Home Defense--use #7 Bird.

This is NOT from me. This is from a guy who really knew his stuff. I came up to him demanding buckshot for defense. He told me to use #7 bird.

Frankly, anybody who says that (insert your favorite "underpowered" round here) does nothing needs to demonstrate it with live ammo. His reasoning was pretty simple. Bird shot will decimate a large portion of flesh. It will not have penetration problems. It will kick less (actually, the same guy recommended a 2 3/4 load over a 3 1/2 load).

At that point, I even considered a 20 guage. I just figured to go with 12 guage to get ammo easier.

People need to think with their head, not their ego. Everyone needs to talk to the guy I talked to. You .45'ers, I'm talking to you :D :D :D .

Thank you, but I'll stick with my 00 Buck.

OK. Imagine you are an organ in a thug's body. Would you liked to be obliterated, or have holes poked in you?

The large holes may miss the important stuff. Being blown apart will not.

Your reasoning and colloquial evidence is less than compelling.

It's not my reasoning. The guy looked pretty sharp--didn't belong in the box-store.

The choke won't allow more dispersion beyond the 4 inches. However, you are far more likely to get all 4 inches turned into hamburger. Get a higher velocity load if you want.

The fact remains that there are no shotgun self-defense rounds. We have no equivalent of the hollow-point. I actually ended up with #7 steel 12 guage, 2 3/4. He said it would do the job. I believe him.

Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't feel at all undergunned with #7 1/2 shot at close range, and I'd feel bad for the guy getting shot with it. However, I still believe 00 or 000 Buck is a better choice.

Bootganger,

Please read http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/173_11_041200/herdson/herdson.html .

Use whatever you prefer to load your defensive shotgun, for whatever reasons, based on the advice of whatever expert you choose to listen to and accept advice from. I am no expert, by the way.

Please note that with ANY firearm, you and your projectile(s) must accomplish two tasks- 1) placement, and 2) penetration. You as the shooter must strike vital areas with your shot(s). The projectiles you fire must penetrate sufficiently to reach the vitals.

Choose wisely- both your shotgun ammo and your experts,

lpl/nc

http://www.midwayusa.com/eproductpage.exe/showproduct?saleitemid=150399

http://www.midwayusa.com/eproductpage.exe/showproduct?saleitemid=151068

Shotgunners don't have "equivalent" HP loads, theirs are much cooler.

Look around more, use the search, try and learn all you can while ignoring what you "know" about using bird shot. If you don't change your mind, alright, but at least it'll be your decision and not the sharp looking guy at the store.

Yeah, I remember that story. Remember that it was a low angle.

In any case, the message is to use the 2 3/4 buckshot instead of the 3 1/2. Placement of the second shot takes precedence over a few more pellets. Don't get me started on the benefits of many 9mm over a few .45 :cuss: :cuss: .

My home defense weapon is a Remington 870 Tactical loaded with rifled slugs. As I see it, this affords major stopping power along with dispersement. With sabot slugs and buckshot, both of which I like, either you need to be spot on (sabot) or you need to worry about collateral damage (buckshot); I feel better knowing that I have three serious projectiles as opposed to one massive slug or several smaller pellets.

Comments?

I've got 12 gauge one ounce loads from Brenneke specifically designed for home defense. They're supposed to do max damage and not over penetrate.

Slugs are squirrely any way you look at it. Technically, it's a "weapon of mass destruction"--over a half inch. I don't want to bother with the idiot laws.

I'd like a huge dispersion, but our "friends" who make laws won't have that. Lacking a sawed-off, I'll go with what I can go with.

:banghead: Weapon laws. :banghead:
:cuss: :cuss: :cuss:

What state are you in? Depending on what state, you may be able to purchase/register a short-barreled shotgun - a "sawed off" as you put it. The National Firearms Act of 1934 allows for registration of these items, which costs $200 and can take anywhere from 2 to 6 months. :)

ok, i've personally seen more shotgun wounds than the majority of you, and i am going to come right out and say that trusting your life to birdshot in a defensive situation is STUPID. zero sugarcoating there ok. STUPID.

making an ugly wound, maybe blinding, maybe getting a 1 month later ICU death by infection or complications is a really dumb way to think about saving your own life.

the shotgun wounds that make it to the hospital and survive (mostly) are almost exclusively bad guys mistaken for pheasants.

birdshot is for birds.

with this kind of attitude, i'm surprised more people dont buy beanbags, or blanks. you CANT count on the psyke "OMG i've been shot" response. it doesnt stop everyone.


end rant

I think there are a lot of loads you can choose that will make the bad guy have a bad day, personally I have 00 reduced recoil 2 3/4 in my 870, if you choose something else, I am sure it can be just as effective

ok, i've personally seen more shotgun wounds than the majority of you, and i am going to come right out and say that trusting your life to birdshot in a defensive situation is STUPID. zero sugarcoating there ok. STUPID.

+1. What he said.

Birdshot in a 12-gauge shotgun vs drywall (http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot3.htm)
Birdshot in a 12-gauge shotgun vs water (http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot22.htm)

End result? If you think #7 birdshot is somehow magically better than the #8 birdshot used in the tests, then don't come looking to me for a life insurance policy. Only buckshot consistantly penetrates deep enough to reach the parts of human anatomy required to stop a bad guy.

Birdshot is for little birds.

I am a Paramedic, and have seen GSW's. I once had a genius for a patient who shot himself with a 12 guage point plank in the thigh. The load?
Wolf 7 1/2 birdshot.
The wound? Well his thigh was the size of a watermelon, but the load did not penetrate throught the far side of his leg-no exit wound. It did not fracture his femur. He did not go into shock. He did not die.
I have seen several buckshot injuries...and most were bad, if not quickly fatal. It seems gang bangers do not know much about 12 guage loads.
The guy you know who "really knows his stuff" (or looks that way?)-well perhaps he dosen't

I think that there is an application for bird-shot.

I used to live in an apartment.

I used a staged loading. The first two shells were #6 LEAD shot (better cross-sectional density) I forget what exactly I chose for the following five buckshot shells.

I chose bird-shot for the first two out of consideration for my neighbors on the other side of very thin walls. However, I figured if two shots from a 12 ga hadn't taken care of it then wall penetration was low on my list of concerns and it was time to get serious. I also figured that folks could try and take cover after a couple shots. Additionally, I suspected I would have close to adequate penetration with the bird shot at the close ranges within my apartment. I also wanted to give the bastard a small chance. I'm not really keen on the idea killing anybody.

The issue is mechanically stopping the intruder. There are some pretty financially blessed folks on the board here but I am not one of them. This means that if someone came and broke into my place they were crazy, on drugs, or really wanting to be on drugs again soon. This eliminates the psychological effects of being shot from my strategy.

Mechanically stopping the intruder is what is called for.

To do this one must break important parts of the intruder's body like vital organs.

To break these parts you want to make holes in them.

Holes are made by objects penetrating the body and the organs.

I wouldn't count on bird-shot penetrating more than four inches. It can penetrate farther but you can't count on it.

So what you want is permanent wound channels . . . lots of them.

That said I think 00 and 000 penetrate more than needed for an indoors home defense situation. It has been a while but if I remember correctly they can sail right through the body. My thought is more pellets like #1 buck.

Of course THAT said by last round of buck in my tube was 000!

No offense but I think the guy recommending steal #7 bird-shot was grossly misinformed.

Cook

I use #4 hevishot turkey loads inside my house- mini-30 shot is for the outside:neener: . Birdshot isn't worth a $h!+- been shot with the stuff at 15yards and although my coveralls had holes in them- I didn't. STEEL winchester expert dove loads- just like what you are considering. I had a zillion salt/pepper bruises and one cut on my ear. I literally looked into the barrel and saw red shell- the idiot was facing s.se pointing exactly at me when I noticed a dove fluttering my way. I ducked and got shot- HARD. yeah, I was red ant mad, and quit hunting public, but learned the truth about #7 steelshot. It's for the birds:rolleyes:

Short range they cant tell bird shot from slugs till they saw the stiff up on the table. not the best pick but it can and does kill up close.

I actually ended up with #7 steel 12 guage, 2 3/4. He said it would do the job. I believe him.

I often joke that breath mints fired from a 12 ga at spitting distance will be lethal... but steel shot?

I can understand a heavy duplex turkey load like #2 mixed with #6 for a short range HD load.

Your suggested load is better than a pointed stick, but you may want to reconsider where you get your advice.

If you use the search function you'll find this is a very popular topic in shotguns.

It's called 'bird shot' because it's designed for and suitable for birds. In fact if you look at shot size recommendations you will see that the larger the bird or animal the larger the shot !!!! It's a matter of penetration more than anything.

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=47430&stc=1&d=1162817157
78 year old Harry Whittington, shot by Vice President Dick Cheney (http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0213061cheney1.html) across the chest and head with birdshot.

I think I'll stick with low recoil 00 Buckshot, thank you.

We have no equivalent of the hollow-point.

Most shotgun slugs are either hollow points, or will expand enough to do the job.
Even a 20 gauge. A cylinder bore 12 gauge is about .72". Hlollow point or not, I would like to see you after getting hit by one at close range. Many thousands of deer have fallen victim to shotguns slugs (and buckshot), and deer are descent sized critters, with wild muscles. I use 6 shot for shooting squirrels, and while some pellets penetrate well, others are just under the skin. 7 shot is even smaller. I would recommend going with a larger shot size, if possible. I would recommend buckshot.

With #7 1/2 shot you might not even penetrate heavy clothing.

I've played around with a few loads in my backyard shooting range, which has a few old appliances lined up for hanging targets, with tree trunks, behind, backstopped by dirt.

7 1/2 birdshot won't penetrate the (thin) sheet metal on the side of and appliance.

#4 heavy loads will MOSTLY penetrate one layer.

00 (3" magnum) buckshot, on the other hand, will blow completely through both sides (plus whateevers in the way on the inside) and still penetrate 1-3" into the wood.

So, IF I only had a shotgun, and IF I only had birdshot, that's what I'd use, and I have no doubt that it'll make a mess outa the BG at close range....But, basically, the heavier/bigger shot wins, especially since I don't have to worry much about over penetration.

I'm not going into my credientials here. The people who know me know I've seen enough GSW's to form a pretty decent opinion. I've seen people shot with 7 1/2, I've seen people shot with slugs. At the distances I would use a shotgun for, 10 yrds max, the difference between birdshot and heavy loads is slight. Beyond that, you start loosing penetration with the light shot pretty quick, I would imagine even more so with steelshot. I don't even have a social shotgun right now, but the wife loads her's with a couple of 4's and then the rest with OOO buck. If I were in a situation where shots might stretch out past 10 yrds I'd rethink that combo, but where we are now I'm comfortable.

Well, given what I've learned at Gunsite and Thunder Ranch, I am switching to the AR-15 for home protection.

Many police departments are switching from the shotgun to the carbine.

There are some good reasons, but as with all things, "it all depends."

I'm in the buck shot & slug camp, but I'm still pondering how useful the larger sizes of Hevi-Shot would be - something like their Dead Coyote loads with 50 T-sized pellets of .20" each. If it will kill coyotes at 100 yards it must have some other uses.

I can't find the picture from the magazine ad, but here's a quote from Guns & Ammo:

"At a recent Remington seminar held at Cody, Wyoming, I watched as a 3-inch load of No. 4s in lead, steel and Hevi-Shot were fired into eighth-inch thick metal targets at 40 yards. The steel shot lightly dented the target with minimal hits. Lead did somewhat better with more hits on target, but no penetration. The HS performance stunned me. Eighty percent of the pellets blew completely through, perforating the metal like a sieve."

And that was just #4 shot.

John

Suit yourself. I won't do it.

I kept my HD shotgun loaded with #6 for years. Heard all of this "birdshot is bad" stuff and decided to try it out.

Next time I found a dead cow, I did some tests. I shot a (already dead from disease, but fresh) cow in the neck (about 10" thick) from different distances. I used an 870 30" full and Rem shur shot (el cheapo) #6.

At 10 feet the shot penetrated completely thru, wad and all. Left a hole just larger than 12 ga.

At 15 feet it did the same, but the wad hung in the far side skin. Again, 12ga hole.

At 20 feet, there was very little penetration. 4" maximum (prolly less), and a nasty wound about the size of a golf ball.

At 25 feet there was no penetration, just an ugly pattern about the size of your hand. Sure, maybe a few pellets sunk in, but it wouldn't have dropped anyone.

Note that these distances are in feet, not yards. 15 feet is VERY close, way too close for comfort, close enough that if someone is coming for you, you aren't going to get another shot off before they're on you.

Also note that this is a 30" full, not an 18" cylinder. I don't want to be shot with ANYTHING at ANY RANGE, but I'm not a big believer in birdshot anymore.

Birdshot will do nasty things at extremely close range, but almost nothing at mid range or thru light cover. Buckshot on the other hand will blow right thru (both) car doors @ 25 yards.

Guess which one I'm loading now.;)

Doesn't anyone hunt??? How many times have you shot a pheasant, grouse, quail or dove with #6, #71/2, #8 or #9 shot at close range (say 10 - 15 yards as a real close hunting shot) and had to pick pellets out of the meat? I love my shotguns, but if it won't turn a little bird into dust, I don't want my life depening on it.
Sighting in slugs for deer season usually makes me cry like a little girl after a while (well, not really, but you know what I mean). If it does that to me, I won't mind using it to protect myself.
Just my opinion.

At 10 feet the shot penetrated completely thru, wad and all. Left a hole just larger than 12 ga.

At 15 feet it did the same, but the wad hung in the far side skin. Again, 12ga hole.

At 20 feet, there was very little penetration. 4" maximum (prolly less), and a nasty wound about the size of a golf ball.

These results may actually be exactly what you want, depending on the situation. Currently, I live in the 8th largest city in the US, with some of the most expensive real estate, so we live a lot closer together than people who have acreage.

There are few shots inside my home that would be longer than 15'. I think that the longest wall-to-wall distance is 21', so if I figure that I'm standing in front of the wall and so is an intruder, that's about 15'.

On the other sides of my walls are neighbors, and soon, a baby.

So, the best load I can imagine would be one that blasts a 12 Gauge hole clean through someone who wants to hurt/kill my family, but loses steam before it hits anyone else. Sounds like I'll swap the 00 Buck out, and put in some of my Quail load.

Sounds like my house, but my exterior walls are 14 inches of solid brick.


"Doesn't anyone hunt???"

Sure do, ducks and geese, and I use #4 & #6 Hevi-Shot. It's density is greater than lead and it's harder than lead, so it loses less steam downrange and penetrates a heck of lot better than lead. And now you can get pellets with greater density than Hevi-Shot.

John

I have my 12 ga loaded with #1 buck right now. Someone about 10 years ago gave me a couple of cartridges of the stuff and I just use that "just in case" I need to defend my home. While the #1 may not be as large of pellets, I think it would suffice better than anything with smaller pellets. For hunting deer I don't even use my 12 ga as it is mostly used for turkey, geese, duck, etc.

There was a self defense show on TV recently, where the "expert" said he preferred 7 1/2 shot for an in house shooting situation, because it limits damage to people on the other side of the wall. They showed the result of buckshot hitting a drywall panel and also 7 1/2 shot hitting the panel. At across the room distances, the buckshot had no spread whatever, and blew a clean hole through the panel. The 7 1/2 shot spread out to about 4 inches, and did not completely penetrate the panel.

The emphasis was on AIMED fire of the shotgun, since it will not spread into a large pattern at close distances, and hitting an attacker requires more effort than just pointing in the general direction.

The lack of penetration is considered to be a good feature in an apartment type situation, where many people live close together with thin walls separating them. Killing your neighbor with buckshot while defending against an attacker is not a good idea. Hitting an attacker with 7 1/2 shot will hurt significantly, and may stop an attacker (which is what we want - we don't want to unnecessarily kill the attacker). 7 1/2 shot to the face, or several shots to the body should deter an attacker, and send them to the hospital for treatment, where they will be arrested by the police.

In less densely populated areas, or where you know there is no danger of injuring someone on the other side of the wall, or where longer distances are going to be involved in a defensive shooting, small sized buckshot will be a more effective stopper, but we must as responsible shooters consider the basic rule - know what is behind your target, and hold your fire if injury will result to someone other than the intended target.

may stop an attacker (which is what we want...

I bet most people would prefer "definately stop" over "may stop" any day. Realistically, you might only ever get to "very probably stop", but that kicks the hell out of "may".

you guys need to be really careful about what you say on here, some young impressionable types may just listen.

i dont care how many shotgun wounds you think you have seen, please believe me that birdshot is a really bad idea. i've seen people die from it too, but those are the exception to the rule, and it sure as hell didnt "stop" them.

unique experience a few years back.... lady gets shot by crazy ex. small size target load to right breast, close enough that the breast was hamburger about 4-5 inches diameter with the shot cup embedded in the tissue. other shot was buck 8-9 entrance sites in a 5 inch diameter area in the abdomen, with 6 exit wounds on left lower flank.

she was talking "sort of" when she came in. i lost track of her after she left my area that day and never followed up but i do believe she lived.

please stop "the at close range its all the same" nonsense. lightweight shot is not something you want to stake your life or the lives of your family on.

be careful with your internet "expert" advice, you may contribute to some schmuck getting himself killed.

Doesn't anyone hunt??? How many times have you shot a pheasant, grouse, quail or dove with #6, #71/2, #8 or #9 shot at close range (say 10 - 15 yards as a real close hunting shot) and had to pick pellets out of the meat? I love my shotguns, but if it won't turn a little bird into dust, I don't want my life depening on it. - tuna

Exactly. One of these days I'm going to run a poll with these four options:

1) I have hunted small game with birdshot, and I think its adequate for self-defense.

2) I have hunted small game with birdshot, and I think its inadequate for self-defense.

3) I have not hunted small game with birdshot, and I think its adequate for self-defense.

4) I have not hunted small game with birdshot, and I think its inadequate for self-defense.

I doubt number one will get many votes.

7 1/2 isn't even *adaquate* for 7 pound jack rabbits past 30 feet. Sure isn't *adaquate* for 200 pound methheads at 15.

00 buck or slugs for serious applications. Or at close range or when trying to severly limit penetration, a turkey duplex load as mentioned above.

And if all else fail pull out your 10 gauge double barrelled 3 1/2 inch magnum buckshot load from hell. That tends to do the job.

I don’t know why I bother.

SkunkApe, I would like to see your pole.

I worked in a trauma teaching facility in Shreveport, LA for several years. I have worked in a level II trauma center in East Texas (no longer accredited). I have seen a lot of penetrating trauma.

I have hunted for 20+ years now and shot everything from Doves to Deer with shotguns. I have killed little hogs and big boars with a shotgun.

I have taken classes in using the shotgun for self defense. I have read what the experts recommend.

Every expert I have taken classes from or read has recommended buckshot as the minimum loading.

Ask Mr. Ayoob he is a member of this board. Ask Mr. Jim Cirrilo what he thinks; he has been in more than a few gunfights. Ask Clint Smith.

Here is an excellent rule of thumb. If you won’t shoot an 80-150 lb deer with it when your life does not depend on it, are you going to trust that same load to stop a 180-200 lb man when your life does?

On the other hand….I have had an “expert” on this board PM me and tell me my 15 some odd years experience in critical care and trauma meant nothing, my 20 + years hunting meant nothing. My classes in self defense from various experts meant nothing. That he knew more than Ayoob, Cirrilo, Cooper, Farnam, Izumi, Jordan, Miculek, Smith, and Taylor people who I have read, and in some cases had the privilege of taking a class from or speaking with. This “expert” stated he knew more than all of the above mentioned experts (flatly refusing to name his credentials) I had openly discussed mine and the classes I took on the THR. Told me I did not know what I was talking about and 7 ½ shot was perfect for home defense.

I am sticking with buckshot, #1 please, patterned in the individual gun.

Here are two interesting charts I found at www.tacticalshotgun.ca/content_nonsub/shotguns/shotgun_ammunition.html

http://www.tacticalshotgun.ca/pics/graph_buckshot_energy.jpg

http://www.tacticalshotgun.ca/pics/graph_birshot_energy.jpg

Okay, make it three. Slugs too.

http://www.tacticalshotgun.ca/pics/graph_slug_energy.jpg

Everyone is talking about 1 hit of birdshot, but what about a semi loaded with 6 birdshot shells? This is quite similar to the .22lr as a SD thread stating 1 .22lr won't have much stopping energy, but what about 10? Personally I think I can squeeze off 10 .22lrs in an accurate manner in the time it takes me to shoot 2-3 9mms the same way. (That's because I suck at pistols, but not everyone is an expert :( )

Charles S,

Mas weighed in on the subject on http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=232418 earlier this morning. I'm not gonna bug him to answer the same question twice in one day.

Some people get it, some folks don't WANT to get it. No need to worry about trying to accelerate an idea to a velocity sufficient to penetrate a made-up mind, it ain't gonna happen. People who want to learn, will learn. Some folks want to state an opinion over and over with no background in training, experience or fact. The Internet makes that easy, unfortunately. And the words they type are worth just as much as the words I type when weighed on a scale, all they are, are words. That's all any of us have to offer on the 'net, is our words. It takes a certain level of sophistication to weigh those words, some folks have it and some folks don't. No need to worry about that, all we can do is offer the words, and the ideas they represent. Some folks WILL get it. They make it worthwhile. Not all the seeds that get planted will sprout after all.

Oh, and Cirillo would rather have an M-1 carbine with hollow points than a shotgun or handgun, I have heard him address his preferences in person. Mr. Smith I have never had an opportunity to speak to, I don't know what he would say (but on the subject of birdshot for defense, I think I can guess).

Regards,

lpl/nc

If you MUST use birdshot, make sure it's a turkey load.

my answer to the birdshot vs buckshot debate.


http://www.btfh.net/shoot/bullet-test-4.html

The-Fly, I think your link pretty much closes this thread. Whoever the guy was that told the threadstarter his info on Birdshot was DEAD wrong. 00 buck for home defense...bottom line.

The-Fly, I think your link pretty much closes this thread. Whoever the guy was that told the threadstarter his info on Birdshot was DEAD wrong. 00 buck for home defense...bottom line.

The-Fly, I think your link pretty much closes this thread. Whoever the guy was that told the threadstarter his info on Birdshot was DEAD wrong. 00 buck for home defense...bottom line.

EdLaver,

I think you might want to check your mouse, I think it is set on burst. LOL:D

yeah sorry, having some tech difficulties, can a mod Delete one please? thanks

I could, but it would be less fun. Silly threads deserve silly jokes.

;)

Mike

If the intent is to KILL a person, and you don't care if someone in another room may be killed when you miss the intended target, then by all means use Buckshot. Most professional legal advice is to shoot to stop the attacker, not to kill them.

I have seen some of the "experts" on TV, advocate using two pistol shots to COM followed by one to the head, for stopping an attack. Then the "expert" spouted off a poem that ended something like 'and one to the head, makes them dead'. This by a "professional" trainer that happens to be a police officer, swat team member, and police trainer. A civilian following that advice (to train to kill - on the advice of a police officer) will find themselves in much more legal difficulty than a police officer, when the case gets to trial.

We all should use deadly force with extreme caution, and reserve it for situations where no other action is possible. The police attempt to use LESS LETHAL force when possible, even though that force sometimes does kill (tazers). Birdshot as the first two rounds of a magazine, followed by buckshot, will reduce the risk of fatality, and still offer a reasonable protective force. After all, there are many reports that the mere sound of a pump shotgun being racked, froze an attacker in place.

If the intent of the shooter is to kill, rather than stop, then buckshot (as advocated by so many "experts") is the obvious choice. It seems that the popular opinion on this board, is to maximize the potential of killing as a means of stopping an attack, regardless of the danger to non-aggressors. What a bloodthirsty lot of armchair gunslingers we have on this board.

The best advice is to try to avoid an armed conflict; barricade in a safe room and call the cops. Don't try to sweep the house so you can initiate an attack that justifies shooting the home invader. Use the minimum amount of force necessary to stop an attack, and don't try to hold the invader for the police. Don't chase the invader out of your house.

You are more likely to lose your possessions due to legal expenses, than to what a home invader may carry off in his arms. Only when it is absolutely necessary to save your (or family/guests) life from serious harm or death should you even consider shooting a home invader.

One of Many,

I am sorry...are you serious? You mean to tell me if 2 home invaders came into your home looking to steal, pillage, and possibly hurt you or your wife and children you would simply coral your family into a room and call the cops while they pillage and destroy your home? C'mon now, I know that nobody will agree to that here. ONCE AN INTRUDER HAS ENTERED YOUR HOME SELF DEFENSE IS A MUST! :cuss: Now I know courts are becoming more dumb-founded about the obvious, but I dont know a jury on the planet that would convict a home owner for killing a or several intruders for invading his/her home. The only way I could see that happening is if you shot one in the back multiple times or something like that. Or if you chased them out into your front lawn and shot them dead. If a single intruder ever came into my home I would try to detain him 1st at gunpoint only if he wasnt armed with a firearm. If he was armed then I would fire. Multiple burglars (which most home invaders work in teams) I wouldnt even hesitate to fire.:cool:

If a single intruder ever came into my home I would try to detain him 1st at gunpoint only if he wasnt armed with a firearm.

[temporary thread hijack]

Personally, I don't care if it's a firearm or not. When I was on active duty SF orders at my base, we recieved an e-mail from a local police captain showing the most horrendous knife wounds many of us had ever seen. They were inflicted on one of his officers by a gang member that got the drop on him before he could draw his weapon. After that e-mail, our Commander initiated a 30 foot standoff rule for persons armed with edged weapons - if someone so much as pulled out a knife within our view, guns were drawn. If the person took a step toward one of us, night night. The safeties on our M9s were also off at all times. Always. I suppose such measures are nessecary while protecting 30 million dollar fighter aircraft.

[/ temporary thread hijack]

That being said, I feel the same way about edged weapons as I do about firearms. Just as deadly, and alot less noisey, which obviously has it's advantages to a BG. I treat all weapons as just that - weapons. I do agree with you though to a certain extent. If someone is ransacking my house and I haven't secured my wife and son yet, then hell yes I'm going to go find them, and go room to room looking if they aren't where they should be. If I manage to find them before I find the BG(s), then I'll bunker down with them in a secured room and let the thieves take whatever they want. I'll call the cops and let them sort it out - my family comes first. Stuff is replaceable, lives are not.

Oh, and Federal RR 00 buck is in my gun.

If the intent of the shooter is to kill, rather than stop, then buckshot (as advocated by so many "experts") is the obvious choice. It seems that the popular opinion on this board, is to maximize the potential of killing as a means of stopping an attack, regardless of the danger to non-aggressors. What a bloodthirsty lot of armchair gunslingers we have on this board.

I also see your point, and you've made several valid ones. However, coming from an LE background, my mentality is that if I have to shoot someone, that means I feel that my life is in imminent danger of being prematurely ended by whatever unfortunate jackass found his way into my home. If I get put into that situation, I'm going to shoot to kill. Not shoot to maime, hurt, sting, or offend. I'm not looking for a fight, but if someone brings the fight to me, you can bet your ass I'm going to win it.

Every person needs to consider thier surroundings and, with a degree of common sense that every gun owner *should* posess, pick an appropriate type of ammunition to suit their needs. Is 00 or 000 buck good for an apartment complex? Certainly not. No one is here to endanger the lives of innocent bystanders on purpose. There is a use for birdshot, as some situations don't allow for anything else. A heavy turkey load seems to be the best bet in those situations. But, for someone who has the safe option of effectively using 00 buck as opposed to birdshot, I don't see why someone would choose the latter over the former.

But thats just me. Like I said, if I have to shoot, I'd rather kill the person than turn their abdomen into hamburger. If they don't go down right away, that affords them the opportunity to retaliate. I'd wager a paycheck that someone who has hamburger where their abdomen used to reside would be willing to take a shot or two before they went down, if it even DID bring them down.

Its not ineffective, but IMO if there is a better option for so-and-so, why tell him not to go with it?

Yes, I would like to point out that, "A wounded animal (BG) goes into defense mode." Put yourself in the attacker's shoes. If you were the BG and were shot, wouldn't you want to take a chance of getting a good hit in before losing the fight?

If the intent is to KILL a person, and you don't care if someone in another room may be killed when you miss the intended target, then by all means use Buckshot. Most professional legal advice is to shoot to stop the attacker, not to kill them.I agree on shoot to stop, not to kill. However, explain to me how birdshot, which does not penetrate deeply enough to reliably strike any major organs outside of immediate contact distance (And some would argue inside of it, as well), is supposed to reliably stop an assailant. Sure, you just turned his stomach into hamburger. That's nice. What if your assailant is not dissuaded? The whole point is to create reliable rapid physical incapacitation. That is not achieved via a flesh wound. It can only be achieved via wounds that, through tragic coincidence, also have a high mortality rate. C'est la vie.I have seen some of the "experts" on TV, advocate using two pistol shots to COM followed by one to the head, for stopping an attack. Then the "expert" spouted off a poem that ended something like 'and one to the head, makes them dead'. This by a "professional" trainer that happens to be a police officer, swat team member, and police trainer. A civilian following that advice (to train to kill - on the advice of a police officer) will find themselves in much more legal difficulty than a police officer, when the case gets to trial.The trainer, if he was not quoted out of context and portrayed just that, is an idiot. There are a lot of idiot trainers out there. Some of them wear badges. They produce bad trainees, some of whom wear badges, and further the spread of silly ideas.

The drill described is the Mozambique drill. The idea is to get two shots to COM and then aim for the head. The time it takes for you to re-aim for the small target of the head give sthe opponent a chance to expire, fall down, drop the gun, run away, or continue to threaten. So, you now have a sight picture on his melon. Is the target still up and threatening? If so, press the trigger again. If not, cover him with your weapon and/or achieve cover and/or address other threats.

One can make the argument that the whole drill can be done very rapidly and fluidly, and thus seem like a killing move, but it is not the erstwhile-victim's fault that his attacker took too long to fall down. I'd certainly not be tarrying too long on the analysis; I like life on the green side of the grass. But if I shot him twice and he went down like a sack, I'd refrain from adding the third shot. That is what counts.

That is the real test of what your purpose is; if you shoot him twice in the chest and he falls down and is no longer presenting a threat, do you shoot him again? If the answer is yes, you're almost certainly in legal hot water. If you don't, it sounds like you shot to stop, not kill. Whether he lives or dies is up to EMS.

Mike

I've posted this story before but it bears repeating. I'm an ER doctor and did my residency in emergency medicine so I've seen a few gunshot people before. When I was in training I was rotating on the trauma team at the level one trauma center when we got a guy who had been shot breaking into a house COM with a 12 gauge using birdshot.

Dude was climbing in a window when he was confronted by a 15 year old with the shotgun. Kid was in the room and distance was 5-12 feet from the window. Kid told him "If you come in this house I'll shoot you." Dude said "F%$& you" and tried to come in anyway. Kid pulled the trigger and hit him square in the center of the chest. Dude fell back out the window, got up, and ran down the street. Cops found him huddled up on a porch a few houses away. Ambulance came and brought him to us. Dude was awake, combative, and required restraint when he got to us in the trauma bay!

Had two partially collapsed lungs and a chest full of birdshot. He was lucky that his heart hadn't taken a hit. As it was he got put on the ventilator, went to ICU, and walked out of the hospital 6 weeks later.

Important point? After getting shot the dude ran away and was still awake and fighting us 20-25 minutes later. If the purpose of shooting someone is to stop the threat then in this case birdshot failed. If you want to put it in your shotgun then by all means go ahead but I'll never use it for self defense.

epijunkie67,

exelent story.

birdshot is not worth using unless you have nothing else. buckshot or slugs, forget the birdshot.

We use 6 shot in the prisons, doesn't penetrate past the fat layer as a rule. Takes the fight out of a con, but I think I'd prefer a bit more when the target could reach out and re-arrange me. I don't think slugs are a good idea because you will be waking up out of a deep sleep probably, I'd like a bit more error compenstaion factored in. Mick.

One of Many,

It's necessary to solve Problem One first, before you have the luxury of worrying about Problem Two. In other words, if you are put in a situation where shooting is necessary, then you best shoot quickly and effectively, because if you do not solve Problem One (the shooting quickly and effectively problem) then you will never have to worry about Problem Two (the legal problem) because someone will be throwing dirt in your face.

I wish people would get over the idea that it was their responsibility- or option- to "shoot him just a little bit." Citizens are not cops, and are governed by a different set of rules in the use of force. What cops do, or what someone erroniously thinks cops have to do, is of no matter. IF you as a private citizen are justified in shooting, then you are justified in killing. IF you are not justified in killing, you are not justified in shooting. Even if you are justified in your own mind the legal system may take an opposite tack- there are some prosecutors in some areas who seem convinced that no private citizen under their authority has any right of self defense at all. Fortunately those prosecutors are few and far between, but they do exist. BUT you have to be alive to be prosecuted, even unjustly, and if you do not solve Problem One then Problem Two gets to be pretty irrelevant.

It would be nice if we could all carry our Star Fleet- issued phasers around with us, set on STUN. Maybe someday we can. But right now that's not possible, so we have to make the best we can of the options we have. As far as I am concerned, the best option I have to defend myself and my family at home is a short repeating shotgun with both buckshot and slugs available as needed. No, I don't WANT to kill someone- I am not a homicidal maniac. I would not shoot someone over physical property- only someone who was threatening grave bodily harm or worse to myself or someone else. I understand the concept of shooting to stop, and I understand the necessity of making each single shot as effective in stopping an attack as possible.

You see, every shot fired will be accounted as a separate blow struck in self defense. EVERY SHOT FIRED must be justifiable, not just the first one. There are people rotting in jail right now for having fired one shot too many in what was an otherwise justifiable shooting... . Think about that, please, and then tell me how good an idea it is to load your defnsive shotgun with something less than the most effective ammunition it is capable of firing.

Please go to the thread at http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=231925 and read Skip Gochenour's lecture outline that I posted earlier. And let me append here a paraphrase of his closing remarks, not included there:

If you have made up your mind to defend yourself and your loved ones, with complete awareness that you might be injured, crippled or even killed in the process, and that your loved ones might have to witness whatever horrors transpired in the process... if you have faced those ugly realities and dealt with them, and are still sure that the right thing for you to do is to defend yourself and your family when necessary no matter what the cost... ARE YOU GOING TO BE SCARED OF SOME LAWYER?

lpl/nc

I have followed this thread, and have not posted until now.

It is of my opinion, this thread went awry of THR Misson Statement, and then with some Quality postings got back to THR Mission Statement.

I appreciate the Quality Postings and feel as others have shared, this thread should be closed and end with Quality posts.

Steve

My take. #7 #8 and #9 shot are for clay and real small birds so they are very bad stoppers. #4 to #6 are borderline man stoppers, since they are made for bigger birds, but like www.theboxotruth.com showed #4 will still penetrate multiple layers of sheetrock. There is no magic bullet. If you have a concern about over penetration try a heavy fowl or turkey load as the first round, THEN follow it up with buckshot.

870 w/ 20" barrel and 7 shot tube. 7+1=8 000, slug, 000 slug, 000, slug, 000, slug. I hit it one way or another. Pretty sure it wont get up when its over with.

Doesn't anyone hunt??? How many times have you shot a pheasant, grouse, quail or dove with #6, #71/2, #8 or #9 shot at close range (say 10 - 15 yards as a real close hunting shot) and had to pick pellets out of the meat? I love my shotguns, but if it won't turn a little bird into dust, I don't want my life depening on it.

I have never shot any pheasants,but I have had the same occur with 6 shot on squirrels.

Quote of epijunkie67:

I've posted this story before but it bears repeating. I'm an ER doctor and did my residency in emergency medicine so I've seen a few gunshot people before. When I was in training I was rotating on the trauma team at the level one trauma center when we got a guy who had been shot breaking into a house COM with a 12 gauge using birdshot.

Dude was climbing in a window when he was confronted by a 15 year old with the shotgun. Kid was in the room and distance was 5-12 feet from the window. Kid told him "If you come in this house I'll shoot you." Dude said "F%$& you" and tried to come in anyway. Kid pulled the trigger and hit him square in the center of the chest. Dude fell back out the window, got up, and ran down the street. Cops found him huddled up on a porch a few houses away. Ambulance came and brought him to us. Dude was awake, combative, and required restraint when he got to us in the trauma bay!

Had two partially collapsed lungs and a chest full of birdshot. He was lucky that his heart hadn't taken a hit. As it was he got put on the ventilator, went to ICU, and walked out of the hospital 6 weeks later.

Important point? After getting shot the dude ran away and was still awake and fighting us 20-25 minutes later. If the purpose of shooting someone is to stop the threat then in this case birdshot failed. If you want to put it in your shotgun then by all means go ahead but I'll never use it for self defense.

Emphasis mine.

The threat WAS stopped, because the invasion/attack was ended by the use of birdshot fired into the chest of the BG. When the BG ran away, the purpose of defense was accomplished. That the BG was still able to fight the cops and ER people, is not germane to the effective use of birdshot as a defense, which DID stop the BG from continuing his invasion/attack. In some cases where defense is not the primary reason for having the gun, it may just be what shells were left over from the last hunting trip.

Whether you load birdshot, or heavy turkey loads, #6 shot, #4 shot or more lethal choices, should be well considered before even picking up a gun as a defensive tool. In the other situations (from example above) we are discussing, a deliberate choice is being made. In many cases, a BG getting wounded by gunshot will scare them into flight, or surrender. In a few cases where the attacker is crazy or doped up, lethal force may be necessary to stop an attack. What I am suggesting is that we consider a less lethal force as the first choice, backed up by the more lethal means.

Whenever a gun is discharged at an attacker, we must have the legal right of using lethal force, or the shooting is not justified; that does not mean that we should intend to kill, if other options are available. A shotgun with 5 to 8 rounds in the magazine, provides an opportunity to begin the defense with less lethal (usually) force, and progress through more lethal choices of ammo if the attacker does not stop quickly.

We each have our own personal sense of morality, that will determine our actions when the necessity of defense occurs. I choose to stop the attack using the minimum lethality necessary, rather than the maximum lethality possible. Your choice is not my responsibility, nor vice versa. The fact that we can discuss the reasons for our choices, make us all more aware of the gravity of the decisions we make, and the possible consequences.

The threat WAS stopped, because the invasion/attack was ended by the use of birdshot fired into the chest of the BG. When the BG ran away, the purpose of defense was accomplished. That the BG was still able to fight the cops and ER people, is not germane to the effective use of birdshot as a defense, which DID stop the BG from continuing his invasion/attack. In some cases where defense is not the primary reason for having the gun, it may just be what shells were left over from the last hunting trip. The threat was stopped only by chance and the decision on the part of the criminal to abandon the crime, not by the birdshot. epijunkie67 story shows that at a little further than contact range the birdshot clearly didn't remove the criminal's ability to attack, merely his desire, which is germane to the basic concept of self defense. Fine, that ended this particular attack, but real world you plan not for the optimum condition, but for the worst case. And in the worst case, had this attacker been slightly angrier or more determined the birdshot clearly wouldn't have stopped him. In a dangerous, dynamic situation, the last thing most people want to be worried about is analyzing their attacker. I don't know what he's thinking, or how he'll react to any given action on my part, and don't really care to do the math. The only way I exercise control of the situation is by acting in a way that limits the available options of my attacker, hopefully to nothing but harmless ones. What you're advocating, outside of an ammo choice, is a strategy that deliberately introduces extra variables into a potentially life or death situation, by making a choice that clearly will live the attacker with decision making capabilities and what's worse, only slightly impair his ability to act. That might be fine in your logical/moral framework, but it won't work for a lot of people, and it's clearly fraught with many perils.

There is NO nonlethal firearm, so even a round with "minimum lethality" can kill; even 'less than lethal' beanbags/stingers/baton rounds can kill; once you've committed to discharge a firearm you've committed to potentially killing someone. And without a medical history you have no realistic way of concluding that your round is less likely to kill this particular individual; i.e. a beanbag at close range might more effectively kill a person with a heart problem than buckshot. Therefore again, the only choice that is objectively rational is to use a round that has the least chance of allowing continued struggle, because this would ultimately lead to either a) the atttacker successfully harming you/someone you're trying to protect, or b) needing to be shot again, and no matter what the baseline lethality is for a particular round, that lethality goes up as more are applied. Long sorry short, once confrontation has become inevitable, it should be ended as quickly and definitively as possible, for everyone's safety. And via the long trail of logic, we arrive back where we started; it has been demonstrated repeatedly that birdshot cannot be counted on to accomplish a quick and definitive end to a confrontation reliably. So therefore while it may be a fine personal presence of mind choice, it's not by any stretch of the imagination, an objectively sensible choice.

Folks,

Y'all will all have to make your own decisions in regard to if, and when, and how you will defend yourselves and your loved ones. That's a given.

None of us will very likely be there to help out any of the rest of us with their gunfights. Likewise, courtroom battles, if it comes to that. You're on your own, pretty much, you and yours; and your decisions and actions will decide the outcome of your particular situation.

But please understand this. There is absolutely nothing "more moral" about using a potentially less effective load in your HD shotgun. I don't care if Billy Graham himself tells you that's the case- it's flat wrong. You have no guarantees you will have a chance to fire more than one shot in your gunfight- you may receive a disabling wound, your firearm may be damaged by incoming fire- who knows what might happen. You have no guarantees that the hot burglars/home invaders/crazied junkies/whoever that crash into your house are going to make room in their plans for your moral superiority. But you can bet they didn't kick in your door to invite you to a picnic on your lawn. You have no way to be sure that they will follow your neatly scripted home defense scenario that starts with your throwing a handful of marshmallows at them from across the room and gradually increasing your level of lethality from there. And if you assume that they will, and make your plans accordingly, you are in my humble opinion acting in a genuinely foolish fashion. Life doesn't give a dead rat what your plans and expectations are, Murphy is a bastard and he's always hanging around looking for someone to put the dunce hat on. Whatever else you do, don't volunteer to be Murphy's stooge.

I hate to repeat myself, but I feel I have little choice here. Folks, you CANNOT shoot someone 'just a little bit." ANY TIME you fire a shotgun at someone, NO MATTER WHAT it's loaded with, you are exercising lethal force- and you had better be justified in using lethal force EVERY TIME you pull the trigger, because you can bet that someone is going to eventually evaluate every shot you fired as to its necessity. Do yourself a favor- picture yourself as the star attraction in a courtroom. Picture yourself explaining to judge and jury EVERY ACTION you took in defending yourself and your family, and picture yourself being gnawed on by a hostile attorney who inists that you explain every reason for every action you took. Ask yourself in your heart of hearts if you want to try to explain that, while you were in fact willing to shoot someone repeatedly with a shotgun (you had a PLAN to do that, right? You just said so...), that you didn't really want to kill them but were perfectly willing to settle for just maiming them for life. Do you think anyone is going to be grateful to you for not killing them, but only blowing away half their face? Really? I suggest you go back and re-read Skip Gochenour's material again, especially :

http://www.teddytactical.com/archive/MonthlyStudy/2006/02_StudyDay.htm

http://www.teddytactical.com/archive/Feature/2006/08_Feature.htm

http://www.teddytactical.com/archive/MonthlyStudy/2006/05_StudyDay.htm


Odds are that it won't ever come down to you actually having to use your shotgun in defense- relatively few people ever do. But in cases like this, it is not the ODDS that matter- it's the STAKES, and the stakes are your life and those of your loved ones. If you do need it, you are going to need it very badly. Loading it with anything less than the most effective ammunition you can manage is like refusing to call the fire department when your house catches on fire because you have your garden hose, and therefore don't need a 3" line with a Turbojet nozzle on it.

This stuff is not a game of Mother May I, anyone who is willing to violate your home and threaten your family with sufficient bodily harm to justify being shot at by you, has surrendered all rights to the expectation of any consideration from you. Your only concern should be making sure you and your family survive such an encounter without injury, and effectively stopping the person or persons who seek to cause injury to you and yours. Stopping them effectively might just mean they die. It DOES NOT mean you are trying to kill them, that you want to kill them, that you intend to kill them- just to stop them. My advice is that you try to stop them in the most effective manner possible, and I assure you that you will achieve no moral superiority by using less effective means in stopping an unprovoked assault once it comes to actually pulling the trigger. If anything, by using less effective means, you only pave the way for tragedy. And if your moral compunctions against killing someone in legitimate justified self defense are so strong that you aren't willing to risk it, then you have no business planning to shoot someone 'just a little bit' with a shotgun.

Get some training, people. Go out and put yourself into the hands of an instructor who has done his or her homework, and who is prepared to explain to you what you really do need to know about trying to save your life with a shotgun. The NRA classes are available all over, you don't have to necessarily spend three days in the sun with Louis Awerbuck, or elbow your way into the NTI. But whatever you do, get yourself beyond the myths, and the what-ifs, and the if-onlies. They'll get you in trouble.

I'm done with this thread now, I just hope this whole thing helps someone avoid making a bad mistake, or a series of them.

lpl/nc

This thread (especially that computer case picture) has made up my mind. 00 buck is what I shall load the 870 with.

It depends on the housing situation...

If you live in an apartment, I could understand using birdshot. It wouldnt penetrate walls and potentially kill your neighbor like buckshot would.

If you live in a house, buckshot is the only rational choice.

Interesting thread. I wont get into the arguement about "most effective" but will state that equal weights of lead, traveling at the same speed will have equal results upon impact. I am of course not taking into consideration distance traveled as the 100 yard shot is not really rational in a self or home defense situation. Within "in house" range the size of the projectiles will be irrelevant as long as the weight of the charge is the same. Dispersion is not a great factor under 15 yards. Hopefully, none of us will have to find this out for certain under duress. Stay safe.
DJW

DJW, my house gun is a 870 18" with a cylinder choke. At 15 yards, the spread with birdshot is pretty big. Now if a scum bag was 5 feet from me, birdshot MIGHT work. But i prefer to have the ability to drop him from a safer distance.

I live in an apartment, and i subscribe to the theory that anything that can drop a bad guy can go through many walls. Be it 223, 9mm, or buckshot. Moral of the story....dont miss :D

I have a friend who was shot in the ass with a "dove load" of #8 shot. His girlfriend shot him after an argument. She tried to shoot him in the crotch, but he spun around when he saw her with his gun. The impact point was the rear right leg, right where the top of the thigh and lower buttock meet. As a result of the shot, he lost about a pound of flesh. He now has a hole there about the size of half of a fist. He has many pellets that could not be removed. The pellets went into his pelvis and hip and even into the bone. He spent 2 weeks in the hospital and a month in a nursing home with a suction device hooked up to the wound. He still walks with a limp. It was really a devestating wound. And to this day, when I talk to people about it, their reaction is "oh, bird shot." I have to explain to them that's about 3/4 ounce of lead that, for all practical purposes, hits like a solid mass of lead than immediately breaks up and goes every-which-way.

I think a load of #7 or #8 would be about perfect in a house. It'll stop anyone, and it won't shoot through walls or ceilings and kill your kid in his bed.

Lee has said it all. Anyone who really believes that when the SHTF, you will have time to think is fooling yourself. If you aim a gun at someone, you should shoot them. If you shoot them, you should kill them.

Any other thinking is pure hollywood. Shooting is your last resort, but if you have to, do it.

00 buck.

>>If you aim a gun at someone, you should shoot them. If you shoot them, you should kill them. <<

Oh good grief!

This is mindless, clueless, irresponsible, dangerous, costly, and just flat wrong.

So, you point a gun at a bad guy, and he gives up and surrenders, or runs away, you still shoot him with the intent to kill?

Two words:

Visiting Days

I think a load of #7 or #8 would be about perfect in a house. It'll stop anyone, and it won't shoot through walls or ceilings and kill your kid in his bed.

Birdshot WILL go through a sheetrock/drywall wall.

have a friend who was shot in the ass with a "dove load" of #8 shot. His girlfriend shot him after an argument. She tried to shoot him in the crotch, but he spun around when he saw her with his gun. The impact point was the rear right leg, right where the top of the thigh and lower buttock meet. As a result of the shot, he lost about a pound of flesh. He now has a hole there about the size of half of a fist. He has many pellets that could not be removed. The pellets went into his pelvis and hip and even into the bone. He spent 2 weeks in the hospital and a month in a nursing home with a suction device hooked up to the wound. He still walks with a limp. It was really a devestating wound. And to this day, when I talk to people about it, their reaction is "oh, bird shot." I have to explain to them that's about 3/4 ounce of lead that, for all practical purposes, hits like a solid mass of lead than immediately breaks up and goes every-which-way.

I think a load of #7 or #8 would be about perfect in a house. It'll stop anyone, and it won't shoot through walls or ceilings and kill your kid in his bed.That's a terrible wound. Now...how close was she when she did it, and, if your friend had been armed and been of a mind to commit murder, would it have prevented him from doing so? The answer to #1 is unclear, but so is the answer to #2. My point is that, while I won't be jumping in front of Dick Cheney during a quail hunt, it is by no means any indication that the load is a reliable stopper.

Mike

If you aim a gun at someone, you should shoot them. If you shoot them, you should kill them.I hope, for the sake of all involved, you most of all, that you never have to shoot anyone. That is the most concisely incorrect piece of information posted yet.

We shoot to stop, not to kill. If you don't understand the difference, please do everyone supporting RKBA the favor of learning it before it is too late.

Mike

I just skimmed through this thread but I didn't see anyone mention the "Box of Thruth" yet :confused:

Pretty sure they had a comprehensive "testing" of HD loads.

That's a terrible wound. Now...how close was she when she did it, and, if your friend had been armed and been of a mind to commit murder, would it have prevented him from doing so? The answer to #1 is unclear, but so is the answer to #2. My point is that, while I won't be jumping in front of Dick Cheney during a quail hunt, it is by no means any indication that the load is a reliable stopper.

Mike


I think it was about 10-15 feet. She was standing at the end of a walkway, he was in the drive-way calling 911 when she shot him.

They had both been in the house, she came out of the bedroom with the gun. They grappelled and he didn't want her to get hurt so he shoved her back and went outside. She followed. He went to his car, got his phone and called 911. She stood at the end of the walkway and pointed at his crotch, he spun and she fired. 911 recorded his screaming. She picked up the phone and told 911 she had shot someone.

He had effectively been incapacitated. He was in no position to shoot anyone. The shot dropped him. A followup shot would have been all too easy. Had he been hit int he chest or head, I think he would be dead.

Ok. 10-15 ft is pretty close range. That is the length of a room in my house. Assuming that the performance of this load is indicative of how well birdshot performs on an average, and assuming that you are correct about what would have happened if he was hit COM (neither of these are assumptions upon which I would wager any sum of money, btw), we still do not know:

1. How well will it perform at greater ranges? Even in a HD scenario that is a useful thing to know. I have a decent sized hallway, an open stairwell, and a pretty huge kitchen/morning-room/living room area within which I might have to take a shot. I would wager that this is not an unusual situation for most posters here on THR.

2. How well does it do at penetrating winter clothing? Unless you only plan on hosting a home invasion in the summertime, you need to think about what your HD load will do against an armed intruder wearing a heavy winter coat.

I know what a 12g loaded with slugs or buckshot will do in those situations. What will #7 birdshot do?

Mike

I think I was a bit misunderstood. You don't ever point a gun at someone, period...unless you have no choice.

You don't try to wound someone, unless you are an expert and have been trained to do so.

Good grief is right....I get the strong feeling most of you guys don't know what you are talking about period. You talk like you would be calm enough to handle the situation like people do on TV.

I stand by my statement. Avoid having to use your gun at all cost. If you do, you had better be able to prove it was life threatening and you had no way to egress. And if that is the true situation, aim, shoot, and aim dead center...else you will do more damage to your neighbors and will probably end up in jail....good grief...you said it.

I get the strong feeling most of you guys don't know what you are talking about period.

Funny, I got the same feeling when I read your post. So I checked your post history and found that you've been giving out advice on shotguns and shell suggestions for the last couple of weeks. What struck me as odd was this post (http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=2788913#post2788913), where you talk about your first time firing a shotgun a mere three weeks ago.

Do you have any other credentials other than 3 weeks of shotgun shooting experience to base these statements on? I know the people you are contradicting have some pretty good experience to back them up.

NO I DO NOT HAVE EXPERIENCE ON THIS TOPIC...HOPE I NEVR DO. and I am new to shotguns, mostly a rifle guy.

I rarely enter this type of discussion, because it is full of opinions. Lee makes good sense to me. I do feel since I did get into this and have been bashed a bit, to explain the conversations I have had with people I trust on this topic. In particular a childhood friend who is a LEO. Not that he knows everything or is even right, but he knows more than I do.

Read any gun forum and you will find this topic. there are actually people who choose a handgun as a HD weapon! From what I have been told, if you were ever in the situation...even someone well trained, but being in the situation for the first time...you will be shaking like a leaf. If anyone thinks they can hit a target with a pistol like they were shooting paper at the range, they are simply deluded. He has told me, a shotgun is the best chioce.
Because you will most likely hit the target.

The next thing is, in a stressful situation, thinking properly is the first thing that goes. You may pump the gun and warn the intruder to get out, but you might also discharge the weapon before you know what has happened.

Call, the police, get behind some furnature, wait for the cavalry. If you pump the shotgun, keep the safety on. then only if someone breaks down a door, and starts at you with a knife in hand, do you even consider pointing the weapon and firing. And then you should have tried to get away. Never look for the intruder. Never.

Well, that was his advice. From the amount of folks who advocate buck at close range (about 1/2 here)...you are going to kill. even if you shoot someone in the leg. hit the artery and they will die. Like you would be calm enough to think about that in the situation anyway???

Call the cops, get out, or find a safe spot and wait. This really was my intention behind that post. Let's hope it never happens to anyone.

I think a lot of folks are deluded into thinking it is like the movies...everyone is John Wayne. I doubt it would go down anywhere near the way most think it will.

but if it happens, birdshot seems to weak to stake your life on.

I think I was a bit misunderstood.Fair enough.You don't ever point a gun at someone, period...unless you have no choice.Agreed.You don't try to wound someone, unless you are an expert and have been trained to do so.I would submit that you don't try to wound someone even if you are an expert and have been trained to do so.Good grief is right....I get the strong feeling most of you guys don't know what you are talking about period. You talk like you would be calm enough to handle the situation like people do on TV.There are times when I would agree with you, but this is not one of them. The people posting in disagreement in this instance seemed to be pretty reasonable, to me.I stand by my statement. Avoid having to use your gun at all cost. If you do, you had better be able to prove it was life threatening and you had no way to egress.Generally true, and always wise.And if that is the true situation, aim, shoot, and aim dead center...else you will do more damage to your neighbors and will probably end up in jail....good grief...you said it.Agreed. So, where is this "always shoot to kill" nonsense you are claiming?

See, what confuses things is that shooting to kill and shooting to stop seem to be the same thing, because the aiming points are similar (pretty much identical, actually). It is a sad coincidence that wounds that reliably stop an assailant are also the ones most likely to kill him. What differs is your motivation in shooting him. This will come out if you 10-ring an assailant and he drops his gun. Do you shoot him again?

If yes, you are trying to kill him. I sincerely hope you like small, enclosed spaces and regimented daily routines, because (if there are reliable witnesses who tell the truth), that is what you will probably get.

If no, you obviously are not trying to kill him- you have the perfect chance to off him, but you let him fall to the ground and you called 911. Why? Because you were not trying to kill him, you were trying to stop him from killing you. When that threat vanished, you did not shoot him again.

The difference is not semantic. The difference could keep you out of prison.

Mike

I've seen a few shotgun wounds in my job. A couple that come to mind:

1. A drug dealer was trash-talking a Mexican immigrant in the immigrant's front yard. Immigrant walks inside, grabs a single-shot 12 gauge, and shoots the drug dealer from his front porch. The dealer tries to stumble away, but doesn't make it out of the yard. He falls over dead. I don't know the exact size of the shot, but it was bird shot of some kind. The dealer bled out. No one wound was fatal....he was just peppered and bled out from a bunch of tiny holes.Some of them went deeper than others, and some weren't that serious. But he didn't walk 10 steps before he fell over and never got up.

2. A man shot his brother in the torso with 00 buckshot from a 12 gauge pump. Funny thing, this shooter was also on his porch and the victim was in the front yard. None of the buckshot penetrated deeply enough to hurt the victim seriously. Some of the pellets actually fell out when the victim took off his shirt. There was some speculation that the pellets may have glanced off the ground before they hit the victim, but we could not proove that.

3. A bank robber shot a security guard with one blast from a 12 gauge, I forget what kind of shot it was. I think it was bird shot but I cannot remember for sure. The blast literally blew the guard's head off. There was no head when we got to the scene, only pieces.

What I have taken away from this and a couple other shooting's is that, although nothing is foolproof, a shotgun is quite deadly, even with birdshot. Just my observations, YMMV.
Now, gotta get back to work. Lunch is over.
-David

Coronach. I see your point. But 00 buck aimed dead center is shooting to kill. If you want to stop the attacker and not kill him, then 00 buck may not be the wise choice. Yet 1/2 here advocate it. I was also told not to mix loads in the gun.

It's one confusing topic, because it is so hypothetical, and yet so potentially lethal. My choice of words was not good. but shooting to stop at 15 feet with buck, is shooting to kill isn't it? I just meant, don't try to be Humprey Bogart and think you can shoot the knife out of the guys hands...you might hurt others as colateral damage and might just get yourself killed, and go to jail, loose your house on legal bills etc..., I was advised to always aim dead center and only if you intend to shoot. Would have been better choice of words...it was late, I was tired.

If you have to shoot, you have to shoot. That would be my defense. roaming around the house looking for a bump in the night with a loaded gun is not very wise. Perhaps that should have been my comment. No offense to anyone. Just my opinion on this topic.

Birdshot WILL go through a sheetrock/drywall wall.


From www.theboxotruth.com

4. Birdshot does not excessively penetrate drywall walls. But it does not penetrate deeply enough to reach a bad guy's vital organs. Birdshot makes a nasty but shallow wound. It is not a good Stopper.
and

Birdshot as a Defense Load
I have had a lot of questions, summed up as follows: How effective is birdshot (#4, #6, #8, etc.) as a defense load?

We have done tests with various birdshot loads. Birdshot penetrated through two pieces of drywall (representing one wall) and was stopped in the paper on the front of the second wall. The problem with birdshot is that it does not penetrate enough to be effective as a defense round. Birdshot is designed to bring down little birds.

A policeman told of seeing a guy shot at close range with a load of 12 gauge birdshot, and was not even knocked down. He was still walking around when the EMTs got there. It was an ugly, shallow wound, but did not STOP the guy. And that is what we want... to STOP the bad guy from whatever he is doing. To do this, you must have a load that will reach the vitals of the bad guy. Birdshot will not do this.

In fact, tests have shown that even #4 Buckshot lacks the necessary penetration to reach the vital organs. Only 0 Buck, 00 Buck, and 000 Buck penetrate enough to reach the vital organs.

Unless you expect to be attacked by little birds, do not use birdshot. Use 00 Buck. It will do the job.

Bird shot will penetrate a SHEET of drywall, but it will not penetrate fully thru a Sheetrocked wall.

Another quote:
___________
Lessons learned:
1. Notice that the #4 and #1 Buck penetrated 6 boards. In previous tests, 9mm, .45 ACP, and M-193 out of an AR all penetrated all 12 boards.

So, it seems that these loads do not "over-penetrate" as much as some have led us to believe.

The 00 Buck penetrated 8 boards, but was stopped by the 9th. Still not as much penetration as the pistol or rifle loads.

The slug penetrated all 12 boards.

2. Once again, please notice the size of the entrance spreads....2 1/2" to 3 1/2". Therefore, anyone that says, "With a shotgun, you don't even have to aim. Just point it in the general area of the bad guy, and you can't miss", does not know what they are talking about.

You can very easily miss with a shotgun. You must aim to hit your target.

3. The slugs were "bad" penetrators. By that, I mean that they will penetrate several interior walls. If you have loved ones in your home, consider this as you select your home defense weapon.

4. I "racked" the shotgun several times during the tests, and no bystanders lost control of their bowels.
Conclusion: Racking a shotgun will not make the bad guy faint.

Frankly, I was surprised that the shotgun did not penetrate more than it did. I had been led to believe that they penetrated more than a .223 rifle or a 9mm or .45 ACP. Such was not the case.

Amazing what you can learn by doing a little testing.
_______________

Got to love #2 and #4 especially... :D

I've never shot anyone and hope I never have to. I can't think of much that would be more life-altering.

I don't keep a shotgun handy for home defense - though I know its probably the best weapon. But I do keep a .357 handy. And even then I worry about over penetration. So I keep the gun handy with a speed-loader of Glaser Safety Slugs nearby. I've got kids and a wife I worry about and I'd hate for a round to go through a wall and hit one of them. I think I'm well armed.

If I did keep a shotgun for home defense, I'd probably keep it loaded with 2 3/4 inch #5 turkey loads. I think that load would be devestating, with enough energy to make it through thick clothing, but less of a concern with respect to over-penetration compared to buck-shot. On top of that, I'd probably go with a 20 ga instead of a 12.

Lonestar,

Bird shot will penetrate a SHEET of drywall, but it will not penetrate fully thru a Sheetrocked wall.

You need to read the quote you posted:



Quote:
We have done tests with various birdshot loads. Birdshot penetrated through two pieces of drywall (representing one wall) and was stopped in the paper on the front of the second wall.

YOUR quote states that birdshot penetrated 2 pieces of drywall and was stopped by the second wall.

It is difficult to point a pistol and hit a target with it, especially in the dark and under stress...you really need to aim and be calm...a long gun on the other hand is easy to point and easy to hit a target with. It's a simple question of physics and sighting.

Pointing a shotgun from the shoulder is aiming a shotgun. It is very natural, like looking down a long stick. A pistol requires much more training to handle properly, and to hit something with it. This is why folks put laser pointers on pistols after all. Parallax alone makes pistols inaccurate if you can't line up the sights. It's a lot to think about in a split second. I'd rather be holding a long gun.

I also think anyone entering a dark room after hearing a pump action shotgun being chambered is a complete psycho or on drugs...at the shooting range, no one flinches (why would they...no one is going to shoot you)....in a dark room at close range...I would go to the next house. But of course I am a rational law abiding person...maybe they think different.

I read a story about the gunfight at the OK corral. I think 33 shots were fired, doc holiday had a shotgun and fired once. If I could pic one weapon to have in my hands if I had to shoot, it would be a 12 guage shotgun.

but then, I am very good with a rifle, and couldn't hit a barn from the inside with my 1911s. ;)

having my shotgun at hand makes me feel more safe, but maybe after reading this thread, it makes me feel uneasy.

Like our soldiers in Iraq with such tight rules of engagement, they probably fear a situation where they have to think...shoot, don't shoot...more than a firefight. that split second could change your life...I too hope to never face it. but if I do, it would be with a shotgun for sure.

00 Buck vs. Bird Shot...I don't understand why this argument/question is brought up so often.

Can generations upon generations of military/law enforcement be wrong?

I'll stick with my 00 buck and slug combinations.

Oh well, here goes again.

Here is what Mr. Ayoob recommends.

"At LFI, we suggest buckshot. It has proven itself over the years as the optimum close/intermediate range antipersonnel shotgun round.

Birdshot can still go through sheetrock. One does not minimize danger to family members in other rooms by using birdshot; one does so by working out a coordinated defense plan that will not have one firing in the direction of other household members. If the armed, identified intruder ducks behind a wall or piece of furniture or other barrier, you WANT to be able to reach through and hit him."

http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=2830965&postcount=8

BTW, the important thing to get from that thread is that prior planning with an understanding of Fields of fire is much more important than loading.

Mr Farnam recomends the following

"We recommend 00 buckshot in the standard, nine-pellet loading. Federal, Remington, Winchester and other reputable manufacturers produce this load in great abundance, as it is the standard used by most law enforcement departments. Other sizes of buckshot are acceptable, but 00 renders the best performance. We do not recommend any of the magnum shotshell loading, 2 3/4" or 3". The magnum loadings are very uncomfortable to shoot and offer little benefit in return. We do not recommend birdshot and other reduced-recoil loadings. You need to practice shooting the real thing!"

Mr. Izumi recommends #1 buck.

When working pre-hospital in Shreveport I responded to a call in which an attacker was stopped with one shot to COM with a Davis 22. He was very dead by the time we arrived on scene.

Therefore, based upon some of the logic in this thread, the Davis 22 is an ideal self defense handgun.

No, it worked once, that does not mean a 22 long rifle is a reliable stopper.

I have two questions for those of you who recommend #7 1/2 Birdshot.

Are you basing this recommendation on experience and or training? Do you have any experience or training?

Do you have any experience hunting with a shotgun?

For those of you who don't understand the difference in shooting to kill and shooting to stop. I highly recommend you take a course in self defense. It has almost nothing to do with the load you select. It is all about state of mind and intent.

I'm certainly not interested in getting into a pissing match with anyone. But I will say the "cooridnated home defense plan" gets all shot to hell once an intruder ducks behind a wall. "Excuse me sir, that's not part of the plan, please stand over there where I can shoot you." I hope he obliges. If doesn't, I'm retreating. If he goes into a room where my son is, I'm not shooting through any wall.

The simple fact is is that smaller individual pellets have less energy, thus less penetrating power. Buckshot can kill someone in the next room. So can bird shot, but its less likely.

If I were to engage a bad-guy on the street, I'd like a rifle, but I'd take a shotgun if I had to, loaded with 00 or 000 buck. In my home, I would want a load of smaller shot. The theory that birdshot isn't serious medicine is nonsense. I've seen its effects on the human body, up close.

When you are defending your life, the goal is to live. Killing the criminal is 100% incidental to that fact. If you stay alive by stopping or killing, it doesn't much matter. And if you don't kill anyone else in the exchange, all the better.

By the way, the good Mr. Ayood is talking about a miss. Miss with bird or buck shot and it will likely go through a wall. Hit with birdshot and it will stay in the body. Buckshot can retain enough energy to go all the way thru the body then who knows where. The best load will penetrate the vitals and expend all its energy in the body. A heavy load of hi-vel birdshot will do that. A load of uck can pass through the body. After all, the average human is pretty lightly built.

Coronach. I see your point. But 00 buck aimed dead center is shooting to kill.No, I don't think you see my point. A choice of shoot to kill or shoot to stop is a question of intention, not target. If I was shooting to kill a man, where would I shoot him? In the chest. If I was shooting to stop a man, where would I shoot him? In the chest. You are inferring that all shots to the chest are "shots to kill". This is not the case.If you want to stop the attacker and not kill him, then 00 buck may not be the wise choice.This might be the root of the misunderstanding. I want to stop the attacker; I don't care whether he lives or dies.Yet 1/2 here advocate it.1/2 of all people are probably wrong on any given issue. ;)I was also told not to mix loads in the gun.Probably wise. You need to know which round is ready to go, and unless you're very calm and have counted your rounds, you'll have no idea if you have birdshot, slug or buckshot up next (depending on what creative loadout you're using).It's one confusing topic, because it is so hypothetical, and yet so potentially lethal. My choice of words was not good. but shooting to stop at 15 feet with buck, is shooting to kill isn't it? I just meant, don't try to be Humprey Bogart and think you can shoot the knife out of the guys hands...you might hurt others as colateral damage and might just get yourself killed, and go to jail, loose your house on legal bills etc..., I was advised to always aim dead center and only if you intend to shoot. Would have been better choice of words...it was late, I was tired.I think we agree in general; you shoot for COM.

Mike

A birdshot experience of mine:

I made a solid hit at about 15' on a coyote's shoulder with a 20 ga #6 shot and it spun him, he got up quickly and started running in circles biting at his shoulder and just as I was trying to reload my single bbl, he left the area abruptly and ran for a mile or so at a full run. Feeling sickly, I followed to the river and never did find him. I was very young and was sure my shotgun would blast him dead at that close range. I saw a patch of red wound the size of a softball where I hit him. I carry some slugs or buck when bird hunting
now.
Use #4 buck or larger for defense. If birdshot was effective, many le would use it. They do not.

I think your post C shows I certainly do understand what you have said. I read it carefully and am fully aware of your point. What I haven't really decided is what should be in the magazine. My advice has been 00. but others make good points too.

but 45 has it right...no plan is going to work the way you may think it will. the best plan is to figure out how to deal with the situation without shooting before hand...(dog, lights, alarms, egress) then fall back on shooting if all else fails. problem really is that someone who isn't there will judge your actions in the calm light of hind sight....that is what makes me want to unload my shotgun.

but I probably won't..an unloaded gun is a club.

If someone breaks into my house, I am unloading the saiga into their COM.

10 rounds x 12 pellets X 00 buck = quickest incapacitation in the history of the universe. It's the closest I can come to running them over with a bus.

lol @ beerslurppy


ok, now not to toot my own horn or anything, but i and a few others who deal with this stuff everyday (trauma people) have already posted about how birdshot is highly INEFFECTIVE in regards to rapidly incapacitating a determined attacker............. but every few posts someone jumps in and says that it is!!???


:scrutiny: um yea, i'll have 2 of whatever you are drinking

I suspect it's like most other areas in self defense . . . it all depends.

Someone shot at 20 yards or more will be hurt, but the severity decreases with range.

However, I suggest that a load of buckshot at 3 to 7 yards would behave pretty much like a load of buckshot or even a slug.

You may want to shoot a shotgun with bird shot at a target that is 3 yards away to see, but I think you'll find it to be a particularly effective load.

Having said that, this would not be my choice.

I would prefer a short AR-15, every time. More ammo, better stopping power, less penetration than most handgun rounds in the walls of a house, it will defeat most common body armor (bad guys are wearing that stuff these days), and its effectiveness does not fall off nearly as quickly with increased distance.

It's all a personal matter, but I can guarantee that a shotgun inside of 7 yards, with a center-of-mass hit, is a stopper.

Choose wisely- both your shotgun ammo and your expertsYeah. What Lee said.

Me?

00 spit from an 870P,
backed up by a 9.

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=47597&d=1163073635

#4 buck is a good median, try it.

I really think the bottum line is that, reguardless of what your are loading/shooting, the most important think is to know the capabilities of your choosen weapon and rounds, and your abilities with those two. I mean, whatever you decide to load up, know where it is gonna hit at, and how far away you can effectively expect to shoot in reguards to your desired result. You could have whatever you think is the biggest baddest weapon, with whatever you think are the biggest baddest rounds, but if you are not familiar with the weapon, or the rounds or how the two interact together, you are doing yourself a grave injustice. Not giving yourself a PACE is also an injustice. Have you practiced how you would clear your house? What would be the best method? Ya, you may live in the house, and be familiar with the layout of it, but that does not give you as much advantage as if you have thought about it, gone through it, and rehersed it. PACE= Primary Alternate Contingency Emergency.
For instance, my PACE for WOC
P= 870 shotgun 12ga
A= H&K P2000 .40
C= 10/22 .22
E= Pepper spray and a collapsable baton

Practicing with your WOC is also extremely important. I used to have a golf club as my emergency, but by practice, I learned that if was really not effective as I could not really get much swing indoors.

My PACE for my MOC is quite extensive and would not be understood unless you knew the lay of my place. But my Emergency plan does include going out a window and coming back in a door. Have a friend come over and you two war game it all day long, him being a burglar, how he would move through the house, what he would do, where he would go, how you would counter it etc etc etc. You would be surprised what you will learn.

I mentioned what I load earlier, a .00 slug alternating combo. I know for a fact that it will go through walls, and believe me, if I deem it nessessary, I will shoot through the walls. I would rather patch drywall, then be put in a bag. As far as killing vs wounding/incapacitating, I would rather be judged by 12 then carried by 6. Know your state laws as well. The law for the state I am currently stationed in states that I have to tell a burgler/perp to stop and that I have a weapon, and "ask" them to leave....... 3 times!!!! Dead men tell no tails. As far I am concerned, I did ask 3 times. He is in a bag, he wont argue with me.

In reguards to your choice or #7 vs anything else, what would you NOT want to be shot at with? I personally would much rather you shooting at me with bird shot then .00 or slugs. .00 and slugs are the rounds I would least want to be up against, thats why I load them.

The afforementioned is all my personal opinion. What works for me may not work for you. Take it or leave it.

Lonestar,

Bird shot will penetrate a SHEET of drywall, but it will not penetrate fully thru a Sheetrocked wall.

You need to read the quote you posted:

We have done tests with various birdshot loads. Birdshot penetrated through two pieces of drywall (representing one wall) and was stopped in the paper on the front of the second wall.

YOUR quote states that birdshot penetrated 2 pieces of drywall and was stopped by the second wall.

True it will EXIT a sheetrock wall (2 pieces of sheetrock), but if what exits can't penetrate the paper of the next sheet, it probably will be harmless and not penetrate the skin of someone on the other side of the wall. Now they were refering to #8 birdshot not #4 which will penetrate multiple layers of sheetrock. That is the problem with overpenetration. Sheetrock it a flimsy barrier. Your either going to penetrate multiple walls (www.boxotruth.com, test glaser pistol rounds too, again it went thru MULTIPLE layers of sheetrock) or if it can be stopped in one "Wall" it probably will be a poor choice to stop an intruder.

I don't use shotguns for HD, but if I would, I would use a turkey load, that would have LOWER penetration than buckshot, and HIGHER stoping power than #8 birdshot. and I would just use it as the first round in the chamber, and follow it up with buckshot. After the first shot, I hope to have the sense to make sure of my backstop if I need to take a second.

hey lets all use beanbag rounds after racking the slide a few times to scare them!!!!! no penetration issues there


sillyness

I have been shot at longer ranges (about 30 yards) with 7 1/2 and it nearly killed me.

I have seen SEVERAL shotgun wounds at inside the house ranges, real peoples houses, 1 to 5 yards. All were fatal except the one with a slug which blew a hole in the BG's thigh. I do property management for a company that owned what are referred to in my community as the "Crack Stacks", Low income Hi rise apartments. I also lived for a long time on a semi rural farm that had lots of problems with feral dogs and other pests.

IF you are shot with a shotgun, 12 or 20 at 1-5 yards COM, you will die. I have not seen one yet that lived. Regardless of whether it was 8 shot or 000 buck. Two weeks ago I saw a very large (obese) young man who had been shot at door opening range, with a 12 gauge loaded with low brass game loads. (I was close enough to see the empties, but not to read the case, not my job anyway) The man was obese enough to require a flat bed cart to maneuver him down the hallway as the EMT gurney was not sturdy enough, yet the first shot had killed him DRT. According to the EMT that I talked to, the damage to his chest reminded him of a guy falling on a grenade. The second shot had been a message shot, with the shotgun in contact with his face when they pulled the trigger.

I have also shot several large feral dogs inside the barn, usually use #6 in that gun and not one has lived more then a couple of second.

People often make the mistake of not realizing the density of the shot mass at the ranges that you are going to be facing in the house. Unless your house shows up on "cribs" it will be very rare for most of us to get a straight shot of more than 5 yards. Penetration will be there at that range.

If you have the ability to see real life, a shot gun blast at close range, on a living thing, you will understand. Gangbanger injuries are usually driveby's with punks shooting poorly at running targets from a lot greater distances than expected. In my experience the only deadly Drive by has been when a BG was standing back to the curb and had no idea the car was there till the shots rang out. In our buildings, (over 1100 apts) when shotguns have been used, the ME truck shows up.

oh

my

:what:

:what:

:what:


:scrutiny:

i'm forming seriously non high road thoughts about this....


thats it i'm out

I reckon I'll weigh in now. We've read some anecdotal evidence here, we've read some some tests, and we've read the opinions of experienced professionals.

What have we learned?
-We all know that nothing is absolute, there are too many variables.
-We've seen that birdshot can stop a person at close range.
-We've seen that buckshot/slugs can fail to stop a person.
-We know from several years of ammo testing and wound analysis (handgun, shotgun, and rifle) that stopping a person requires a deep wound channel. The wider and deeper the better. Multiple wound channels are helpful, but not as important as a deep and wide wound.

What are our options in a shotgun loading?
-Slugs, followed by buckshot most cinsistently produce deep penetration with a wide wound channel.
-Birdshot can produce a wide and somewhat deep woundchannel, but it's effectiveness in doing so is greatly decreased as range increases.

How do we apply this?
-Plan with family/room mates to get everyone grouped together behind the primary gunhandler(s) to reduce the chances of wounding them.
-In a lower density residential area, i.e. houses with yards, extra penetration is rarely a disadvantage with proper planning.
-In a higher density residential area, i.e. apartments, townhouses, condos, one cannot account for neighbors and excessive penetration can be a problem. These residences generally have shoter max distances for shots to be taken at.

Read the posts in this thread carefully. Look at your personal situation. Decide what load will be most reliable at stopping a threat while accounting for your surroundings. What load each person goes with is their own choice. We're all able to use our brains to read and analyze the information to come to our own conclusions. Let's hope none of us ever have to put it to the test against a real threat.

Somebody has a signature that says something like "the plural of anecdote is not data". Yeah. There's a lot of patently ridiculous "info" and faulty logic in this thread, and hopefully it doesn't get one of the purveyors killed, or even worse someone unfortunate enough to've actually believed it.

I live in a townhouse. The CETME, M48, and SKS are Right Out. I patterned 00, 0, and #1 on some Osama posters. Out of an 18.5" barrel, Numero Uno does what I want it to.

Are we still beating this dead horse?!?!

After carefully reading this thread, I've decided that regardless of my personal circumstances, overpenetration should be THE most important issue affecting my ammunition choice. I've also learned that just about anything can POSSIBLY stop a BG.

With these revelations, I've decided trust the defense of my home to a new strategy. From now on, I'll keep a bowl of Cool Whip, along with a wooden spoon as a launcher, next to my bed.

Cool Whip to the eyes can possibly cause infection, and will most assuredly render the BG unable to see, thus stopping him. Plus there's no chance of overpenetration.

I just hope I don't have a midnight snack before a home invasion.:neener:

Please, someone, for the love of all that which is Holy, close this thread.

Friends don't let friends load up with #7's.........

and friends don't let friends respond to crappy threads like this..........

Sadly, no one told me not to.

Why not go with season shot? :confused:

It's time to let this thread die. Has anyone noticed that the OP hasn't posted again on THR since the day he registered? Me suspects that the mods recognized him as the troll he was and yanked his account. But this silly thread lives on.

Why not go with season shot?

Only for gourmet weekends in New Guinea. And I haven't had my Kuru shots.

Thread closed.....