Shotgun for defense? Maybe not.

[FAS1]

Read the cases in the various NRA magazines for "Armed Citizens" and from all the different Second Amendment groups and especially the anti-gun crowd and you'll find that the portrayal will be similar in all fifty states, territories and protectorates of the United States of America.

You blow away some miscreant who has broken into your home and you better be prepared for the deluge of derogatory comments that the media, the prosecutors, your neighbours will bombard you with prior to getting your ass sued by the dead SOB's family for unlawful death and that's after the state has brought criminal charges against you for manslaughter/3rd degree murder/wrongful death whatever your state's terms are since most are different.

You will have to go to court if you only fired your weapon into the ground as the BGs will claim reckless endangerment and sue your ass off...It matters diddly squat if you live in a Castle Doctrine state or not--you will still end up in both courts (criminal and civil); it's just the chances of you getting off are just greater but you still better have an extra $50,000 kicking around to get a good lawyer.

Not true in Texas. This is from a recent amendment to our Castle Doctrine along with no duty to retreat. The BG's do not get the benefit of doubt here!


Sec. 83.001. CIVIL IMMUNITY [AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE]. A [It is an affirmative defense to a civil action for damages for personal injury or death that the] defendant who uses force or[, at the time the cause of action arose, was justified in using] deadly force that is justified under Chapter 9 [Section 9.32], Penal Code, is immune from civil liability for personal injury or death that results from the defendant’s [against a person who at the time of the] use of force or deadly force, as applicable [was committing an offense of unlawful entry in the habitation of the defendant].

 

[451 Detonics]

Fact is if birdshot worked then military and law enforcement would be using it...but instead they use buck. Now overpenetration and civilian bystanders are not much problem for the military but for LEO's they are a very large problem yet they still use buck. Birdshot is for birds and lacks the penetration needed for SD. If it didn't lack it I wouldn't have to pick shot out of dove breasts. Don't want to hit your kids in their bedroom? Don't shoot at their bedroom. Figure out a plan that gets your family behind you even if it means giving the kids the big bedroom. Make plans and practice them.

BG's breaking into houses hate two things...light and noise. For about 100 bucks you can set up your house so a single button on a remote will light up every room in your house except your bedroom. Another button can turn on a very loud alarm bell. Worse case is they will freeze up briefly giving you time to round up the kids and be in position to cover the door to the room everyone should be in by now.

 

[Sav .250]

Stop playing around. Use Buck shot. I`m sure your phone book will look a lot different!

 

[SeekHer]

I'll turn this around again and suggest the very same DA will claim you are a cruel sadistic fiend for using birdshot because this caused massive and horrific flesh wounds that you intentionally chose for the sole purpose of inflicting torturous pain.

Sorry, but I don't advocate the use of small birdshot for home defense--I just said that #BB and #2 at five yards will kill you dead and at ten yards will probably kill you dead but they're still bird shot...My P/HD husks are loaded with #F and #TT but those are bird shot as well.

I said that we should change the phrase to read--Small bird shot is for the birds!

The thing is most people don't know what bird shot is! Just parrot the stock phrases, not giving it any research...Which is why I started my first reply with "Define Birdshot".

Buck starts at #4 (up to #0000) anything less is bird...The difference between #4 buck (0.24) and #F (0.22) is negligible but the latter shot is considered bird and if mixed with #2 bird makes for a very deadly under 25 yard killer.

I and some others call #F, #TT, #T, #BBB transitional shot as its big enough to take out people and it will and does but it just isn't called buck so that means #F, #TT, #T, #BBB is bird.

 

[SeekHer]

Not true in Texas. This is from a recent amendment to our Castle Doctrine along with no duty to retreat. The BG's do not get the benefit of doubt here!


Sec. 83.001. CIVIL IMMUNITY [AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE]. A [It is an affirmative defense to a civil action for damages for personal injury or death that the] defendant who uses force or[, at the time the cause of action arose, was justified in using] deadly force that is justified under Chapter 9 [Section 9.32], Penal Code, is immune from civil liability for personal injury or death that results from the defendant’s [against a person who at the time of the] use of force or deadly force, as applicable [was committing an offense of unlawful entry in the habitation of the defendant].

If you're going to cite a specific penal code, please cite it as it's written not as how you interpret it.

The underlined is the key phrase and it's a jury and/or judge that deems if it's justified...If it isn't you get criminal and civil, if it is then it has cost you that $50,000 to get yourself out...They can give you a lesser charge and that could get a guilty verdict which means you're now open for civil action by the wounded/scared/dead person or their surviving family.

 

[Mike1234567]

Sorry, but I don't advocate the use of small birdshot for home defense--I just said that #BB and #2 at five yards will kill you dead and at ten yards will probably kill you dead but they're still bird shot...My P/HD husks are loaded with #F and #TT but those are bird shot as well.

I said that we should change the phrase to read--Small bird shot is for the birds!

The thing is most people don't know what bird shot is! Just parrot the stock phrases, not giving it any research...Which is why I started my first reply with "Define Birdshot".

Buck starts at #4 (up to #0000) anything less is bird...The difference between #4 buck (0.24) and #F (0.22) is negligible but the latter shot is considered bird and if mixed with #2 bird makes for a very deadly under 25 yard killer.

I and some others call #F, #TT, #T, #BBB transitional shot as its big enough to take out people and it will and does but it just isn't called buck so that means #F, #TT, #T, #BBB is bird.

You're probably right but if I want to give the BG a chance I'll load the first shot with a marker bag. My comment was only to illustrate the flip-side to the statement that a DA will call a homeowner a killer-in-waiting just because he used buckshot instead of birdshot. If a DA is gunning for you he'll twist the facts around no matter what physical reality is.

 

[ForumSurfer]

In highschool, a classmate defended himself against an intruder by using a short barreled 20 shotgun loaded with birdshot at really close range. One shot and the intruder was dead where he stood and fell.

Can it work? Absolutely, but only when the stars somehow align in your favor.

Would I use it? Yes, but only on birds and evil flying orange discs.

Other than that...buck shot or slugs for me.

 

[Mike1234567]

I researched this quite a bit before deciding on 4-buck for the first two rounds and 00-buck for the remainder. I've always been on the fence regarding LTL rounds. Now that I'm alone I "might" decide to keep a marker bag chambered as the first round... but I'll never use bird shot for HD.

ETA: I recently moved to a rural area so overpenetration is less of a concern for me.

 

[Waywatcher]

Personally, I feel BB is probably going to be adequate inside a house. For outdoors, I would prefer slugs, or a rifle. Slugs are nice, a big ol 440 grain, .73 caliber wad of lead moving faster than a magnum handgun load.

 

[straightshooter9]

Regarding the "Legal" ramifications of shooting at a BG.............
and I'm in FLORIDA which has the "No Retreat" Castle Doctrine..........
I couldn't care less about legalities for myself if I need to shoot an intruder with #4!
My house was broken into in MIAMI SHORES by a THUG neighbor......
The Miami Shores POLICE told me had I been home and I blew him away inside my house they would deem it self-defense, nothing else, regardless of what he was doing or his intentions.

Could I live with that decision????........hehehe........try me!

 

[THplanes]

I'll turn this around again and suggest the very same DA will claim you are a cruel sadistic fiend for using birdshot because this caused massive and horrific flesh wounds that you intentionally chose for the sole purpose of inflicting torturous pain.

I'd add that the prosecutor could argue that using something perceived as less than lethal means you were not really if fear of your life or great bodily harm. The prosecutor can spin either choice however they want.

 

[ClickClickD'oh]

If you're going to cite a specific penal code, please cite it as it's written not as how you interpret it.

...and I suggest you read Chapter 9 of the Texas Penal Code since you felt it so important to highlight it... or at least get a basic understanding of Texas law before commenting on it. Let's take this specific statement:

You blow away some miscreant who has broken into your home and you better be prepared for the deluge of derogatory comments that the media, the prosecutors, your neighbours will bombard you with prior to getting your ass sued by the dead SOB's family for unlawful death

If you "blow away" a person who has "broken into your home" in Texas, you won't be "getting your ass sued by the dead SOB's family" because in Texas "[breaking] into [a persons] home" is called Burglary, which happens to be a lethal response crime in Texas...


The important bit that applies here is Texas Penal Code Chapter 9.32(b)(1)(A):

Sec. 9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON. (a) A person is justified in using deadly force against another:

(1) if the actor would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.31; and

(2) when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:

(A) to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force; or

(B) to prevent the other's imminent commission of aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery.

(b) The actor's belief under Subsection (a)(2) that the deadly force was immediately necessary as described by that subdivision is presumed to be reasonable if the actor:

(1) knew or had reason to believe that the person against whom the deadly force was used:

(A) unlawfully and with force entered, or was attempting to enter unlawfully and with force, the actor's occupied habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment;

(B) unlawfully and with force removed, or was attempting to remove unlawfully and with force, the actor from the actor's habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment; or

(C) was committing or attempting to commit an offense described by Subsection (a)(2)(B);

(2) did not provoke the person against whom the force was used; and

(3) was not otherwise engaged in criminal activity, other than a Class C misdemeanor that is a violation of a law or ordinance regulating traffic at the time the force was used.

(c) A person who has a right to be present at the location where the deadly force is used, who has not provoked the person against whom the deadly force is used, and who is not engaged in criminal activity at the time the deadly force is used is not required to retreat before using deadly force as described by this section.

(d) For purposes of Subsection (a)(2), in determining whether an actor described by Subsection (c) reasonably believed that the use of deadly force was necessary, a finder of fact may not consider whether the actor failed to retreat.

...Which means, if you bothered to read what the law says you would know that the law reference you highlighted specifically and pointedly states that the law must assume the use of force was legal if the person force was used against was committing the crime of burglary... or as you said, "broken into your home."

We understand that some people might not think too highly of shooting burglars.. the last reported that tried that tack was run out of town on a rail. Texas approve of shooting burglars, both in the law and in popular sentiment.

 

[LibShooter]

The prosecutor can spin either choice however they want.

Sounds like some folks need a better class of prosecutor. I guess we're lucky but officers of the court around here are not trying to find an excuse to jail homeowners who use guns to defend their lives and families. And I can't recall a single case of a bad guy's family successfully suing a victim over a justifiable shooting. These things may happen sometimes, somewhere but certainly not everyday and everywhere.

 

[FAS1]

If you're going to cite a specific penal code, please cite it as it's written not as how you interpret it.

The underlined is the key phrase and it's a jury and/or judge that deems if it's justified...If it isn't you get criminal and civil, if it is then it has cost you that $50,000 to get yourself out...They can give you a lesser charge and that could get a guilty verdict which means you're now open for civil action by the wounded/scared/dead person or their surviving family.

It's obvious you don't understand Texas law and I am sure it's quite different where you live. Probably even hard for you to imagine that we can legally use deadly force to protect ourselves in our occupied space AKA our "Castle".

 

[AKElroy]

I use 00-buck because it's tried and trusted - do a back to back comparison with 00 vs #6.
Significantly different shot damage...

Most people are better off with a pistol in close quarters because they haven't been trained in defensive shotgun.

As for damage comparisons between 6 shot and 00 buck, it depends on the target. Melons dramatically react to bird shot, and will not be as explosive with buck. That's why taurus uses melons to sell 410 pistols. Unfortunately, melons aren't likely to kick down my door in the middle of the night. For that, I want penetration. As for shotguns requiring more training than pistols, it is just false on every level. Both require practice. Both beg for training.

 

[45-ACP]

...

 

[Andrew Wyatt]

"It is tough to beat a 28-inch long 12GA CQC tactical shotgun in tight quarters such as a hallway, narrow stairwell or crowded basement in a dwelling when you must quickly change direction or your point of aim that will also have an immediate 7 (magazine fed 6+1) 00-buck rounds available in battery."

It's actually relatively easy. What you do is you toss the PGO in the trash and put a stock on it. Then you take a class from someone who knows how to run a shotgun.

 

[ClickClickD'oh]

1) Loose your full shoulder stock for a set of pistol grips on your 12GA pump and install the shortest allowable legal barrel length, which is usually 18-inches. You should end up with a 12GA that will be roughly 28-inches long.

Oh brother. Everyone wants a Denzel Special. Man on Fire is one of those movies I wish more thugs would watch. Please, please, please for the love of god. Get all the thugs toting Denzel Specials.

 

[KodiakBeer]

+1 (or am I number 2 or 3 by now?) on NOT choosing a PGO shotgun!

If anyone thinks a PGO shotgun is a good idea, then run a course (any kind of course) against someone using a stocked shotgun. You will lose.

 

[45-ACP]

...

 

[Ruddie]

I use a Mossberg 500 persuader with Remington express 2 3/4 9 pellet buckshot in my house. I also have my other shotgun loaded with Polyshock slugs. Those are fun.

 

[Andrew Wyatt]

I have a mystical and secret technique i use to keep a fully stocked shotgun from hitting walls indoors.

 

[ForumSurfer]

KB, my post refers to HOME DEFENSE weapons... not "running a course" outdoors. In tight walled quarters you will loose.

You'd be surprised. Courses are setup to replicate those tight quarters using plywood walls. You'll be surprised with the results. If PGO's offered any speed or maneuverability increases, you'd see competitors using them. PGO's seem like a great idea, but whatever you can do with a PGO, you can do better and faster with a stocked shotgun...except for storage.

 

[Justin]

If anyone thinks a PGO shotgun is a good idea, then run a course (any kind of course) against someone using a stocked shotgun.

This challenge is issued every time a PGO thread comes up. Not one PGO advocate here has responded in the affirmative.

Ever.

KB, my post refers to HOME DEFENSE weapons... not "running a course" outdoors. In tight walled quarters you will loose.

That's odd. I've shot plenty of 3 gun matches that have involved navigating tight quarters with a shotgun and have yet to "lose." In fact, in the archives of this very forum are my observations from a very tight-quartered, close-range 3 gun match in which a competitor actually did show up with a PGO shotgun. For those who are interested, they can use the search function to find those posts.

 

[straightshooter9]

45-acp......thanks for that detailed analysis, sounds like the H-132
may be the right choice for me, I plan to check it out.

And ya gotta LOVE TEXAS!!!

Just to add to my previous comment about the MIAMI SHORES Police telling me any action by me against any intruder would be considered "self-defense" he also told me, "off the record", to make sure he's dead. No need to having any witnesses able to testify, especially the THUG!

I am grateful I was able to serve in the military 45 years ago, if I had it to do all over again I would make a career of it!

Having said that, the training I received showed me that I CAN "drop" somebody if my life is threatened!........(and I did in SE ASIA) especially since I'm an OLD FART and I'm not physically able to take down the attacker...........

so for you THUGS out there (like they will be on this forum...hehe....) please don't break into my house.......
I'll be using some fine "recommended" ammo!
Thanks guys!