A head shot to a white tail with #4 buckshot would probably have killed it on the spot. But #4 birdshot? Nope. That old geezer should have been ashamed. If this was larger deer in AK then even #4 buckshot to the head shouldn't have been attempted, IMO.
Shotgun for defense? Maybe not.
- Thread starter Dfence
- Start date
- Status
A common 12 gauge slug is about 450 grains. Considering that many people use pistol caliber or AR type rifles for home defense you are looking at ~60-230 grains for a bullet depending on what you are using. That 450 grain bullet is traveling at ~1800 fps, which is faster than the heavier weight pistol rounds. This is producing huge amounts of "knockdown power." If I was in a life threatening, close quarters situation and had to choose between a rifle/pistol and a 12 gauge with slugs, I'd take the 12 gauge with slugs. Even if you miss the report and explosion of whatever you do hit would scare many people to death. And all that power would definitely stop any crackhead in their tracks after one shot.
True enough.
12 gauge slugs,even low recoil 12 gauge slugs, are flat out bad ju-ju.
I read a magazine article back in the 1970's were upon shotgun scribe Bob Brister took out a Cape Buffalo using an old Peters 2 3/4 inch standard Foster one ounce slug out of his O/U Perrazzi shotgun.
That's some sledgehammer power guys.
12 gauge slugs,even low recoil 12 gauge slugs, are flat out bad ju-ju.
I read a magazine article back in the 1970's were upon shotgun scribe Bob Brister took out a Cape Buffalo using an old Peters 2 3/4 inch standard Foster one ounce slug out of his O/U Perrazzi shotgun.
That's some sledgehammer power guys.
But "goon" in post #38 said the shooter wasn't using slugs on a deer but #4 birdshot!! And the OP wrote about using #6 birdshot for HD!!
WHAT?!?!
Are you serious? I guess you also subscribe to the "sound of racking round" will do the same..............
I think size F is underrated. They penetrate quite well and you can pack a lot of them in a 3" hull.
Oneounceload- If it's not scary let me shoot at something within a 1ft radius of your body from inside 20 ft range, while you are clothed as a criminal would be (no hearing or eye protection). If you don't feel like running it's because you trust me not to shoot you, or you are hopped up on something. And no, I don't think the racking of a shotgun would scare anyone.
Mike1234567 said:
Yep, but it was #6. My grandfather used #6 for everything - rabbits, grouse, squirrels.
He did note that shooting a deer with it was a mistake. Bear in mind that at the time he was a young man, early 20's at most. He was fairly close and figured that from a full-choked gun the pattern on the head would be tight and the pellets would penetrate to the brain. Even with years of hunting experience, he also bought into the belief that nothing creates damage like a shotgun, regardless of the load used. After that slugs were always used - and that gun has excellent regulation with them.
Point is though, I wouldn't use birdshot for defense unless that was the only ammo I had. But pretty much no matter where you are in the US, you can get buck shot and even reduced recoil tactical buck shot easily enough. I can't understand why people insist on not choosing a load that's obviously more likely to be effective.
Jason W said:
If it must be birdshot, I agree that something with large pellets is better. I could even see loading your first shot with one of them. They minimize the danger of overpenetration but might be effective enough. But were it me, the second round up in the magazine would be at least No. 4 buck (not #4 birdshot for anyone who might be confused).
Last edited:
Shot composition also counts for a lot. All other things being equal, shot made from a hard alloy is a better choice than pure lead.
In a few informal gel tests I've conducted, a 1-1/4 ounce load of size F cleared the 12" block I had and then disappeared into the backstop.
My 3" loads (which I have yet to test) contain 50 pellets. At close range, that's a lot of tissue damage.
Still, my handloads wouldn't be my first choice for defense due to the fact that they're my handloads.
At across the bedroom distances, I have no doubt that the new tungsten alloy BB and T sized defense loads some manufacturers are now offering would shred an invader sufficiently to stop a fight, but for the price of a box of that stuff, you can buy several boxes of equally effective 00 buck.
In a few informal gel tests I've conducted, a 1-1/4 ounce load of size F cleared the 12" block I had and then disappeared into the backstop.
My 3" loads (which I have yet to test) contain 50 pellets. At close range, that's a lot of tissue damage.
Still, my handloads wouldn't be my first choice for defense due to the fact that they're my handloads.
At across the bedroom distances, I have no doubt that the new tungsten alloy BB and T sized defense loads some manufacturers are now offering would shred an invader sufficiently to stop a fight, but for the price of a box of that stuff, you can buy several boxes of equally effective 00 buck.
I keep Federal Tactical 00 9-pellet. FliteControl wad puts it at a 5" spread at 30 feet (pretty much my in-home distances). I don't feel under gunned one bit.
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.
Significantly different shot damage...
Most people are better off with a pistol in close quarters because they haven't been trained in defensive shotgun.
Shotgun for defense? Yes! Birdshot? Maybe not
I see it like this...
Birdshot might work at point blank distances in a self defense situation. Buckshot or a slug would work. Buck and slugs aren't costly or scarce.
Why would you choose to use birdshot instead?
I see it like this...
Birdshot might work at point blank distances in a self defense situation. Buckshot or a slug would work. Buck and slugs aren't costly or scarce.
Why would you choose to use birdshot instead?
A lot of state/city prosecutors like to portray the home defender as a blood thirsty gun nut using killer loads that the military uses to kill terrorists as a description of the homeowner to the jury especially if they used a "tactical" shotgun with a short (18½" "barely legal") barrel.I see it like this...
Birdshot might work at point blank distances in a self defense situation. Buckshot or a slug would work. Buck and slugs aren't costly or scarce.
Why would you choose to use birdshot instead?
That the homeowner only wanted to kill someone--why else would they have their guns loaded with killer rounds next to the bed, just waiting for someone to break-in.
They are killers and even got training at gun clubs and shooting ranges where they went to practice their deadly art by shooting hundreds of rounds each month--actually they had attended a Cowboy action event or a three gun shoot.
By using such a heavy load, one that only police should have in their guns, the defendant only wanted to kill--where if they used a smaller shot the son of this distraught woman would still be alive today.
OR WORDS TO THAT EFFECT!
I, just a layman not an attorney, just turned everything around so that the defendant is now viewed as the blood thirsty murderer instead of a victim of the crime.
Read some of the NRA-ILA or Massad Ayoob articles about what the prosecutors can and will do and have done...Especially NYC, Chicago.
New Jersey is claiming that the use of hollow points are murder weapons that only felons possess and their use in P/HD is forbidden.
Shooting them with birdshot (#BB) at 5 yds is a lot easier to defend as everyone has heard about "buckshot" and its deadly powers...Everybody knows that birdshot is for the little, itsy bitsy birdies and could never hurt anyone.
No doubt there are jurisdictions like you describe, where the legal forces favor the criminal element over the law-abiding homeowner.
But I choose not to reside in those areas.
I also choose buckshot over birdshot in my HD shotgun.
YMMV
There were a couple of landmark cases, just along these lines, in the last few years in Texas, since you got Castle Doctrine in.No doubt there are jurisdictions like you describe, where the legal forces favor the criminal element over the law-abiding homeowner.
But I choose not to reside in those areas.
I also choose buckshot over birdshot in my HD shotgun.
YMMV
Like I stated, read some of the literature available out there from NRA-ILA, JPHO, GOA, RKBA 2nd Amendment Foundation et al and trial experts like Massad Ayoob.
You're not exempt living in the Lone Star state...Not as bad as San Francisco, NYC, Chicago or Washington D.C.--the latter two told SCOTUS to stuff it and their decision(s)..
If you live in a place like that, you gotta move or make changes in your local government. Trust me, there are places in the US where prosecutors are not out to crucify homeowners honestly protecting themselves and families. It seems to me the most important choice is not what ammo you keep in the shotgun, but the zip code in which you keep the shotgun.
birdshot is perfect for defense, although #6 might be slightly edging on the under-powered side (but I would feel COMPLETELY safe with #7 or 8 shot, don't get me wrong). What I want to PREVENT is sending pellets through a wall / door and into the kids next door or someone/thing not meant to be hit by them. Just imagine it: you break into someone's house and hear a shotgun racking and then feel the impact of a hundred pellets being stabbed into your body. I personally would not stick around for the next shell in the chamber. Just because they won't go through a phone-book doesn't mean they are ineffective.
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.
A Major factor is media coverage of the event--amount (popularity), stance, public opinion(s), severity of the crime and whether a similar case has just been tried locally or in neighbouring states and its outcome.
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.
A city/county/state will have X number of lawyers/prosecutors working in a department under a manager and all are under the DA and all of them will prosecute to the fullest extent of the law as set forth by their boss(es) and the severity and the diligence that they pursue the matter will not based on the statues or tenets of the law but if an election is/isn't imminent.
You might want to take a look at the following. On these tests you need to look at the calibration BB. It gets way too much penetration. So at a minimum you need to subtract 20% from the given penetration numbers. On some, where the BB penetrates 6", it's more like 25-30% reduction. In addition some are a version of heavy shot.
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=7357182#post7357182
Number 6 or 8 birdshot isn't going to do anything but piss off a fat guy like me.
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.
amd6547
Member
I keep standard cheap 00 buck in my HD shotgun...but for close range HD, I wouldn't have a problem using a heavy, hard alloy turkey load.
Largely academic for me though. My preferred HD long arm is my CMP M1 Carbine.
Largely academic for me though. My preferred HD long arm is my CMP M1 Carbine.
These cards play both ways...
If the homeowner just wanted to kill someone, he would have just done it. Watch the news - there are plenty of examples of folks who shot someone, and not too many are homeowners.
The homeowner was also more qualified to handle a firearm than the average LEO, due to the fact he trained on a monthly basis, vs a typical LEO that practices before qualification.
And why would the city require officers to use the same or similar ammo in their duty shotguns? Does the city want their officers to kill every suspect? Personally, I have never heard of a LEA issuing birdshot for duty.
Something else, if you use a tacticool shotgun, the DA might try use that against you due to the fact it has a "military" look. If you use a plain jane sporting shotgun, that same DA will claim you used a weapon capable of killing a grizzly bear.
Last edited:
By all means, feel free to stick with birdshot if that's your desire.
I don't live in fear of using an appropriate load to protect my family. In Texas, if I act to protect me and mine from an armed intruder in my own home, I have no fear of the legal system trying to turn the tables in favor of the criminal.
Maybe it's different where you live.
I'd move.
YMMV
ClickClickD'oh
Member
Your two statements contradict each other as many of the sources you say we should read directly state that it's a good idea to use the same equipment and ammunition that the police use as it's easier to defend in court.
- Status
