I really need some general understanding of stopping power in self defense

[angrybird]

Hello,

I have a black powder revolver for home defense. Why such outdated technology? Because I live in France and that's the only thing I can legally have without having a shooting or hunting licence and having to register it. France is getting more and more insecure and I don't see why I should be a victim.

It is a Colt 1860 44 cal. copy which is not only a beautiful piece of art but also fires .454 cal. 140 gr. round lead balls at about 900 fps. I was hesitating a long time if a 1851 Navy 36 cal. that shoots a .375 cal. 80 gr. round lead ball at about 1000 fps is the better choice.

Do you think I made a good choice? What arguments would favor a 44 against a 36 and vice versa? I was thinking the smaller caliber was powerful enough and uses less black powder so it will create less smoke in my house, but the bigger caliber will eventually stop a madman better. But then I really just want to stop the aggressor, not make lasagna out of him. Is a 44 too much against an aggressor? (I mean in the civil war era they killed horses and bears with a 44).

While I understand my revolver really well and know how to handle it safely, I don't have any experience in firearms against living aggressors, nor is it a "normal" topic in France as it is in the US for example, so we are poorly (not at all) educated concerning self defense with firearms.

But ultimately I want to get my licence to be able to buy a double barreled shotgun for home defense, but in that case it would be way more powerful than my 44 revolver anyway right? (assault rifles, pumpguns and handguns are much more complicated to get, and at least one year waiting time etc.)

So you see my point: I'm afraid my 44 revolver is overkill to stop a home invader until police arrives. But then I saw videos of people getting shot and running around. Am I overestimating the power of my gun? What is exactly meant by stopping power? Killing? What would you have chosen in my case?

I would really appreciate opinions from people into this matter, maybe if you work in law enforcement or are dealing/have experience with such situations or just have really good knowledge? Thank you!

 

[MachIVshooter]

If I were limited to BP revolvers, a Remington 1858 new army .44 cal would be my choice. They can be loaded hotter and are quicker to swap cylinders than open top Colt patterns. Top loads in an 1858 will rival standard pressure smokeless .45 Colt & .45 ACP power

Between .44 and 36 cal. for SD, the choice is obvious. You want to stop the attacker as quickly as possible, and bigger bullets do that better than smaller ones, especially when you're talking about a round ball that has no meplat or expanding cavity to cut, will simply push through and tear.

 

[Shaq]

Sometimes, when we hear about restrictions in other countries, we learn to appreciate the freedoms where we live.

To answer your question about "stopping power," it has nothing to do with "killing." Any gun can kill...eventually. Stopping power means the ability of a bullet to cause your adversary to immediately stop his attack on you with one torso hit. Caliber is important, but shot placement & where the bullet goes & what it damages is much more important. Many people have more confidence in a larger-diameter bullet. Theoretically, a larger bullet may do more damage, & may provide better stopping power. The ballistics you describe in your Colt 1860 44 cal. are NOT overkill. Black powder firearms are limited in power, compared to modern smokeless cartridges. And you have no quick reload capability, so the bigger the better.

 

[angrybird]

Sometimes, when we hear about restrictions in other countries, we learn to appreciate the freedoms where we live.

To answer your question about "stopping power," it has nothing to do with "killing." Any gun can kill...eventually. Stopping power means the ability of a bullet to cause your adversary to immediately stop his attack on you with one torso hit. Caliber is important, but shot placement & where the bullet goes & what it damages is much more important. Many people have more confidence in a larger-diameter bullet. Theoretically, a larger bullet may do more damage, & may provide better stopping power. The ballistics you describe in your Colt 1860 44 cal. are NOT overkill. Black powder firearms are limited in power, compared to modern smokeless cartridges. And you have no quick reload capability, so the bigger the better.

Absolutely, that's why I always say to Americans you can be really proud to have your 2nd (and 1st) amendment and let never anyone only try to touch it! In Europe the governments prefer to have a people of victims to control much easier.

In that sense stopping power is good, if something happens I want to stop him, not necessarily kill him, even though I wouldn't care, my family's and my life come first. But self defense in Europe is messed up, so you will end up in court if you protect your family against a madman. So are there statistics if it's easier to survive a shot in the lower abdomen (intestins area) vs torso (lungs)?

 

[bassjam]

If there could be legal implications for exerciser your (God given right to) self defense I could see an argument to a smaller caliber. One could argue they had chosen a smaller firearm to wound and not kill.

That's a different way of viewing things vs how most of us in the US sees things. Most of our states have laws allowing us to use deadly force if our life is in danger, so in that case your .44 black powder revolver is a great choice! I would also add that being a single action, you want that first shot to cause as muc damage as possible since you'll have to cock the hammer again for a second shot. In a true life and death situation, you may not have time for that second shot, and nervous and sweaty fingers could slow you down even more!

 

[mjsdwash]

Hello,

I have a black powder revolver for home defense. Why such outdated technology? Because I live in France and that's the only thing I can legally have without having a shooting or hunting licence and having to register it. France is getting more and more insecure and I don't see why I should be a victim.

It is a Colt 1860 44 cal. copy which is not only a beautiful piece of art but also fires .454 cal. 140 gr. round lead balls at about 900 fps. I was hesitating a long time if a 1851 Navy 36 cal. that shoots a .375 cal. 80 gr. round lead ball at about 1000 fps is the better choice.

Do you think I made a good choice? What arguments would favor a 44 against a 36 and vice versa? I was thinking the smaller caliber was powerful enough and uses less black powder so it will create less smoke in my house, but the bigger caliber will eventually stop a madman better. But then I really just want to stop the aggressor, not make lasagna out of him. Is a 44 too much against an aggressor? (I mean in the civil war era they killed horses and bears with a 44).

While I understand my revolver really well and know how to handle it safely, I don't have any experience in firearms against living aggressors, nor is it a "normal" topic in France as it is in the US for example, so we are poorly (not at all) educated concerning self defense with firearms.

But ultimately I want to get my licence to be able to buy a double barreled shotgun for home defense, but in that case it would be way more powerful than my 44 revolver anyway right? (assault rifles, pumpguns and handguns are much more complicated to get, and at least one year waiting time etc.)

So you see my point: I'm afraid my 44 revolver is overkill to stop a home invader until police arrives. But then I saw videos of people getting shot and running around. Am I overestimating the power of my gun? What is exactly meant by stopping power? Killing? What would you have chosen in my case?

I would really appreciate opinions from people into this matter, maybe if you work in law enforcement or are dealing/have experience with such situations or just have really good knowledge? Thank you!

the thing about BP balls is they'er known for killing more than suddenly stopping things. Still, most people will run at the sight and sound of a bb gun, and of those that wont, many wont stop at a 44mag, so I wouldent worry. I prefer the New Model Army's more, they're far less finicky. If you really think you may shoot it, keep a fire extinguisher or some water nearby. most everything has flame retardant (curtains, carpet, cloaths) but you never know.

 

[angrybird]

If there could be legal implications for exerciser your (God given right to) self defense I could see an argument to a smaller caliber. One could argue they had chosen a smaller firearm to wound and not kill.

That's a different way of viewing things vs how most of us in the US sees things. Most of our states have laws allowing us to use deadly force if our life is in danger, so in that case your .44 black powder revolver is a great choice! I would also add that being a single action, you want that first shot to cause as muc damage as possible since you'll have to cock the hammer again for a second shot. In a true life and death situation, you may not have time for that second shot, and nervous and sweaty fingers could slow you down even more!

To be accurate, we are allowed to use deadly force when our life is in immediate danger, but ONLY in this case. That means when someone threatens you directly with a weapon or is about to kill you. At least when someone breaks into a home at night it's less complicated (you won't get problems because the law says you can't see what he is about to do when he comes in your direction). These are the only tolerated cases. The fact that our judges are mostly left wing doesn't make it easier...

 

[22-rimfire]

In a home defense scenario, you generally are not limited by the size of the handgun. So, the 44 choice is where I would go. Stopping power is hard to assess with a particular caliber, but generally speaking the larger the bullet diameter the better the stopping power. Do they have the same restrictions with shotguns in France? If not, a 12 ga pump shotgun is hard to beat for home defense.

 

[RPRNY]

I prefer the Remington 1858 but your Colt is a great choice too and there is wealth of information online (and a thread on here as I recall) on how to resolve the cap jam issues associated with the Colt 1860. The 44 Cal 1860 was designed to stop horses. It was used very effectively in combat, albeit a bloody long time ago. A .454 140 lead ball at 850 fps will make a mess of anyone not wearing body armor. It will "stop" folks provided shot placement allows it to.

Given the restrictions you face, you have made a very solid choice. Now, to make it count, you need to do the exact same thing as anyone with the most modern, cutting edge, tactical whatever. Practice, practice, practice. If you can make a center mass shot, with your heart racing, probably in a low light situation, and adrenaline pumping through you, then you will stop an aggressor. The only way that happens is muscle memory from practice, practice, practice. Develop the load that shoots closest to point of aim at the best velocity and then practice making 5 shots into a torso sized target over and over. Some folks will do a jog in place between shots to get your heart rate up and simulate stressful conditions. There's lots of excellent information on technique available on-line but the key is to find a stable shooting stance that allows you to make good shots at the ranges you think are likely and practice doing just that, over and over.

 

[angrybird]

In a home defense scenario, you generally are not limited by the size of the handgun. So, the 44 choice is where I would go. Stopping power is hard to assess with a particular caliber, but generally speaking the larger the bullet diameter the better the stopping power. Do they have the same restrictions with shotguns in France? If not, a 12 ga pump shotgun is hard to beat for home defense.

For a smooth barreled shotgun it has to be single shot, double barreled or max. 3 shots to be able to buy it with a shooting or hunting licence and an ID and then it has to be registered. With more than three shots it has to be a rifled barrel. More than 3 shots and a smooth barrel puts into a higher category (same as handguns and semi auto rifles, full auto rifles are completely illegal) where you have in addition to ask the government permission first to get one and give a proof of residency, declaration of all your guns and ammunition, birth certificate, medical certificate, criminal record, proof you are actively shooting in a club and their OK you can get such a weapon, proof you detain a gun safe, and then you have to wait until you get the permission and then it's only valid for 5 years before you have to redo the procedure.

 

[angrybird]

I prefer the Remington 1858 but your Colt is a great choice too and there is wealth of information online (and a thread on here as I recall) on how to resolve the cap jam issues associated with the Colt 1860. The 44 Cal 1860 was designed to stop horses. It was used very effectively in combat, albeit a bloody long time ago. A .454 140 lead ball at 850 fps will make a mess of anyone not wearing body armor. It will "stop" folks provided shot placement allows it to.

Given the restrictions you face, you have made a very solid choice. Now, to make it count, you need to do the exact same thing as anyone with the most modern, cutting edge, tactical whatever. Practice, practice, practice. If you can make a center mass shot, with your heart racing, probably in a low light situation, and adrenaline pumping through you, then you will stop an aggressor. The only way that happens is muscle memory from practice, practice, practice. Develop the load that shoots closest to point of aim at the best velocity and then practice making 5 shots into a torso sized target over and over. Some folks will do a jog in place between shots to get your heart rate up and simulate stressful conditions. There's lots of excellent information on technique available on-line but the key is to find a stable shooting stance that allows you to make good shots at the ranges you think are likely and practice doing just that, over and over.

Thanks I will look into that! I went for the Colt because the 1858 just felt wrong in my hands. But it's a solid gun too no question.

 

[TomJ]

So are there statistics if it's easier to survive a shot in the lower abdomen (intestins area) vs torso (lungs)?

You want to aim for the thoracic triangle (imaginary triangle drawn by a line connecting each nipple and connected at the top by the notch at the clavicle) as that will most likely stop an attacker quicker than aiming for the lower abdomen.

 

[strambo]

Here is a down and dirty run-down of terminal ballistics and the mechanism of wounding for handgun projectiles.

At handgun velocities, the only tissue damage is from what the bullet touches known as the permanent cavity. Depending on the bullet shape (round, vs. flat, vs. hollow point) this wound cavity can be less than the bullet diameter, i.e. soft tissue getting pushed out of the way by a rounded bullet causing a smaller wound channel than the bullet diameter. An expanding HP obviously makes a wound channel larger than the bullet diameter (and also limits penetration).

There is no "stopping power" and there is no "shock effect" or temporary cavity that causes damage. It is simply a function of how big and deep of a hole and what organs or internal structures did it damage?

Now, statistically for handgun wounds, about 8/10 are survivable.

With the above in mind let's talk anatomy. The only way to instantly "stop" a person is to hit the central nervous system. Brain, brain stem, very high spine (cervical vertebrae). Hit the spine lower and they will instantly lose function from that point down.

The part of the brain for an instant stop (mid-brain/Pons/Medulla) is about lemon sized and the aim point is the tip of the nose from the front. Or more commonly, a triangle formed by the eyes down to a point at the top of the lip.

The most common error is to aim high on the forehead. The skull is very thick here and also angling back making it even thicker (like a tank turret). Add in a rounded bullet shape (compounded more by your ball) and we can easily get a bullet that glances upward and doesn't penetrate the skull. So, aim eyes or lower.

We cannot ever count on hitting the 1" spine through the torso on purpose, so we'll skip it.

Next (and most common) aim point is center-chest. Many people inaccurately refer to this as "center of mass" and it is a pet peeve of mine. Center-mass of the torso is near the solar plexus and too low. Center chest is a triangle area from nipple to nipple at the base up to the suprasternal notch (top of the sternum, base of the throat).

This area contains the heart, both lungs, and major vessels like the aorta and vena cava. A hit here, even to the heart, will not result in instant incapacitation. A person shot through the heart can still fight for another 7-30 seconds. The lungs take up the most space here, a lung hit can take many many minutes before the the lung collapses affecting breathing.

So, given those facts, your best bet is usually to rapidly hit the center-chest area 2-4 times, then if the threat is still on their feet (and not running away) transition to the head. Bonus points for either doing it while moving or doing it from behind cover or concealment (as in the home scenario).

In your shoes, I'd go for the double-barrel shotgun, loaded with #4-00 Buckshot with a butt-cuff holding more shells backed up by the revolver. One load of 00 buck in the chest would be more than the wounding equivalent of instantly hitting them with all 6 shots from the revolver simultaneously. Much more rapid blood loss leading to incapacitation much quicker.

 

[angrybird]

Here is a down and dirty run-down of terminal ballistics and the mechanism of wounding for handgun projectiles.

At handgun velocities, the only tissue damage is from what the bullet touches known as the permanent cavity. Depending on the bullet shape (round, vs. flat, vs. hollow point) this wound cavity can be less than the bullet diameter, i.e. soft tissue getting pushed out of the way by a rounded bullet causing a smaller wound channel than the bullet diameter. An expanding HP obviously makes a wound channel larger than the bullet diameter (and also limits penetration).

There is no "stopping power" and there is no "shock effect" or temporary cavity that causes damage. It is simply a function of how big and deep of a hole and what organs or internal structures did it damage?

Now, statistically for handgun wounds, about 8/10 are survivable.

With the above in mind let's talk anatomy. The only way to instantly "stop" a person is to hit the central nervous system. Brain, brain stem, very high spine (cervical vertebrae). Hit the spine lower and they will instantly lose function from that point down.

The part of the brain for an instant stop (mid-brain/Pons/Medulla) is about lemon sized and the aim point is the tip of the nose from the front. Or more commonly, a triangle formed by the eyes down to a point at the top of the lip.

The most common error is to aim high on the forehead. The skull is very thick here and also angling back making it even thicker (like a tank turret). Add in a rounded bullet shape (compounded more by your ball) and we can easily get a bullet that glances upward and doesn't penetrate the skull. So, aim eyes or lower.

We cannot ever count on hitting the 1" spine through the torso on purpose, so we'll skip it.

Next (and most common) aim point is center-chest. Many people inaccurately refer to this as "center of mass" and it is a pet peeve of mine. Center-mass of the torso is near the solar plexus and too low. Center chest is a triangle area from nipple to nipple at the base up to the suprasternal notch (top of the sternum, base of the throat).

This area contains the heart, both lungs, and major vessels like the aorta and vena cava. A hit here, even to the heart, will not result in instant incapacitation. A person shot through the heart can still fight for another 7-30 seconds. The lungs take up the most space here, a lung hit can take many many minutes before the the lung collapses affecting breathing.

So, given those facts, your best bet is usually to rapidly hit the center-chest area 2-4 times, then if the threat is still on their feet (and not running away) transition to the head. Bonus points for either doing it while moving or doing it from behind cover or concealment (as in the home scenario).

In your shoes, I'd go for the double-barrel shotgun, loaded with #4-00 Buckshot with a butt-cuff holding more shells backed up by the revolver. One load of 00 buck in the chest would be more than the wounding equivalent of instantly hitting them with all 6 shots from the revolver simultaneously. Much more rapid blood loss leading to incapacitation much quicker.

Great explanation, thank you very much! I really like how the US prioritizes the life of the victim and has great associations like the NRA where people can learn how to preserve their life and the ones of their families and friends. I'm born in the wrong country. As the shotgun is relatively easy to get, I'll probably go for this one in the long run.

Edit: @strambo you mentionned you would recommend a double barreled shotgun in my case, is there a special reason you would prefer that over a three shot pumpgun/semi-auto? Are these easier to reload, especially under stress?

 

[Telekinesis]

Edit: @strambo you mentionned you would recommend a double barreled shotgun in my case, is there a special reason you would prefer that over a three shot pumpgun/semi-auto? Are these easier to reload, especially under stress?

First, Strambo, great write up. I was resisting the urge to write something similar and was glad to see someone took the time to put it together.

Angrybird, I may have misread something above, but didn't you say that licensing was much more difficult for a pump, and that a double barrel was much easier to get?

Personally I would prefer a pump to a double barrel for the extra round, but with practice you can get very quick at ejecting and reloading a double barrel. If you go with the pump; you'll want to get practice at port loading - basically you shoot the first 3 and then load 1 into the chamber and fire, eject, load another into the chamber and fire, and repeat. Don't count on just the 2 or 3 rounds in the gun being all you'll need.

Apart from the possible legalities thing (that could just be a misunderstanding on my part), advantages for the double barrel (I'd recommend an over/under barre configuration) are faster follow up shot for barrel number 2 (no pumping required), and the ability to use 2 different chokes (this is more useful for hunting or clay shooting). Something else that might be useful for home defense is that for a given barrel length, a double barrel will usually have a shorter overall length than a pump/semi auto.

And I wouldn't worry about your .44 being too much gun. Handguns generally suck at stopping people, but also a 140gr bullet at 900 fps sounds pretty similar to a 9mm, except that you don't get to use any of the cool expanding ammo.

 

[shafter]

The old Army Colt may be obsolete but it is still deadly. That pistol was a favored sidearm through some horrific carnage during our Civil War as well as other places. Sure, a Glock would serve you better but if a black powder revolver is all you can have then go for it. You can squeeze a little more power out of the Remington model but I don't think it's an essential upgrade. Under stress the 1860 points more naturally than any other pistol I've handled.

As for swapping cylinders I don't see that being much of an issue in a home defense situation.

 

[strambo]

Edit: @strambo you mentionned you would recommend a double barreled shotgun in my case, is there a special reason you would prefer that over a three shot pumpgun/semi-auto? Are these easier to reload, especially under stress?

I didn't realize a 3-shot pump was an option I guess. Would it be 3 in the magazine plus 1 in the chamber? Either way, the pump (or a reliable semi-auto) with a side-saddle would be best. However, in trained hands the double-barrel is a serious weapon and can be reloaded quickly. Either way, 2 loads of 9 pellet 00 buck gives you nearly the wounding power of three, 6 shot cylinders from the black powder .44.

 

[Gun Geezer]

Cant' much argue with the comments above: 44 cal at 900 fps is a tad anemic. Thast about like a current 38 Special +P. Not an awe inspiring fight stopper, but I do carry one as my CCW. All that said, if I had 6 shots of 44 round ball shooting it at across the room distances I'd feel pretty good about it. Anybody with one in his chest may continue to fight but he's going to be bleeing and hurting both!

Now a double barrell 12-gauge would be a fight stopper! 00 buck at 5 yards is so warm and fuzzy. Couple that with your 44 and you would be safe enough.

 

[thedeal]

Dogs aren't outlawed in France. Grab a Belgian Malinois from... Hungary. Mals have incredible stopping power.

 

[danez71]

Can you get a black powder double barrel shotgun with out a license?

Something like this for example?
http://www.cabelas.com/product/pede...uts?destination=/catalog/browse.cmd?N=1100202

 

[22-rimfire]

....In your shoes, I'd go for the double-barrel shotgun, loaded with #4-00 Buckshot with a butt-cuff holding more shells backed up by the revolver. One load of 00 buck in the chest would be more than the wounding equivalent of instantly hitting them with all 6 shots from the revolver simultaneously. Much more rapid blood loss leading to incapacitation much quicker.

Double barrel vs pump action... I would choose the pump mostly because I am used to using a pump shotgun hunting and its operation is almost second nature to me. But if there are a lot of legal hassles to jump through with the pump shotgun, I'd go with the double.

I would use #4 buck (12 ga) which has 27 pellets versus 00 buck. I don't think you gain much at close range with the 00 size.

With self defense, always shoot to center of mass as there is more margin for error. People move.

 

[fastbolt]

Whenever one of our folks (cops) tried to start a conversation about "stopping power" using their duty or off-duty handguns, I explained that any conversation about "stopping power" needs to be confined to discussing motor vehicles and braking.

FWIW, even shotguns and rifles aren't guaranteed to have "1-shot stopping power". Gun shot wounding and "instant incapacitation" really needs to take into consideration whether, and to what degree, critical anatomical tissues, structures and organs are involved.

One description offered by expert in the LE field in years past ('89) was that "stopping power" was probably more realistically considered to be wounding which prevented the "attacker" from having the ability to be capable of further volitional physical action (meaning no longer able to continue doing whatever deadly force action it was that had caused the attacker to be shot).

I once met a grizzled retired federal firearms instructor (among other things) who was asked in a class about "stopping power". A young fellow (cop) was trying to get the instructor to draw a line about what constituted "stopping power". The instructor told him that as far as he was concerned, "stopping power" was accurately and rapidly delivering a pair of 1oz shotgun slugs to an attacker's head. I suspect he was trying to make a point to the young fellow.

Handguns are ... handguns.

 

[Panzerschwein]

The big .44s with a full charge were excellent stoppers. The .36s? Not so much. Ballistically it is like comparing a .380 to a .45 ACP.

You made the right choice in that .44. They were made to stop charging cavalry horses and were tremendously more capable battle guns than the frankly wimpy .36s, though the .36s are fun to target shoot with.

 

[angrybird]

First, Strambo, great write up. I was resisting the urge to write something similar and was glad to see someone took the time to put it together.

Angrybird, I may have misread something above, but didn't you say that licensing was much more difficult for a pump, and that a double barrel was much easier to get?

Personally I would prefer a pump to a double barrel for the extra round, but with practice you can get very quick at ejecting and reloading a double barrel. If you go with the pump; you'll want to get practice at port loading - basically you shoot the first 3 and then load 1 into the chamber and fire, eject, load another into the chamber and fire, and repeat. Don't count on just the 2 or 3 rounds in the gun being all you'll need.

Apart from the possible legalities thing (that could just be a misunderstanding on my part), advantages for the double barrel (I'd recommend an over/under barre configuration) are faster follow up shot for barrel number 2 (no pumping required), and the ability to use 2 different chokes (this is more useful for hunting or clay shooting). Something else that might be useful for home defense is that for a given barrel length, a double barrel will usually have a shorter overall length than a pump/semi auto.

And I wouldn't worry about your .44 being too much gun. Handguns generally suck at stopping people, but also a 140gr bullet at 900 fps sounds pretty similar to a 9mm, except that you don't get to use any of the cool expanding ammo.

The pump or semi-auto shotguns I could get with "only" a licence, ID and registration are smooth barreled with max. 3 shots or with a rifled barrel when it has more shots. But I don't intend shooting slugs so the rifled ones are not really an option I think, they spread enormously with shot.

I didn't realize a 3-shot pump was an option I guess. Would it be 3 in the magazine plus 1 in the chamber? Either way, the pump (or a reliable semi-auto) with a side-saddle would be best. However, in trained hands the double-barrel is a serious weapon and can be reloaded quickly. Either way, 2 loads of 9 pellet 00 buck gives you nearly the wounding power of three, 6 shot cylinders from the black powder .44.

It would be 2+1. But I just realized underlever shotguns (and rifles) are in the same category, without a 2+1 shots restriction.

Dogs aren't outlawed in France. Grab a Belgian Malinois from... Hungary. Mals have incredible stopping power.

I always had dogs yes! Beautiful life companions.

Can you get a black powder double barrel shotgun with out a license?

Something like this for example?
http://www.cabelas.com/product/pedersoli-coach-gun-side-by-side-12-ga-black-powder-shotgun/2317327.uts?destination=/catalog/browse.cmd?N=1100202

Yes, they are historical firearms without modern cartridges so I could get one without a licence.

 

[Odd Job]

For a smooth barreled shotgun it has to be single shot, double barreled or max. 3 shots to be able to buy it with a shooting or hunting licence and an ID and then it has to be registered. With more than three shots it has to be a rifled barrel. More than 3 shots and a smooth barrel puts into a higher category (same as handguns and semi auto rifles, full auto rifles are completely illegal) where you have in addition to ask the government permission first to get one and give a proof of residency, declaration of all your guns and ammunition, birth certificate, medical certificate, criminal record, proof you are actively shooting in a club and their OK you can get such a weapon, proof you detain a gun safe, and then you have to wait until you get the permission and then it's only valid for 5 years before you have to redo the procedure

However, after you have gone through that process, can you use that for self defense?
Because if that was the case, a registered shotgun has far fewer drawbacks to you compared to an unregistered black powder pistol. In the event of a shooting, your whole life is going to be an open book when the investigation starts. I would endure the extra hoops to jump through, in order to afford myself the more reliable form of defense, in your position.