You be the JUDGE

[cdoc42]

YOU be the Judge

I have a 3” Taurus “Judge.” My goal has been to keep it for home defense with the first two cylinders containing Winchester “Defender” .410 cartridges and the remaining 3 containing .45 Colt cartridges holding 255gr cast or 250gr JHP XTP bullets.

For the heck of it, yesterday I ran a test from a distance of 7 yards at 8.5 x 11 inch sheets containing a target of the following ring sizes: 9.25”- 6.25” -and 3 rings and a bull totaling 5.25”.

I fired 2 shots at each of 5 targets using the following .410 shells:

2-3/4 inch, 0.5-oz #8-1/2: total pellets = 497

All 3-inch, 11/16-oz loads of:

#7-12 = 482

#5 =234

#4= 186

Winchester Defender .410, containing 4 copper-plated discs (approx. .38 caliber) and 16 plated BBs, for a total of 8 discs and 32 BBs.

My target plan would initially be the head and face of any intruder, thus avoiding the need to be concerned about clothing penetration, causing a motion stall so I can turn my attention to the use of the .45 Colt loads at the body. What I discovered changed my mind about using the Winchester Defender cartridges.

My face measures approximately 5 inches laterally and 5 inches vertically to my nose, so the 5.25-inch diameter 3-ring center is of interest.

This is how the various loads performed:

#8-1/2 shot: 110 total hits on the entire 8.5 x 11” sheet (22%); 31 (6%) were in the 3-ring, 5.25” center

#7-1/2 shot: 75 total hits on 8.5 x 11” (20%); 28 were in the 5.25” center 3 rings

#5 shot: 54 total hits (23%); 12 (5%) in the 5.25” center 3 rings

#4 shot: 48 total hits (26%); 14 (8%) in the 5.25” center rings

Surprise: Two Defender rounds delivered 6 total hits (15%) on the entire 8.5 x 11” paper, and they were all BBs. Only 2 were in the 5.25” 3-ring center. There was no sign of any of the 8 discs hitting the paper.

The absence of the discs might be explained by the relatively poor accuracy of the .45 Colt cartridges. All of the 4 cast and JHP rounds that I fired averaged 3 inches high and 2-inches to the left of the center of the target. However, that may not be a problem with a center mass target on an intruder from 7 yards, as far as the bullets are concerned.

So, YOU be the judge. Which .410 cartridge would you choose in this circumstance if you were going to do what I plan?

[44 AMP]

So, YOU be the judge. Which .410 cartridge would you choose in this circumstance if you were going to do what I plan?

Personally, I wouldn't choose any .410 load for self defense, though if I had to, I'd choose slugs.

I think this,

My target plan would initially be the head and face of any intruder, thus avoiding the need to be concerned about clothing penetration, causing a motion stall so I can turn my attention to the use of the .45 Colt loads at the body.

might put you in legal jeopardy. "Motion stall"?? I assume you mean a pause, a hesitation, a stop in the attack, right??

The point I can see is a zealous DA having a "field day" with that idea. Consider this possibility...

"Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, the accused did defend himself, shooting his attacker in the face with birdshot. The attacker stopped their attack, ending the threat, at which point the accused then put THREE FOURTY FIVE CALIBER SLUGS into his chest, KILLING HIM!!!. THAT, ladies and gentlemen is not self defense, it is MURDER!!"....


Personally, I would ditch the Judge in favor of a different revolver, and the .410 for defense idea along with it. You've got .45 Colt, if you get it to hit where you aim it, I think that would be superior to any .410 load.

I've got .45s and I've got a .45/410 (Contender, 10"). As a pest gun, the 10" .410 does pretty well. Against people from a 3" barrel? good luck with that.

Just my opinion, worth what you paid for it, or, possibly, less....

[cdoc42]

44AMP, you brought up an excellent question, and one everyone should address, consider, and plan for as well, in the event of an intrusion of your home by an unexpected and uninvited person at a time of day or night when it would be least expected, and, as such, creates a concern for the safety of you and your family. Even in the presence of an insurance policy that would be used to protect you in such an instance, any choice of words other than personal defense should be withheld until you are supported by your own attorney.

Then one can draw attention to the issue you raise and plan to answer the potential question regarding, at least, the definition of “stall” versus “pause.”

I found 33 interpretations of “pause,” and I stopped at 53 for “stall.” But here are a few that would be pertinent to the question at hand:

Stall verb
(transitive) To cause to stop making progress, to hinder, to slow down, to delay or forestall.
Stall noun
An action that is intended to cause or actually causes delay.
Stall verb
(intransitive) To come to a standstill.
Stall verb
To stop suddenly.
Stall verb
To forestall; to anticipate.
Pause noun
a temporary stop in action or speech
Pause verb
temporarily interrupt the operation of (a process or device)
Pause noun a time interval during which there is a temporary cessation of something
Pause verb
To stop in order to consider; hence, to consider; to reflect.
Pause verb
To hesitate; to hold back; to delay.
Pause noun
Temporary inaction or waiting; hesitation; suspence; doubt.
Pause verb
(transitive) To halt the play or playback of, temporarily, so that it can be resumed from the same point.
Pause verb
(intransitive) To interrupt an activity and wait.

Any prosecutorial adventure by those related to the intruder would obviously be directed to proving your (or my) intent to end the life of this now-claimed-to-be victim. But I have to believe the weight of that approach is heavier when facing a claim of self-defense.
I might argue that the potential inaccuracy of a solid projectile in the midst of a stressful circumstance poses a greater threat to adjoining rooms or even other people in nearby homes than what might appear to be my intent to kill the intruder. As such I decided a safer route would be to create a stall or pause in his intended course of action to protect those around me until I could ascertain if his advance would terminate without further action. During that period of delay, if he turned to escape I would have no reason to shoot him again, and, in fact, it would then be unjustified. However, if he continued his interruption and potential for the threat to my safety, I would have had time to be more certain my secondary cartridge choice would be sufficiently accurate and do no ancillary harm.
I would imagine even with your first choice of weapon you might suffer the same challenge. “Why did you choose such a devastating weapon?” “Why not a smaller caliber that would simply wound him and render him incapable of continuing his threat without ending his life?”
But I’m grateful that you included your concern as it certainly should be something everyone who uses their gun for protection must consider.

[44 AMP]

Certainly, if the attack stops, then resumes you are justified defending your self from the resumption of the attack.

My point was, particularly in light of the way you first described your plan that you wouldn't be giving the attacker the time to change their mind between the "discouraging" shot to the face, before putting the rest in his chest, and that MIGHT be a problem determining if it was actually a "good shoot" or if you went beyond justifiable self defense.

“Why not a smaller caliber that would simply wound him and render him incapable of continuing his threat without ending his life?”

This is a much different matter, resting on two main points...

First is, there is no such thing as a "smaller caliber" guaranteeing anything, including only wounding, because small bullet also kill.

Second point is the fiction that it is ok to just shoot to wound someone. IT IS NOT!!

The law considers shooting someone to be deadly force. Not "wounding force", LETHAL FORCE. When deadly force is justified, and the attacker dies as a result of being stopped, that's legally their fault.

The problem with only trying to wound someone is the way the law looks at that. IF you say you only meant to wound them, that is an admission you did not believe that deadly force was required, and IF YOU don't believe deadly force is necessary, then you are not justified in shooting them.

That turns self defense into assault, or, possibly murder (If they die from their wounds).

We need to be clear about what we say to "officers of the court" (which includer the police) about how we shot to STOP the attack, and only that. We should never announce an intent to only wound, or an intent to kill. THAT turns a justifiable defense into a criminal act.

[cdoc42]

I'd be willing to bet that a significant portion of gun owners do not recognize the legal threat potential involved in protecting themselves. Today, given the burgeoning crime rate across the nation, the perceived need for a gun for protection, defunded police, the advertised need for legal protection for gun owners, and the appetite by trial lawyers to prove their worth (and personal need), a quagmire faces every citizen who has never had an encounter with a legal threat.

I applaud your personal views of the legal issues discussed among these FL threads, and while you have freely admitted the absence of license behind them, there has to be some concern of caution among those of us in your shoes that your view is just that, legally unsupported.

For example, "The problem with only trying to wound someone is the way the law looks at that. If one says I only meant to wound him, that is an admission you did not believe that deadly force was required, and IF YOU don't believe deadly force is necessary, then you are not justified in shooting them."

Is that the way you look at it, or is it the way the law actually looks at it? Because it seems to put the average gun owner in a position where no matter what has been done, it is unjustified.

If I am of the persuasion that death is the last resort and I only want to stop (not pause) his progress, the best I can do is wound him. Having a legal gun means it is my choice regarding options to protect myself, but I may not put deadly force on my list of first things to do.
If an unwelcomed intruder arrives in my home, is there a legal demand that I first investigate the content or extent of tools he (assumption) might possess that accompanies (his) threat to my safety?
So I decide to wound him to stop his progress. Then you suggest that a lawyer comes along trying to prove what you said about the absence of the threat requiring deadly force, which would apply not only to guns but to any weapon I happen to have available. Is that the idea? If I amputate his hand because he hit me with unusual force, am I liable for his injury because my act was using deadly force?

This is not meant to be a joke. It really identifies a focus of dissension that contributes to our inability to come to a reasonable gun control conclusion.

[TunnelRat]

Originally Posted by cdoc42

If I am of the persuasion that death is the last resort and I only want to stop (not pause) his progress, the best I can do is wound him. Having a legal gun means it is my choice regarding options to protect myself, but I may not put deadly force on my list of first things to do.

I’m trying to figure out how this sentiment agrees with first shooting an intruder in the face as you suggest in the first post.

[cdoc42]

TunnelRat, your extraction of the first sentence of that paragraph missed the sentence above which was the reason for the paragraph. I did not change my "plan" - I was putting myself in the position of the average gun owner in that first sentence - who might even be you, in this instance.

I'm not taking an oppositional position with respect to 44AMP's suggestions, I'm amplifying the complexity of the situation, made so by the trial lawyer's need to find whatever avenue might be available to serve his client's interest. Our system is not purely about justice, but rather, about winning.

For example, if you are awakened by your wife or significant other at 3 a.m. in your second-floor bedroom, about her concern about an abnormal noise that may relate to a possible intruder downstairs somewhere, and you have a gun in your nightstand for protection against just such an intrusion, what would you do?

1) Stay put and wait, hoping the intruder won't enter your bedroom at some point? But be prepared to shoot him if he does enter.
2) Stay put but loudly announce that you are awake, you have a gun, and are aware of his presence, hoping to scare him away to avoid an altercation.
3) Do what most TV episodes do- take your gun and as silently as possible, move down the stairs, looking for the intruder, and being prepared to shoot him when you see him?
4) Proceed with #3, but once again, loudly announce you have a gun and will use it if necessary, hoping he'll run off.
5) Simply call the police and hope they arrive before any of the above situations arise.

These are all plans that any one of us can entertain but 44 AMP brings to our attention that there are legal ramifications that may not justify your action in any one of them, for any number of possible reasons.

So my only question of what shot size would you use IF you happened to choose my approach to the situation has not even been answered because of the more immediate need to address complications surrounding the actions we might take to protect ourselves.

[TunnelRat]

Based on your results and video results I have seen before I would not choose a Taurus Judge for self defense, much less home defense.

[44 AMP]

TO answer your question about shot size, I don't think it will matter much, inside the house, shooting someone in the face.

What's going to matter most is total impact mass, where the pellets hit, and where they go, and don't go, after impact.

My grandfather was an old Yankee farmer. His home defense gun was a shotgun. His do everything else gun was that same shotgun. He used birdshot, from #8 down to #1. He also had "punkin balls".

His standard advice if you needed to defend yourself with a shotgun (and birdshot) was to shoot them in the face. Inside the house range, 12ga, they will almost certainly cease any attack, be injured, possibly blinded, and will run off. And, if they happen to die as a result of being shot, well, they shouldn't have been doing what got them shot in the first place.

The 12gauge would do that very well, because it has a large amount of mass, and at a handful of paces, that mass is still very concentrated, acting like one very LARGE bullet.

The .410 is the smallest common shotgun bore, delivers a much lower mass of projectiles, and in the case of a 3" barrel Judge revolver, delivers them at a much lower speed due to the extremely short barrel, AND, the shot charge is being spun (at least a bit) by the rifling of the .45 caliber barrel.

Both of these factors work against the already limited power the .410 has available. You tested and reported pellet hit count on your targets, did you have any opportunity to test the velocity of the shot??? Or, for that matter, the .45 Colt slugs you fired???

Generally speaking bird shot is loaded to essentially black powder speeds (11-1300fps) from full length shotgun barrels. Going faster than that degrades the pattern. Buckshot is often a bit faster, but not a lot, and slugs are loaded about as fast as they can be, since there is no pattern to worry about.

Now, adjust full length barrel speed to your 3" Judge. What are you going to get? I don't know, but my guess would be something around 800fps possibly less. Additionally, the rifling spinning the shot charge creates "holes" in the pattern. Areas up to several inches across where there is no shot on the target. I've got personal experience with this, shooting a 10" .45/410 Contender. The empty spots are something you need to test to see where, and how big they are, at different distances, and each ammo load can be different.

From what I can see, if the entire .410 shot charge struck as a single mass, the best you're going to get is the equivalent of a small caliber pistol bullet like a .380, and your own test show that with the shot you used, less than 10% of the pellets hit in the desired target area at 7 yards.

I wouldn't consider that adequate performance. Particularly when you have the option of .45 Colt in the same gun.

[cdoc42]

44AMP, once again, thanks for your sage advice.

I did not do any chronographing with the "Judge." Actually, I did the test to gain some confidence about the use of the gun as intended, and the results mirror the feelings and advice of you and TunnelRat, not so much because of the various shot loads, but the poor accuracy of the .45 Colt rounds, and particularly, the surprise that only 6 BBs out of 32, and none of 8 copper projectiles from 2 shots of the "Defender" rounds hit the entire 8.5 x 11" paper. I agree that the 3-inch barrel is unimpressionable.

You mentioned the TC .410/.45, and I also have one with the 10-inch barrel. Have you ever hunted birds with the .410? I found it to be wicked over a German Shorthair for both pheasants and chukars with 2-3/4" shells and #6 or #5 shot.

But even more surprising is how well the Ruger Super Blackhawk in .44 Mag does over a dog on pheasants, loaded with Speer capsules containing 68 #6's (130gr) and 103 #7-1/2.s (134gr). Ages ago, when birds were $9 each at a preserve, the owner requested his presence with his dog (I presumed he wanted to be sure no injured birds escaped) and my friend and I came back with 9 out of 9 pheasants. The owner was glowing with surprise as he laid the birds on the ground and announced to those surrounding us, "They got them with handguns!!!"

Some day I'm going to secure a mannequin head just to see what the 7-1/2" Ruger will do with #6's......

[FrankenMauser]

Which .410 cartridge would you choose in this circumstance if you were going to do what I plan?

None of the bird shot.
None of the Defender loads.
Maybe buck or slugs, if I had to use a .410.

But my choice is to not use a .410 (of any kind) for SD/HD.

[L. Boscoe]

a lot depends on the laws in your state-when I lived in Texas, if someone
was on your property and advancing toward you that was justification to
kill them. In NC, where I now live, if an intruder is inside your home, you
are within your rights to shoot them without warning, although I think the best advice in the OP's situation is call 911, then wait upstairs to see if the
intruder comes up. I tell women who don't like guns to fire a shot into the ceiling or floor, and see what happens after that.
I deal with inmates as a counselor, and most agree that burglars don't like to enter an occupied dwelling. If someone enters an occupied dwelling, they are most certainly good subjects to be shot.,

[ballardw]

Originally Posted by FrankenMauser

But my choice is to not use a .410 (of any kind) for SD/HD.

My choice a .410, of the Remington Magnum variety. 210grn JHP in the vicinity of 1200 fps.

[44 AMP]

Have you ever hunted birds with the .410?

Not with the Contender 10". Have with actual .410 shotguns. I did find the Contender to be an excellent barn rat wrecker. (actual rats, ones that took down chickens and even turkeys).

And, speaking of which I was never happy with the accuracy of .45 Colt rounds from that barrel. Since I have a fondness for actually hitting what I aim at, I eventually got a .45 Colt barrel for my Contender and it shoots quite well, much better than the .45Colt/.410 barrel I have.

I have heard people say that the .45 Colt shoots fine from their Judge or Governator or what ever, but I've also heard people say otherwise with theirs...

I have some Winchester 3" .410 slugs and the box says 1/4oz slug at 1800fps.

I have no doubt that speed was from a full length (possibly 26"?) tube. Essentially that would be a 110gr slug at 1800fps, which is nothing to sneeze at. Now, what happens when you put that in a 3" revolver? You don't get 1800fps, no way.

And, as I mentioned, the slug load is always the fastest one...

The .410 is an excellent light shotgun for small game, but its use for self defense in a revolver is marketing hype, which a lot of people who don't know any better swallowed, hook, line, and sinker....

[dawg23]

You're apparently more interested in defending your (poor) choice of guns than in listening to some excellent advice that's been offered.

The Judge might be a decent weapon for snakes, depending on the distance. They are not, and have never been, an intelligent choice for self-defense. They may work for SD - but so will a .22LR or .22 short. It depends on shot placement, adequate penetration, a sufficient number of well-placed follow-up shots, and luck.

For CCW go get a reliable revolver in .38 Special or bigger, or get a semiauto in 9mm or bigger. These are not great "man-stoppers", but they are concealable. Any reliable revolver (e.g. Smith, Ruger), and any top tier semi-auto (e.g. Glock, Smith M&P) will be far more accurate than what you have.

For home defense get a 12 gauge loaded with reduced recoil 00 buckshot (such as Federal Flight Control with muzzle velocity down around 1150 ft/sec). These are great man-stoppers. As Tom Givens says, "When people get shot with a shotgun, they tend to stay shot.” (Your pistol isn't a shotgun.)

[FrankenMauser]

The fact that Taurus managed to create a modern, multi-chambered blunderbuss, and market it successfully enough that they got S&W to jump on the bandwagon, amazes me.

The "best" accuracy with them seems to be with slugs that are typically 1/5 oz; followed somewhat closely by 000 buck, but you only get three pellets.

You get an 87 gr slug (or THREE!! 68 gr balls), with diminished accuracy, at comically low muzzle velocity.
Even specialty loads that can achieve 950 fps, or so, still have severe issues with patterning.

On the other hand, a .380 Auto has higher capacity, heavier projectiles, higher velocity, actual accuracy potential, and will come in a small, lighter, more use-friendly, more manipulable package. Let alone 9mm, .30 Super Carry, .32 H&R, etc., etc. Even .32 S&W Long target loads have better ballistics than the vast majority of .410 loads in a 5/6-shot blunderbuss boat anchor, marketed as a self defense revolver.

Psst.
Psssssst.
Don't tell anyone. But...

There's this little "thing" that people like to poop on, called a Kel-Tec P32. It has all of the defensive capabilities of a .410 revolver, but is a fraction of the size and 1/5 of the weight of a Judge/Governor.

Ssshhhhhhhh.
Don't tell anyone. Taurus and S&W might stop selling meme guns that the marketing departments turned into homeruns.

[bamaranger]

I have never understood the rationale of "shooting to wound", nor the fascination the Judge and Governor pattern revolvers.

Some type of intentional wounding shot is universally condemned by all agencies and training facilities. Shooting anybody, with anything, is use deadly force, whether they survive or not, and I would think, whether wounding was intentional or not.

The .410 revolvers might make a good snake gun, if one feels the need for such a thing, but there are far better choices for SD and HD.

Still the shops that sell them say they go like hotcakes.

[44 AMP]

They sold a lot of pet rocks in their day, too....

[stinkeypete]

My experience is with a used 10" single shot T/C Contender single shot .45/410 with a screw-in choke. I would not use a rifled .410 pistol for anything other than tin cans. It was fun for a box or two of shells, then I too discovered the .45 LC accuracy was not great and sold the barrel for what I paid for it.

I also agree that if you are in sensible fear for your life in your own home, you should defend your life and family with deadly force. Your goal is to stop the threat any way possible.

No plan survives first contact with the enemy. I am not in favor of your complicated defense plan because it requires aiming in the dark at very close quarters and a precision you may not have with panic and survival the only thing on your mind.

I would love to see photos of your patterns! The #7 1/2 birdshot gave an unexpected result. Was that a clear concentration of pellets unlike the other size pellets, or was it simply random chance like tossing 4 heads in a row?

A recent development in ammunition has changed how we can think about shotguns- .410 is the latest thing in Turkey hunting because of Tungsten shot. Tungsten is 60% more dense than lead. People are shooting out to 70 yards or farther with .410. It's also $6.00 a shell.

But I would prefer a solid reliable 12 gauge for directing shotgun pellets (Number 4 birdshot for me) or a solid reliable pistol.

I am sorry my opinion of the Judge is so negative- I consider it a "moped"- neither a good bicycle or a good motorcycle. Bad at both jobs.

[OldMarksman]

Not for me.

[DaveBj]

I watched a couple video reviews of the Judge on YouTube, and my response was "Yeah -- nope!"

[Nathan]

I would be careful of placing any “plan” in writing or on a web forum.

I personally have no issue with the use of 410 as long as the load is patterned and penetration checked at reasonable ranges. I’m not sure a 7yd pattern will give you much help over a Jhp point shot. It would be good to have jhp’s to back it up. How do you know how many intruders there will be?

[FITASC]

The 12gauge would do that very well, because it has a large amount of mass, and at a handful of paces, that mass is still very concentrated, acting like one very LARGE bullet.

I'll disagree with this as not all of those pellets will hit as a single projectile. If I hit you with a 1oz solid rock or 1oz of grains of sand, the rock will do more damage. There;s is nothing wrong with birdshot at close range on the face, or a kneecap, but larger shot will penetrate better, especially if thick winter clothing is involved

[cdoc42]

FITASC, I feel I should just bring this to your attention because it was part of my initial post:

"My target plan would initially be the head and face of any intruder, thus avoiding the need to be concerned about clothing penetration,....."

Back to Dawg23 on post #15, who said: "You're apparently more interested in defending your (poor) choice of guns than in listening to some excellent advice that's been offered."

The entire point of my post was NOT for advice on what to use. It was for an evaluation of the different shot sizes and loads. My last line: "So, YOU be the judge. Which .410 cartridge would you choose in this circumstance if you were going to do what I plan?

[44 AMP]

I'll disagree with this as not all of those pellets will hit as a single projectile.

My experience is that at very short range, enough of them will be together to act like a single large bullet. No, small shot won't have the penetration larger shot or a single bullet does, but penetrating heavy winter clothing is not the issue under discussion here.