frayluisfan
Member
Hi, All.
A while ago, there was a thread that dealt with birdshot for home defense. A lot of ink was spilled on that thread, and I thought I'd throw out the results of some experiments that I have run as a result of reading it. One point that some people raised was the concern that birdshot would not penetrate. One poster even went so far as to say that he'd feel more comfortable with a .22 pistol than with a shotgun with birdshot. So I have done a few experiments--with what materials I have on hand, obviously, since I don't have access to ballistic gelatin.
***PROVISO*** The following is referring to birdshot ONLY at across-the-living-room distances, i.e., 10 yards or less. This is an effort to answer the question of whether birdshot would be useful as a last-ditch home defense tool, specifically against people IN THE HOUSE. If that's all you have, should you use it or just flee?
1. milk jugs filled with water. Since tissue is around 75-80% water, water can serve as a useful approximation. Obviously not as close as ballistic gelatin, but a lot cheaper. Anyway, I lined up a series of milk jugs filled with water, and shot them at a range of 5 yards with a variety of self defense loads. Hollow points from 9mm, .357, 10mm, and .44 magnum were used. Then I tried a 12 gauge with birdshot. Result-->Birdshot penetrated slightly less than other rounds: 2 milk jugs with bird shot as opposed to 3-4 with others. However, the damage to the first milk jug was dramatically different. The most powerful pistol HPs split the first jug and sometimes even the second, while birdshot shredded the first one, penetrated the second.
2. 1/2 inch plywood. Plywood was shot with birdshot at about 5 yards. Birdshot penetrated the plywood and sent chunks of plywood flying backwards. (I think the human sternum is about this thick. Can anyone correct me?)
3. Sopping wet phonebooks. Again, a crude attempt to approximate tissue. Similar to the milk jugs, birdshot penetrated about 2/3 of what pistol rounds did, but did far more damage.
Observations: Seems that *at very close range* we could expect penetration to be a bit less than some pistol HPs, but the plywood test especially ought to lay to rest the concern about whether birdshot across the living room would just create a flesh wound.
My conclusion: If I know someone is breaking down the door and I have a minute or so to get ready to repel boarders, I would feel much better starting the festivities with my semi-auto 12 gauge with 3 rounds of birdshot than any pistol. There is no question in my mind that _at that range_ birdshot does more damage than any pistol round I've seen, regardless of the test medium. The semi auto and the controllability of a shotgun mean that I can deliver more lead, more accurately and faster than with any pistol I own.
What do you think?
A while ago, there was a thread that dealt with birdshot for home defense. A lot of ink was spilled on that thread, and I thought I'd throw out the results of some experiments that I have run as a result of reading it. One point that some people raised was the concern that birdshot would not penetrate. One poster even went so far as to say that he'd feel more comfortable with a .22 pistol than with a shotgun with birdshot. So I have done a few experiments--with what materials I have on hand, obviously, since I don't have access to ballistic gelatin.
***PROVISO*** The following is referring to birdshot ONLY at across-the-living-room distances, i.e., 10 yards or less. This is an effort to answer the question of whether birdshot would be useful as a last-ditch home defense tool, specifically against people IN THE HOUSE. If that's all you have, should you use it or just flee?
1. milk jugs filled with water. Since tissue is around 75-80% water, water can serve as a useful approximation. Obviously not as close as ballistic gelatin, but a lot cheaper. Anyway, I lined up a series of milk jugs filled with water, and shot them at a range of 5 yards with a variety of self defense loads. Hollow points from 9mm, .357, 10mm, and .44 magnum were used. Then I tried a 12 gauge with birdshot. Result-->Birdshot penetrated slightly less than other rounds: 2 milk jugs with bird shot as opposed to 3-4 with others. However, the damage to the first milk jug was dramatically different. The most powerful pistol HPs split the first jug and sometimes even the second, while birdshot shredded the first one, penetrated the second.
2. 1/2 inch plywood. Plywood was shot with birdshot at about 5 yards. Birdshot penetrated the plywood and sent chunks of plywood flying backwards. (I think the human sternum is about this thick. Can anyone correct me?)
3. Sopping wet phonebooks. Again, a crude attempt to approximate tissue. Similar to the milk jugs, birdshot penetrated about 2/3 of what pistol rounds did, but did far more damage.
Observations: Seems that *at very close range* we could expect penetration to be a bit less than some pistol HPs, but the plywood test especially ought to lay to rest the concern about whether birdshot across the living room would just create a flesh wound.
My conclusion: If I know someone is breaking down the door and I have a minute or so to get ready to repel boarders, I would feel much better starting the festivities with my semi-auto 12 gauge with 3 rounds of birdshot than any pistol. There is no question in my mind that _at that range_ birdshot does more damage than any pistol round I've seen, regardless of the test medium. The semi auto and the controllability of a shotgun mean that I can deliver more lead, more accurately and faster than with any pistol I own.
What do you think?