# Birdshot in shotguns



## Grenadier (Jun 6, 2008)

I've sometimes had a debate with some folks, when it comes to smaller sized pellets being an effective manstopper from a 12 gauge shotgun.  

Back when I lived in an apartment with thin sheetrock walls, I'd keep my Remington 870 loaded with two 12 gauge shells of #8 shot, followed with 3 shells of 12 gauge 00 Federal Tactical buckshot, since at close ranges, birdshot can do a flesh-flaying job quite nicely.  

Some folks said "only use all 00 buckshot, since small shot will only piss off the attacker!"  

Well, it looks like birdshot *can* be an effective manstopper.  :rofl:

The results are a bit skewed, of course, since he did shoot himself, and with BOTH barrels:

http://www.yakima-herald.com/stories/3225



> YAKIMA -- Friends of a 20-year-old man who accidentally shot himself after putting a sawed-off shotgun in his pants initially claimed he was the victim of a drive-by shooting, Yakima police said.
> 
> The man, suffering from massive groin damage, was airlifted to a Seattle hospital where he was reported in satisfactory condition Monday.


----------



## K31 (Jun 6, 2008)

In our younger days a friend of mine used to demonstrate what a 12ga loaded with birdshot could do, by holding the muzzle several inches from a small tree trunk say, 4-5 inches in diameter, and pulling the trigger.   If you can't guess this felled the tree in one shot.   I've read "Box O' Truth" saying birdshot isn't a reliable stopper based on a couple of second hand accounts but my home defense gun has #4s in it.


----------



## allenjp (Jun 6, 2008)

I always keep my home defense shotgun loaded with #8 birdshot, except the last two, which are 000 buck, because I have two kids asleep in other rooms, and I don't want bullets or pellets going through my walls if I can help it. I fired birdshot into the side of an old washing machine once from about 5 feet, and trust me, a couple of shots like that will make someone think twice about coming at you again (that is if it doesn't put them down for good). I figure if I can't stop them with the first three shots it's time to switch to something with a little more oomph behind it.


----------



## Deaf Smith (Jun 6, 2008)

My wife used to work in the OR room at a major hospital that was in, uh, a crappy place.

She as been in CVICU, CVOR, OR, Truma I, and even director of CV nursing.

Well she told me long time ago that people shot with low powered rounds like .22, .25, .32 most of the time walked in talking! As the round's power increased, more were carried in (like 9mm, .38, .357, .45s)

The *ONLY* ones that just about always were carried in were shotgun wounds. The majority were birdshot wounds (but we are not talking Dick Cheney spraying with birdshot while dovehunter wounds.)

She said the wounds didn't look so bad once you cleaned the blood off (unless it was a contact wound) but when you opened them up, the shotgun had dammaged many organs and the bleeding was very hard to impossible to stop.

Just do this experiment. Get some kind of old meat, and shoot it at 3 feet with your favorite birdshot load and see the rat-hole wound. Then do it at 15 feet and see not only how close the pattern is but how deep it goes.

I can tell you it will reach the heart, lungs and liver easly. And it will also reach all those artieries.

I would not hesitate using bird shot at indoor range. The pattern will not spead out that far and the load will still penitrate to vitals. Nice part is the load won't go outside the target either. You will actually deliver the whole ouce and a quarter, plus shot collumn and any wadding, on target.

If you worry about penitration (or lack of it) just use high base or 'baby' magnums.

If, on the other hand, you want a general purpose shottie, get a vang comp and use buckshot. But that's another story.

Deaf


----------



## chinto (Jun 7, 2008)

in an apartment building where your engagement range is say 10 yards max, bird shot is lethal!!!  hell a load of 00 or 000 load of shot may kill the attacker and your neighbors  4 year old child in his bead through the wall!!  in such a situation bird shot will kill as well as buckshot!  now out on the farm at say 60 yards or 50M that bird shot is useless or nearly so, but 00 or 000 will kill that attacker.  but at 50M or more I would prefer a rifle, say 30-06 or 308 cal ...  but that is me.


----------



## KenpoTex (Jun 7, 2008)

I personally don't use or recommend birdshot for SD/HD purposes.  I've seen enough annecdotal evidence and had some personal experiences (various varmints and aggressive dogs) and I've found it to be a poor substitute for the bigger stuff (number 4 buck on up) when it comes to adequate penetration beyond anything but point-blank range.  

To each his own though...


----------



## Deaf Smith (Jun 7, 2008)

But Ken,

Appartments are point-blank range!

Deaf


----------



## Big Don (Jun 7, 2008)

My Dad's idea of a demonstration to illustrate the destructive power of a 16 Ga shotgun, was to blow away a railroad tie he had planted upright out on the ranch. I was 8, he stood ten feet away and with one shot, birdshot cut that tie in half.


----------



## allenjp (Jun 7, 2008)

With a 16 Guage huh? That's impressive!

.410 might not be a bad HD choice either...


----------



## KenpoTex (Jun 7, 2008)

The problem, as I see it, is that as soon as the shot starts to spread, you no longer have a 1-1.25 oz. (546.8 grain) projectile, you have about four-hundred .003 oz. (1.3 grain) projectiles. I don't see a 1.3 grain projectile doing a whole lot. As I said, I've had occasion to shoot a few nasty critters and the birdshot did not perform well. One specific incident was a very aggressive dog that I shot with a load of 7 1/2s from about 8 feet. I hit him directly in the head and other than "deterring" him, it didn't do much. I had to follow up with a .357 to put him down.  



			
				Big Don said:
			
		

> My Dad's idea of a demonstration to illustrate the destructive power of a 16 Ga shotgun, was to blow away a railroad tie he had planted upright out on the ranch. I was 8, he stood ten feet away and with one shot, birdshot cut that tie in half.


 Having shot a who knows how many thousands of rounds of 16 gauge at all manner of targets, I find it a little hard to believe that it cut a _railroad-tie_ in half...just saying.


As I said...to each his own, if you feel that birdshot is the way to go for HD, by all means use what you prefer.  I'm sure that a load of 8's will cause someone to slow down so you can throw some follow-up shots, However, I'll stick to my 00's.


----------



## chinto (Jun 9, 2008)

kenpotex said:


> The problem, as I see it, is that as soon as the shot starts to spread, you no longer have a 1-1.25 oz. (546.8 grain) projectile, you have about four-hundred .003 oz. (1.3 grain) projectiles. I don't see a 1.3 grain projectile doing a whole lot. As I said, I've had occasion to shoot a few nasty critters and the birdshot did not perform well. One specific incident was a very aggressive dog that I shot with a load of 7 1/2s from about 8 feet. I hit him directly in the head and other than "deterring" him, it didn't do much. I had to follow up with a .357 to put him down.
> 
> Having shot a who knows how many thousands of rounds of 16 gauge at all manner of targets, I find it a little hard to believe that it cut a _railroad-tie_ in half...just saying.
> 
> ...



shot of any kind on impact spreads in a 45 degree and even more angle in the body.  5 bird shot in the liver and aorta is very very lethal.. and the 15 in the lungs will stop him as well.  like I said, at 10 yards/9Meters  very very lethal... at 50 go with #4 or 00 or even 000 buck.


----------



## Skpotamus (Jun 9, 2008)

http://www.shadonet.com/2008/01/25/...t-buckshot-or-slugs-for-shotgun-home-defense/

A site with birdshot tests side by side with buckshot and slugs at close range (3 yards).  

None of the birdshot got the minimum FBI penetration requirements of 12" in ballistic gelatin with a maximum of 18" for handgun rounds.  I don't beleive any of the pellets got past 7" of gelatin.  Compare this to ballistic gelatin tests of .22LR's who typically get around 10" of penetration.

Buckshot penetrated 22" into ballistic gelatin, with a slug pentrating 17" into ordinance gelatin (note that a slug that doesn't deform can get overpenetration).  

I would NOT recommend using birdshot to any of my students (NRA instructor) or anyone else for personal protection.


----------



## KenpoTex (Jun 9, 2008)

Skpotamus said:


> http://www.shadonet.com/2008/01/25/...t-buckshot-or-slugs-for-shotgun-home-defense/


 
Thanks for posting that, very informative.

I particularly liked this statement:


> At the end of the day you must realize that anything that will penetrate a human enough to force them to stop an attack is going to also penetrate walls. The best way to avoid this is to prevent the situation where you must shoot, and practice enough to reliably hit the bad guy in a defensive situation.


----------



## Tomu (Jun 11, 2008)

> None of the birdshot got the minimum FBI penetration requirements of 12" in ballistic gelatin with a maximum of 18" for handgun rounds. I don't beleive any of the pellets got past 7" of gelatin. Compare this to ballistic gelatin tests of .22LR's who typically get around 10" of penetration.
> 
> Buckshot penetrated 22" into ballistic gelatin, with a slug pentrating 17" into ordinance gelatin (note that a slug that doesn't deform can get overpenetration).



While I do agree in part with the penetration issue, IMO when it comes to self defence energy deposition(see shock) is as important as penetration. This is why no one in their right mind would use FMJ rounds for personal defence.  
My primary home defence weapon is mossberg 600 W/#4 hevi-13 from environmetal. Also have Taurus 7-round W/125 JHP's just to be safe.


----------



## chinto (Jun 12, 2008)

Skpotamus said:


> http://www.shadonet.com/2008/01/25/...t-buckshot-or-slugs-for-shotgun-home-defense/
> 
> A site with birdshot tests side by side with buckshot and slugs at close range (3 yards).
> 
> ...


interesting.. I have a shotgun that has first round  bird shot, and the next round is #4 buck.. I always figured that the second round is for keeps... but I do  not live in an apartment but a small house.   in an apartment I might go to the very lightest buck as say 3rd round, but heavy end of bird shot would be the first two as I do not want to punch a hole through the wall and kill the neighbors in that situation.  put 2 rounds of 12 bore shot with full power loads in to some one at point blank.. even bird shot will provably convince them to stop.. if not well that 3rd should be something guaranteed to be lethal. I am an ex EMT and I can tell you that shot is a very nasty thing to get shot with! but after it happens you want to be able to show you used all the care you could to preserve your life and not kill the neighbors while stopping the intruders!!  that way you both hopefully didn't kill the neighbors, and if you did have some go though the wall the jury will provably say " crap he/she did every thing in the world not to have that happen!!


----------



## KenpoTex (Jun 12, 2008)

Tomu said:


> While I do agree in part with the penetration issue, IMO when it comes to self defence energy deposition(see shock) is as important as penetration. This is why no one in their right mind would use FMJ rounds for personal defence.
> My primary home defence weapon is mossberg 600 W/#4 hevi-13 from environmetal. Also have Taurus 7-round W/125 JHP's just to be safe.


 
Hmm...yes and no.

With high-velocity rifle rounds, you do get the nasty "temporary wound cavity." However, pistol rounds just don't have the speed necessary to accomplish this. It seems that the "hydrostatic shock" theories of people like Sanow and Marshall have been pretty much de-bunked by guys like Dr. Martin Fackler who basically states that the ONLY factors that affect a handgun round's "deadliness" are depth of penetration and _permanent_ wound cavity a.k.a. the "crush cavity." That being the case, the advantage of a JHP over a FMJ is not because of any sort of "energy dump" that you get with a high-velocity rifle round, but because by expanding, bullet is increasing the diameter of the permanent wound channel.


----------



## tellner (Jun 12, 2008)

I know it's anecdotal, but it's worth mentioning...

Let's call this acquaintance of mine Platypus Boy. For reasons which none of his friends can fathom the United States Army has made him a first lieutenant. He's currently serving his umptieth tour in Iraq. 

Before he first went over PB expressed some reservations about the stopping power of the M4. The reservations were expressed in terms like "This stupid POS is going to get my *** killed." A wise friend of mine who has survived a lot of Bad Things sent him off with a case of 12g Remington Solid Copper Slugs and told him to get one of those short barreled Mossberg shotguns the military is fond of, the one with the bayonet lug. 

PB scrounged up the Mossberg. Now he keeps it tied to his body most of the time. Lots of people on his own side would like to liberate it. The case of shells is long gone and has been replaced a few times. He says that nothing he has shot with one of them has ever gotten up again. The Army now recommends triple taps to guarantee a stop with the 5.56. He has never had to use more than two shots, seldom more than one. It has penetrated everything from mailboxes to cars. It will certainly penetrate drywall and 2x4s. Most of all it will penetrate men and make sure they stop whatever they are doing, usually forever.


----------



## chinto (Jun 12, 2008)

Skpotamus said:


> http://www.shadonet.com/2008/01/25/...t-buckshot-or-slugs-for-shotgun-home-defense/
> 
> A site with birdshot tests side by side with buckshot and slugs at close range (3 yards).
> 
> ...


well the romans found that 2 inches in the belly to be fatal.. and that does work to with a shotgun.. but like I said .. in an apartment situation I am also looking at being able to tell the jury and judge and DA and his grand jury .. " i shot the attacker 2 times with light shot and he was not down or dead.. so I fired the 3rd round that was much heavier!  if you do have any collateral damage in that situation you will provably not do prison time.. if you just blast off with say 00 buck or even #4 and do end up wounding or killing some on on the other side of the wall, you got lots of legal problems besides the dead intruder to explain!!!!  the lawyers and provably the DA will be looking to hang you if it was a kid or wife asleep or something!!!  I can cycle a masburg 590 3 rounds in less then 4 seconds if I really have to..  most will stop for the first round if its a hit .. second if not and hell if you gota shoot 3 times with a shotgun.. the jury members are going to be saying I would have shot him 3 more times in terror!!!


----------



## Skpotamus (Jun 13, 2008)

Fatal and incapacitating are not the same thing.  Especially 2000 years ago before antibiotics were around.  A minor wound then could become infected and kill.  

The penetration numbers for the gelatin tests suggest that 00 buck wouldn't overpenetrate an average human body.  Much less have enough power to blow through a wall or two and into another person.  

FWIW, our military carries FMJ 9mm's.  Pretty much all of Europe LEO's carry 9mm in FMJ as well from what I understand.  

I can empty 15 rounds of 9mm in about 4 seconds.  I sure as heck wouldnt want to be trading shots with someone in my house.  The more shooting going on, the more likely I'm gonna get shot, or someone not in the fight is gonna get shot.  I want to have to put as few shots in the direction of an intruder as possible to incapacitate them so they don't have time to shoot back. 

Anytime you shoot someone, you're going to have legal problems.  hell, there are people in prison today for shooting burlgars who shot at them first.  Don't think that you're going to "legal proof" yourself by using smaller rounds.  

Even if you don't get a criminal charge filed against you, you're almost certain to be sued in civil court.  I could see some shyster lawyer using the birdshot against you.  "You see ladies and gentlemen of the jury, the defendant loaded his gun with a round designed to cause maximum pain without killing.  If his life had truly been threatened, he wouldn't have been using such ammo, instead he was looking for a moment to main, cripple and enjoy the inteense pain he inflicted on my client.... now give my scumbag client all the defendants $$$"  (somewhat paraphrased but you get the idea)

Just about any argument made about overkill by loading 00 buck or HP's can be justified by the question "what do my local LEO's carry?"   Mine has 00 buck loaded into their shotguns, with slugs on hand for cover penetration if needed.  

I would recommend on finding out what YOUR local LEO's carry, and use that.  


Good luck and be safe.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 14, 2008)

Grenadier said:


> I've sometimes had a debate with some folks, when it comes to smaller sized pellets being an effective manstopper from a 12 gauge shotgun.
> 
> Back when I lived in an apartment with thin sheetrock walls, I'd keep my Remington 870 loaded with two 12 gauge shells of #8 shot, followed with 3 shells of 12 gauge 00 Federal Tactical buckshot, since at close ranges, birdshot can do a flesh-flaying job quite nicely.
> 
> ...


 At hallway home defense range birdshot won't be distinguishable to 00 buck to the recipient.  Keep in mind that until the shot pattern dissipates over distance, it's virtually a solid mass with the same mass as 00 buck.....it's only after it dissipates that the individual pellets lose effectiveness, which 00 buck only retains because of the individual pellets greater individual density....but while together, you'll find that they aren't that distinguishable.

Anyone who believes that getting hit with #8 at 5 feet is significantly 'less lethal' than 00 buck at 5 feet should try this experiment.......fill one sock with about 1/2 pound of #8 lead shot and another with 1/2 pound of 00 buck lead shot.......then have the most sadistic friend you know smack you in the back of the head alternately between the two as hard as he can, and see if you can distinguish one from the other.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 14, 2008)

Skpotamus said:


> Fatal and incapacitating are not the same thing. Especially 2000 years ago before antibiotics were around. A minor wound then could become infected and kill.
> 
> The penetration numbers for the gelatin tests suggest that 00 buck wouldn't overpenetrate an average human body. Much less have enough power to blow through a wall or two and into another person.
> 
> ...


 That's why I choose to live in a state where we don't abide by such idiotic legalist arguments......we pass laws clearly outlining what is admissible when dealing with an intruder, and limiting the power of Prosecutors and Trial Lawers to punish law abiding citizens.  This is OUR country after all.....and if we accept the tyranny of the judiciary it's our OWN fault!


----------



## Skpotamus (Jun 15, 2008)

sgtmac_46 said:


> At hallway home defense range birdshot won't be distinguishable to 00 buck to the recipient. Keep in mind that until the shot pattern dissipates over distance, it's virtually a solid mass with the same mass as 00 buck.....it's only after it dissipates that the individual pellets lose effectiveness, which 00 buck only retains because of the individual pellets greater individual density....but while together, you'll find that they aren't that distinguishable.
> 
> Anyone who believes that getting hit with #8 at 5 feet is significantly 'less lethal' than 00 buck at 5 feet should try this experiment.......fill one sock with about 1/2 pound of #8 lead shot and another with 1/2 pound of 00 buck lead shot.......then have the most sadistic friend you know smack you in the back of the head alternately between the two as hard as he can, and see if you can distinguish one from the other.


 
It's interesting that the ballistic tests done at 9 feet show an entirely different effect than what you suggest when using #4 shot (almost twice the size of #8 shot).  What do you base your conclusions on?  

Rather than get into a pissing match as to who's state has better laws (My state has some of the better laws for personal and home defense   ), I'll simply point out that I repeated advice given by some of the better known self defense advocates  and trainers out there (Ayoob, Taylor and a few lawyers I've spoken to) regarding ammunition choices and possible legal scenario's about "too lethal" ammunition concerns and people choosing "weaker" rounds for concern about how they look during a shooting.  

I would suggest that people (everyone) not listen to any gunstore commando, or keyboard ninja on the internet (even if I AM wearing my ninja hood and have my grappling hook in my hand RIGHT NOW).  Instead, look up the data from scientific test results, then maybe talk to some police officers or military veterans or hunters who've seen different wound channels and shooting effects first hand.... and judge for yourself what you want to trust your life and the lives of your family on.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 15, 2008)

Skpotamus said:


> It's interesting that the ballistic tests done at 9 feet show an entirely different effect than what you suggest when using #4 shot (almost twice the size of #8 shot). What do you base your conclusions on?
> 
> Rather than get into a pissing match as to who's state has better laws (My state has some of the better laws for personal and home defense  ), I'll simply point out that I repeated advice given by some of the better known self defense advocates and trainers out there (Ayoob, Taylor and a few lawyers I've spoken to) regarding ammunition choices and possible legal scenario's about "too lethal" ammunition concerns and people choosing "weaker" rounds for concern about how they look during a shooting.
> 
> I would suggest that people (everyone) not listen to any gunstore commando, or keyboard ninja on the internet (even if I AM wearing my ninja hood and have my grappling hook in my hand RIGHT NOW). Instead, look up the data from scientific test results, then maybe talk to some police officers or military veterans or hunters who've seen different wound channels and shooting effects first hand.... and judge for yourself what you want to trust your life and the lives of your family on.


I'm not sure who your referring to as an internet commando, but i've been in law enforcement for 12 years, been a law enforcement firearms trainer for much of that, and have seen people shot with various firearms, including shotguns.  Spare me the ad hominems, as they are typically trotted out on the internet when differences of opinion compel someone to attack the messenger, and not the message. 

I promise you that you WILL NOT know the difference if you are hit in the upper torso by #7, #8 or 00 buck at 10ft or less!  Only you're coroner and ME will know the difference!

As for the spread of #8 shot at 10 feet, it's about 4 inches.  Beyond 20 feet it's effects are anemic, but when dealing with INDOOR self-defense range, the likelihood of having an extreme range shot is far less than the likelihood of overpenetration through walls by larger shot.  Those arguing that bird shot is ineffective at stopping someone at close range do so based on the FLAWED assumption that it requires GREATER than 6 inches of penetration in to the chest cavity to provide effective incapacitation....and that simply IGNORES the fact that we aren't talking about a .22 round......we're talking about over ONE OUNCE OF SHOT at 3,000+ ft/lb penetrating 6 inches in to your CHEST!  Even with body armor, you're looking at severe internal injuries! 

Meaning, at 10 feet or less, #8 shot is a more effective manstopper than rounds fired out of most handguns.  .  Now, my opinion on the IDEAL personal defense round is the Polyshok round!  But unless you're LEO or military you unfortunately can't get it.  But it's the ONLY thing I keep in my HD shotguns!  http://www.polyshok.com/




That's all i've got to say about shot size and shot patterns.  Amatures talk too much about hardware, professionals concentrate on tactics!


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 15, 2008)

One last thing on the subject.....since we're trotting out 'experts', i'll refer to a story Peter Capstick told. As a hunter and PH of dangerous game for many years, Capstick is hardly a novice on the subject of fatal wounds.  In fact, his real world first hand experience on what works on dangerous animals trumps most gelatine tests and theories as to what 'should' happen.

At any rate, Capstick tells of a chance confrontation with a Lioness while bird hunting with O/U shotgun loaded with #8 shot.  As Capstick recalled it, the gal charged, and was dropped stone cold dead with a frontal shot to the head at about 5 feet.....a shot from #8 shot that crushed her skull and killed her instantly.  I'll trust Capstick on dangerous game, over many self-proclaimed experts shooting gelatine any day.  Any load that will stop a Lionesse charge at close range (even if not ideal) is more than suitable for stopping other 'Thin-Skinned' intruders.  The belief that #8 shot out of a 12 gauge is somehow 'ineffective' against an intruder at close range simply because someone conducted some gelatine tests and it didn't reach their magic number of inches penetration (you might ask them about the size of the crush cavity) is frankly a little silly. 

I also find it compelling that Capstick and many other PH's prefer and preferred #4 to 00 buck shot when following up wounded Leopards.  Actually, now that I think of it Capstick had a few other compelling things to say on shot size, i'll have to dig him out and reference it later.

At any rate, fun conversation.


----------



## Skpotamus (Jun 15, 2008)

My gunstore commando quote wasn't directed at you, and I apologize if it appeared that way.  It was not my intent to belittle your opinion or you in anyway.  

My intent was a general suggestion for people not to listen to others opinions so much as it was to look at the facts presented before them before they made up their minds.  Opinions they should listen to and give some weight would be the various experts out there and what they recommend.  I doubt you will ever find a big name firearms instructor that recommends birdshot for home defense.  You're the first firearm instructor I've EVER heard say that.   Out of curiousity, what round does your department issue you for your shotungs?  

http://www.backwoodshome.com/articles2/ayoob031221.html  an article by massad ayoob about shotguns, including a section on ammo selection.  A quote from that article when talking about buckshot "These pellets will normally stay inside the assailants body with a front to back shot, reducing danger to innocent bystanders who might be located unseen behind a violent criminal. "
For those of you who don't know, Massad Ayoob is a LEO, a LEO trainer, a former lawyer and prosecutor as well as the head of the LEthal Force Institute.  

Ballistic gelatin simulates synthetic soft tissue.  Muscle, organs, etc.  Bone is a much harder and more difficult for projetciles to pentrate.  Hence the relatively large penetration requirements for the FBI (18").    6" in flesh isn't the same as 6" through the chest as the bones will deflect and stop a lot of the pellets.  

Anectdotal evidence isn't data and I would caution it's use as such.  I've got anectdotal evidence that says that birdshot isn't as effective.  
I've also seen shotgun wounds first hand.  Both in people and an animals.  A hunting accident where a hunter was crossing a fence, dropped his shotgun and shot himself in the chest.  The person who was shot walked out of the woods holding a rag to his chest, and drove himself to the hospital, 25 minutes away.  We were hunting squirrels, so I'm guessing he probably had #6 shot in his 12 gauge.  

By the same token, I could also bring up the story of Trooper coates, it was brought to my attention in my first NRA instructor school.  Tropper coates was killed in the line of duty by some scumball with a .22 pistol.  This was after trooper Coates put 9 .357 magnum rounds into the guys chest.  The guy is currently serving a life sentence in prison (he survived the 5 357's to the chest, but trooper coates was killed by a single 22 round to the side).  

The fact is, that nothing you can shoot by hand is guaranteed to drop a person without putting it in the right spot.  Going light and thinking it's going to be as effective as something heavier doesn't make a lot of sense.  That's like saying a .22 is just a dangerous as a .357 at close range, so I'm going to carry it instead.  

It is an interesting topic, and a fun discussion.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 16, 2008)

Skpotamus said:


> My gunstore commando quote wasn't directed at you, and I apologize if it appeared that way. It was not my intent to belittle your opinion or you in anyway.
> 
> My intent was a general suggestion for people not to listen to others opinions so much as it was to look at the facts presented before them before they made up their minds. Opinions they should listen to and give some weight would be the various experts out there and what they recommend. I doubt you will ever find a big name firearms instructor that recommends birdshot for home defense. You're the first firearm instructor I've EVER heard say that. Out of curiousity, what round does your department issue you for your shotungs?
> 
> ...


  No, nothing you can shoot by hand is 100% effective......but a 12 gauge is as close as you get in extreme close quarters....and a 12 gauge at close range with ANY load is superior to the firepower typically relied upon by folks in the form of a handgun, including a .357!  At 10 feet or less, the shear energy of 3,000+ ft/lbs applied to the upper torso, regardless of shot size, trumps intermediate hand gun rounds.  

So my point isn't that #8 is an optimal load for a tactical shotgun dealing with thin-skinned warm blooded predators....but merely that it is 'more than adequate' to the task of self-defense at close range against thin-skinned warm blooded predators....and that in an environment where fear that a stray pellet of 00 Buck or a Slug will penetrate couple layers of sheetrock and possible embed in the skull of a sleeping child, it's a suitable trade off of some efficiency for still effective close range firepower.

So again, my only real point is that you're never poorly armed hiding in your bedroom with a loaded 12 gauge with any shot in it!

As for anecdotal evidence, we have to rely on that, because the assumption that a number of inches of gelatine is a reliable indicator of lethality is, in many cases, even more dubious as evidence.  Add to that most of the study has been on single projectiles, not on shotguns.  Our knowledge of shotgun lethality comes from sportsman and police anecdotal evidence.

One should keep in mind that studies of wound ballistics and projectile lethality are VERY controversial and unresolved areas!


----------



## chinto (Jun 19, 2008)

sgtmac_46 said:


> No, nothing you can shoot by hand is 100% effective......but a 12 gauge is as close as you get in extreme close quarters....and a 12 gauge at close range with ANY load is superior to the firepower typically relied upon by folks in the form of a handgun, including a .357!  At 10 feet or less, the shear energy of 3,000+ ft/lbs applied to the upper torso, regardless of shot size, trumps intermediate hand gun rounds.
> 
> So my point isn't that #8 is an optimal load for a tactical shotgun dealing with thin-skinned warm blooded predators....but merely that it is 'more than adequate' to the task of self-defense at close range against thin-skinned warm blooded predators....and that in an environment where fear that a stray pellet of 00 Buck or a Slug will penetrate couple layers of sheetrock and possible embed in the skull of a sleeping child, it's a suitable trade off of some efficiency for still effective close range firepower.
> 
> ...


at 8 feet or so as an ex EMT who has seen some gunshot wounds I would suggest that any kind of full power load in a 12gage/bore shot gun is a bad thing to be on the receiving end of.   The ME is likely to be pulling bits and pieces of what ever load out of lots of places!  the shot or other projectiles in a "shot load" spread very very widely  on contact with the body.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 20, 2008)

chinto said:


> at 8 feet or so as an ex EMT who has seen some gunshot wounds I would suggest that any kind of full power load in a 12gage/bore shot gun is a bad thing to be on the receiving end of. The ME is likely to be pulling bits and pieces of what ever load out of lots of places! the shot or other projectiles in a "shot load" spread very very widely on contact with the body.


 Yeah, it's not something I want to test on the receiving end of that's for sure.


----------

