Buckshot for home defense?

Buckshot or slugs?

  • Buckshot or other

    Votes: 38 88.4%

  • Slugs

    Votes: 5 11.6%
  • Total voters
    43
  • Poll closed .
C

CobrayCommando

Moderator
Hello all, first some background: my friend and I may be splitting the cost of a shotgun that he will use for home defense and we will use for informal skeet shooting. It will probably be something like a Mossberg 500 (as I said, informal skeet shooting). Anyway, I was just wondering how many of yall use buckshot for home defense as opposed to slugs and why.

Also, does anybody use those specialty shotgun rounds such as macho gaucho balls, flechettes etc? Or perhaps buck and slugs in alternation?
 
The mossberg 500 comes with an 18.5in barrel so I don't recommend skeet shooting. As for home defense both slugs and buck should be ok.
 
Buckshot.

Slugs are just big bullets and the gun MUST be precisely aimed.

The big advantage of a shotgun for home defense is the speed at which you can hit the target with a load of buck.

With buck, you don't actually AIM the gun, you POINT it.....QUICKLY.

Hitting a target with a slug is slower than hitting with a cloud of buckshot.

That's why every police department in America uses buckshot as the primary load for shotguns.

At very close range the shot is more or less a solid slug. As the range opens up, the shot spreads into a cloud and increases the chances of getting hits on target.

Most people with any sense DO NOT use any of the "trick" loads of balls, or flechettes.

Rubber balls may, or may NOT do the job. Flechettes are one of those good ideas that fail to pan out in the Real World.

This is why no police department allows their use by anyone but SWAT teams, and then only for very limited, special cases. Even most SWAT teams don't use any of these rounds.

You can "Dutch" load a shotgun with a mix of different sizes of buckshot and slugs.

However, you first have to take into account your living arrangements.

If you live in the typical apartment or house, slugs will very possibly get you sued by the neighbors and prosecuted by the law.

Slugs PENETRATE, and can sail right through almost any building's outer walls, killing someone down the block.

For these reasons, most people stick to the tried and proven buckshot, and forget the slugs and trick loads.
 
Not a Mossberg...

But my 870 Mk 1 HD gun, as it sits by the nightstand, is filled with 8 rounds of Winchester full-brass 00 Buck. I do not feel outgunned. ;)

870-3.jpg
 
The reason why I like mossbergs is the controls. Slide unlock on the rear right of the trigger guard, and a slide saftey on the top of the gun.

The 870 has the slide unlock at the front right of the trigger guard, and a button saftey at the rear of the trigger guard.

I feel that both are good setups. Some people like the 870 setup, and others like the mossberg setup. The military uses versions of both. I think the 870 has the edge in aftermarket accessories. The main one is a mag extender. I would definitely feel which one is most natural, for the user.
 
I have a Mossberg 590 and I'm a fan of the "Dutch load" for defense. 1st two Rounds #8 Birdshot, All others 00 Buck. With slugs on the buttstock. My thought process is that first shot will be target of oppourtunity, while follow on will give me the oppourtunity to consider whats outside the walls.

All things considered the sound of bolt slamming home should make the BG reconsider his career choices.
 
Have Mossberg 500

"Special Purpose", 20" barrel, Cylinder choke, pistol grip. Like DaninDetroit, first 3 rounds are #4 birdshot, next 4 are 3" magnum(15 pellet S&B) 00 buckshot. As pointed out, the advantage of using shot is that, under stress (and If I have to use this it will be) you only have to point it in the right direction, as opposed to really aiming it. And, no (or minimal) overpenetration problems. At the typical ranges you might use a gun for HD, almost any shot load is enough to take the fight out most any BG. Heck, the muzzle blast from mine with the 3" magnum round would probably kill 'em at close range :D
 
So the general reasoning behind using birdshot for the first two rounds is lessened wall penetration, and it will probably stop anyone sane? According to firearms tactical, #1 buck is the smallest diameter shot that will reliably penetrate 12 inches of gelatin at home defense ranges. It also says that it has a far higher cross sectional density than #00, and produces 30 percent more wound trauma.

You slay slugs for the last couple rounds, but if you are pursuing a burglar out into your front yard and shooting him that is against the law and a misuse of deadly force. One, he is only breaking and entering if he is in your house, he can legally be on the porch or yard (unless its tresspassing), and two, you must cease all use of deadly force when the burglar no longer presents SERIOUS bodily harm to you or anybody else.

That said, from what I have learned today, my ideal setup would be 1 round of #6 birdshot, and then 2 rounds of #1 buck, followed by slugs (just in case the bugger is crazy high on PCP and you need to ventilate the heart/head/spinal area post haste.) I say one round of birdshot, because if the guy gets hit with it and doesn't voluntarily cease and desist, he will be closing distance with you very very fast (home defense ranges, a human can sprint 25 yards in 2 seconds). I would want my second shot to have a reliable chance of penetrating vital organs and the skull, something the birdshot will certainly not do. Its either that or have a bayonet on the end right?! :D
 
http://www.ballistics-experts.com/Forensic ballistics/Wound & Terminal ballistics/Fig 1.htm


I don't think birdshot will do it unless you are almost in contact range of the target. #6 shot from 12 gauge in the picture at the link above. 10 yards distance.

Furthermore, over and over the statistics of such encounters show only small numbers of shots fired in each event. If you only get one, two or maybe three shots in most such events, I want each one to be able to do the job. Imagine shooting a bad guy twice with birdshot, it doesn't do the job and you get no more shots. That is probably a fair chance of how it would go.

A good 22LR would probably be more effective more often than #6 birdshot. Think about it. #6 birdshot is .11 caliber with only 2 grains weight. It would exit the barrel at about the same speed as high velocity 22LR rounds which are twice the caliber, but 40 grains.

Go back and look at this link.
http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs10.htm

A high powered .177 pellet gun will fire at 900 fps a pellet of 5-11 grains depending on the pellet used. Do you think even 50 of these would be a good man stopper?
 
Last edited:
I'm glad folks brought up the smaller loads, saved me a lot of typing. Will throw in my two cents worth and hopefully not parrot any one of the above too much. :)

Generally speaking you want a form of bird load for home defense, at least for your first one or two shots. Our department personnel who teach civilian firearms courses recommend straight bird shot for home defense; 00-Buck and rifled slugs are great for LE, but not always appropriate for the home. Birdshot will give an adequate spread that hopefully will find the target on your first "point and click" instinct (well, hopefully not "click" - "boom" is preferable here but I digress). Added benefits to this approach as noted above are wider effective area, especially at distance, and minimal damage to what lies in and beyond your walls.

When deciding how to load your shotgun, keep in mind your home defense circumstances. If your round penetrates the wall and keeps going, what or who might it hit (gas lines/appliances, children's bedrooms, or neighbors if in multi-unit housing)? Do you have thick (i.e. concrete / rock) walls, or thin walls (i.e. mobile home)? Next look at the ballistics and load the biggest bird load you can find as your first round (and second if you so choose). Follow up with any progressive scheme you like, there are some good examples above. Round or two of smaller Buck, some 00-Buck, maybe even a couple slugs. My work SG's loaded straight 00-Buck with Slugs on the stock. My home SG's loaded (1) #6, (1) #4, (3) 00-Buck, (2) Slugs.

Another thing I'd like to suggest is investing in a good light system for your home defense gun. Middle of the night, adrenaline-induced accidents can be significantly reduced by proper target identification. Please shoot criminals responsibly ;). All joking aside, I would also like to clarify that shooting for trespassing exclusively is NOT covered under justifiable homicide, at least not in any state's statutes I'm familiar with. The things to keep in mind, in order, are as follows: (1) 'Tis better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6; (2) If you shoot someone, you *will* to go jail until its all sorted out; (3) If being tried by 12, you will be judged on whether you had reasonable and justifiable fear of great bodily injury to self or others, and whether a reasonable person in your situation would have had that same fear and would have acted in the same way.

Adhering to these guidelines will keep you and your loved ones alive and free so that the family can come after everything you have that their perfect little angel wasn't able to steal from you.
 
Funny you should mention the bayonet

The reason I don't worry about slugs, is that by the time I've emptied 7 rounds out of the shotgun, I've reached my "fallback" position, where my SKS awaits...WITH the bayonet fixed and 10 rifle rounds available...And then there's also my OTHER SKS (M model) that takes AK mags, and I have 240 rounds worth of loaded magazines for....'Course at this point that means there's at least a platoon worth of BGs to deal with :eek:
 
I think we can all agree that it's best not to mess with dfaugh ;)

Wanted to follow up a bit to esldude's post that appeared as I was writing my previous reply. While research does show that #6 shot isn't the most potent ammunition and won't produce the most horrendous injuries, we must keep in mind our objective for home defense. The ideal resolution to this situation is the intruder gives up, prones out at gunpoint, and waits for your local LE to show up. Or he could run, which keeps you safe but doesn't always ensure justice. When it goes bad and you have to shoot, however, killing him is not in your best interest in the long run given all the legal implications. A light "peppering" with bird shot will hopefully get his attention and cause him to either give up or run as noted above. For times that this doesn't happen, you have more lethal ammo ready to go in however long it takes you to pump, which should be less time than it takes for him to recover from the stun of the first lead wall you sent his way. If you have to shoot again you also just gained a nice "he didn't stop when I shot him with a light, less lethal load" defense.

Speaking strictly in terms of penetration, .22 or .177 may indeed be more effective than #6 shot. The shotgun's purpose is to *not* confine the user to a single point of aim (as required by single projectile weapons) while being able to deliver a variable amount, density, and size of pellets. At the stated 25 foot distance I think we can all agree that even a well-aimed hit from a loosely-choked #6 wouldn't do a whole lot. The idea, again, with a lighter load is to deter, not kill in one shot. As the range decreases one could argue that the "effectiveness" of the wounding potential increases, as the percentage of pellets impacting the target in more concentrated area will increase, ceteris paribus.

The concept of "dutch" or progressive loading, then, could be summarized as a "wounding" shot and then full-bore lethal force. For those uncomfortable with #6 shot and their control of the situation with follow-up shots or physical restraint, and more comfortable with the prospect of jail time and endless civil suits, a small buck might be better suited than a larger bird shot. For law enforcement, we have enough alternatives that if the handgun or shotgun are employed it needs to be a one-shot-stop.
 
The ideal resolution is for the intruder not to intrude. If he has, then maybe he will be nice and leave if you are home. I wouldn't hold out much hope for that.

If he is in your home and a threat to your life you have a right to use lethal force. And legally I don't think a court will call birdshot non-lethal. If you are in law enforcement maybe you could enlighten me. Either way if you kill someone there will be great legal difficulties. On that I agree.

You probably have seen video of people on drugs who didn't stop even when confronting police. What if that guy breaks into your house? Maybe the guy has a knife or gun and when you make your prescence known verbally or with birdshot he simply comes after you rather than running away. Having prescence of mind to shoot twice, remember it is only birdshot, shoot some more to get out that buckshot etc. etc. just doesn't sound highly likely. Again, you may well only get a chance for two shots if the guy forces the issue rather than laying down.

Furthermore birdshot doesn't spread all that much at short distances. You still have to make the shot placement. I forget, but what open cylinder shotgun is expected to pattern birdshot 50% or 60% into 30 inches at 40 yards? How wide do you think it is at 20 feet? Wider than a single bullet, but not so wide really as to mean sloppy aiming is going to work.

I know it is conventional wisdom to use birdshot in shotguns for defense. Didn't make all that much sense to me when I first heard it upon a little reflection. The more I look at what is involved, the less sense it has made. I know it can work, has worked, and will in some instances work in the future. But it sure has a considerable chance not to work at all. And you should have ample, clear reason to employ a firearm before you do so.

My point about the pellet guns and 22 is that a pellet gun would generally be considered totally inadequate in such a serious situation. And yet the pellets in such a weapon are more powerful than those in #6 shot. The birdshot's main advantage is the huge blast that will accompany it.
A 22LR is certainly marginal though not useless for self defense. But the projectile it fires is far, far more powerful than the pellets in birdshot. My point wasn't aim vs. not aiming. Simply the probability such small projectiles with limited penetration have to end a serious conflict is very small.
 
Just my .02:

Anything can penetrate sheetrock, including birdshot. The myth that loading with birdshot will protect innocents on the other side of a wall is exactly that. Rule 4.

OTOH, birdshot is not a reliable stopper against lightly armored (think leather jacket) targets.

At home defense engagment distances a shotgun's pattern open up very little and so the weapon must still be aimed, not pointed.

Big bullets let in a lot of air, and let out a lot of blood.

Again keeping Rule 4 in mind, I load with slugs.

Denny
 
The problem with slugs is that they will go through damn near anything. Houses, cars, etc. They will certainly go through your guy and out the other side. Unless you are shooting into a hillside or have vast amount of open ground around, you probably don't have suitable backstop handy you can rely on. Shotguns are generally pretty crappy rifles when push comes to shove.

I go for buckshot myself. Birdshot seems silly to me. If you shoot him, you better have cause for lethal force. If so then use lethal force. Plus the idea that causing serious injury with birdshot is less legally entangling than killing a man is unfortunately crap. They can't charge you with murder but they can still charge you with something else nearly as entangling. Plus your civil liability is much greater if he lives as a cripple than if you had just killed him. Not that this is a good thing, but if he dies you have to pay for his dependants. If he lives you have to pay for his care as well.

Its a "shot" gun. Use shot as your primary load. Have some slugs handy in case you need the added range for flexibility. The real debate for me is what size shot.
 
MrAcheson,

Don't know if you read the link to firearms tactical above. Looks like #4 buck doesn't penetrate deeply enough. Looks like #1 buck does and causes a larger total amount of tissue damage and blood loss than the larger shot will.
So #1 buck might be best. It looks like #1 or larger is needed for good enough penetration. So #1, 0, 00 or 000 should be able to do the job.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top