This make me re think defensive loads....

What's the synopsis? Throw us a bone and give us a brief description of the video...

What's the synopsis? Throw us a bone and give us a brief description of the video...

Click to expand...

+1

I'm not watching a 12 minute video so I can speculate about the meaning of an ambiguous OP.

Addresses the myth that bird-shot won't be effective in home invasion situations (20ish feet). He shoots a boar rib rack wrapped over a pork shoulder all covered in denim. Uses a target load 1 1/8th ounce.

OK, and this is NEW, sorry but this is done, and done and done

check out Box-O-Truth.com

I remain unimpressed.

Nobody I know says birdshot is ineffective,the consensus among those who have tested is it's LESS effective than buck. ESPECIALLY once the pellets are no longer enclosed by the wad.

Those concerned about overpenetration with larger pellets can alay their fears by by practicing enough to ensure ALL their 00 ends up COM in the targets....

Shadow 7D said:

OK, and this is NEW, sorry but this is done, and done and done

check out Box-O-Truth.com

Click to expand...

But it did give conflicting results. Box o Truth tested on drywall. Not bone, muscle and blood. I forget at what distance though.

It has been common knowledge for decades that buckshot, and especially "OO" buckshot is the most effective in stopping power for home defense.

He does some good stuff, but his blatant misrepresentation of the difference in buckshot and birdshot spread makes him seem like an idiot. At the distance, he says they both have "about the same spread." Apparently Jeff enjoys creating his own myths when supposedly debunking others. I am not sure how you can call the spread the same when the birdshot spread looks to be about double of that of the buckshot. Last I checked, you don't get to pick and choose which subset of holes to measure for determining spread, but that is what he does and he ignores the full pattern of the birdshot.


He later says in his summary statements that "birdshot don't spread no further than buckshot." Idiocy. He plainly demonstrated that it did.

Funny thing, the lack of size similarity between birdshot and buckshot when shot from the KSG shotgun by Quinn at 30 feet shows a difference of closer to three time the spread with birdshot over buckshot. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPGT0JWqtFo&feature=relmfu

Misrepresenting the data isn't doing us any favors. That is for certain.

It has been common knowledge for decades that buckshot, and especially "OO" buckshot is the most effective in stopping power for shotguns.

Click to expand...

Fixed that for ya. I have no argument that if using a shotgun for defense, 00 buck (or something very similar) is the best. But rifles will outclass buck shot in terminal effect, especially if you don't have all of the 00 pellets hitting vital areas on the target. If you have the time (and the stomach) take a look at some pictures of wounds from high power rifle rounds, they look horrible. They are MUCH worse than wounds from 00 buck which just look like someone who was shot with a pistol several times.

At the risk of being too graphic, I have seen pictures of someone shot in the thigh with 5.56 from (IIRC) 100-200 yards and the guy's thigh was ballooned up to the size of a basketball!

As far as using birdshot for home defense... look at what the police and military use. They are all using either buckshot or slugs. I have seen birdshot that didn't even penetrate the back of a quail vest. I wouldn't count on it to protect the life of myself or my family.

At the risk of being too graphic, I have seen pictures of someone shot in the thigh with 5.56 from (IIRC) 100-200 yards and the guy's thigh was ballooned up to the size of a basketball!

Click to expand...

That sounds like the Phillipino pics seen here...WARNING, quite nasty images...
http://www.timawa.net/forum/index.php?topic=17111.0

Those are not immediate injury results, but swelling and infection well after the injury occurred and only because of the extensive compound complex fragmentation of the femur with the fragments doing considerable additional damages and involving much more tissue. May also be compartment syndrome as well.

This sort of wound is NOT what you see when the person or animal is killed. Post-injury complications really can't be used indicate wounds at the time of the incident. Similar hugely nasty results can be found from some snake bites, ski injuries, allergic reactions, etc. For example...
http://faoj.org/2011/10/01/compartm...d-with-an-open-lisfranc-injury-a-case-report/

Compartment syndrome images...also gruesome...
https://www.google.com/search?q=Com...iW2gXu5-3kDw&ved=0CEwQ_AUoAQ&biw=1419&bih=707

Telekinesis said:

As far as using birdshot for home defense... look at what the police and military use. They are all using either buckshot or slugs. I have seen birdshot that didn't even penetrate the back of a quail vest. I wouldn't count on it to protect the life of myself or my family.

Click to expand...

LEO and Military purposes for shotgun ammo can be different than home invasion. LEO and military may have to take shots past 30 feet.

As far as the anecdotal report of the quail vest, have any info on the gauge distance, and shot used?

Can't really stream video at work; how far did it make it through the shoulder? What was the distance it was fired at?

vicdotcom said:

LEO and Military purposes for shotgun ammo can be different than home invasion. LEO and military may have to take shots past 30 feet.

Click to expand...

In regards to "lethal force munitions," my department only authorizes the use of 00 buckshot. We're trained and tested firing the 870 Police at 25 yards, without exception. I was very pleasantly surprised to learn how easy it is to put all nine pellets into a human torso at 75 feet. Shooting any closer certainly doesn't create any problem or disadvantage.

I see no reason to limit my weapon in the home; at least in my home, where I don't have a single 25 yard straight-shot distance from any one wall to another.

Skribs said:

Can't really stream video at work; how far did it make it through the shoulder? What was the distance it was fired at?

Click to expand...

20 feet away. 12 gauge 1 1/8th remington target load. Made it through the denim, the ribs, and about 2-3 inches into the shoulder meat.

I keep #4 buck in my shotgun , I patterned it at 25 yards with both 00 buck and #4 , the 00 pattern had gaps that could miss vital organs , the #4 was much more regular and even . I have seen #4 pass through a 200 lb hog at that range . Kevin

I keep 3 buck in a 20 gauge. It's enough and I really ain't worried about it penetrating walls if a miss. I don't think it'll make it through the brick and if it does, wouldn't have much umph left. I'll take the risk, anyway.

Apparently there is an even better load

than the old standby, OO-Buckshot... 1-Buckshot, specifically the new Federal LE132-1B load:
http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=87269
Not sure whre any non-LE can get any, but there it is.

C-

20 feet away. 12 gauge 1 1/8th remington target load. Made it through the denim, the ribs, and about 2-3 inches into the shoulder meat.

Click to expand...

Makes me wary of a shot at angle and through extremeties, i.e. if he has arms up (as in, he's pointing a gun at me) and I'm aiming for the chest. I've heard too many times that birdshot is gruesome, but shallow, and it's likely to cause a lot of tissue damage, but not at a depth that would make hitting vitals more likely.

Apparently there is an even better load

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

than the old standby, OO-Buckshot... 1-Buckshot, specifically the new Federal LE132-1B load:
http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=87269
Not sure whre any non-LE can get any, but there it is.

C-

Click to expand...

Not a problem...
http://www.cheaperthandirt.com/product/3-0311820
http://www.outdoorsplus.com/fed-12g-2-3-4-1oz-truball-hp.html

20 ga....
http://www.midwayusa.com/product/54...tor-truball-hollow-point-rifled-slug-box-of-5

Interesting it is suggested as a replacement for the Brenneke that is hard to get now (supposedly) that I have more than a case of from years ago. Looks like I will just stay with it.

The only thing IMHO that should make you re-think defensive shotgun loads is a change in your circumstances that requires a change in the load you use, or the advent of a new load that does what you want a defensive shotgun load to do better than anything previously available. Watching a single youtube video is IMHO a poor basis for such an important decision.

But it's your decision to make...

I read a report written by a doctor that served in Iraq. The military uses shotguns in close quarters and in areas where they are trying to avoid collateral damage. He said, no one he treated that was shot above the waist with a shotgun survived. Birdshot is an effective killer as well. If you are shot in the stomach it is very difficult for a doctor to remove all the birdshot. Not to mention infections from the contents of the intestines leaking into the body cavity.

Just because you delivered a fatal wound with birdshot does not mean you have stopped the attack. To stop the attack we are talking 30 feet.

I was thinking about the 1-buckshot load, but tthansk for the google-fu on the slug ammo!
C-

While I'm not a huge fan of birdshot over buckshot, I wouldn't hesitate to use a 1 1/8 oz load of #6 or #4 turkey shot on an intruder. While yes, it may only penetrate 4-6 inches, your essentially taking a cheese grater to a 12" diameter circle of the intruder in those few inches of penetration. You can't ignore the bleedout or shock effect there.

Nonetheless, I have the standard 9 ball 00 buckshot load ready to use in my shotgun. It's done its damage many times over...

If that video changes your mind about anything, you're probably a tool with little in the way of real conviction.

First of all, he should have had the pork shoulder in front of the rack of ribs. Most people don't wear clothes directly over their ribs. I don't have much in the way of a bench press cause I have a girly-man chest but I still probably have a good 2 to 3 inches of muscle and tissue in the form of pectoral muscles between my clothes and my rib cage.

Secondly, as I've said many times before, 1/3 of Americans are obese and just under 1/2 of us are overweight. At 6'6" and 190 pounds, I don't fall in this category, but chances are good if you have to drop the hammer in anger, they're going to be a bit thicker than me.

Additionally, look at the target he shoots to demonstrate the spread of the shot. Notice how the target's arms and hands obscure his torso?

So, have him repeat this test with two pork arms out in front of the pork shoulder, with the ribs behind the pork shoulder so that the birdshot has to penetrate the forearms/wrist bones of a 250 pound critter, denim, 3 or 4 inches of meat, then the ribs. That is far more realistic than the test he performed.

There is a reason those in the know insist on having adequate penetration before worrying about over penetration. Adequate penetration doesn't just mean for ideal shot presentation on ideal targets. We aren't preparing for an ideal situation here. If the situation was ideal, we wouldn't have to shoot somebody. I plan for a less than ideal situation by requiring anything I am to trust my life to demonstrate that it can reliably penetrate to and through the vital organs of a large man-sized critter regardless of shot presentation. The FBI likewise requires a minimum of 12 inches of penetration through tissue, even after penetrating sheet metal or windshield glass. Turns out they learned some lessons the hard way, and those are the lessons that usually stick with you.

I've seen birdshot from a 26 inch barreled XFull turkey choked Rem 870 fail to penetrate the chest cavity of a rabbit on a regular basis at ranges I have inside my house--say the 50 feet from my kitchen to my living room. No hillbilly shooting pork shoulders is ever going to change personal experiences. And my personal experiences tell me that birdshot is for the birds.