What size HD buckshot?

[Kindrox]

Are any of these people actual professionals?

Yes, the professionals that process the dead bodies.

 

[Zoogster]

How can you be that far away? The longest distance i could possibly be from an intruder (and still be line of sight) is about 30 feet. Generally the longest distance i could be in our house is 20 feet. For this ambush of which you speak, we would generally be 10 feet apart.

Birdshot should not be used for defense. Having tested many loads at many ranges on various targets just having fun at informal shooting areas, it will only destroy something solid within about 2-3 feet. It would not penetrate into tissue very far but within muzzle blast distances of 2 feet it will do serious damage.
Within 1-2 feet it would easily blow open a rib cage, or shatter a skull. You can chop 2x4 pieces of wood in half at that range without a hiccup. Back up 1-2 feet more and it just occasionaly blows them in half or takes out large chunks, and back up another 1-2 feet and it just peppers the target with the same load. Huge difference.
Having experience with powerheads, more commonly known as bang guns, I also know a shotgun loaded with anything would be deadly with the muzzle touching the target, but it could blow or bulge the barrel. The muzzle blast combined with any shot within tissue would destroy the tissue. Underwater blanks do as much damage when fired with the muzzle touching as rounds with projectiles do. The muzzle blast does far more damage than the projectile ever could.

The difference 1-2 feet make with birdshot is so huge that it would be foolish to use it for home defense. Once some of the shot leaves the shotcup it ceases to be effective. Prior to that it acts like a sintered slug.
An old poaching trick is to cut the top of a birdshot shell just under the shot most of the way around the shell. When the round was fired the entire top of the shotshell was blown down the barrel, acting more or less like a slug (dangerous with a choke). Those rounds would easily take down deer according to many poachers.
So a plastic slug filled with tiny birdshot acts almost like an actual slug. Similarly a shotcup from 1-2 feet filled with birdshot is not much different.
But from 5 feet away it will just make a light shallow wound. The individual pellets once they leave the shotcup will not have enough individual mass to penetrate enough to reach anything important.

So inches -1 foot away absolutely lethal, 2 feet still devastating, 3 feet may or may not work. 5-10 feet won't stop anyone determined to shoot back.
So birdshot is reliably effective from about 1 yard.
Do you want to limit yourself to 1 yard?

 

[Gryffydd]

No one ever said birdshot won't kill people. The issue is that it is a poor stopper.
If it weren't there would at least be some police agencies using it. There would be at least some shooting schools teaching its use. But there's not.
The fact that no one seriously involved with shooting for defense advocates birdshot outweighs in my mind the people who have seen a few people killed by birdshot...

 

[winchester '97]

anything of decent size that will put 75% or better of the pellets into someones chest at indoor hd ranges will be effective. just based on how it patterns out of my gun i like 000 buck. overkill? yes. all the pellets in a basketball sized circle at 50 feet? yes.

 

[inSight-NEO]

I personally prefer Low-Recoil 00 Buckshot (9 pellet) as it affords very tight patterns for all of my smoothbores, is very manageable for quick follow-up shots (if necessary) and is not quite as penetrative as "standard" 00 Buck.

Now, all of this talk about penetration/overpenetration is understandable. However, Im of the mind that knowing your weapon, familiarizing yourself with the ammo you currently choose for HD use, being aware of your surroundings and practice (and more practice) means much more than arguing about penetration related issues. Not to mention that unless you can clearly identify and see your intended target, you have no reason to fire anyway. Closely tied to this is to make sure the "target" is within ranges you are accustomed to.

Any effective (or relatively so) HD load can be penetrative...some more than others. Of course, the more penetrative rounds are usually better at stopping vs. others (at least when speaking of shotguns...for handguns, well, thats a different story). Just as a reminder, most effective handgun loads can penetrate further than even 00 Buckshot. Im also betting that these same handguns, unless weilded by trained hands, might allow for even greater chances of missing vs. any "aimed" shotgun. Something to keep in mind...

Regardless, almost any round can prove disastrous if fired from a weapon held by inexperienced or careless hands.

 

[rbernie]

http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot3_2.htm

 

[Gryffydd]

rbernie, I think you missed posts 48 and 50

 

[rbernie]

Yup.

Ah, well - always good to reiterate data.

 

[Gryffydd]

Ah, well - always good to reiterate data.

Especially when it's not being absorbed fully

 

[inSight-NEO]

Well, I guess my last post essentially mirrored what has already been discovered via "the box of truth."

Regardless, I always find it fascinating that ammo choice, in this case for shotguns (as relating to HD), seems to incite as much "head scratching" as trying to sift through the various option packages offered for, say, Toyota vehicles.

Anyway, shotgun ammo (slugs notwithstanding), as a whole, generally will not penetrate as much as many popular handgun calibers/loads do. Yet, many, many people use handguns for HD purpose.

Now sure, researching ammo effectiveness/penetration is not a bad thing at all. Im sure we have all done it for the most part. But, in the end, remember why you are using the shotgun (or handgun) for HD in the first place...to STOP a violent threat. The possible danger of over analyzing ammo selection is that one may become inclined to continue "stepping down" in power due to his/her concerns about penetration issues and essentially, could end up with ammo that really is not all that effective. Thus, one could then be left with a somewhat less-than-effective HD solution. Balance is sometimes hard to acheive, but you want to tip the balance in your favor...not the assailants.

Keep in mind, Im not saying that you fall within this category. Rather, Im just giving you a general opinion of mine as relating to this particular topic.

So, what Im trying to say is this: Try not to become completely wrapped up in this "overpenetration" issue when considering buckshot. Yes, many buckshot loads penetrate quite well, but then again, so do many "effective" loads. Find the most effective load you feel comfortable with, one that has been proven to STOP an opponent in his/her tracks, and get used to firing it...over and over. Practice using your shotgun...over and over and over. Try having a well thought out and plausible plan should someone ever enter your dwelling with bad intentions. Then consider this "plan" over and over.

To me, this stuff will go much much further than being hung up on which HD load is better for this or for that.

 

[The Wiry Irishman]

On one of the many other "can I use birdshot on things that aren't birds" threads, someone linked to some rather gruesome autopsy photos. The dead many had been shot twice with bird shot, once in the leg and once in the chest, then brought down with either a rifle or pistol. (I can't remember) The bird shot wounds looked like somebody had used a cookie cutter to remove a 1/2 inch deep circle of flesh. The man was somewhat overweight, and the birdshot wound to his chest didn't go deep enough to reveal bone, much less penetrate it.

 

[Kindrox]

Practice using your shotgun...over and over and over. Try having a well thought out and plausible plan should someone ever enter your dwelling with bad intentions. Then consider this "plan" over and over.

When i read this, I think "execellent advice . . . for the single man." I know there are women out there into this, but i don't think the typical woman is.

My wife will go to the range several times a year but she is not a gun nut. She is not going to walking the house practicing fire lanes a couple times a month. And she is even less comfortable than I am with a loading such that if she misses with a shot, she will be sending lead into a neighbors house.

I'd rather have her confident in carrying and using a shotgun inside the house, with her knowing the limitations of her ammo. The notion that she is better off with her .380 pistol made me chuckle, on box o truth it had about equal penetration as the shot I am initially planning to use.

 

[The Wiry Irishman]

The notion that she is better off with her .380 pistol made me chuckle, on box o truth it had about equal penetration as the shot I am initially planning to use.

12 gauge 7 1/2 birdshot gel test:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=381023

5.9" max penetration. Granted, you'll get more penetration with 6 shot, but this was also out of a longer-than-typical SD length barrel, which might even it out.

Link to a few .380 gel tests:

http://www.brassfetcher.com/380ACP.html

The worst penetration out of all of them was 9.4". Everything else was 12"+, including some hollowpoints. I don't think #6 shot is going to get you 6+ inches over the 7 1/2 I linked above.

I understand the concern with overpenetration. Maybe look at #4 buck. Here's the box of truth test, penetrated the equivalent of 3 walls, not too much more than birdshot:

http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot3.htm

And a gel test of #4 buck:

http://www.brassfetcher.com/12%20gauge%20number%20four%20buckshot.pdf

Almost 16" of penetration.

 

[pmrtruck]

Great Thread


Great posts, links, information.
Lots of good thinking points.
Good information usually leads to better choices!
Thank you, all!
I have tasted the kool aid, 00 buck for my shotty!
Anyone looking to buy any birdshot?

 

[Girodin]

You amuse me because you sound like the guy where going to the corner store with anything less than a 10MM, a New York reload and 50 rounds of ammo is akin to committing suicide. I’m sure you’re a real riot in the “what .380 for SD” threads too.

Keep spewing logical fallacies, this one is called an ad hominem. Lets follow your "logic" because I think one should get training I must be totally radical. The idea that one get professional training in the use of firearms, particularly for defensive use is not a radical idea. The fact that you think so is telling. The gun I carry the most often, because it best suits my particular needs at this time, is in fact a .380 ACP. When I carry something larger it is a 9mm. Your knowledge of what I do is as lacking as your knowledge about the defensive use of a shotgun.

What you don't get is that many reasonable people are trying to balance two things, their own safety with the safety of bystanders. Since you don’t get it, you can’t even contribute with “hay this is a more effective round with the same (lack of wall) penetration if you miss.” You seem to be in a rut of only thinking about your own skin.

I would suggest you have your priorities way out of order. If you need to deploy a HD weapon it is because there is an immediate threat of death or serve bodily harm to you and/or your loved ones. The proximate concern is that threat. If you are unable to sucessefully stop that threat, the possibility of over penetration will not matter one iota. Take a moment to consider that. If you shoot a round might miss or overpenetrate, it then might go through a wall, where it might hit someone, who might be seriously injured or killed. Notice all those mights. If you do not stop an immenent threat there is not mights, maybes, or possibles. Yes people should do what is possible to minimize the risks of over penetration. This could include things like knowing the shooting lanes in your home, arranging furniture to cover problem spots, having a plan to congregate the family, etc. Ignoring the proximate threat for a more remote one is stupid. I was going to use a softer term but I think this thread (aided by your posts in it that are filled with baseless personal attacks, used as cover for your weak position) has gotten to the point where bluntness is warranted over trying to keep people feeling warm and fuzzy. So I will repeat, it is stupid and shows that you not only do not understand terminal ballistics you probably do not understand the types of situations that will warrant shooting some one.

I am not surprised you have no training in defensive shotgunning. Your posts make that very very clear. Statements like:

I’m not going to send buckshot into their houses to increase the odds of my own survival by 0.001%.

show that you do not get it? What living things have you ever shot with bird shot? What living things have you shot with buckshot? With a 5.56 round? I cannot imagine that it is many if you honestly believe that the difference between them is that negligible. I honestly don't know what to say to a statement like that.

Wow! Other than scoring a lucky CNS hit, I am sure I could get to someone (20 feet away) with a .380 and still be able to fight for a while. I am sure that after taking as many hits as i can give you (starting 20 feet away) with birdshot, you won't be interested in fighting when and if you get here.

This one is truly funny. You can count on bird shot for a psychology stop but not a .380. Counting on psychological stop is stupid. You need to be aiming for a physiological stop. Re-read my posts on what will cause a physiological stop.

I am sure I could get to someone (20 feet away) with a .380 and still be able to fight for a while.

If I just wanted to be jerk I would pull out your same silly argument, I'll get my .380 and lets try it if you are so sure. I think you understand why that is a stupid argument.

One of the major flaws in your home defense plan is you seem to be basing much of it and your arguments for bird shot on the false premise that one will certainly be able to get off multiple shots. You also seem to be premising it on the giant assumption that you will be dealing with one guy who you can pump bird shot at until he stops wanting to do you harm. Does that assumption not strike you as dangerous and with out good basis.

How many intruders would take a hit to the face like that at 20 yards and keep coming? Plus you have 20 more yards to discourage him.

You can guarantee a head shot? If you are so sure of making hits then why the fear of over penetration. After the projectiles go through a bad guy they wont have nearly as much steam left. Further, what guarantees that he needs to get to you? He couldn't have a gun?

hat differance would you give it? And what data do you support that with?

What data did you support yours with. I would point to my anecdotal experience having shot living things with a range of shotgun, rifle and pistol rounds. I would point to gel tests. I would point to the fact that no police agency or military uses bird shot, and one thing I learned from some experience I had being able to work with some DOD folks is they have plenty of money to test things out.

I haven't patterned my HD gun yet

I cannot say I am surpirsed in the least. I am astonished that you can so definitively tells us how your gun and ammo will preform having never patterned it.

Wife? Can I really train my wife to have figgured all this out in advance?/QUOTE]

Does she have the same resistance to training and new information that you do?

ALERT ALERT ALERT, the following is actually a point and not a logical fallacy and or an attack. This actually addresses something I typed in a somewhat sensical way.

I am not trying to sell birdshot as a super duper penetrator. All the pistol caliber frangible rounds and the .223 rounds touted for acceptable HD (i.e. lack of over-penetration) all share the same limitation - it's hard to drill a BG 14" deep but stop in the first or second wall.

You might consider that certain rifle round may not provide the ideal penetration level but they are vastly superior to bird shot in that respect. I have shot living things with such rounds and the damage is notably different than the type of damage bird shot causes.

When i read this, I think "execellent advice . . . for the single man." I know there are women out there into this, but i don't think the typical woman is.

My wife will go to the range several times a year but she is not a gun nut. She is not going to walking the house practicing fire lanes a couple times a month. And she is even less comfortable than I am with a loading such that if she misses with a shot, she will be sending lead into a neighbors house.

If one wants to be able to use a gun in self defense it is axiomatic that one should be sufficiently proficient with it. Some of your comments seem to indicate that you envision you or your wife engaging is house clearly. That is dangerous, much more so if you have no clue what you are doing.

I am not, repeat not, suggesting that everyone has to be well trained and practice weekly with their firearms. I am suggesting that if you plan to employ a gun you ought to have a reasonable amount of QUALITY training. The likely hood of the type of outcomes goes up greatly with training.

Yes, the professionals that process the dead bodies.

I have an uncle who after graduating at the top of his class from Cornel Medical became a surgeon. He often does ER work. He also went to Iraq as a surgeon. He has seen his fair share of gun shot victims. He would tell you that bird shot is a better choice than rifle rounds, 00 buck or pistol rounds if you get to choose what you'll be shot with.

I do not think there is any new info or contentions to add to this thread. This is how all bird shot for HD threads go. Load what you think serves you best, and I genuinely hope neither of us ever have occasion to be able to say I told you so. I do not believe bird shot is good for HD (well perhaps if birds were attacking). Even if penetration issues are a serious concern I believe there are better choices. What is of at least equal concern to me is that tactics and skill sets tend to win the day even more so than equipment. You don't seem remotely open to improvements or obtaining more knowledge in either department. The good news is the odds of needing to shoot in HD is rather low.

 

[ARKIESTEEL]

I got a good deal a few years ago on some copper plated #4 turkey loads 3". I have a remington 870 with an 18 and half inch barrel and keep it loaded with them. At 20 feet it will shoot thru 1/4 inch plywood ever time I pull the trigger. I dont know how that compares to shooting into a bad guy but I would guess that he wouldnt be much of a problem after the first shoot. I am however open to any ideas somebody might have as to what I should use besides that. I have no "clear the house" training so my plan has always been to hole up in the bedroom with the wife and child (she still sleeps with us and I would as soon fight a bad guy bare knuckle as fight her about where she sleeps, I am working on it). The distance from the corner of the bed to the bedroom door is 8 feet, I think at that range just about any load for a shotgun would transfer the idea to the bad guy that you dont like him and dont want him in your house. Like I said open to ideas

 

[Gryffydd]

A couple of thoughts

copper plated #4 turkey loads 3"

Probably quite a bit better than #6

At 20 feet it will shoot thru 1/4 inch plywood ever time I pull the trigger.

So will my pellet rifle. Having 100 some pellets fired at the same time helps you with shot placement--increasing the odds that you hit something vital--but it's still about penetration. If all those 100 some pellets do is create a bunch of tiny flesh wounds then you're relying on the bad guy deciding to stop.

The distance from the corner of the bed to the bedroom door is 8 feet, I think at that range just about any load for a shotgun would transfer the idea to the bad guy that you dont like him and dont want him in your house.

On the other hand, he might get the idea that the quickest way to improve his situation is to shoot back or jump that last 6-8 feet and stick you with his knife. You want him to not have that choice because his aorta and parts of his spine are leaving him headed down your hallway. Sorry for the gruesome imagery, but that's what has to happen in order for you to be in control of the situation. If it's just a massive flesh wound--even if it may kill him later--not hitting vitals still leaves the choice in the bad guy's hands. He may decide to run. He may decide to lie down, and he may decide to shank you.

 

[JShirley]

It has been a while since I watched the video but if I recall, buckshot passed through four interior walls and then for an unknown distance.

Proving it possesses the penetration needed to stop a large aggressor. I always find it odd when folks looking for defensive ammunition choose loads based on what to miss with. Who cares what to miss with?

I'm concerned with what happens after I hit the home invader. Personally, I'm a slug man. This is based on what I've seen shooting live game, not from what I've read on the intarwebs. Regardless, as long as it patterned well, I wouldn't be overly concerned with using any shot size BB and larger inside a house, unless I lived in an area where bears or other large dangerous game might be an issue. In that case, only slugs need apply.

John

 

[inSight-NEO]

When i read this, I think "execellent advice . . . for the single man." I know there are women out there into this, but i don't think the typical woman is.

Actually, Im married. My wife, for now, has yet to learn the "ins and outs" of the 12 ga. But, she has expressed a desire to learn; and this is where it all starts.

My wife will go to the range several times a year but she is not a gun nut. She is not going to walking the house practicing fire lanes a couple times a month. And she is even less comfortable than I am with a loading such that if she misses with a shot, she will be sending lead into a neighbors house.

I understand the point. To add, Im not necessarily a "gun nut" or "tactical afficianado." However, as I mentioned earlier, almost any effective HD load (those being very capable of one or two shot stops) will have decent penetration. There is almost no way around it, I believe. Hence, this is why practicing, to me, takes on such a significance when it comes to familiarity with any weapon used for HD. Personally, I dont want to leave it up to a "lighter" load in order to try compensating for any lack of ability.

Now, getting back to the practice/awareness thing, I have tried (over the years) to learn the schedules my neighbors keep (when they are home, most likely to be out and about, etc.,) and this has helped as well. In addition, when my wife is home, I try maintaining an awareness of which area of the house she resides in. This may sound ridiculous, but in truth it really doesnt take much effort...just a bit of observation. Plus, it only makes sense to be aware of such things when you have a loaded weapon within your home...for whatever reason. So, in essence, depending on the day or time of day, certain areas within my home become more dangerous than others, in terms of possible penetration issues. Now, while Im certainly not obsessed with these things, they do cross my mind on a fairly regular basis. I tend to not rely on mere "guesswork" if I can help it.

Plus, there is that little fact that I would not even consider firing a weapon at an intruder until they are close enough to justify doing so (safely).

Again, I understand all the worries about overpenetration. I mean, no sane person wants to harm an innocent...I certainly dont. But, you also need to consider that the whole point of owning a weapon for HD is to STOP an attack. Therefore, it only makes sense to load with the most powerful ammo you feel confident with and then...practice. It may seem like Im of the Russian roulette mentality, but no. I too have thoughts and concerns about penetration. But, lets face it, my .45 ACP would probably penetrate more than my 12 ga. loaded w/Low Recoil 00 Buckshot. Should I then consider going with a smaller, less penetrative caliber/round? If so, could I rely on such a round to make a one or two shot stop if need be? Round and round it goes...

Now, my ammo selection came about through research as well, but my primary concerns centered around the ability to stop (not to kill) and reliability. In terms of penetration issues, I have found that consistent practice has helped assuage this problem, in my mind at least. Now, I may one day reconsider my current ammo selection for various calibers. But for now, what I use seems to meet my objectives. Each to his/her own.

I'd rather have her confident in carrying and using a shotgun inside the house, with her knowing the limitations of her ammo. The notion that she is better off with her .380 pistol made me chuckle, on box o truth it had about equal penetration as the shot I am initially planning to use.

Agreed. Confidence is completely necessary. Without it, serious mistakes could be made during the worst of times.

Oh, and if your wife feels more comfortable with a handgun, that is all good. As of now, my wife falls within this same category.

Keep in mind, Im not trying to tell you or anyone else what is "right" or "wrong." Im merely giving you an "insight" into my mentality and how I approach HD and my particular caliber/ammo of choice. Its the things I have mentioned which have helped me to somewhat cope with any fears/doubts I may have concerning the harming of innocent lives during a violent HD encounter. It is also these very things that have helped make me feel much more confident and capable should (God forbid) violence ever come knocking.

 

[Kindrox]

Gryffydd,

I don't want to insult you but I am not reading your posts. All I have seen in the last few I read is that I am wrong. Just saying that without addressing my care abouts is not usefull to me. I'd block you but I guess this forum does have that feature.

For everyone else, I thank you for your knowledge and opinions. I am not married to one solution. I have aquired 00 buckshot, #4 buckshot, #2 shot, #4 shot, and I already had #7.5 birdshot. I also have some of the mini shells for the wife to get comfortable with the mechanics of the 870.

I am going to pattern the different options at 20 feet. I notice the box o truth and the video I saw both generally jump from 00 buckshot to 8 birdshot. Well there are a lot of sizes in between. I want to see what I can find about performance/penetration of both. I might end up doing a little testing of my own, I notice there are lots of 0.99 cents a pound meat deals on big chunks.

Who cares what to miss with?

From what I read in self defense shootings, SD hit rates, while better than the cops (which I think was 11% or so) are still far less than 50%. I expect I'll be moving, the BG will be moving, stuff will happen.

Plus, there is that little fact that I would not even consider firing a weapon at an intruder until they are close enough to justify doing so (safely).

I agree with that. While I think the loadings we end up choosing need to perform well at 20 feet, what percent of SD shootings happen at 10-20 feet versus 0-10?

 

[Gryffydd]

Kindrox,

I've already given you suggestions about addressing your care.

Oh, and this forum does have a block function... But you'll be using it a lot if you block everyone who disagrees with you, since that's pretty much everybody in this thread.

I am going to pattern the different options at 20 feet. I notice the box o truth and the video I saw both generally jump from 00 buckshot to 8 birdshot. Well there are a lot of sizes in between. I want to see what I can find about performance/penetration of both. I might end up doing a little testing of my own, I notice there are lots of 0.99 cents a pound meat deals on big chunks.

Fantastic! You're on the right path.

 

[Kindrox]

Personally, I dont want to leave it up to a "lighter" load in order to try compensating for any lack of ability.

A lot has been made of the box o truth results where smaller shot only penetrates a couple pieces of drywall. I think the automatic comparison is that the same will be true of penetration of flesh.

I notice that the first piece of drywall significantly disperses the lighter shot (and buck shot for that matter) into a spray pattern. The small shot, on their own, don’t have the umph to penetrate much further and are stopped quickly.

I don’t think this spray pattern is going to happen in a solid object like a body. I think you will see (assuming the shot enters as a clump) that the shot more or less stays close together, resulting in much deeper penetration in a body than in the drywall dispersal pattern.

I am going to go back and look at gelatin tests to see if this is born out, and if it is, then the question for is, what is the lightest shot that reaches the needed depth in a body, and what is the drywall penetration of that.

I may well find there is a very good happy medium to be found.

 

[UnclePete]

Birdshot should not be used for defense. Having tested many loads at many ranges on various targets just having fun at informal shooting areas, it will only destroy something solid within about 2-3 feet. It would not penetrate into tissue very far but within muzzle blast distances of 2 feet it will do serious damage.
Within 1-2 feet it would easily blow open a rib cage, or shatter a skull. You can chop 2x4 pieces of wood in half at that range without a hiccup. Back up 1-2 feet more and it just occasionaly blows them in half or takes out large chunks, and back up another 1-2 feet and it just peppers the target with the same load. Huge difference.
Having experience with powerheads, more commonly known as bang guns, I also know a shotgun loaded with anything would be deadly with the muzzle touching the target, but it could blow or bulge the barrel. The muzzle blast combined with any shot within tissue would destroy the tissue. Underwater blanks do as much damage when fired with the muzzle touching as rounds with projectiles do. The muzzle blast does far more damage than the projectile ever could.

The difference 1-2 feet make with birdshot is so huge that it would be foolish to use it for home defense. Once some of the shot leaves the shotcup it ceases to be effective. Prior to that it acts like a sintered slug.
An old poaching trick is to cut the top of a birdshot shell just under the shot most of the way around the shell. When the round was fired the entire top of the shotshell was blown down the barrel, acting more or less like a slug (dangerous with a choke). Those rounds would easily take down deer according to many poachers.
So a plastic slug filled with tiny birdshot acts almost like an actual slug. Similarly a shotcup from 1-2 feet filled with birdshot is not much different.
But from 5 feet away it will just make a light shallow wound. The individual pellets once they leave the shotcup will not have enough individual mass to penetrate enough to reach anything important.

So inches -1 foot away absolutely lethal, 2 feet still devastating, 3 feet may or may not work. 5-10 feet won't stop anyone determined to shoot back.
So birdshot is reliably effective from about 1 yard.
Do you want to limit yourself to 1 yard?

Great post, Zoogster.

 

[KBintheSLC]

Gryffydd

I've been noticing your responses lately.

removed by moderator

I wonder if your mighty words would be so harsh in person. Unlikely.

Do us a favor, dull the edge on you little cat claws a bit... you are bound to get your point across better with less insult and abrasion.

 

[Gryffydd]

The fact that birdshot underpenetrates in flesh as well as wall boards is already well known. This is well traveled ground.

Oh I forgot, he sticks his fingers in his ears, closes his eyes and yells " lalalalalala" whenever he sees my posts.