Birdshot in shotguns

[sgtmac_46]

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.

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

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]

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!

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]

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.