Buckshot vs. Birdshot for home defense - Page 2

roy reali · September 20, 2005, 04:36 PM

If I wake up in the middle of the night and confront an intruder in my bedroom, and I fire a couple of rounds of high base 6's into his abdomen, are you telling me I am SOL?

You are a nurse. My wife is undergoing major chronic illnesses. I have the utmost respect for nurses. I have learned that you guys do more to keep patients alive and going then any MD.

You should however know that there is a big difference in shooting animals and shooting people. That big variable is shock. Shock can turn an otherwise nonfatal wound into a life and death battle. Shock does not seem to be such a problem with animals.

leadcounsel · September 20, 2005, 04:52 PM

In surprise scenarios, you may only get to shoot your gun one time. Make sure that your are shooting the best possible self defense man stopping round.

Mortally wounding the attacker does you no good if he can still attack you with his gun, knife, or jumping on you and bleeding his HIV all over you while you wrestle with him.

Look, just get buckshot (my research says 0, or 00) like the overwhelming evidence supports and rest easy.

I don't understand really why this is a debate.

Charles S · September 20, 2005, 04:55 PM

Quote:

You should however know that there is a big difference in shooting animals and shooting people. That big variable is shock. Shock can turn an otherwise nonfatal wound into a life and death battle. Shock does not seem to be such a problem with animals.

I have been a nurse for over a decade, almost 15 years. Shock will stop someone quickly, but it cannot be counted on.

Quote:

That big variable is shock.

I have had gunshot victims walk into the ER. I believe that if you induce shock you will stop the person, I do not believe that you can reliebly induce shock without penetration. As I stated earlier; I have experience in this area. I have worked, in the past, in Shreveport, LA where I have seen and cared for numerous gunshot wounds.

Based upon my experience I think that birdshot is not reliable. I have seen too many instances where people shot with birdshot did not stop what they were doing, some even drove themselves to the hosptial. I am looking for RELIABLE, rapid incapacitation. I do not believe that that can be achieved utilizing bird shot.

My 2 cents, you want to ignore my experience that is up to you. I will not trust bird shot. I feel so strongly about this that I carry a handgun when I am bird hunting.

I would sugest that any who wish should get some advanced training like Gunsight, Thunder Ranch, ect.

Charles

Harley Quinn · September 20, 2005, 09:45 PM

Think about what you are saying here.
1 1/8 ounce of lead moving at 1300 feet per second and still in its wad. The wad holder is still wrapped around this lead and you are telling me it will only make skin deep penetration? LOL

The wad usually does not totally seperate for about 15 feet. Just go to a range and check it out. The wad alone will go into a person at that range.

Reread my post, I have personally done tests. 1 3/8" wooden doors are quite a bit harder than jeans and leather. At 5 feet you can stick your hand through the door, the gut of someone would be similiar. In a house where loved ones are at and behind other walls this is the prudent round of choice.

Bird shot is not for the weak of stomach.

Some of the shot stays in the person so he has absorbed all the energy and it is not all passing through.
Slugs are just that one round, not 70 or thereabouts hitting the target at say 'less then 10 feet along with the wad'.

You guys are making me think we need more laws to protect yourselves from yourselves. LOL LOL No actually it is sad :barf:

Harley

leadcounsel · September 20, 2005, 09:52 PM

When I have used birdshot and shot plastic milkjugs the birdshot generally penetrates only one side of the empty jug and most of the birdshot can be recovered in the milkjug. Thats equivalent to a pellet gun and I'm not interested in using it for home defense.

If that's your weapon of choice, best of luck to you.

Charles S · September 20, 2005, 09:56 PM

Quote:

1 1/8 ounce of lead moving at 1300 feet per second and still in its wad. The wad holder is still wrapped around this lead and you are telling me it will only make skin deep penetration? LOL

That is not what I stated. I stated that it did not cause rapid incapacitation.

Quote:

The wad usually does not totally seperate for about 15 feet. Just go to a range and check it out. The wad alone will go into a person at that range.

I do not disagree I have personally removed the wad from the skin.

I am sure that your testing of inanimate objects make you more of an expert than anyone with real life experience in gunshot wounds.

Like I stated before get some real training by professionals. I have, and see what they recomend.

Hey you are responsible for your own protection not me. I have made my choices based upon real life shootings I have personally cared for. I know what a shotgun can do. I have seen open abdominal wounds from knifes, handguns, rifles and shotguns (Penetrating trauma is the term we use).

The key is not the ultimate death of the intruder through exangination. It is rapid or instant incapacitation.

Charles

leadcounsel · September 20, 2005, 10:00 PM

+1 Charles

roy reali · September 20, 2005, 10:55 PM

How far did you shoot the milk jug? What was the jug made of?

Harley Quinn · September 21, 2005, 12:46 AM

When the guts are strewn across the room like they have been scooped out with a sharp shovel because the person was hit with #71/2s at 5 feet the last thing you need to worry about is shock. Believe me.

You see the ones that get to the Operating room not the ones that go to the morgue.

Harley

liliysdad · September 21, 2005, 12:50 AM

#71/2s.............see, that equates to number 35.5 shot, pretty fine stuff.

Kidding aside, all of it will kill you, sometimes. Why chance it? I really could give to craps what you use, but Im using the stuff thats designed for it. I shoot clays with #7 1/2s, and scrotes with #00.

leadcounsel · September 21, 2005, 01:06 AM

Those who think that birdshot is adequate for self defense are missing the POINT.

The POINT is that adequate self defense requires immediate massive INTERNAL tissue damage and interruption with KEY vital organs.

While birdshot will, granted, probably cause alot of surface tissue damage and blood loss, it is inadequate at stopping assailants with any regularity, particularly drugged assailants who aren't feeling pain. Birdshot will, however, penetrate up to two sheets of drywall whereas 00 penetrates 8 sheets according to www.theboxotruth.com

Any search on the internet will result in the same advice; don't rely on birdshot for self defense.

Is it lethal? Yes. Can it be used for self defense? Of course. Am I going to trust MY life to it. Absolutely not! I'm not interested in the assailant dying in the emergency room. If there is an assailant assaulting me, I want a one shot stopping round. You may not get a chance for a second shot.

I trust MY LIFE to calibers that will IMMEDIATELY stop an attacker in his tracks due to the penetration, velocity, bullet expansion, and/or massive internal penetration and tissue damage and would channels, such as 00 buckshot, slugs, .40, and .223.

Harley Quinn · September 21, 2005, 01:10 AM

I am advocating this in your home at close quarters because as has been pointed out the other stuff really penetrates and goes through stuff it is not leaving all the energy in the suspect.

00 buck is my call for police work or outside shooting where the distance gets greater, but the background really is a needed concern. As was stated the slug as a one round into the suspect is better then 4 in and 8 somewhere else.

Shoot what you want. I have seen all the wounds I want for a life time.

I like paper and cans and plastic jugs that go woosh. For real action watermelons at 20 feet or you can use the sledgeomatic at 2 feet LOL.

Harley

EV1L · September 21, 2005, 02:34 AM

Good site about gunshot wounds. http://www.firearmstactical.com/wound.htm And here is a pic of the damage #4 buckshot will cause.

EV1L · September 21, 2005, 02:55 AM

***LINK***

Harley Quinn · September 21, 2005, 10:44 AM

Hi,
I remember the time frame and the tests that were done by the FBI.

Interesting statement in the article, I find that a give away.

Lets just say that all the gun manufactors and the manufactors of ammo are in this conspiracy to decieve the public. They had many persons on their payroll to decieve the public and the shooters who annually killed so many things they started an outrage by the Enviromentalists, is very much fabrication.

The 10mm, and 357 were designed to get around the large slow moving projectile that was on the scene (the old 45 auto and 44 spl).

And of course the 9mm which is the most popular hand gun cartridge of all time is not worthy of any consideration.(world wide)

I have seen so many bullet wounds and death by gunfire, some die because of shock, some die because they think they ought to and others die because they bled out from a shot to the leg and it hit the artery, or the puny 38 stopped a man in his tracks and he was dead before someone could get to him.

The term Hydrostatic shock that turn organs to jelly, are also bogus?

If it goes thru the object it does not stop the object. You get hit in the lower abdoman and if it stops in your spine or pelvis you are going down now.

FMJ is and was designed because it produced less trauma. Geneva rules remember. But this webpage is proof positive? Good stuff but all does not fit so neat in the box.

A slug that hits a vest causes so much blunt force trauma they bleed internally and the shock to the system is real. The 223 will go through the vest the heart and the spine and kill the person 5 feet behind them (FMJ).

Let's see the armor piercing round that goes thru a car door and then some of it hits the driver in the chest cavity goes thru him and kills the passenger (in the head) and lodges in the other door HMMM.

I find the webpage a good one and it has information that I would consider good. Thanks for sharing.

The picture of the person who was shot is a very terrifying vivid example of what happens to persons who are as we say shot. Superficial you say? OK!

I feel that my posts are accurate to the question asked in the initial post.
Much of what has been discussed is off topic.

I also feel that most of the persons that say they will kill a human at the time of the shooting will be very hesitant. That's good.

Then you have the new generation of cowards who shoot indescriminatly into crowds and kill innocents. These are the true terrorist's in our society and we have persons who want them to have rights,??? Interesting our society.

Harley

EV1L · September 21, 2005, 12:19 PM

The Answer:

"Hydrostatic shock is the effect commonly believed to be caused by a high velocity object entering a body, such as a bullet fired from a weapon.

The shock is described in the following way—the object will cause ordinary damage by the actual penetration, but also pass a shock wave in the surrounding tissue due to the energy of the slowing object being passed into the largely liquid material of the body (65%+). The shock wave, or sometimes competing shockwaves from multiple impacts, are believed to cause greater damage than the object itself, sometimes enough to rupture internal organs and fracture bone. Especially large objects are believed to cause hydrostatic shock by the closure of the cavity created by the object's passage.

There is a body of opinion, however, that believes hydrostatic shock is errant nonsense. The argument is based around how energy is transferred and the effects of such a transfer. Issues raised include kinetic energy vs. momentum, the rate of energy transfer, thermodynamics (kinetic energy would be transformed into heat), the speed of sound in tissue, hydrodynamic effects, 'wound tracks', and the nature of a body.

Testing in recently killed pigs (soon enough that no loss of muscle elasticity or rigor mortis could occur), shows that large amounts of tissue distruption from spherical projectiles only occurs at striking velocities somewhere between 800 and 1100 meters per second (2,500 and 3,600 feet/second). A velocity of 764 m/s (2507 ft/s) resulted in a hole barely larger in diameter than the 6 mm projectile used, while a velocity of 1116 m/s (3661 ft/s) produced a 20 by 25 mm hole in muscle. (Fackler, et al)

Some sources attempt to compare inelastic media, such as fruit and water jugs, to people, saying that the massive "splattering" effect also occurs in living flesh. This is totally contrary to the known laws of physics.

If an exerted force exceeds the tensile strength of a material, deformation and tearing occur. Because water effectively has a tensile strength of zero, any force exerted on it will deform or "tear" it (cause it to splash), discounting the effects of gravity. Human muscle tissue, however, has a tensile strength of roughly 1 to 4 MPa (145 to 580 lbf/in²); other tissues may be weaker or stronger. If the force of the "hydrostatic shock" exceeds the tensile strength of the tissue struck, then stretching or tearing of the bullet hole can occur. Lesser forces will still displace tissue, but not hard enough to cause any damage other than bruising due to blunt trauma."

Reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrostatic_shock

Harley Quinn · September 21, 2005, 01:45 PM

Hi
The 22-250 is one that fits the bill very well, so is the 220 swift, goes through steel(that is a mis nomer) what happens is the friction of it hitting the 3/8 plate and velocity send the hot steel from the plate mixed with the molten bullet, then it go's through the steel sending quite a bit more down the road than the original weight of the bullet.

Take one of the above and load it so the primers don't flatten but close.
Now you are getting some very high velocity, the longer the barrel the better, but of course there is a limit. FMJ is the best under these conditions.

The statement about hydrostatic shock was sarcasam

In my above post.

Hydrostatic shock is very real and the difference between 2500 and 3600 is quite a bit (percentage) now add the additional fps that I have just suggested (into the low 4000+) and we are talking bad news.
But...The bullet is the thing, got to be able to take that kind of velocity.

PS. If you need wikipedia you have not had first hand experience.

Harley

EV1L · September 21, 2005, 02:58 PM

"PS. If you need wikipedia you have not had first hand experience."

No I dont have a first had experience of shooting someone and seeing what the Hydrostatic shock will be like, if that what you meant by first had experience. And the only reason I used wikipedia because its a reliable source and poeple cant argue on how accurate the info is.

Harley Quinn · September 21, 2005, 05:06 PM

EV1L
If you read what wikipedia is, it is very controversial. Anyone can post about the subject and they will tell you it is very controversial.

If I have knowledge that you don't have, and believe me I do.
I am not going to go to a location like wikipedia and try to convince you.

Like all of this controversy (this discussion, off topic) It is not relevent to what the person asked.

Reread the original post.

Harley

BoneDigger · September 21, 2005, 05:23 PM

I have a question about buckshot for defense. Winchester still makes expanding led shot where some manufactureres use only copper coated. As a person that has shot deer with buckshot, the led shot expands much more and causes more damage while not overpenetrating the deer. Copper coated tends to go right through, where led will often stop in the deer. Has anyone ever tested the different brands for penetration vs just throwing different sized shot (00 buck, 1 buck, etc.) at the boards?

Todd

OneInchGroup · September 21, 2005, 07:33 PM

From what everybody seems to understand about ammunition, seems it would be logical to assume that shells labeled as "Birdshot" "Dove Load", Quail Load" etc. were designed and assembled with, ummm shooting BIRDS in mind.

"Buckshot" is not called that because it was designed to blow doves into powder (Although I've seen that happen once or twice), but because it will most likely knock down a male deer. At least that's probably what the Ammo Makers had in mind, mebbe. Perhaps it would be smart to go with what the shells were DESIGNED for when trying to decide what to use them for.

Bottom line on home defense though, is to only use a shell, a load, or a weapon that is 99.99999% likely to be lethal at the range chosen. There are only three imperatives that matter in a home defense scenario.
1. Be prepared to use, and then USE lethal force when confronted with a home invasion situation. If the other guy is armed, he will not ask permission to kill you before trying his very best to do so.
2. Make sure that once gunfire begins, you will be the only survivor of the confrontation. In today's real world, you must be CERTAIN that you will be the only one testifying at the coroner's inquest or at the Grand Jury.
3. Once you have terminated the intruder and made sure all wounds are front to back, and have called a lawyer to deal with the next phase of your life, then put away your weapon and call 911, being sure to tell the 911 operator what you look like and where you will be when the police arrive. You do not want to be shot by mistake by some nervous rookie.

If you do all these things in the proper order, you may just possibly survive the experience.

roy reali · September 21, 2005, 07:39 PM

What if you were to use .223 ammo in a rifle. Lets say that the ammo box has a picture of a varmint on it. Would this disqualify the ammo from human use?

EV1L · September 21, 2005, 09:08 PM

Harley Quinn

I'm not arguing with you, I'm just pointing out some points.

Harley Quinn · September 21, 2005, 09:09 PM

Roy Has a very good point. So do others.

I was viewing some of the posts and not many seem to understand the idea this fellow is asking. Home defense as in the home, as in rooms occupied by loved ones and other persons who you may care for.

Most of the buck shot and slugs are really to powerful inside a home they go through walls innocents etc. I should clairify something I notice I did not give the correct number of shot per ounce regarding 7 1/2s. I did not hit all the keys. In a 12 gauge in an ounce + of 7 1/2s you are shooting something that is just smaller than .10 and it contains close to 400 of them, more if you are shooting 1 and 1/4 ounce in 3" mags. Really look it up. Now the close range makes it a very deadly weapon and it also makes it less dangerous. If that makes sense.

Probably for the house a 410 is really a good all rounder make sure the barrel is 18+ inches and have a stock. Great for hitting people or shoving into a loose dog prior to blowing them away. Really 410 has more power than a hand gun and the versatility of several different shells in the snout. you could start with a scatter gun round of #8s, then go for the double 00 or triple 000 and finish it off with a slug or two as they are running down the drive way because you jerked instead of squeezed, say because of your own fears and apprehension. LOL

You who believe, will believe, you who don't, won't. So what, ignorance is fine but now you should know different. If you don't I will still sleep soundly.

Harley

OneInchGroup · September 21, 2005, 09:20 PM

Roy,

What a brilliant riposte you've tossed up today! You get the "clever guy" award for the next 2 minutes, so enjoy yourself!

I suppose the concept of sarcasm is lost on you? Trying to point out to those naifs on the board that only a birdbrain loads birdshot for a lethal force scenario, and any case in which you fire on another human HAS TO BE a lethal force situation. Can you understand the term "Negligent Homicide"? How about "Wrongful Death Lawsuit"?

Did you also miss the parts about the after-action sling your butt will be in if you just cripple or mutilate a housebreaker whose attorney will then make your life WORSE than it is for the nitwit you shot?

Trouble with these forums is there are only a few really trying to be helpful, and just loads of smartasses just out to prove they are champs of the snappy, snippy comeback.

Try being flip with the 300 lb felon who just plowed thru your front door, see if being cute works with him.

September 20, 2005, 04:36 PM	#26
roy reali Senior Member Join Date: August 23, 2005 Posts: 3,248	No Hope? If I wake up in the middle of the night and confront an intruder in my bedroom, and I fire a couple of rounds of high base 6's into his abdomen, are you telling me I am SOL? You are a nurse. My wife is undergoing major chronic illnesses. I have the utmost respect for nurses. I have learned that you guys do more to keep patients alive and going then any MD. You should however know that there is a big difference in shooting animals and shooting people. That big variable is shock. Shock can turn an otherwise nonfatal wound into a life and death battle. Shock does not seem to be such a problem with animals.

September 20, 2005, 09:45 PM	#29
Harley Quinn Junior member Join Date: August 30, 2005 Location: State of KALI Posts: 1,531	Come on Think about what you are saying here. 1 1/8 ounce of lead moving at 1300 feet per second and still in its wad. The wad holder is still wrapped around this lead and you are telling me it will only make skin deep penetration? LOL The wad usually does not totally seperate for about 15 feet. Just go to a range and check it out. The wad alone will go into a person at that range. Reread my post, I have personally done tests. 1 3/8" wooden doors are quite a bit harder than jeans and leather. At 5 feet you can stick your hand through the door, the gut of someone would be similiar. In a house where loved ones are at and behind other walls this is the prudent round of choice. Bird shot is not for the weak of stomach. Some of the shot stays in the person so he has absorbed all the energy and it is not all passing through. Slugs are just that one round, not 70 or thereabouts hitting the target at say 'less then 10 feet along with the wad'. You guys are making me think we need more laws to protect yourselves from yourselves. LOL LOL No actually it is sad :barf: Harley

September 20, 2005, 10:55 PM	#33
roy reali Senior Member Join Date: August 23, 2005 Posts: 3,248	How Far? How far did you shoot the milk jug? What was the jug made of?

September 21, 2005, 12:46 AM	#34
Harley Quinn Junior member Join Date: August 30, 2005 Location: State of KALI Posts: 1,531	Charles When the guts are strewn across the room like they have been scooped out with a sharp shovel because the person was hit with #71/2s at 5 feet the last thing you need to worry about is shock. Believe me. You see the ones that get to the Operating room not the ones that go to the morgue. Harley

September 21, 2005, 01:10 AM	#37
Harley Quinn Junior member Join Date: August 30, 2005 Location: State of KALI Posts: 1,531	Background is a must I am advocating this in your home at close quarters because as has been pointed out the other stuff really penetrates and goes through stuff it is not leaving all the energy in the suspect. 00 buck is my call for police work or outside shooting where the distance gets greater, but the background really is a needed concern. As was stated the slug as a one round into the suspect is better then 4 in and 8 somewhere else. Shoot what you want. I have seen all the wounds I want for a life time. I like paper and cans and plastic jugs that go woosh. For real action watermelons at 20 feet or you can use the sledgeomatic at 2 feet LOL. Harley

September 20, 2005, 04:52 PM	#27
leadcounsel Junior member Join Date: September 8, 2005 Location: Tacoma, WA Posts: 2,119	In surprise scenarios, you may only get to shoot your gun one time. Make sure that your are shooting the best possible self defense man stopping round. Mortally wounding the attacker does you no good if he can still attack you with his gun, knife, or jumping on you and bleeding his HIV all over you while you wrestle with him. Look, just get buckshot (my research says 0, or 00) like the overwhelming evidence supports and rest easy. I don't understand really why this is a debate.

September 20, 2005, 09:52 PM	#30
leadcounsel Junior member Join Date: September 8, 2005 Location: Tacoma, WA Posts: 2,119	When I have used birdshot and shot plastic milkjugs the birdshot generally penetrates only one side of the empty jug and most of the birdshot can be recovered in the milkjug. Thats equivalent to a pellet gun and I'm not interested in using it for home defense. If that's your weapon of choice, best of luck to you.

September 20, 2005, 10:00 PM	#32
leadcounsel Junior member Join Date: September 8, 2005 Location: Tacoma, WA Posts: 2,119	+1 Charles

September 21, 2005, 12:50 AM	#35
liliysdad Senior Member Join Date: June 7, 2004 Posts: 1,145	#71/2s.............see, that equates to number 35.5 shot, pretty fine stuff. Kidding aside, all of it will kill you, sometimes. Why chance it? I really could give to craps what you use, but Im using the stuff thats designed for it. I shoot clays with #7 1/2s, and scrotes with #00.

September 21, 2005, 01:06 AM	#36
leadcounsel Junior member Join Date: September 8, 2005 Location: Tacoma, WA Posts: 2,119	Those who think that birdshot is adequate for self defense are missing the POINT. The POINT is that adequate self defense requires immediate massive INTERNAL tissue damage and interruption with KEY vital organs. While birdshot will, granted, probably cause alot of surface tissue damage and blood loss, it is inadequate at stopping assailants with any regularity, particularly drugged assailants who aren't feeling pain. Birdshot will, however, penetrate up to two sheets of drywall whereas 00 penetrates 8 sheets according to www.theboxotruth.com Any search on the internet will result in the same advice; don't rely on birdshot for self defense. Is it lethal? Yes. Can it be used for self defense? Of course. Am I going to trust MY life to it. Absolutely not! I'm not interested in the assailant dying in the emergency room. If there is an assailant assaulting me, I want a one shot stopping round. You may not get a chance for a second shot. I trust MY LIFE to calibers that will IMMEDIATELY stop an attacker in his tracks due to the penetration, velocity, bullet expansion, and/or massive internal penetration and tissue damage and would channels, such as 00 buckshot, slugs, .40, and .223.

September 21, 2005, 02:34 AM	#38
EV1L Junior Member Join Date: September 17, 2005 Posts: 14	Good site about gunshot wounds. http://www.firearmstactical.com/wound.htm And here is a pic of the damage #4 buckshot will cause.

September 21, 2005, 02:55 AM	#39
EV1L Junior Member Join Date: September 17, 2005 Posts: 14	Real pics of (shotgun wounds) *LINK*

September 21, 2005, 10:44 AM	#40
Harley Quinn Junior member Join Date: August 30, 2005 Location: State of KALI Posts: 1,531	Thanks for the web and view Hi, I remember the time frame and the tests that were done by the FBI. Interesting statement in the article, I find that a give away. Lets just say that all the gun manufactors and the manufactors of ammo are in this conspiracy to decieve the public. They had many persons on their payroll to decieve the public and the shooters who annually killed so many things they started an outrage by the Enviromentalists, is very much fabrication. The 10mm, and 357 were designed to get around the large slow moving projectile that was on the scene (the old 45 auto and 44 spl). And of course the 9mm which is the most popular hand gun cartridge of all time is not worthy of any consideration.(world wide) I have seen so many bullet wounds and death by gunfire, some die because of shock, some die because they think they ought to and others die because they bled out from a shot to the leg and it hit the artery, or the puny 38 stopped a man in his tracks and he was dead before someone could get to him. The term Hydrostatic shock that turn organs to jelly, are also bogus? If it goes thru the object it does not stop the object. You get hit in the lower abdoman and if it stops in your spine or pelvis you are going down now. FMJ is and was designed because it produced less trauma. Geneva rules remember. But this webpage is proof positive? Good stuff but all does not fit so neat in the box. A slug that hits a vest causes so much blunt force trauma they bleed internally and the shock to the system is real. The 223 will go through the vest the heart and the spine and kill the person 5 feet behind them (FMJ). Let's see the armor piercing round that goes thru a car door and then some of it hits the driver in the chest cavity goes thru him and kills the passenger (in the head) and lodges in the other door HMMM. I find the webpage a good one and it has information that I would consider good. Thanks for sharing. The picture of the person who was shot is a very terrifying vivid example of what happens to persons who are as we say shot. Superficial you say? OK! I feel that my posts are accurate to the question asked in the initial post. Much of what has been discussed is off topic. I also feel that most of the persons that say they will kill a human at the time of the shooting will be very hesitant. That's good. Then you have the new generation of cowards who shoot indescriminatly into crowds and kill innocents. These are the true terrorist's in our society and we have persons who want them to have rights,??? Interesting our society. Harley

September 21, 2005, 12:19 PM	#41
EV1L Junior Member Join Date: September 17, 2005 Posts: 14	What is Hydrostatic Shock??? The Answer: "Hydrostatic shock is the effect commonly believed to be caused by a high velocity object entering a body, such as a bullet fired from a weapon. The shock is described in the following way—the object will cause ordinary damage by the actual penetration, but also pass a shock wave in the surrounding tissue due to the energy of the slowing object being passed into the largely liquid material of the body (65%+). The shock wave, or sometimes competing shockwaves from multiple impacts, are believed to cause greater damage than the object itself, sometimes enough to rupture internal organs and fracture bone. Especially large objects are believed to cause hydrostatic shock by the closure of the cavity created by the object's passage. There is a body of opinion, however, that believes hydrostatic shock is errant nonsense. The argument is based around how energy is transferred and the effects of such a transfer. Issues raised include kinetic energy vs. momentum, the rate of energy transfer, thermodynamics (kinetic energy would be transformed into heat), the speed of sound in tissue, hydrodynamic effects, 'wound tracks', and the nature of a body. Testing in recently killed pigs (soon enough that no loss of muscle elasticity or rigor mortis could occur), shows that large amounts of tissue distruption from spherical projectiles only occurs at striking velocities somewhere between 800 and 1100 meters per second (2,500 and 3,600 feet/second). A velocity of 764 m/s (2507 ft/s) resulted in a hole barely larger in diameter than the 6 mm projectile used, while a velocity of 1116 m/s (3661 ft/s) produced a 20 by 25 mm hole in muscle. (Fackler, et al) Some sources attempt to compare inelastic media, such as fruit and water jugs, to people, saying that the massive "splattering" effect also occurs in living flesh. This is totally contrary to the known laws of physics. If an exerted force exceeds the tensile strength of a material, deformation and tearing occur. Because water effectively has a tensile strength of zero, any force exerted on it will deform or "tear" it (cause it to splash), discounting the effects of gravity. Human muscle tissue, however, has a tensile strength of roughly 1 to 4 MPa (145 to 580 lbf/in²); other tissues may be weaker or stronger. If the force of the "hydrostatic shock" exceeds the tensile strength of the tissue struck, then stretching or tearing of the bullet hole can occur. Lesser forces will still displace tissue, but not hard enough to cause any damage other than bruising due to blunt trauma." Reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrostatic_shock

September 21, 2005, 01:45 PM	#42
Harley Quinn Junior member Join Date: August 30, 2005 Location: State of KALI Posts: 1,531	Hydro shock 22-250 26" barrel Bad dude Hi The 22-250 is one that fits the bill very well, so is the 220 swift, goes through steel(that is a mis nomer) what happens is the friction of it hitting the 3/8 plate and velocity send the hot steel from the plate mixed with the molten bullet, then it go's through the steel sending quite a bit more down the road than the original weight of the bullet. Take one of the above and load it so the primers don't flatten but close. Now you are getting some very high velocity, the longer the barrel the better, but of course there is a limit. FMJ is the best under these conditions. The statement about hydrostatic shock was sarcasam In my above post. Hydrostatic shock is very real and the difference between 2500 and 3600 is quite a bit (percentage) now add the additional fps that I have just suggested (into the low 4000+) and we are talking bad news. But...The bullet is the thing, got to be able to take that kind of velocity. PS. If you need wikipedia you have not had first hand experience. Harley

September 21, 2005, 02:58 PM	#43
EV1L Junior Member Join Date: September 17, 2005 Posts: 14	"PS. If you need wikipedia you have not had first hand experience." No I dont have a first had experience of shooting someone and seeing what the Hydrostatic shock will be like, if that what you meant by first had experience. And the only reason I used wikipedia because its a reliable source and poeple cant argue on how accurate the info is.

September 21, 2005, 05:06 PM	#44
Harley Quinn Junior member Join Date: August 30, 2005 Location: State of KALI Posts: 1,531	EV1L If you read what wikipedia is, it is very controversial. Anyone can post about the subject and they will tell you it is very controversial. If I have knowledge that you don't have, and believe me I do. I am not going to go to a location like wikipedia and try to convince you. Like all of this controversy (this discussion, off topic) It is not relevent to what the person asked. Reread the original post. Harley

September 21, 2005, 05:23 PM	#45
BoneDigger Senior Member Join Date: July 22, 2005 Location: Tyler, TX Posts: 660	A question... I have a question about buckshot for defense. Winchester still makes expanding led shot where some manufactureres use only copper coated. As a person that has shot deer with buckshot, the led shot expands much more and causes more damage while not overpenetrating the deer. Copper coated tends to go right through, where led will often stop in the deer. Has anyone ever tested the different brands for penetration vs just throwing different sized shot (00 buck, 1 buck, etc.) at the boards? Todd

September 21, 2005, 07:33 PM	#46
OneInchGroup Senior Member Join Date: June 23, 2005 Location: People's Republic of Maryland Posts: 136	Buck or Birdshot For Home Defense From what everybody seems to understand about ammunition, seems it would be logical to assume that shells labeled as "Birdshot" "Dove Load", Quail Load" etc. were designed and assembled with, ummm shooting BIRDS in mind. "Buckshot" is not called that because it was designed to blow doves into powder (Although I've seen that happen once or twice), but because it will most likely knock down a male deer. At least that's probably what the Ammo Makers had in mind, mebbe. Perhaps it would be smart to go with what the shells were DESIGNED for when trying to decide what to use them for. Bottom line on home defense though, is to only use a shell, a load, or a weapon that is 99.99999% likely to be lethal at the range chosen. There are only three imperatives that matter in a home defense scenario. 1. Be prepared to use, and then USE lethal force when confronted with a home invasion situation. If the other guy is armed, he will not ask permission to kill you before trying his very best to do so. 2. Make sure that once gunfire begins, you will be the only survivor of the confrontation. In today's real world, you must be CERTAIN that you will be the only one testifying at the coroner's inquest or at the Grand Jury. 3. Once you have terminated the intruder and made sure all wounds are front to back, and have called a lawyer to deal with the next phase of your life, then put away your weapon and call 911, being sure to tell the 911 operator what you look like and where you will be when the police arrive. You do not want to be shot by mistake by some nervous rookie. If you do all these things in the proper order, you may just possibly survive the experience.

September 21, 2005, 07:39 PM	#47
roy reali Senior Member Join Date: August 23, 2005 Posts: 3,248	Other Ammo What if you were to use .223 ammo in a rifle. Lets say that the ammo box has a picture of a varmint on it. Would this disqualify the ammo from human use?

September 21, 2005, 09:08 PM	#48
EV1L Junior Member Join Date: September 17, 2005 Posts: 14	Harley Quinn I'm not arguing with you, I'm just pointing out some points.

September 21, 2005, 09:09 PM	#49
Harley Quinn Junior member Join Date: August 30, 2005 Location: State of KALI Posts: 1,531	Hi Roy, thats cute I like your logic. Roy Has a very good point. So do others. I was viewing some of the posts and not many seem to understand the idea this fellow is asking. Home defense as in the home, as in rooms occupied by loved ones and other persons who you may care for. Most of the buck shot and slugs are really to powerful inside a home they go through walls innocents etc. I should clairify something I notice I did not give the correct number of shot per ounce regarding 7 1/2s. I did not hit all the keys. In a 12 gauge in an ounce + of 7 1/2s you are shooting something that is just smaller than .10 and it contains close to 400 of them, more if you are shooting 1 and 1/4 ounce in 3" mags. Really look it up. Now the close range makes it a very deadly weapon and it also makes it less dangerous. If that makes sense. Probably for the house a 410 is really a good all rounder make sure the barrel is 18+ inches and have a stock. Great for hitting people or shoving into a loose dog prior to blowing them away. Really 410 has more power than a hand gun and the versatility of several different shells in the snout. you could start with a scatter gun round of #8s, then go for the double 00 or triple 000 and finish it off with a slug or two as they are running down the drive way because you jerked instead of squeezed, say because of your own fears and apprehension. LOL You who believe, will believe, you who don't, won't. So what, ignorance is fine but now you should know different. If you don't I will still sleep soundly. Harley

September 21, 2005, 09:20 PM	#50
OneInchGroup Senior Member Join Date: June 23, 2005 Location: People's Republic of Maryland Posts: 136	Buck or Birdshot? Roy, What a brilliant riposte you've tossed up today! You get the "clever guy" award for the next 2 minutes, so enjoy yourself! I suppose the concept of sarcasm is lost on you? Trying to point out to those naifs on the board that only a birdbrain loads birdshot for a lethal force scenario, and any case in which you fire on another human HAS TO BE a lethal force situation. Can you understand the term "Negligent Homicide"? How about "Wrongful Death Lawsuit"? Did you also miss the parts about the after-action sling your butt will be in if you just cripple or mutilate a housebreaker whose attorney will then make your life WORSE than it is for the nitwit you shot? Trouble with these forums is there are only a few really trying to be helpful, and just loads of smartasses just out to prove they are champs of the snappy, snippy comeback. Try being flip with the 300 lb felon who just plowed thru your front door, see if being cute works with him.