PDA

View Full Version : Bird Shot for home Defense?


Northslope Nimrod
November 16, 2008, 08:55 PM
Ok, Many people may slam me on this one but here goes.

I have seen many bullets penetrate several walls, enter neighbors houses, etc. (9mm, 357, 30-30) I have several people in my home. I worry about shooting past my target, through a wall and hitting an unintended victim. :(

So, I'm thinking, bird shot would be effective at close range (in a house) but that it likely would not penetrate through walls and maintain lethal force coming out the other side.

If you think this is a viable alternative, what size shot would you use?

hogdogs
November 16, 2008, 09:02 PM
This is routinely mentioned here at TFL... Buckshot balls are not bullets and will not penetrate as many wall layers as an equal size bullet. Bird shot at near point blank will make a single entrance hole but the pellets will lose forward motion too early at closer distances than buckshot. Shooting the front of the torso is not the goal... it is to get in deep enuff to assuredly STOP the intruder.
I can't remember the name of the site that has all kinds of tests done with various bullet calibers and shot gun ammo.
But it says, and I agree, BIRDSHOT FOR BIRDS BUCKSHOT FOR BUCKS AND INTRUDERS... Or something like that...
Brent

Dave McC
November 16, 2008, 09:15 PM
Birdshot will work if close enough.

So will buckshot.

Close enough with birdshot is measured in feet.

Buckshot, yards.

We cannot predict the range in our next firefight.

I'll stick to 00....

Northslope Nimrod
November 16, 2008, 09:25 PM
Won't buckshot be deadly after passing though just one wall?

hogdogs
November 16, 2008, 09:40 PM
Here is the link to the box o' truth
http://www.theboxotruth.com/
I am not sure of the one wall thing... I wouldn't shoot unless I had a target acquired and would attempt to make sure that any pass thru would not go into the kids' bedrooms.
Brent

Swampghost
November 16, 2008, 09:51 PM
Way too many factors involved without some clarification.

Here, most of the homes are concrete block and some of the older ones have block interior walls, pretty safe until you get up to to around 30-06. In your typical stick built home the parameters change a lot.

A shotgun load is carrying at least a 1 oz. load of lead that hangs together for 25-50 ft., well over the average 'confrontation range' of 8-12 ft. in most home invasion situations. It's also unwieldly unless you have a large home.

My choice is a 13 rd. 9mm. with snakeshot as the 2 first rds. This easiliy allows for 'first stike' capability without penetrating walls. Sound, muzzle flash and pain/possible blindness should subdue most intruders. If not, 11 Black Talons and a back-up mag of Hydra-Shok's should solve the problem or buy me time to get to the Mini-14. Not that any one would really consider a full on assault on MY house, not a whole lot here unless you like women's clothes.:D

oneounceload
November 16, 2008, 10:00 PM
at your typical bedroom distance of 12-15 feet, birdshot in the face/head or at a knee WILL stop the attack.....but in the heat of the moment, possibly awakened from a sound sleep, can you ensure you will hit those spots?? I can't....but then my first response gun is a S&W 357 with a 12 gauge as backup - and it has 00 in it.......YMMV

rem870hunter
November 16, 2008, 10:53 PM
load the shotgun so the first round that goes into the chamber is high brass #4 or#6 bird, after that buckshot. i reloaded mine as to where i have high brass #6 fired first,then 1 #1 buck, 2 0 buck. i hope to never have to fire in my home.

even having said that at the other end of the hall is my daughters bedroom door. i would possibly aim low and take out legs as they tried coming down the hall. the intruder(s) legs that is,not my daughters or my sons legs.

zxcvbob
November 16, 2008, 11:10 PM
Turkey or goose loads are probably OK. But I think you'd be better to just use smaller buckshot to limit the penetration somewhat. Even the biggest birdshot *might* be a little too small to be reliable.

Guy B. Meredith
November 16, 2008, 11:24 PM
00 and slugs are next to my Mossberg, but I live in a single family house with the next wall over 20 feet away.

Gunfighter123
November 16, 2008, 11:29 PM
I agree with Rem870hunter ---- I load my SG so that when I rack it , the first rd. into the chamber is a Hi-Power #4 birdshot , then 4 rds. of 00 buck ,and the last 2 rds. are slugs.

I;ve seen crime scene photos of what birdshot can do at very close range and those people sure didn't look like they enjoyed it :eek:

My house is a "stick built" and my neighbors are close , also as you can never tell where your loved ones might be at the time ----- I feel safer with a birdshot rd. up first.

FWIW --- not talking a "Trap Load " but a Hi-Power #4 field load.

Cerick
November 16, 2008, 11:41 PM
I dont want to have to think in an emergency situation, "I hope this birdshot will stop the BG!" Never want to think that when I know 00 buck will.

speakerguy79
November 16, 2008, 11:51 PM
What is the difference between high brass and low brass?

Cerick
November 16, 2008, 11:57 PM
From what I understand, High Brass can handle a bigger powder charge. High brass = High Power.

hogdogs
November 16, 2008, 11:59 PM
Little difference now days... But typically high brass refers to heavy powder charge rather than a soft hitting round just intended to chip clay birds...
Brent

SumToy Custom Barrel
November 17, 2008, 12:26 AM
You can go with 31/4-11/8-9's or 31/4 -11/4-9's and it will stop them. If you go with the smaller chokes it is like a rifle. We take a 24 inch Browning and at 50 feet with AA 23/4-11/8-9's and it will group shot with in a 1 inch spot.

Jseime
November 17, 2008, 01:30 AM
A 12 guage at close range is a 12 guage at close range period. That is a lot of brute force coming out of the end of that barrel, at close range a load of bird shot is going to cause a lot of damage to the person who is on the recieving end.

Buck will penetrate further into a person but how much penetration do you need to knock someone over and pacify them? The sound of you racking the action of a shotgun is going to send most guys out the nearest window and they wont be back. I wouldnt hesitate to use bird shot for HD.

The only shotgun shells I have at the moment are 3" magnum BB steel goose loads I would take those before birdshot but I am sure it would work.

Swampghost
November 17, 2008, 02:21 AM
I suggest that y'all take a trip outdoors and actually see what a 12 Ga. will do to 2 layers of 1/2" sheetrock spaced 3-1/2" apart @ 12 ft. The hole will be approx. 1" and go through both pieces and more even with #8.

No conjecture, just do it!

When I was a kid Dad loaded with dimes, that was really old time. IMHO a 12 ga. is not a home defense weapon if you have a modern home with cheesy walls.

troy_mclure
November 17, 2008, 04:05 AM
a co worker shot a home intruder with low brass #7 1/2 shot at 10', the intruder died after 3 days in the hospital. the shot removed his eyes, teeth, most of his lower jaw, and upper sternum.

it will definately put somebody down.

im loaded with 2-#6 2 3/4, 2-3mm flechettes in 3" mag, and a 1-1 1/8 oz slug in
3" mag.

Musketeer
November 17, 2008, 08:42 AM
a co worker shot a home intruder with low brass #7 1/2 shot at 10', the intruder died after 3 days in the hospital. the shot removed his eyes, teeth, most of his lower jaw, and upper sternum.

it will definately put somebody down.

3 Days. It worked, true, but hitting someone in the head with a brick might also work.

If I am shooting in my house it is already a worst case scenario and I want something I know will punch right through his breastbone or skull to neutralize the valuable stuff deep inside and end the fight as quickly as possible. Birdshot may do that, other stuff will do it more reliably.

Dave McC
November 17, 2008, 09:14 AM
Buckshot may be deadly after passing through one wall.

A perp will NOT be deadly after buckshot impacts his CNS.

Sporting shotguns get pointed, defensive tools get aimed.

At the max range inside Casa McC, my patterns will be less than 10" across.

I've trained to place that in Minute Of Perp.

So should you.

We can argue all day long about the advantages of the 870 over the 500 or vice versa, ad nauseam.

Darn near any Shotgun will work if we can shoot it and do so regularly.

Rmart30
November 17, 2008, 09:22 AM
I suggest that y'all take a trip outdoors and actually see what a 12 Ga. will do to 2 layers of 1/2" sheetrock spaced 3-1/2" apart @ 12 ft. The hole will be approx. 1" and go through both pieces and more even with #8.

No conjecture, just do it!

Ive got to agree on that one. You just dont know till you see a actual shot inside a stick built house of what kind of penetration it does.
Ive seen #6 birdshot go thru 2 separate walls..... (4 sheets of sheet rock) before a wooden dresser stopped it.

hogdogs
November 17, 2008, 09:27 AM
Okay I couldn't stand the suspense further!!! All this hub-bub about the sound of a shot gun racking a shell will send a man running...
So I took all the shells out of mine, Checked it 2 more times and YELLED... FREEZE MUTHA F'ER And racked the action... Didn't scare me one bit... But my little pitbull mix female ran out of the room and momma's pomeranian/chihuahua cross bailed under the bed hitting her head on the way!:eek: So I shut off the lights (might work in the dark) tried it again and same result (NOTHING) I didn't run or poop my pants. Just stood there...
So I got the bright idea to include a second party. Called momma in the room and after explaining the hollerin' and why her dog was cowering and shaking under the bed I told her to just Cycle the action real hard and fast... DERN IT!!!:mad: Nothing again! Had her do the loud yell first (this was easy as she was still mad I scared her dog) and last result same as the rest... NO NEGATIVE REACTION OF FEAR!:cool: Don't believe it will work on more than a couple chicken dogs!:D

So I loaded my number 3 Buck back in my 20 gauge, 5 in the tube, 1 in the pipe (I would use larger buck but cannot find any for the 20 at walmart) and went to sleep. No shoot to wound nor "SHOOT TO I HOPE TO STOP THE THREAT..." for me. Flat out 2 COM of sho-nuff stopper shots!
Ya'll load what and how you wish but do not load what others believe should work. I have whacked far too many rabbits against a tree trunk to stop the flopping when shot at fairly close range with #7 1/2 or even #6...
After you have shot and killed or wounded several thousand animals followed by field dress and butcher duty you will have a better grasp on shotgun results...
Brent

T.A.Sharps
November 17, 2008, 08:20 PM
Wow, this subject is like beating a dead horse, burning it, then growing a plant in its ashes, then beating the hell out of that plant.

nemoaz
November 17, 2008, 09:00 PM
I've put my fist throw two layers of sheetrock. My elbow once too.

Maybe you should consider one of those guns that shoots those little plastic frisbees. Or the ones that shoot the arrow with a suction cup on the end. That's the only thing I can think of that MAY not penetrate sheetrock.

I've never read of a bird committing a burglary so I wouldn't use a shotsize designed to penetrate two inches into a tiny bird.

300magman
November 17, 2008, 09:35 PM
Alright, all you anti birdshot guys, consider this.....how far away was that guy Dick Chaney dropped? and how fast did he go down? :p

Gats Italian
November 17, 2008, 09:36 PM
The first line of defense is a Beretta PX-4 in its 20+1 night stand configuration with 147 grainers. The drill for my 7+1 Mossberg 500 is as follows:

Chamber--High brass #4 buck shot.
Tube first--Same.
Tube Second-Same.
Tube Third--High brass #00 Buck shot
Tube Fourth--Same.
Tube Fifth--Same.
Tube Sixth--Same.
Tube last--Slug, acts pretty well as a last shot indicator through felt recoil.;)

Side Saddle--All slugs.
Butt Cuff--All #00 Buck.

.357 mag
November 17, 2008, 09:37 PM
I never hear of a "buck" causing to much trouble ether.

A face full of 1 1/4 max dram 4# will work. Every animal I've shot didn't like it and didn't live long enough to for me to care.

I think shot placement is the key. (No one as said this yet.)

Maybe the person that broke into your house is wearing a vest. That will stop just about HD handgun rounds. Most likely buckshot to. Then what.

I've went rounds in of Forums about this. If you have other people in your house other than yourself. "Birdshot" is the way to go. At least for the first round or two. then you can step it up.

I load. 1-1 1/4 4#, 1- 2oz 3 1/2 5 hevi shot(turkey load) then a 3" 00 buck

Thats my story.

.357

.357 mag
November 17, 2008, 09:39 PM
Alright, all you anti birdshot guys, consider this.....how far away was that guy Dick Chaney dropped? and how fast did he go down?

he was 25 yards away. He was hit with #8's out of a 28 gauge.

hogdogs
November 17, 2008, 09:42 PM
And he was fine as frogs hair albeit a bit sore with a few little holes in his face! He was a wuss lawyer not a "BUCK" on the rampage. And buckshot is just a word as is BUCK a slang term used for male humans...
Brent

300magman
November 17, 2008, 09:43 PM
Seriously though, in my area no one talks about and few worry about home defence...those that do generally own dogs.

But if I were thinking about home defence with a shotgun I might consider steel. Steel hits like a brick at close range and sheds energy very quickly. A waterfoul load of BBB or T would have considerable punch and possibly not penetrate though the house as bad as lead...at least in theory.

I hunt geese at 25 yards with BBB, at that range its perfect, at 35 yards they shake it off like rain, and when I once shot a goose at 10 yards it had 10 holes pretty much clear through it that looked like they were .22 caliber.

Anyone want to weigh in on steel goose loads vs lead buckshot?

Swampghost
November 17, 2008, 10:17 PM
OK. Cheney was 25 YDS. away, 75 ft. The shotcup, if you use them, melted away @ about 30-50 ft. in my experience AND it was #8.

That load @ 12 ft. (your average home invasion confrontational distance) would have a lot of different consequences. I'm gussing that you could see air through the body.

Mike U.
November 18, 2008, 01:46 AM
Alright, all you anti birdshot guys, consider this.....how far away was that guy Dick Chaney dropped? and how fast did he go down?

That guy was a lawyer. You put them down permanently with silver bullets or a wooden stake through the heart.
I've also heard bang sticks work on'em, sometimes. That is, if you catch them in the water.

nate45
November 18, 2008, 02:39 AM
I know I for one am going to start using BIRDshot for defense. As soon as I start worrying about being attacked by birds.:p

Ruger4570
November 18, 2008, 11:09 PM
These threads come up all the time with advice from many that have never fired a shot at anyone and claiming the results. I also wouldn't think the Ole Box o' Truth is the final word on much of anything other than an interesting read and sometimes right. Now I am NOT looking to get sideways with any of you, but there is just too much uninformed BS floating around.

I don't have a wall in my house more than 25 feet from the opposite one, additionally, I don't think I or the bad guy are gonna be hugging or sliding along a wall with furniture on it. Therefore, in a 25 foot room the ranges will most likely be no MORE than 15 feet, most likely in the center of the room or hall.
I don't claim to be an EX SPURT either, but I will put my trust in a couple of #4 3" Turkey loads,at 10 to 15 feet or closer.
I don't expect to be "racking" my gun so he even hears it, he sure as hell ain't gonna fill his pants, he MAY run, maybe not, you want to take that kind of chance, what if he is hard of hearing? In fact, why worry about what ammo, don't even load your gun, no need too, just keep "racking" your gun, it is bound to terrify a BG.

Why make ANY noise to TELL him WHERE you are or even if you KNOW of his presence in your home. I will quietly load my gun, get into a position of concealment, probably close to the floor or low on one knee where he DOESN"T expect me to be and lay my demand on him to hit the deck... his choice to comply or mine choice to make him comply, boom.
I also don't have countless rounds strapped on my gun, extended magazines or any other Tacky cool stuff. Running gun battles in a home invasion is basically Holly Weird stuff. I use just a Berreta 390 semi auto that for many years has NEVER failed to function, not once. So I don't think I need a so called "more reliable?? pump gun. I think for the most part, one shot, possibly two on an unsuspecting, unexpecting BG will put an end to the conflict right now.
Besides, what good is a pump gun if that BG gets off a shot and happens to hit your left hand, how you gonna pump the gun, with a semi, I just keep pulling on the trigger and it shoots.
Anyone wanting to test MY method, please come on over around 2 or 3 in the morning and we can discuss it in the ICU, that is if you survive.

USA123456789
November 18, 2008, 11:21 PM
:):)

nate45
November 19, 2008, 02:49 AM
there is just too much uninformed BS floating around.

And it is coming from those that advocate birdshot for defense.

A person can have all the 'trust', 'faith', and 'belief' in the world that birdshot is adequate for defense, but that doesn't make it true.

There is a plethora of information available that shows birdshot offers inferior penetration when compared to buckshot and slugs.

Here is a test of 7 1/2 shot (http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=381023) from ten feet away. The deepest penetration depth was 5.9 inches and that was on bare gelatin. Add four layers of denim or light, commonly encountered barriers and you will have less.

Nearly all of the 'EX SPURTs' as you put it advocate buckshot for defense, all testing has shown birdshot to be inadequate for defense.

Now then, I have a bunch of other links of the gel testing of buck shot, birdshot and slugs. I have links to the comments of noted defense and wound ballistics experts. What I want to know is where is your proof that birdshot is adequate for defense? Supply some proof that #4 shot has adequate penetration at 15 Ft.

I already have plenty of test data, my own and that of others showing it does not, so I would be real interested in the tests that show that it does and the comments of the 'expert' that recommends it.

.45 COLT
November 19, 2008, 08:42 AM
The best part about this recurring subject is that everybody has the answer, and even though the answers are very different, they are all correct – at least, according to whoever “has the floor” at the time. What I don’t see is anybody saying that he tested a load, using (insert test parameters here), and relating the results. Now, I know that you can’t go down to the local lockup and sign out a felon to try your load of choice on, but a lot of meaningful results can be obtained using a medium other than human flesh. I know what my loads will do if the intruder is wearing heavy Carharts or a t-shirt. Worried about overpenetration? Some drywall and a couple of two-by-fours will let you make judgment based on walls. If it is important to you, and it seems to be judging from these threads, you should test your load so you know what will happen when you touch one off.

Three large, very anti-social dogs roaming my house at night also tend to give me some peace of mind.

DC

Vergeltung
November 19, 2008, 09:46 AM
nate's empirical data is enough for me. issue is closed in my mind.

Ruger4570
November 19, 2008, 11:34 AM
Nate, you are certainly allowed to use WHATEVER YOU want to use for your home defense rounds, likewise, I am too. I have neighbors all around me closeby and have no desire to shoot buckshot or slugs through walls anymore than possible. I'd sure hate to kill a innocent neighbor in my quest for the best penetrating of a bad guy shotshell.
It is true, walls do have a few 2 x 4's in their construction, but these are generally 16"on center leaving around 14" of nothing but drywall. That deesn't even take into account many windows in most rooms.
As far as any testing performed by me all I can tell you is I shot several loads of #4 3inch magnums completly through 3 sheets of 3/4" plywood. How does that rate against body penetration, fairly well I would assume.
I don't advocate using 7 1/2 shot nor 8's or 9's any more than I would a 22 as a first choice, but I would take ANY of these rather than NONE of these.
From the little testing I have actually done, I doubt there are too many home invaders willing to take more than one, possibly two Magnum #4 Turkey loads.
Your loads may be fine in your neighborhood, but not in mine. I don't know what it takes to be an expert, but I think a measure of common sense and safety for yours and your neighbors should fall into the equation.

nate45
November 19, 2008, 12:50 PM
As far as any testing performed by me all I can tell you is I shot several loads of #4 3inch magnums completly through 3 sheets of 3/4" plywood. How does that rate against body penetration, fairly well I would assume.


Oh really? Thats very interesting, I just happen to have some 3/4 inch plywood and some 3 inch Magnum #4s, I have several different brands and even tungsten heavier than lead ones. I'll bet these tungsten ones will zip right through one or two sheets of 3/4 inch plywood.

How far away were you when you shot? What choke were you using? Were the sheets right together or did they have space between them? I want to know so I can do it and post some pics.

http://i267.photobucket.com/albums/ii296/nate45auto/100_0702.jpg
http://i267.photobucket.com/albums/ii296/nate45auto/100_0710.jpg

Ruger4570
November 19, 2008, 01:53 PM
Sure Nate, I used my standard turkey load consisting of Remington Premier High Velocity Turkey Shells. These are copper plated and the load has 1 3/4 oz of shot at 1300 fps, not 1 1/4 oz loads. Plywood was approx 2 or inches +/-apart.
I think you will find if you use THOSE loads the plywood will lose, much as a bad guy being hit COM or head.

New_Pollution1086
November 19, 2008, 02:06 PM
Bird, 00,00,00,00,00

thats how mine is loaded, mostly b/c I don't want to kill someone. if the continue to come at me or threaten me, i unload the rest.

I have a setup in my apt for an intruder and unless he is at me door it works, (tested with roommates)

next time i go to the range im going to buy a pumpkin and put jeans and a sweatshirt on it and shoot it, ill post on here the results.

T

Mike U.
November 19, 2008, 02:13 PM
next time i go to the range im going to buy a pumpkin and put jeans and a sweatshirt on it and shoot it, ill post on here the results.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruger4570
As far as any testing performed by me all I can tell you is I shot several loads of #4 3inch magnums completly through 3 sheets of 3/4" plywood. How does that rate against body penetration, fairly well I would assume.

Oh really? Thats very interesting, I just happen to have some 3/4 inch plywood and some 3 inch Magnum #4s, I have several different brands and even tungsten heavier than lead ones. I'll bet these tungsten ones will zip right through one or two sheets of 3/4 inch plywood.

How far away were you when you shot? What choke were you using? Were the sheets right together or did they have space between them? I want to know so I can do it and post some pics.

GAME ON, BABY!

I am soooo looking forward to seeing these test reults. :cool::D

T.A.Sharps
November 19, 2008, 04:30 PM
All you birdshot nuts are basing your argument on either you ONLY want to really hurt or scare the intruder, or you want to use whatever will will not penetrate your walls.

I've shot an air soft pistol, shooting plastic pellets with a spring at 200fps that penetrated half way through a wall.

Not to mention the various penetration tests with bird shot that you can go find.

So any argument that #4 is safer because it won't penetrate "so much" is pure horse sh!t. If you are going to shoot at someone and miss, it will go through the wall.

The second philosophy you all have that is based on the fact that a turkey load or other birdshot will hurt him so much that there is no way he will keep coming at you. There are plenty of examples, especially in law enforcement, showing how a shot that does not immediately incompasitate someone still gives him the chance to get off one round at least.

He will definitely not be so careful with his choice of firearm or caliber.

Since there is no magic 0 penetration shot load, your only concern should be to put this person down with no chance of him pulling his trigger.

Tests aside,
the fact alone that we have to have these long threads all the time to question the reliability of bird shot is enough not to depend on it for your life.

You can buy some slugs or buckshot just as easily as you can birdshot.

Furthermore, the idea some of you have to shoot your bird load first, then your slightly heavier load, then you're more heavier than that load... blah blah blah. That is just dumb, how many shots you think you would really get off before he could shoot one.

Musketeer
November 19, 2008, 04:39 PM
Bird, 00,00,00,00,00

thats how mine is loaded, mostly b/c I don't want to kill someone. if the continue to come at me or threaten me, i unload the rest.


Sorry but that is an absolutely irresponsible mindset.

If you shoot someone it is because you believe lethal force was necessary. If it was then you are wrong to use anything less. If it was not then shooting him with birdshot and explaining you did not want to kill him opens you up to prosecution for the unwarranted use of deadly force.

Make up your mind now as to what would cause you to shoot and then load the most effective round available for the situation. Anything else is irresponsible.

rem870hunter
November 19, 2008, 04:47 PM
someone is trying to get me to say something i don't want to.

just because i have an untruder.


am i supposed to hurt my own to stop an attacker?

i'm changing my HD shotgun loads to winchester low recoil/low noise #8 target loads. and i am going to aim for the intruders face or head.

i'll still keep 5 winchester #1 buck on the stock cuff. and a box of sluggers on the nightstand with my flashlight.

nate45
November 19, 2008, 05:02 PM
Plywood was approx 2 or inches +/-apart.

OK, I can nail three sheets together with 1x2, but I need to know how far away you were and what choke you used.

next time i go to the range im going to buy a pumpkin and put jeans and a sweatshirt on it and shoot it, ill post on here the results.

That isn't a very realistic test and actually neither is shooting wood, 10% ballistic gelatin is the standard and the substance that most closely simulates human flesh.

Here are some good tests of shotgun loads from number 8 to OO Buck.

12 gauge Wound Profiles (http://www.shotgunworld.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?t=109958)

#1 Buck through a sheet of 3/4 inch plywood, two layers of 10 oz denim and into ordnance gelatin.
(http://www.brassfetcher.com/FBI%20Test%205%20(Exterior%20door)%20Winchester%203%20inch%20magnum%20unplated%201%20buckshot.html)

This article should be a sticky.

Shotgun Home Defense Ammunition (http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs10.htm)

Birdshot, because of its small size, does not have the mass and sectional density to penetrate deeply enough to reliably reach and damage critical blood distribution organs. Although birdshot can destroy a great volume of tissue at close range, the permanent crush cavity is usually less than 6 inches deep, and this is not deep enough to reliably include the heart or great blood vessels of the abdomen. A gruesome, shallow wound in the torso does not guarantee a quick stop, especially if the bad guy is chemically intoxicated or psychotic. If the tissue crushed by the pellets does not include a vital cardiovascular structure there's no reason for it to be an effective wound.

GAME ON, BABY!

I don't see it as a game, I think it is deadly serious business. People who have no or limited knowledge of firearms read this site in search of factual information. They may be trying to decide what is the best load to load a newly purchased shotgun with, a shotgun they may need to defend their lives and the lives of their famalies.

If someone wants to load their shotgun with birdshot for defense thats their business, but it is not the best choice and it's a choice that could have fatal consequences.

Bird, 00,00,00,00,00

thats how mine is loaded, mostly b/c I don't want to kill someone.

I understand I don't want to kill anyone either, I hope no one reading this wants to kill anyone, but if you don't want to possibly kill someone then don't shoot them with a deadly weapon.

http://www.tacticalshotgun.ca/content_nonsub/gelatin_testing/bird_4_rem_heavy_dove/bird_4_heavy_dove_rem_c.jpg
Gelatin Testing: #4 Birdshot


Range: 3 yards
Shotgun: 18 inch barreled Remington 870 Marine Magnum

Round: 12 gauge 2� Remington Heavy Dove 1-1/8 oz #4 Birdshot
Measured Average Permenant Cavity: 6.5 inches (16.5 cm)

Musketeer
November 19, 2008, 05:05 PM
Nobody can stop you from using loads designed to be used against 6oz feathered creatures with hollow bones or frangible clay targets. If it stopped somebody once somewhere it must be good enough, after all I read it on the web. :rolleyes:

mavracer
November 19, 2008, 05:09 PM
here is a sight that has many gelatin tests from #8s to slugs.remeber these are bare tests.
http://www.tacticalshotgun.ca/ballistics_shotgun.html
Bird, 00,00,00,00,00

thats how mine is loaded, mostly b/c I don't want to kill someone.
most states will consider this deadly force,yet you admit you didn't think deadly force was necessary.Just playing devil's advocate.
if you feal that way get some less than lethal shells(bean bags) and load one of those.yes they're expensive but way cheaper than the lawyer fees for manslaughter.
http://www.ammunitiontogo.com/catalog1/product_info.php/pName/3rds-12-gauge-tail-stabilized-bean-bag-ammo/cName/lessthanlethal-ammo-12-gauge-ammo

Musketeer
November 19, 2008, 05:36 PM
DO NOT get bean bags or other garbage for your shotty. ANYTHING fired out of a gun is considered deadly force. Using that bean bag will buy you the same amount of trouble as birdshot. In addition just the use of the weapon to make a threat is threatening deadly force without justification if you do not believe using deadly force is justified.

Mike U.
November 20, 2008, 01:12 AM
I don't see it as a game, I think it is deadly serious business. People who have no or limited knowledge of firearms read this site in search of factual information. They may be trying to decide what is the best load to load a newly purchased shotgun with, a shotgun they may need to defend their lives and the lives of their famalies.

If someone wants to load their shotgun with birdshot for defense thats their business, but it is not the best choice and it's a choice that could have fatal consequences.

If they are, in fact, searching this site for factual information, then how could they possibly overlook the dozens of threads where shotgun afficionados continually advocate the use of shotgun slugs or buckshot for HD and SD?
It is THE standard answer.
Every newbie that steps in and asks is given the same advice. Use buckshot or slugs, then it's on to which one(?) and can I use rifled slugs in my smoothbore(?) Yada, yada, yada. The song remains the same. :)

Bill DeShivs
November 20, 2008, 03:21 AM
For the umpteenth time-
Buckshot is great for confrontations of uncertain distance-like encountered in law enforcement. Targets may even be 40 yards away.
In your home, heavy birshot will suffice. You are choosing the distance-it's in your house.
I personally know of an instance of #8 shot blowing a hole almost through a man's chest.
I also know of a suicide, where buckshot did NOT exit the head.
All the "expert's" recommendation of buckshot is geared toward law enforcement-not home defense. If you fear overpenetration, heavy birdshot is fine.

T.A.Sharps
November 20, 2008, 03:49 AM
I thought I would post this since I'm not sure how many of you would actually take the time to look here when you give someone advice to defend their lives with bird shot.

It is from the Box O' Truth web sight that people talk about.

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.

But doesn't 00 Buck penetrate too much in interior walls to be a "safe" load in a home?
Yes, it does penetrate a lot. But any load that is going to be effective will need to penetrate walls to have enough power to penetrate bad guys. If our only concern was to be sure we didn't penetrate walls, we would use BB guns. However, BB guns will not stop bad guys.

Therefore, we must use loads that will STOP bad guys, and this means that they will also penetrate walls. So, be sure you hit the bad guy and do not shoot into walls where loved ones are on the other side.

When To Use Birdshot
A friend of AR15.com sends this:

"I saw a gunshot victim, about 5' 10" and 200 lbs, taken to the operating room with a shotgun wound to the chest. He was shot at a range of six feet at a distance of just over the pectoralis muscle. He was sitting on his front porch and walked to the ambulance. We explored the chest after x-rays were taken. The ER doc had said 'buckshot' wound, but this was obviously not accurate.

It was # 6 shot. There was a crater in the skin over an inch in diameter. When the shot hit the level of the ribs, it spread out about five inches. There was ONE pellet that had passed between the ribs and entered the pericardium, but not damaged the heart at all. As you say, 'use birdshot for little birds.'"

nate45
November 20, 2008, 04:52 AM
Every newbie that steps in and asks is given the same advice. Use buckshot or slugs, then it's on to which one(?) and can I use rifled slugs in my smoothbore(?) Yada, yada, yada. The song remains the same.

And yet in the very next post....

In your home, heavy birshot will suffice. You are choosing the distance-it's in your house.
I personally know of an instance of #8 shot blowing a hole almost through a man's chest.

Then in the next post....

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.

Then I bolster this post with a visual aid.....

http://www.tacticalshotgun.ca/content_nonsub/gelatin_testing/bird_8_heavy_dove/bird_8_heavy_dove_b.jpg
First three inches of permanent wound cavity were completely destroyed. Little to no temporary stretch cavity effects were observed. Small sized birdshot such as this #8 heavy dove load is a poor choice for deployment with a tactical shotgun. Wounds inflicted from birdshot tend to be gruesome yet shallow as they lack the penetration required to reach vital cardiovascular or central nervous system structures.

Range: 3 yards
Shotgun: 18 inch barreled Remington 870 Marine Magnum
Round: 12 gauge 2 3/4 Remington Heavy Dove 1-1/8 oz #8 Birdshot
Gelatin: 9'x9'x19' 10% ordinance gelatin block
Measured Average Permanent Cavity Penetration: 4.5 inches (11.4 cm)
Temporary Stretch Cavity: 1.0 to 3 inches (2.5 to 7.6 cm)

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. If someone is going to claim the earth is flat or the sun is the center of the universe(which given the empirical evidence is akin to what the bird vs buck shot debate has become) then to be taken seriously they need to provide some proof.

Autopsy reports, ballistic testing or at least the writings of a noted expert (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expert) something to bolster their claim. Until the time that evidence is produced, I'm going to continue to be convinced that buck shot #1 or larger and slugs are the prudent choice for defense applications, whether they be home or police/tactical in nature.

sourdough44
November 20, 2008, 06:43 AM
We can debate all year about the best 'man stopper'. Here's the truth, any gun held by someone with the mindset to use it will repell 95%+ of said bad guys. Yes that other 5% is out there. If what I have at the moment is an H&R single shot 20ga, that's what I'll use.

rem870hunter
November 20, 2008, 07:13 AM
i have seen the box o' truth shotgun tests. and like before when i first saw it. i would like to see the testing done on something other than bare gelatin. like maybe bare gelatin with a winter coat or leather jacket,jeans,heavy trousers. maybe do a gelatin test with it poured into a torso shaped mold and dressed to simulate an intruder wearing heaving or light clothing to see what kind of penetration there is. if its the same depth, shallower,deeper. if there is any deflection of pellets,even if its buckshot. yes if they are wearing body armor that may stop it. but i recall a NJ cop (Zimmerman) that was hit in the face through a door with a shotgun blast. he did die. and i bet he was wearing a vest.

mavracer
November 20, 2008, 09:38 AM
DO NOT get bean bags or other garbage for your shotty. ANYTHING fired out of a gun is considered deadly force. Using that bean bag will buy you the same amount of trouble as birdshot.
I was more trying to say I't a bad idea to admit you wern't trying to kill with birdshot,than reccomending anyone use LTL ammo.as you stated here.
Sorry but that is an absolutely irresponsible mindset.

If you shoot someone it is because you believe lethal force was necessary.
however can you cite any cases where someone was convicted of attempted murder while using LTL ammo or are you stating your opinion as fact.
after all I read it on the web. :rolleyes:
In addition just the use of the weapon to make a threat is threatening deadly force without justification if you do not believe using deadly force is justified.
sorry, thought sombody had broke into the house.didn't know we were talking about something else:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

300magman
November 20, 2008, 09:57 AM
Personally I have very little to nothing staked on this discussion but I am very curious as to how a 3" magnum heavy waterfowl load or even a 3.5" magnum heavy waterfowl load of steel size T shot would fare.

As an unbiased spectator I promote nothing, only knowledge...and perhaps as a natural **** disturber...I do feel the need to point out that most of this testing with bird shot I have have just looked at was done with what seem like pretty light loads to me. Where do you even get 1oz loads of 7.5 ??? The minimum I fire at partridge is 1 1/8 oz but there is plenty of 1 1/2, 1 5/8, or even 1 3/4oz loads that you could have tried those tests with instead.....Would the results have been much different, probably not a whole lot, but if you want to put more effort into your arguements against birdshot at least fire the heaviest damn loads out there and see.

Again, not promoting anything, just pointing stuff out.....and hoping I might egg someone on into testing a load of 3.5" steel T :p Just for the heck of it.

Musketeer
November 20, 2008, 10:41 AM
sorry, thought sombody had broke into the house.didn't know we were talking about something else

justification for use of deadly force, even in the home, varies from state to state.

The ONLY universal in the USA is a reasonable fear for life. Some jurisdictions consider the presence of an intruder as enough to establish that and others do not. I prefer to craft my argument to cover everyone in the USA, even in the most liberal areas.

I do know one class of intruder I would suggest using bird shot against.
http://www.badmovies.org/movies/momdad/momdad4.jpg

Now for Less Than Lethal:

I base my statements on what I have read from qualified experts such as Ayoob. The guy has been there to testify enough that I accept his statements on the issue. In addition here is a little tidbit:

http://www.aele.org/critical-01.html
2. Bean Bags

Deorle v. Rutherford, 263 F.3d 1106 (9th Cir. 2001) An emotionally disturbed plaintiff was shot with a beanbag round while advancing on an officer. The beanbag removed plaintiff’s eye and left lead shot in his skull. Court denied qualified immunity, but held that use of beanbag round was not deadly force. The court stressed that the officer gave no warning and there was no immediate safety threat. In a footnote (11), the court states,

“The appellees also call the cloth-cased shot a "beanbag" round. That euphemism grossly underrates the dangerousness of this projectile. The round is not some sort of "hackey-sack." It is a projectile capable of inflicting serious injury or death, rather than some children's toy.”

In another footnote (14), the court quotes the plaintiff’s expert:

“According to the affidavit of Peter A. Reedy, ‘the Use of Force Continuum, as used in California, would list an impact weapon high on the schedule of force. ... It would be unreasonable for an officer to use an impact weapon on an unarmed person.’”

This court also attached great significance to the mental state of the plaintiff, stating, “In the case of mentally unbalanced persons, the use of officers and others trained in the art of counseling is ordinarily advisable, and may provide the best means of ending the crisis. Even when an emotionally disturbed individual is ‘acting out’ and inviting officers to use deadly force to subdue him, the governmental interest in using such force is diminished by the fact that the officers are confronted, not with a criminal, but with a mentally ill person.”

Now this court's findings of this not being deadly force probably has something to do with protecting an LEO to some degree and is also surprising given the suspect was shot in the head with a bean bag. At the same time the court goes on at length stating that this is not a harmless projectile and can cause significant harm. Remember, that this finding applies to a LEO who has been given specific training in the use of this weapon. Would a court find the same (not lethal force) for an untrained civilian should it come before it? I would not be so certain...

mavracer
November 20, 2008, 11:13 AM
Would a court find the same (not lethal force) for an untrained civilian should it come before it?
It should since the president has been set
Court denied qualified immunity, but held that use of beanbag round was not deadly force.
the court held that the use of beanbag round was not deadly force.
the defense rests
The ONLY universal in the USA is a reasonable fear for life. Some jurisdictions consider the presence of an intruder as enough to establish that and others do not. I prefer to craft my argument to cover everyone in the USA, even in the most liberal areas.

In addition just the use of the weapon to make a threat is threatening deadly force without justification if you do not believe using deadly force is justified.

your arguement is there is a jurisdiction that would concider BRANDISHING in the home illegal.gonna need another case citing.
good luck

Musketeer
November 20, 2008, 11:30 AM
It should since the president has been set
...
the court held that the use of beanbag round was not deadly force.
the defense rests

The court held that the use of a beanbag round by an LEO was not deadly force while going on at length regarding its dangerous nature.

LEOs are trained in the proper use of such devices, civilians generally are not. An LEO using a riot baton on a person is not deadly force while Joe Sixpack using a baseball bat is... Precedent is only applicable should all the contributing factors support it. The only precedent here is that the Bean Bag was non-lethal for the LEO to use while at the same time capable of significant harm. I have found another case online where a mentally deranged suspect did eventually die from bean bag rounds used by the police. Arguing that such force used by an untrained individual is not lethal will be an uphill struggle, especially given the owners manual for the shotgun clearly indicates it is a deadly weapon and I would wager the packaging for the bean bag rounds also states its potential to kill if not used properly.

mavracer
November 20, 2008, 11:56 AM
The court held that the use of a beanbag round by an LEO was not deadly force while going on at length regarding its dangerous nature.
I'm sorry I missed where it differentiated LEO in the court decision you posted gotta get my glasses checked.wait I don't wear glasses:D.

Musketeer
November 20, 2008, 12:33 PM
The case was concerning an LEO and the decision was therefore in reference to one.

Trying to tie that decision relating to an LEO trained in the use of such a device to a justification for a civilian with no such training is a risky proposition. If you doubt me ask a lawyer.

mavracer
November 20, 2008, 12:44 PM
Trying to tie that decision relating to an LEO trained in the use of such a device to a justification for a civilian with no such training is a risky proposition. If you doubt me ask a lawyer.
actually the president is set with the court case you quoted.it's very plain language beanbags are less than deadly force.the DA is going to have to argue LEO have rights to use them that I don't and thats the loosing propisition.And I can hardly see a worse case sceniro for the DA with no verbal warning and a head shot, when TRAINING is a verbal warning and aim below the sternum.

Hey you don't want to use them fine. Hope the DA doesn't see your posts here because "you just wanted to kill him".

oneounceload
November 20, 2008, 12:52 PM
The ONLY universal in the USA is a reasonable fear for life.

Not necessarily true - in certain states, you are required to exit your home and leave it to the BG to ransack and steal rather than have a deadly force confrontation.

I, however, now live in FL, where the Castle Doctrine says otherwise;)

Musketeer
November 20, 2008, 01:07 PM
Not necessarily true - in certain states, you are required to exit your home and leave it to the BG to ransack and steal rather than have a deadly force confrontation.


Cute but not true, even in NYC.

actually the president is set with the court case you quoted.it's very plain language beanbags are less than deadly force.the DA is going to have to argue LEO have rights to use them that I don't and thats the loosing propisition.

Believe what you want. No precedent exists in a vacuum. It is fully dependent on the contributing factors, a big one of which is an LEO in the case in point.

For a DA to argue a LEO has rights with regards to the use of force, lethal and non-lethal, beyond that of a non-LEO is easy and already established. In almost all jurisdictions LEOs have the right to use a variety of levels of force to resolve situations that the normal citizen does not. To say an LEO has a right to use a bean bag where you do not is easy given they already have a right to use a bullet, taser, baton and other tools in situations where you do not.

mavracer
November 20, 2008, 01:38 PM
so you are still contending that I've got 8 rounds of buckshot in my gun and one LTL shell you as a DA are gonna prove I intended to kill him with the first shot (the LTL round).
the president has been set they're less than lethal.says so on the box and they confirmed it in a court of law.
yes the LEO may deploy different levels of force than I can.many places you can't persue a criminal.
but the defined levels of force are the same.
If a LEO shoots a live round at you it's deadly force if you shoot one back it's deadly force.
if deadly force is not warrented it is illegal.
LTL shells are not deadly force.

Mike U.
November 20, 2008, 02:19 PM
Autopsy reports, ballistic testing or at least the writings of a noted expert something to bolster their claim. Until the time that evidence is produced, I'm going to continue to be convinced that buck shot #1 or larger and slugs are the prudent choice for defense applications, whether they be home or police/tactical in nature.
__________________

Bold emphasis added by Mike U.


I agree.

I'm running low recoil 00 buck* as of this writing.
However, recently I've been kicking around the idea of using #2 or #3 buck. More pellets, .25 and .27 caliber respectively, still sized large enough to produce a favorable conflict resolution for the intended victim/homeowner.
This kind of goes against my grain as I normally feel .30 caliber projectiles are a good starting point for serious social conflict resolution. My thinking here is more is better. :)




*I'm still recovering from open heart surgery so I can't use anything with more power(read: kick).

Bill DeShivs
November 20, 2008, 02:28 PM
There is a PRECEDENT that we have the most liberal PRESIDENT in history.

Musketeer
November 20, 2008, 02:33 PM
Believe what you want. If you fire a gun at someone it will be construed as lethal force no matter what comes flying out of it.

Lethal force is related to training as well as the device itself. If I beat you with a police baton there is every chance I will be guilty of using lethal force. If an LEO does so they are most likely not going to be considered using lethal force because they are documented as having been given specific training in the use of the device in a non-lethal manner.

If you do not believe me that these things can kill when used by the untrained and unqualified look at the company that makes them http://www.alstechnologies.com/ and read this concerning training in their use:
http://static.alstechnologies.com/articles/police-dec-2007.pdf
Impact munitions—whether they be rubber, wood, or even
electronic like the new TASER eXtended Range Electronic Projectile
(XREP)—are specially designed projectiles that are made to
strike a subject’s body, causing non-lethal blunt trauma and incapacitation.
Unfortunately, when used incorrectly or when fired at
the wrong angle, some impact munitions can cause serious injury
and even death.

Proper deployment of impact munitions is not just a matter of
aiming at a non-lethal zone on the subject’s body. Many impact
munitions are not as aerodynamic as lethal projectiles. In the case
of bean bag rounds, for example, the shape offers so much resistance
that it affects flight accuracy.

The desired effect of impact munitions is to allow an officer to
incapacitate a subject at a distance without inflicting any permanent
injury on that subject. To achieve this goal, you have to
know where to shoot that subject and how to deliver the impact
round on target.

mavracer
November 20, 2008, 03:33 PM
There is a PRECEDENT that we have the most liberal PRESIDENT in history.
thank god spell check is here.
If you do not believe me that these things can kill when used by the untrained and unqualified
I understand they can be lethal (irrguardless of training) if used improperly.But you are trying to relate that to intent.the worst public defender in the world could surely make it clear to the jury "if my client had of ment lethal force he would not have used a non-lethal round.

I understand you stated your opinion and tried to make it seam fact but the very court case you brought up refutes your own statement.

non lethal= no deadly force.

DO NOT get bean bags or other garbage for your shotty. ANYTHING fired out of a gun is considered deadly force. Using that bean bag will buy you the same amount of trouble as birdshot.

IF as you say birdshot=beanbag surely you can find a case where birdshot used by LEO was concidered not deadly force.

shortwave
November 20, 2008, 04:30 PM
My preference is #4`s to slugs. Stay away from the 'dragon`s breath' and 'bolo' round;):D.

Musketeer
November 20, 2008, 04:37 PM
I understand they can be lethal (irrguardless of training) if used improperly.But you are trying to relate that to intent.the worst public defender in the world could surely make it clear to the jury "if my client had of ment lethal force he would not have used a non-lethal round.

and nobody has been convicted for using lethal force when they thought the item non-lethal?

The bottom line is the owners manual on the weapon says it can be lethal. The product in question says it can be lethal. There is every reason to expect when used by the untrained that LESS LETHAL (the term used on the manufacturer's website) item will is lethal. Use a gun as a civilian with anything and it is lethal force in the eyes of the law. Use a certified less lethal device in a firearm as an LEO with training in the use of such devices and it is considered Non-Lethal. It is the training and certification which makes the difference and which you seem to not understand.

If you take a scalpel to a persons chest cavity and a surgeon does the same the court views both acts differently even if you both have the same intention. YOU are not properly trained or certified to cut up a thorax, the doctor is. Likewise you are not properly trained or certified to use a bean bag round, the LEO who does is. The court may have found his use in this case as non-lethal but it clearly recognizes the significant risk the device posed. The officer has department training and protocol to fall back on to justify his application of the device at that time. You do not. The standards you are held to and the effect of the device in both your hands is completely different.

I see no point arguing with you further. You fail to accept that decisions do not happen in a vacuum irrespective of contributing factors and precedent cannot be simply plucked from one decision and applied to another independent of those factors. You also seem to think your rights to use force are the same as that of an LEO. I have made my case and simply hope any people looking for guidance can understand that logic. If they question it ask an expert in the field or lawyer.

Every weapon's manual says it is a deadly weapon. Anything you fire out of that weapon will come from a box with a warning saying it can be lethal. If you as a citizen fire anything from a gun at a person it is lethal force. PERIOD. If you state you used something less because you felt lethal force was not warranted then you are guilty of using said force without justification. If you loaded a bean bag or bird shot or rock salt or anything else you care to stick down your boom stick, are known to have loaded that stuff to avoid inflicting a lethal wound and use it you may be facing a world of legal hurt. Decide for yourself.

mavracer
November 20, 2008, 05:37 PM
There is every reason to expect when used by the untrained that LESS LETHAL item will is lethal.
why? and I assume you ment "be lethal"
Likewise you are not properly trained or certified to use a bean bag round, the LEO who does is.
apparently you don't under stand the "court denied qualified immunity".It didn't matter that he was a trained LEO because he in fact used the ammunition incorrectly.

Deorle v. Rutherford, 263 F.3d 1106 (9th Cir. 2001) An emotionally disturbed plaintiff was shot with a beanbag round while advancing on an officer. The beanbag removed plaintiff’s eye and left lead shot in his skull. Court denied qualified immunity, but held that use of beanbag round was not deadly force. The court stressed that the officer gave no warning and there was no immediate safety threat.

I see no point arguing with you further.
your not really your arguing with your own evidence.

plom
November 21, 2008, 05:49 AM
just my 2 cents, but in my career as LEO, I've seen 3 perps shot with shotguns,the last one was 2 weeks ago, he droped with a single shot at 8 yards.
All of them were shot with birdshots,usually by farmers using their old side by side, all of them were stoped and died at the scene.
Yes, at HOME DEFENSE RANGE, birdshots will stop a guy, and if you are forced to shoot a terminator that don't drop at the first shot, then try headshot, I don't think perps wear bullet proof eyes protection, blind BG is not so dangerous anymore...

oneounceload
November 21, 2008, 09:52 AM
Not necessarily true - in certain states, you are required to exit your home and leave it to the BG to ransack and steal rather than have a deadly force confrontation.
Cute but not true, even in NYC.


It was true in California when I was there a few years ago

nottelybill
November 21, 2008, 01:29 PM
I have shot things other than turkeys with turkey loads. They will take our almost anything at close range.

nemoaz
November 21, 2008, 04:54 PM
just my 2 cents, but in my career as LEO, I've seen 3 perps shot with shotguns,the last one was 2 weeks ago, he droped with a single shot at 8 yards.Yeah, in my law enforcement and prior EMS experience I've seen some that dropped from birshot. I've also seen two with birdshot wounds to the head that walked about afterwards, although one was missing a jaw. Either could have killed someone had that been his intention.

Anecdotally, we've probably all seen or heard a little of everything. Dozens of people DRT (dead right there) from a .22. People who have taken 7 .45's to the chest and abdomen and walked away. 357 to the head that just skipped off the skull due to the angle. And I believe everyone of these stories and have seen photographs and reports of each. Crazy things can happen. That being said, the ballistic tests are pretty consistent on what it takes to be a reasonable manstopper. And a few inches of penetration in bare gelatin (even less with skin and clothes to penetrate) ISN"T it.

Personally, I wouldn't quibble much with largest birshot, #1, BB, or T shot that some of you have suggested. That's probably fairly close to adequate penetration at across the room ranges. I don't know why you'd limit yourself though. These turkey/goose/duck loads are more expensive than buckshot around here. I also like managed recoil/tactical loads (which are buckshot only AFAIK) because my wife has an easier time with it.

If I were forced to use smaller birdshot, I wouldn't trust it for a COM shot. I'd probably aim for the neck or head. I'd also expect to make multiple shots to stop the badguy.

Here's a pretty good evaluation of different loads: http://www.tacticalshotgun.ca/ballistics_shotgun.html I know that many of you have seen this. I'm sure some haven't. Keep in mind that bare gelatin equals more or less bare flesh. I've you've ever tried to puncture the skin or a person or animal, you know that the skin itself is more resistant to penetration than the flesh underneath. Also, most criminals will be wearing clothing. In my neck of the upper midwest, they were a lot of clothing this time of year.

There is a reason why no law enforcement agency carries birdshot. PLOM, what do you carry in your duty shotgun? Hmmmm...

My last post. I don't really have anything to add. Not really sure I added anything from any of the other weekly birdshot vs. buckshot posts.

plom
November 21, 2008, 05:27 PM
duty shotgun is loaded with low recoil 12 pellets buckshot from fiocchi ;)

Scattergun Bob
November 21, 2008, 05:54 PM
No one will know what the next gunfight will look like, or what it will take to win! Clint Smith

Why Limit yourself by ammo selection? There are more than enough limiting factors using scatterguns as fighting weapons.

I load my scattergun with 000 or 00 indoors and have some slugs handy if it goes outside.

Good Luck & Be Safe

Webleymkv
November 21, 2008, 06:19 PM
Depends on the application, I load one of my HD shotties with birdshot. Then again, it's 3.5" Steel BB shot from a 10ga. The 12ga gets loaded with 3" #4 Buckshot.

nate45
November 21, 2008, 07:12 PM
Why Limit yourself by ammo selection?

In the past I loaded my defense shotgun with #2 bird shot, I did it for years, because I thought they would be adequate.

http://www.TheFiringLine.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=38548&d=1227309630

I just figured no one could stand up to one of those, all I was doing though was guessing and not taking into consideration the fact that if I ever did have to shoot someone it probably wouldn't be a normal person.

More than likely the vast majority of people would be stopped by having a shotgun pointed at them, more than likely the vast majority of people that didn't stop would be if hit by a load of #2 bird shot.

What we have to ask ourselves though is what kind of a person breaks into an occupied dwelling? A normal person? A run of the mill thief who thought no one was home? Possibly, but given the modern day rash of home invasions and bizarre crimes why take a chance?

Look, it is actually very rare for anyone to have to point a firearm at someone, its rarer still to have to shoot, but if someone forcibly breaks into your home in the middle of the night while you are at home, do you really want to be armed with birdshot?

Some people have said well its just the first shot or two, then I've got buck or slugs. What if one or two shots are all you get? Why take a chance? If you actually had to go to the extreme lengths of shooting an intruder, what would be the bigger worry? The remote lightening strike odds of an over penetrating pellet hurting an innocent, are of birdshot, given all we now know of its shortcomings, failing to stop a determined possibly drugged or psychotic assailant?

If we were going to choose a new defense round for our favorite .45 or 9 mm would we pick one that tests showed didn't penetrate deep enough to reach the vitals? If we were going to pick a new deer hunting load would we pick one that failed a penetration test? So why would we pick a defense shotgun load that constantly fails penetration tests? Why?

I'll ask again if someone out there has test showing birdshot delivering adequate penetration lets see them.

Lets see some proof that bird shot is suitable for defense besides wishful thinking and stories of people being killed by it. I can tell relate stories of people being killed by pellet guns, but that doesn't make them proper defense tools.







38548

Homerboy
November 21, 2008, 07:34 PM
Birdhshot MIGHT drop a guy dead, but buckshot and slugs WILL, and IF the guy dies 30 seconds after I shoot him with birdshot, how many shots can he fire back at me in that meantime?

If you're trying to save your life and the lives of your wife and children, I would NOT rely on birdshot. Sorry, but my life is worth more then the POSSIBILITY of shooting through a wall. If I lived in an aprtment (and I used to), I would not opt for a shotgun if I was afraid my buckshot would penetrate a wall. I would get a .38 with Glaser ammo and call it a night.

GreyOne
November 21, 2008, 08:56 PM
I have seen a few SG shooting with birdshot. One was a suicide who put it in his mouth and created a V shaped trough- he was DRT. Another was shot in the abdomen at about 3 feet through a screen door. His intestines were a mess and he ended up with a colostomy bag. About a year later I heard he decided to eat a .45 because the pain was too much.
Bottom line, an attacker may be wearing a heavy wool or leather coat, and that will reduce penetration a good bit, especially with bird shot. If you ever face an attacker who is high on drugs, you will find not much effect from your "rack" sound (I am really tired of that foolish meme) and you may find he does not notice the pain and bleeding of a shallow bird shot wound. Use buck shot if you plan to defend your family- go with bird seed er shot if only your own sorry tail is at risk.

Ricky B
November 22, 2008, 12:28 AM
It was true in California when I was there a few years ago

Sorry, but you were misinformed by someone. It is not true now, it wasn't true then, and it has never been true in CA.

Here is the text of Penal Code §198.5:

Any person using force intended or likely to cause death or
great bodily injury within his or her residence shall be presumed to
have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great
bodily injury to self, family, or a member of the household when that
force is used against another person, not a member of the family or
household, who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and
forcibly entered the residence and the person using the force knew or
had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry occurred.

None of that looks like a rule that "you are required to exit your home and leave it to the BG to ransack and steal rather than have a deadly force confrontation."

Katrina Guy
November 22, 2008, 06:37 PM
SOMEone's seen Alfred Hitchcock's "The Birds" recently huh.

oneounceload
November 22, 2008, 10:18 PM
Rick - thanks for the correction

Ricky B
November 23, 2008, 02:53 AM
You're welcome. And in this vein, here's an item from News of the Weird:

In October, the local government council in Worcester, England, ordered Bill Malcolm to take down the 3-foot-high, barbed-wire fence he had installed to deter the thieves who had broken into his storage shed three times in the previous four months. According to the Daily Mail, the council said it feared the government would be sued by a wounded trespasser. [Daily Mail (London), 10-8-08]

alloy
November 23, 2008, 08:45 AM
Pit Bull ammo...gimmick or viable as a choice?

http://www.ammunitiontogo.com/catalog1/product_info.php/pName/9rds-12-gauge-pit-bull-buckshot-slug-dual-load-ammo/cName/12-gauge-specialtyexotic

Jay1958
November 23, 2008, 12:42 PM
There are lots of choices for those concerned about over-penetration, without resorting to birdshot.

Low-recoil buckshot has the dual advantage of reduced penetration (due to lower muzzle velocity) and lower recoil to make followup shots easier.

Also, 00 buck is not the only buckshot available. 1 Buck and 4 buck both use smaller pellets and have lower penetration of walls, etc. If you are still worried about it, go with BB loads. Smaller than buckshot, but bigger than "birdshot".

Check out this link for comparative sizes:

http://www.ammobank.com/shotsize.html

Personally, I use #1 and #4 buckshot for SD purposes, but that's just me. I don't have any children in my home, and my wife and I sleep in the same room.

Ricky B
November 23, 2008, 01:19 PM
Interesting combo, six 00 buck pellets and a 3/4 oz. slug. Being able to fit a 3/4 oz. slug in with six pellets into a 2-3/4" shell makes me wonder if the slug is simply a flat lead disk, which is probably accurate enough at near-contact distances but may veer unpredictably at, say, 30 feet.

All that the site's listing says about velocity of this ammunition is "loaded to the max load." So one question is whether the velocity is adequate, and assuming it is, this thing must kick like the devil.

Before relying on such a load, it would be wise to test it thoroughly, but at its price (plus my guess at what the shipping would cost), it's going to cost in the neighborhood of $4 per round. That makes testing a bit expensive but not out of the question.

I think, however, that a 3" shell with 12 00 pellets will solve whatever problem this product is marketed to solve (and might even kick less).