Bird Shot for SD?

[PabloJ]

No. The best HD load is 2&3/4" Winchester #1 buck at 1250fps that Walmart or well stocked sporting goods store sells for about $5 per box of 5.

What I want to do is play with some spreader chokes or rifled ones to see if I can somehow open up shot cluster at close range. You know, make into visually impaired person HD gun.

 

[HankB]

I'd use small shot only - ONLY! - if nothing else was available. You can't always pick your home invader or burglar - the "typical" skinny guy in a dirty T-shirt may be out in the car while the guy in your foyer is a 300 pound, 6'6" steroid-pumped biker in full leathers with a big snort of angel dust up his nose.

Do you REALLY want to annoy him with a trap or skeet load, or even something meant for ducks or geese less than 1/10 his size, rather than a charge of 00 buck?

Not me.

 

[lemaymiami]

As a matter of practice I've always thought that it would be unfortunate if there were two accounts of any self defense incident... You'll have entirely enough trouble with one set of facts.

If you have 99 different opinions on the topic of what to use in a 12ga shotgun when you're in that once in a lifetime moment.... I'm betting that only a very few of those expressing any opinion have ever used a shotgun when it's all on the line.

 

[Sheepdog1968]

In a Louis Awerbuck class, he spent time telling a story of someone accidentally getting hit with birdshot at close range by accident by the person next to him fiddling with his shotgun at a skeet or trap range. Blood everywhere. Person went on to survive. Another point he made was that lets say it is the kind of shot where you absolutely must stop the bag guy on the first shot (I'm sure you can come up,with a scenario). Birdshot doesn't have as much of a guarantee to be able do do this. After all of this, he then points out that the first round in Col. Cooper's shotgun was birdshot (not sure if buck or slugs after that).

If I was in a situation where I didn't happen to have buckshot on me, I'd sleep quite fine with birdshot for a night or two or week. Would sell prefer the shotgun over a pistol.

 

[Steve C]

Steve C, where did your associate get all those shotguns and ammo he sold?

He was in the Air Force and based in Japan. Said he'd buy the shotguns and ammo at the PX.

 

[AKElroy]

Take a card board box and set it out to 10 feet then hit it with a full load of number 4's!

At close range bird shot works just like a meat grinder.

Yes, but not deep enough to hit organ meat.

 

[Panzerschwein]

It is an old military rule of thumb that projectiles need, at the least, 58 foot pounds of energy to produce a killing or disabling wound, reliably. That idea was cooked up in relation to designing and using old fashioned Shrapnel shells, later applied to artillery fragments and was most recently used in the design of the Claymore mine. It's not very exact, for people have been disabled or killed by far less energetic projectiles, but general rules are just that: they have exceptions.

Unless the calculator I used is way off, #4 buckshot launched at 1250 fps is down to 58 foot pounds just nine yards from the muzzle. (For comparison, #1 buckshot launched at the same speed has dropped to 58 foot pounds of energy when it has flown 76 yards and 00 buck gets out to a trifle more than 115 yards before its energy drops to that level.)

We know anecdotally that #4 buck works farther than nine yards, but we also know its reputation for poor performance as distance increases. We have read of police becoming disgruntled with the load and switching to 00, due to indecisive results when suspects were hit with #4 buck. At other times it has worked quite well, and its good pattern density is obviously an advantage in getting hits on the target.

We are flirting with the limits of ineffectiveness with #4 buck, and the results show it. That seems to bear out the military's 58 foot pounds estimate, and suggests to me that #4 buck is a sensible lower limit.

Ah, keep crunching those numbers Ken.

Most of the real-world tests I've seen with ballistics gel and heavy denim give #4 buckshot a penetration rating of 11-14" at about 10 yards. That is not bad, and with 27 pellets per average in each 2 3/4" shell, you get quite a bit more frontal area (i.e. wound channel cross sectional density) than your typical 9 pellet 00 buckshot and YES more frontal area than the golden child 16 pellet #1 buckshot loads.

Now granted, you get less penetration that either of those larger pellets but for a small apartment dweller in a tight pedestrian urban zone like me, it's just about ideal IMHO. If I were to live in a suburban or semi-rural area I might well go with #1 buckshot. That's the great thing about shotguns, you can adapt your load for various threat levels and risk assessments.

But as for using birdshot to defend my home and life from violent, dangerous, and possibly very large and drugged up attackers?

I think I'll stick to #4 buckshot and larger.

 

[bubba in ca]

you would think this argument would someday go away!

Use birdshot only by necessity and only with head shots. Jamming the barrel in his Adams apple and then shooting should be a fight stopper, too

If you lack the skill or the will for head shots, use buckshot.

Deadly force is deadly force. Use the round that will work fast and under all circumstances (heavy clothes, drugged maniac, jihadist who wants to die, etc).

Get over the weinie rifle range training and go for head shots whenever possible.
The world has gotten nastier than when silhouette targets were invented.

 

[Jason_W]

Size BB or larger will shred a lot of tissue at in-home distances. I experimented with size F handloads for a bit and I was impressed.

That said, size 4 and 00 buck loads are cheap and available pretty much everywhere so I can't really see a reason to use anything else. Even a #8 bird load will sail straight through an interior wall so the overpenetration argument is moot.

Has there ever been a documented case of a round of any kind being fired in self defense inside a home exiting an exterior wall and harming a bystander?

 

[John Joseph]

Bird shot? If that's all you got, sure.

FWIW, a long time ago back at the Academy, we shot both 00 Buck and #9. #9 could be used to discourage or reroute an advancing "mob"
I doubt this is still part of the training.
Yeah, there is CS, but #9 was still considered an option.
As others have posted, 00 and 4B are available nearly everywhere for not much $$.

 

[j1]

Self defense means to stop the threat of danger to you. Not to hurt the other guy.

 

[C0untZer0]

you would think this argument would someday go away!

Yes along with the misconception that birdshot at extremely close range acts like a slug.

Even if the barrel is pressed up against an assailant's skin, bird shot does not act like a slug.

Just watching gel tests prove this idea false but it keeps getting perpetuated.

 

[hdwhit]

Having practiced with bird shot I'm surprised at how much damage it does at close range.

Basically what you are describing is the idea behind the Glaser Safety Slug line of self-defense ammunition; creating a large, shallow wound by using a large number of small pellets is optimal for taking an opportunistic attacker out of the fight.

It may not be the best choice if your SD situation is defending your home against numerous attackers who are determined to kill or kidnap you, but you will have to look at your own lifestyle and environment and decide which type of threat you are likely to face. For me, living in an affluent suburb where most home-invasions are the result of criminals burglarizing a home they thought was unoccupied, I keep my guns loaded with Glaser Safety Slugs.

 

[hdwhit]

Unless the calculator I used is way off, #4 buckshot launched at 1250 fps is down to 58 foot pounds just nine yards from the muzzle.

The OP was asking about SD at "close ranges" of which "a house" was given as an example. The longest hallway in my house is 18 feet (6 yards) and from my side of the bed to the bedroom door is 9 feet (3 yards). In my father's house, it is 6 feet (2 yards) and in my son's apartment, less than 5 feet. I'm sure most people would be looking at similar distances, so nine yards is much further that most people would ever be shooting at an attacker within their homes.

 

[John Joseph]

FWIW I've seen what happened when a load of bird shot went off near point blank to a boy's shoulder.
The shoulder was gone.
It was a needless tragedy(the boys father was cleaning his gun after a hunting trip) with life long consequences.

 

[ChCx2744]

Just use buckshot or a hollow point slug and call it a day!

 

[CaptTripps]

Only birdshot load I would use would be a heavy goose or turkey load in 3", in larger shot size. Even then it would be way, way down on my list of suitable ammo. I wouldn't have faith it completely.

 

[red rick]

I worked with a woman and was there when she got the phone call that her brother had been killed by his son while they were turkey hunting . I don't know the shot size or the distance .

 

[Kendal Black]

Oh, there is no question birdshot kills and maims people, sometimes. It also sometimes leaves them unfazed, or makes them really angry. The most commonly reported result seems to be a gruesome but superficial wound. Quite often the patient is ambulatory and aware when help arrives. Still other people have had birdshot turned by Carhart jackets or other sturdy outdoor wear.

With so many possible outcomes, why would you want to bet on the chance of getting a useful outcome in a justified self-defense situation, when there are several other outcomes, that are not useful ones, amid the possibilities? What we are looking at is a might-be, maybe-so fight stopper.

I saw a movie once where birdshot would be just the thing for home defense, but the premise seemed farfetched.

 

[tkroenlein]

No.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[shiftyer1]

I shot a medium sized muscular dog 3 times with bird shot from about 15 feet. If it's all u got load it up.......I went to the store and bought buck shot after my lesson. He was still moving around just fine until the 3rd shot.

 

[Joshboyfutre]

I personally think steel shot and number 6 or some high brass number 4 would be fine but I keep number for buck and double up but just to be safe

 

[strambo]

I find it mildly fascinating that the OP contained the necessary info to answer the Q, then conflated 2 totally different concepts resulting in a bad hypothesis.

OP states it has been demonstrated that BS cannot reliably reach the vital organs of a human or large animal even at close range (correct.) Then, hypothesizes that the wound would be so bad that they "must" stop.

Nope, the only way an attacker "must" stop is if their central nervous system is damaged or their brain lacks oxygen ( from damage to vascular organ(s) or major vessels. )

So a person must stop if they lose consciousness due to CNS damage or blood loss/ O2 depravation, in other words only if you damage the vital organs and it has time to take effect.

Them choosing to stop for any other reason is a bonus that we have no control over.

 

[C0untZer0]

the only way an attacker "must" stop is if their central nervous system is damaged or their brain lacks oxygen ( from damage to vascular organ(s) or major vessels. )

That covers most of it, except for breaking major bones, and I know I'm splitting hairs, but I'll post this from Frank Ettin anyway (emphasis mine)

http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=10218456&postcount=48

Let's consider how shooting someone will actually cause him to stop what he's doing.

I. The goal is to stop the assailant.

II. There are four ways in which shooting someone stops him:

A. psychological -- "I'm shot, it hurts, I don't want to get shot any more."

B. massive blood loss depriving the muscles and brain of oxygen and thus significantly impairing their ability to function

C. breaking major skeletal support structures

D. damaging the central nervous system.

Depending on someone just giving up because he's been shot is iffy. Probably most fights are stopped that way, but some aren't; and there are no guarantees.

Breaking major skeletal structures can quickly impair mobility. But if the assailant has a gun, he can still shoot. And it will take a reasonably powerful round to reliably penetrate and break a large bone, like the pelvis.

Hits to the central nervous system are sure and quick, but the CNS presents a small and uncertain target. And sometimes significant penetration will be needed to reach it.

The most common and sure physiological way in which shooting someone stops him is blood loss -- depriving the brain and muscles of oxygen and nutrients, thus impairing the ability of the brain and muscles to function. Blood loss is facilitated by (1) large holes causing tissue damage; (2) getting the holes in the right places to damage major blood vessels or blood bearing organs; and (3) adequate penetration to get those holes into the blood vessels and organs which are fairly deep in the body. The problem is that blood loss takes time. People have continued to fight effectively when gravely, even mortally, wounded. So things that can speed up blood loss, more holes, bigger holes, better placed holes, etc., help.

Another thing birdshot has going against it is that it generally doesn't break bones.

 

[strambo]

I didn't mention breaking bones because it just impairs mobility and is only a means to an end (the "stop"), it is a potential consideration though. You're right, birdshot isn't gonna do that either!

I like #1 buck in the house (good penetration, 16 pellets and some spread) as well as low recoil 00 for general SD use (inside or out) to over 25 yds.