it into service as one of the home defense guns. Will it really be any less effective as a castle defender than a high-cap Glock?
Does someone really need to get an M4 when they have Grandpa's old lever action 30-30? Is a 'tactical' shotgun with all the rails and gizmos really more effective and practical than a New England Firearms break-open single shot that you can buy at pawn shops all day long for $100? Is it??
Again, I am just wanting to hear your thoughts and musings on armed citizen self defense vs 'tactical.' are they different? are they the same? are they similar or on completely different planes of reality?
What say you?