What 12gauge load for HD?

[Buzzcook]

As I mentioned on another thread I have goose shot in my bed side shotgun.

It's a 2 3/4 1oz lead BB load that gets about 1200fps.

Can't use the lead around here for geese anymore and I do think shot of that size at that speed will reliably put holes in things.

I'd be hesitant about using any smaller shot and certainly at any slower speed.

[LockedBreech]

I load my Remington 870 Express Tactical with Hornady's 2 & 3/4" TAP 00 Buckshot load, and store it safety off, fired on an empty chamber with 6 in the tube.

[shurshot]

Nate45, to answer your close ended questions;

I have been fortunate never to have had anyone break in. So no on your hypothetical "drugged up, psycho, home invader" question.

The only wild boar I ever killed was with an old Bear Kodiak Hunter recurve and a 2 bladed broadhead. However, at 3-7 yards, out of my full choke 12 Ga, I'll bet #6 shot in the head, if not lethal, would at least stagger or slow down a wild boar long enough to get a 2nd or 3rd shot into it.

And although I have never killed a deer with birdshot and would not attempt it, as it is unethical and not to mention illegal, I know someone who did, a few decades ago. A head shot w/#6 shot, full choke 20 Ga., out of a treestand. Range was close, less than 20'. Forgot his Buckshot, grabbed birdshot by accident, already in the woods when he realized his error.

*I can't wait to see him and tell him that the Internet gun gurus have spoken and that there was no way he could kill a deer with birdshot even at close range...LOL! He will get a kick out of that. How did he ever get by without Net experts back in the day? How the hell did Wild Bill Hickok get by for as long as he did with those weak, ineffective .36 cap and ball Colts?

Why don't I advocate the use of, or use Buckshot? Thin walls, family members and the windmill of civil litigation that will surely follow, if God forbid I am ever forced to defend myself and or family. And, as I thought I spelled out... I am comfortable at VERY CLOSE RANGE, 3-7 yards or LESS, with a load or two of birdshot to STOP any threat, without going though walls and endangering others..

Bart did a great job of repeating others research findings and brings up some good points of his own, and I don't dispute the numbers. If I lived alone, and didn't worry about neighbors and civil litigation, I would use buckshot, as it is a superior round for self defense. But as I don't live alone, and despite your highly subjective statement "birdshot is inadequate for defense.", I think I'll just stick to #6 high brass, the same load I use for Turkeys, in my Turkey gun.

[Moyer]

If you think that is my argument, you misunderstand me. As I recall, the argument was "there is not a commonly sold 12ga round that will not drop a man with a center mass shot.".

Please read the the sentence of mine that you actually quoted when you started arguing with me. It reads 6ft.

I completely agree that most people reading this forum would be much better off with buckshot. It depends though on how big of a place you live in, who you live with, how close your neighbors are, etc.

I live in a small apartment as part of a large apartment building (as I previously stated). Three out of four of my outside walls, as well as my ceiling, have innocent people on the other side of them. When I go to sleep at night, there's less than 8ft between my feet and the bedroom door and another 10ft between that door and the front door. If I don't kill an intruder with #6 shot in my apartment, it's because I missed.

[shurshot]

Moyer, with only 8 posts, you make more sense than a few that have racked up THOUSANDS of posts...LOL!

Thanks Al-Gore, for inventing the Net and bringing all these armchair Gun experts together online!!!! I just wish some spent half as much time SHOOTING as they do reading and posting advice!

[Willie Lowman]

Shurshot, that just means he has thousands of posts where he can doesn't have to say anything of value!

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Originally Posted by Moyer

Please read the the sentence of mine that you actually quoted when you started arguing with me. It reads 6ft.

Yes, and in the examples I gave you, at least one of those was a 12ga at 6ft and it not only didn't stop the attacker; but the attacker shot and killed the man who shot him, despite being blind in one eye. My point being, there is nothing handheld that will guarantee a stop with a single center mass shot - and load does matter.

It is your choice to load what you want. I just want people to understand that birdshot has serious limitations.

[nate45]

The problem with telling stories about shooting results and relating feelings about effectiveness; is that there is no way to corroborate it. Thats why penetration tests are important as evidence.

A shallow wound that dosen't reach the vital organs will be ineffective. The reason I used the rethorical questions that I did, is because all of those examples, wild boar, deer and home invader require adequate penetration to reach their vitals.

Originally Posted by shurshot

although I have never killed a deer with birdshot and would not attempt it, as it is unethical and not to mention illegal

Why is it unethical and illegal? It is unethical and illegal because bird shot lacks the penetration and effectivness to kill deer. Just as in lacks the penetration and effectivness to stop determined attackers.


Pro Tip: I could write all sorts of shooting stories and the effects I've seen. Sometimes I do as it relates to the topic. However, there is no way to verify pseudo-anonymous tales.

Here is an example:

Originally Posted by shurshot

Thanks Al-Gore, for inventing the Net and bringing all these armchair Gun experts together online!!!!

Now from that post someone might gather that Al Gore invented the internet, when in fact he did not. "Al Gore said he 'invented' the Internet" In fact he never even said that he did.

Thats why I post links to testing, scientific evidence and articles by well known defense and firearms experts. It corroborates my claims much better than un-sourced anecdotes.

[lefteye]

If shot size is irrelevant to "stopping power", as has been implied by some posts, why do different shot sizes even exist? Heck, 7 1/2 is good enough for Canada Geese and bad guys with a .357. Most (maybe all) shot sizes will produce a horrible, but shallow, surface wound on an attacker at 6 feet or 6 yards or whatever - but that is not the objective. THE objective is to STOP the attacker and that may require much greater penetration. As noted previously in this thread, No. 1 buck has been shown to be the best and 00 is (a close) second place. FWIW, I still have several five shell boxes of Peters 2 3/4" Magnum Buckshot, 20 pellets, No. 1 Buck (price tag - $1.59), as well as much more recent production Federal 00 buck.

[C0untZer0]

It's the argument that at close ranges, because the pattern hasn't expanded, the load acts like a "column of lead", just like a slug.

But it's not true.

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.

It's been proven to not be true in ballistic gelatin, and real life examples.

The difference between bird shot and buck shot is this.

How buckshot behaves when it comes into contact with a human body is documented in autopsies. How birdshot behaves when it comes into contact with a human body is documented in hospital reports.

#1 Buck or #0 seem to be the best mix of weight and number of projectiles. The pellets are large enough to penetrate to past 12" and numerous enough to cause a lot of tissue damage.

Did I mention that Firearms Tactical Institute did a report on it?

http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs10.htm


.

[Nnobby45]

#6 birdshot. The same as you hunt bunnys with. It won't go through a wall and hurt a neighbor or family member in the same manner a slug or Buckshot will.
If you have any doubts about birdshot, go fire a shell or two into a gallon jug filled with water at 7 yards or less. Buck and slugs are TOO powerful to use inside your home. Birdshot is fine. Test it.

Being in awe of a burst water jug doesn't amount to a test.

I've "tested" #6 birdshot on many a bird and a few bunnies. Typically it doesn't penetrate the rabbit, and is often found under the skin of a bird the size of a chukar or even quail.

It's rather amusing that some would choose their HD shotgun load on how unlikely it is to harm a family member without much consideration that it's also less likely to injure Bubba the home invader and his friends.

YES, for cryin' out load, if the range is so close that the shot basically amounts to a single projectile, it can be deadly. But to choose a load that has no penetrating ability once the pattern starts to spread is a little silly.

[Tightwad]

Here is what we use:

12 Gauge - 2 3/4" Standard Velocity #1 Buckshot

20 Gauge - 2 3/4" Standard Velocity #3 Buckshot

I use the 12 Gauge and my Mom and Little Sister use the 20 Gauges.

PS Im comfortable with those choices when it comes to recoil, penetration and pellet count.

[Moyer]

Yes, and in the examples I gave you, at least one of those was a 12ga at 6ft and it not only didn't stop the attacker; but the attacker shot and killed the man who shot him, despite being blind in one eye.

Really? Which link was that? Was the shot straight in front or from the side?

[Moyer]

I've "tested" #6 birdshot on many a bird and a few bunnies. Typically it doesn't penetrate the rabbit, and is often found under the skin of a bird the size of a chukar or even quail.

And yet, at less than 10ft, it blows them in half.

[shurshot]

Moyer, I gave up. With all due respect, I suggest you do the same. We keep repeating birdshot is lethal @ short distance, living room distance... and they keep twisting facts, taking our statements out of context, etc. There doesn't appear to be many real hunters or experienced Law Enforcement Officers on here, or folks who shoot often (if at all), but MANY who read, have some knowledge of the facts and then post advice loaded with hypothetical "what if's" and subjective observations, questions and scenarios, based upon other peoples research and data.

I doubt there are many humans out there, drugged or not, who could stand a full load or two of #6 in the chest / neck / face area at 10 feet, and still be much of threat. Obviously, there are quite a few who disagree and feel a 12 gauge shotgun loaded with birdshot (even at 10 feet), it is "inadequate".

Water finds its own level...

[C0untZer0]

I'd like to hear from an experienced law enforcement officer whose department issued #6 shot to stop burglars, home invaders, bank robbers, escaped convicts and other assorted felons.

[hangglider]

What difference does it make? If someone elects to choose a lower-powered birdshot shell because of liability concerns to his neighbors--that's their choice to make--even if it may or may not be a zombie-killer on first trigger pull.

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Originally Posted by Shurshot

I doubt there are many humans out there, drugged or not, who could stand a full load or two of #6 in the chest / neck / face area at 10 feet, and still be much of threat.

I can't say how many are out there; but they are out there - and however many they are, the number who can stand a full load of buck is even fewer.

Everybody has to assess their own risk, I think the risk of having a running firefight in my home where only one of us (and it isn't me) has cover is a more serious risk to neighbors and family than using more penetrative loads. Others may make different risk assessments; but they should understand what those risks are rather than kidding themselves that a shotgun is a death ray regardless of what it is loaded with.

[HALL,AUSTIN]

Well, yes birdshot can be lethal, especially at close distance. NOT debatable. But I do NOT care about the whole over penetration deal. Never seen anything in 12gauge 3inch that would go through my interior walls and then the block, then brick exterior walls..

[Stevie-Ray]

I'd like to hear from an experienced law enforcement officer whose department issued #6 shot to stop burglars, home invaders, bank robbers, escaped convicts and other assorted felons.

As would I, or even one that recommends it be used if any type of buck is also available.

[nate45]

Originally Posted by shurshot

#6 birdshot. The same as you hunt bunnys with. It won't go through a wall and hurt a neighbor or family member in the same manner a slug or Buckshot will.
If you have any doubts about birdshot, go fire a shell or two into a gallon jug filled with water at 7 yards or less. Buck and slugs are TOO powerful to use inside your home. Birdshot is fine. Test it.

How do you know what size shot the readers here use to hunt rabbits with?

So, #6 birdshot lacks the the penetration to go through walls, but it will still go through clothing, ribs and human flesh and reach the heart and spine? Will it also penetrate a skull and reach the human brain? Its some amazing stuff if it can do that and still not penetrate drywall.

I never knew that shooting a gallon jug of water, was a definitive scientific ballistics test that proved terminal effectiveness. Do you have any independent evidence to support that theory?

Buckshot and slugs are TOO powerful for use inside the home? According to whom and based on what evidence? Was it more water jug testing, or did you shoot a tree, or a scrap piece of plywood to reach that conclusion?

Birdshot is fine. Test it. Fine for what shooting rabbits and water jugs? Birdshot has been tested, on ballistic gelatin, the industry standard and it was found to be lacking for defense.

Originally Posted by shurshot

Hey, use slugs, buckshot, a .308, .300 Magnum, hell, use a grenade if you will.

I'm concerned about family in the next room, neighbors, liability, etc., not "Internet tests". My "evidence" comes from the field, not the internet...LOL! I have hunted and trapped my entire life and have seen what birdshot can do at close range (under 7 yards) out of a 12 Ga shotgun, so I'll stick with my birdshot.

Turn off your laptops this weekend, go out to a gravel pit, and SHOOT a load of birdshot at 4 or 5 yards (avg. living room distance might be closer to 3 yards), into a gallon jug filled with water. Test #6 birdshot out of a 12 Ga at close range. No, its not a slug or buckshot load, but it WILL leave a big, NASTY rat hole. You may just change your mind about what you read on the "net" from some Mall Ninja, or at least question as to if the person posting spends more time online than on the range.

You're concered about overpenetration thats understandable, many people are. However, the truth of the matter is, that any rifle, handgun, or shotgun round that is capable of penetrating deep enough to reach the vitals i.e. the heart, aorta, and CNS has the ability to penetrate walls. The surest way to avoid penetrating walls is to hit ones target.

Again, shooting small animals and plastic jugs filled with water, does not prove that birdshot is effective for, or wise to use, for defense. It is analogous to shooting a water jug with a high powered rifle varmint bullet and declaring it adequate for defense against grizzly bears, because it makes a big explosion. It might work, if thats all one had, but I don't think many people would recommend it as a preferred loading.

Originally Posted by shurshot

I agree that Buckshot or slugs has a better chance of stopping a bad guy, as oppossed to birdshot... no dispute here guys. However, to read many of your posts, you make birdshot at close range sound as effective as a Crosman BB gun. Anyone who has fired birdshot at targets at close range (under 7 yards), be they water jugs, lumber, foxes, turkeys or woodchucks, understands how lethal birdshot is, and while it won't penetrate like buckshot or slugs, it is nowhere near as weak and ineffective as some on here are saying. This makes a few of us wonder, given some of the high posts counts that some of you have racked up in such a short amount of time, if perhaps too much time is spent on the internet and not nearly enough on the gun range. ?? Books and numbers are great for armchair commandos, but getting outside and testing the rounds yourself is much more fun, educational and reality based. Just saying...LOL! Load what you will. Be safe.

A common theme through out your posts in this thread, has been to impugn the credibility, character and experience of those who disagree with you. It is what is known as, an ad hominem attack. You've stated your doubts about our field shooting experience, whether or not we are real hunters, or real LEOs, etc. You know I suppose its true, I might be an inexperienced teenage boy, or a twelve year old french girl with a firearms fetish. Since I chose to remain pseudo-anonymous on this site, who's to say for certain?

However, that fact cuts both ways shurshot. How do any of us know you have ever shot anything with a shotgun? We don't, we only have your posts to go on. No one, myself included has said you didn't shoot the things you claim to have. What, at least what I'm saying, is that rabbits, water jugs and enraged chipmunks, do not equal scientific evidence. They also do not equal after shooting reports, autopsies, etc. Your theories on birdshot also aren't in accord with the advice of the vast majority of self defense experts. Which is why I link to independent sources.

The reason I and many others take the trouble to refute the assertion that birdshot is good for defense; is not for love of debating, or winning an internet argument. It is because many uninformed people read The Firing Line in search of informed, fact based information regarding self defense. What loading those people ultimately choose to use for self defense could lead to life or death consequences.

No one in this thread ever claimed birdshot did not have the potential to be lethal. No one claimed it was impossible to defend one's self with a shotgun loaded with birdshot.

What was and is claimed, is that ballistic testing, medical and autopsy reports as well as the advice of ballistic and self defense experts all agree; buckshot and slugs are preferred and recommended for defense.

TL;DR see above sentence

[Moyer]

I can't say how many are out there; but they are out there - and however many they are, the number who can stand a full load of buck is even fewer.

Haha. You just realized you posted BS links before so you post a youtube video and another broken link? How's that for scientific?! Check out the pellet spread on that poor kid's x-ray in the video. Tell me how far away you think the barrel was.

[Moyer]

So, #6 birdshot lacks the the penetration to go through walls, but it will still go through clothing, ribs and human flesh and reach the heart and spine?

Obviously it will still blow through a wall at close range. It's just less likely to keep deadly velocity after going through the other side (and continuing through more walls after that).

Buckshot and slugs are TOO powerful for use inside the home? According to whom and based on what evidence? Was it more water jug testing, or did you shoot a tree, or a scrap piece of plywood to reach that conclusion?

Do you seriously think 12ga slugs & 00 buck are not powerful enough to go through insulation and 2 little layers of drywall at close range and hurt someone on the side? Have you ever shot a 12ga at anything at close range? Ever?

[nate45]

Why are you worried about shooting through a wall Moyer?

According to you everything inside your place will be ten feet or less.

Are you afraid you will completely miss from less than four yards with a shotgun?


Why don't you name some effective, recommended defense cartridges for rifle, pistol, or shotgun that aren't capable of shooting through two sheets of drywall?

I suppose if someone lives in a cracker box with exterior wall made out of sheet rock and surrounded by nuns and hemophiliac orphans, maybe no firearm at all is the best choice.

[shurshot]

NATE45 (you cute little french girl, you ) and the rest of your anti-Bird shot clan... I surrender, I was wrong. You guys ARE right about effective loads for self defense. How could I have been SO foolish to trust birdshot at 10 feet? (PSsst! Moyer, just play along!)

After all, NO police agency issues Birdshot! You are correct guys. Police encounter various ranges of conflict (perhaps even 100 yards or more) and situations, domestic disputes, armed standoffs, moving vehicles, Riots, Robberys, Burglarys, etc. I only wanted stopping power at 10 feet or so in my living room, without any danger of the buckshot or slugs going through the perp, a wall and hitting anyone else, hence my narrow minded choice of #6 shot. What ever possessed me to think that a load of birdshot at 10 feet, out of my tight choked 12 Ga Turkey gun, could be a fight stopper?

I think I read an article (BIG MISTAKE), a few years ago by a firearms defensive trainer, a Clint something or other, (Smith?), in "GUNS" Magazine.. and he advocated using hunting shotguns (duck, turkey, etc.) and birdshot, for home defense. Perhaps this was where the idea took root in my head, as he outlined some very positive points about the birdshot and hunting shotgun for home defense, due to the very short range and penetration concerns. I remember testing the #6 shot on lumber at 10 feet after reading the article, and it looked like it would do the trick. After reading this thread, boy was I (and Clint) wrong. I'm going to write to Clint, and tell him that the TRUTH is on the internet, not in his published articles. I plan to tell him, the internet experts say only use BUCKSHOT! The Nerve of that guy to write about Birdshot! Just because he is a certified firearms self defense trainer with combat experience who wrote a monthly colum for GUNS Magazine, which has only been around since the 1950's. Birdshot...! He is as bad as that Ayoob suggesting 5 shot snub .38's are OK for concealed carry!

You guys have instructed me, corrected me, in the fine art of Internet Combat skills and Armchair Mall Ninja defense tactics and the need for POWER!! I am putting away my shotgun until Turkey season. No birdshot. In fact, I had NO IDEA that there are bad guys out there running around that can take a load of #6 birdshot in the face @ under 10 feet and keep going! Scary stuff my friends! In fact, no buckshot either! I dug around in the barn, under the floor boards and found my old box of "SHTF" toys and I'm loading up for ZOMBIES, thanks to the advice I got here in the last 24 hours! I'm done with shotguns, to hell with over penetration concerns! Look out family, look out neighbors! Lock and Load Boys... Shurshot has seen the light! Praise be to the online gun gurus! I'm going TACTICAL!!!!!!! Hardball or No Ball!

From now on, it's 7.62 and .45ACP. I'm ready to get full penetration in any blood thirsty Zombies or blocks of aggressive "ballistic gelatin". that might invade my home (I keep reading warnings about that stuff on here. It sounds like they are tough to kill if you only have birdshot, at least according to the test results).

Thanks for the education "Self Defense Experts" and you too "little french girl" Although Nate45, I must say, the way you alude to "Since I chose to remain pseudo-anonymous on this site, who's to say for certain?", we are now wondering if you are CIA, or work at the Gunsite Ranch, ex-Navy Seal, Casey Anthony's Attorney, or perhaps part of some covert, undercover, elite online strike force? You tease us with the possibility of having a 007 clearence, or perhaps you are an industry insider, or, well, who knows... then leave us hanging. No fair. You engage in 2 days of Socratic Dialectic, then tease us with your real identity.?? Do tell, Do Tell!!!!!

Me? I won't leave anyone hanging, alude to Gun Guru status, or play "Guess who". I'm just an old gun guy, no more, no less and obviously not up to date on the latest ballistics test or expert's gun wisdom. After all, who reads GUNS magazine and takes their advice anyhow???

But now, after reading these posts, I'm going TACTICAL guys! RAW POWER AND HIGH CAP CLIPS FROM NOW ON!


(PSssst! Moyer... are you still following along? I'm just trying to get them to ease up. They will dispute ANYTHING we say and take our statements out of context, so why try? Don't worry, I didn't lose it...I'm STILL keeping my #6 birdshot loads handy for my Turkey gun! Don't tell anyone, but I LOVE GUNS magazine and suspect that Clint Smith has forgotton more about firearms than half these guys pretend to know! Some of these are old junker guns I'm going to get rid of. A few of these boys on this forum are hardcore (at least when it comes to giving expert advice online..LOL!), so if they see these pics of "Tactical style stuff", perhaps they will relax, sip a cold one and just chill out as they will think they won... and if not, at least they were able to boost their post counts.. My Turkey gun and birdshot are still fine for the house, and my snub .38 fits in my coat pocket when I leave home).