Buckshot for home defense?

Buckshot or slugs?

  • Buckshot or other

    Votes: 38 88.4%

  • Slugs

    Votes: 5 11.6%
  • Total voters
    43
  • Poll closed .
I vote for buck, as long as the range is under 25 yards. Which should be the case for HD.

The mossberg 500 comes with an 18.5in barrel so I don't recommend skeet shooting.
Click to expand...

18 in. barrel may not be ideal for skeet shooting, but I have broken many a clay pigeon with my Bro's Winny 1300 with 18" barrel.

I keep threatening to take it dove hunting. I think the quick handling would be an advantage. But I haven't, yet.
 
Just some more

per sageowls comments...That's pretty much my logic...I'd rather not kill if I don't have to...Will take my chances that birdshot is enough to stop the threat at least briefly(and having known a few people that have been hit with birdshot, I bet it will..Plus I have this mental picture of them picking each one of those pellets OUT, which follows the "payback" part of the equation!)...and the 00 comes in if it doesn't....As far as the shot not spreading out enough at HD ranges, my situation is a bit different in that I have a large house and would likely be shooting at at least 20 ft (I would do everything in my power NOT to get any closer than this.) and could have shots up to 50+ ft. in the house. I chose the #4 and 00 buck loads that I use because in my short-barreled, cylinder choke gun they DO spread out alot at these ranges. Both create about a 12-15" pattern at 20 ft. and 24"+ pattern at 35-40 ft. I only have to worry about overpenetration in regards to my own family, and just by happenstance, in almost any likely situation I would not have to worry about this either, as they would be well above my LOF(assuming a nighttime incursion..In fact, since they a firearms savvy, my sons would probably be the ones backing me with SKSs). My house has very old, thick walls, and only in one direction is there a house less than 200 yards away (and I don't like the old bat anyway :eek:)...Pretty much a free-fire zone in that respect. Other than at nighttime they would have to deal with 1 or more German Shepherds (have 5, 4 trained...not a good idea to PO them) before they got near me or mine. All but one dog kenneled at night though (although they would alert me)...He's 125 lbs, but missing most of his teeth and can't run too well anymore.
 
Contrary to what the vast majority of gun owners think the shotgun is a very poor HD tool anyway. Very few people really know how to use a long gun indoors and even fewer are good at it. The handgun is a far superior choice for HD from a tactics standpoint.
 
esldude: Agreed on most of your points above. I certainly have seen the videos, and before entering law enforcement I worked emergency medicine and got to see, first hand, the crankster that got shot in East Palo Alto in the early 90s a couple dozen times with 9mm by several officers simultaneously before he collapsed due to blood loss. l agree completely that for those in drug-induced states of psychosis and inability to feel pain, most commonly-accepted defense rounds, even traditional "one-shot stoppers," are grossly inadequate. However, that being said, most of the time this is not the person out burging houses.

To address the final point above and assume for discussion that this is the person inside your house, or mine for that matter, then yes, birdshot will be insufficient. Let's set aside external factors for a moment and consider just the mechanics of a gunshot wound. Moreso than in any other situation, your ability to stop this criminal comes down to how quickly and significantly your shots damage the great vessels and the main organs of the cardiopulmonary system. We can all agree that this is impacted by several factors, primarily shot placement and proper penetration. Underpenetrate, the usual result of birdshot against a human target, and the resulting damage will be insufficient to quickly incapacitate a subject immune to the effects of pain. Overpenetrate and you fail to maximize the potential damage of your rounds - just like the higher-velocity pistol rounds, especially in FMJ, going right through and nicking something here and there but not staying in and wreaking havoc.

Bringing back the external factors now, where does that leave us? Some form of buckshot, to be sure. I like the bird load then buck shot myself, but each to their own. If you're only going to get two shots no matter what, the "common wisdom" for this situation would suggest #00, although in looking at the link in your first post I might be inclined to consider #1 instead. I personally believe that the psychological impact of the bird load is enough to guarantee you 3 shots (two after the bird load goes) assuming the distance of 15 - 20 feet. Slugs could be quite efficient as well, but I'd tend to shy away from recommending that as shot placement becomes so critical that it may not be viable in the "nightmare scenario" we're discussing. Even with perfectly clear mind its hard to place a slug into the center box of a non-moving paper target from distance in the dark, much less into a moving hostile intruder while under stress with shaking hands at 3am having just woken up trying to protect the family and not get killed yourself. I think we can all agree, then ... some form of buck shot it is.

Also briefly on the point of bird loads being "non lethal," you're absolutely correct, and I never claimed they were. With the whole debate going on that topic over the past, say, 5 years or so, the two terms are very distinct from each other and cannot be interchanged.

The argument to be made that I spoke of earlier is that your verbal commands and warnings were ineffective, suspect continued towards you having had opportunity to see and having clearly been warned of the shotgun in your hands which you reasonably took to be intent to commit great bodily harm, and you were forced in self defense to shoot, first round was #6 bird shot which you kept loaded first in an effort to deter a would-be attacker with lower probability of life-threatening injury. Bird load failed to deter suspect who continued toward you which you reasonably perceived as and believed to be threat to commit great bodily harm and you continued to shoot an unknown number of rounds until the threat to your life was gone or you ran out of ammunition (whichever the case is).

One thing I should also note here is that you need to call 911 before confronting suspect if at all possible and be loud enough that the dispatcher (and therefore the court-admissable tape) can hear your warnings and know what's going on, hear your fear, and hear the pause between the bird shot and the rest of your shots. Ideally, after this is all said and done one would go back to the phone and explain exactly what happened, no B.S. advise the dispatcher of the location of the weapon and whether or not it's secured, and ensure that they get fire and ambulance enroute for the suspect, who you may or may not elect to help until EMS arrives at your discretion.

Anyway, enough editorializing about the legal aspects of it all. Each person should load their weapon according to their circumstances. Interior wall penetration could be a problem in some parts of my house, but not all (lots of river rock walls). Do I trust the rest of my family with access to this weapon to make decisions about wall penetration on the spot at 3am after just waking up with the adrenaline pumping? No, I don't think I can reasonably expect that of myself. But do I trust them to keep shooting until the threat goes down? Absolutely. So I go with progressive loading.

May none of us ever have to find out if our way is "the right way."
 
Sageowl,

I find it hard to envision the call to 911 complete with warnings between bird and buck shot.

Furthermore, you are only legally justified most places in using deadly force if your life is threatened and you have no reasonable avenue of escape without risking your life or those of your family. Seems to me if you could manage the 911 call, as you describe it, you likely could flee out the back door or some other path. Highly distasteful, but legally if you can leave your home, remove the deadly threat and go for the cops that is what you are supposed to do rather than shoot anyone.

Being in law enforcement do you get many calls like that?
 
I would go with buckshot just for the simple fact that if the situation presented it's self my girlfriend might have to use it and she might miss with a slug. :cool:
 
I pretty much go with Federal 9 pellet 00 buck.
The recoil is low enough for me, and it patterns well in my guns.

If I want a single projo I got plenty of rifles.

For sake of discussion,

some units in the Civil War swore by a buck 'n ball load.

I think this was a round ball and three buckshot, or even a round ball and heavy duck shot.

This way you can hit center of mass at 50 yards and still spread the love about in close.

One of the custom loaders may even offer this, my memory fails.
(Black Hills?)

I've used 870 so long, I don't have time to change. There was a time when those topside Mossberg safeties were extremely exposed to breakage. I guess they've solved that by now.
 
I would go with buckshot just because my girlfriend might have to use it if she was there alone and she might miss with a slug. :cool:
 
I'd like to try some of that "buck 'n ball" ammo sometime. Sounds fun.

The call I described would be the ideal situation for C.Y.A. in court. I've heard calls similar to that for training, but never one complete with everything I mentioned.

In response to fleeing the residence, it is a prudent course of action if it is safe to do so. Check your state's laws - California does *not* require you to do so:

"A person may defend his or her home against anyone who attempts to enter in a violent manner intending violence to any person in the home. The amount of force that may be used in resisting such entry is limited to that which would appear necessary to a reasonable person in the same or similar circumstances to resist the violent entry. One is not bound to retreat, even though a retreat might safely be made. One may resist force with force, increasing it in proportion to the intruder’s persistence and violence, if the circumstances apparent to the occupant would cause a reasonable person in the same or similar situation to fear for his or her safety. "​

Which is pretty straightforward ... the liberal CA legislature added some whiny equivocation a while back immediately following that passage, but the above quote still stands. Here's the rest:

"The occupant may use a firearm when resisting the intruder’s attempt to commit a forcible and life-threatening crime against anyone in the home provided that a reasonable person in the same or similar situation would believe that (a) the intruder intends to commit a forcible and life-threatening crime; (b) there is imminent danger of such crime being accomplished; and (c) the occupant acts under the belief that use of a firearm is necessary to save himself or herself or another from death or great bodily injury. Murder, mayhem, rape, and robbery are examples of forcible and life-threatening crimes.

Any person using force intended or likely to cause death or great bodily injury within his or her residence shall be presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily injury to self, family, or a member of the household when that force is used against another person, not a member of the family or household, who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and forcibly entered the residence and the person using the force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry had occurred. Great bodily injury means a significant or substantial physical injury. (Penal Code § 198.5.)

NOTE: If the presumption is rebutted by contrary evidence, the occupant may be criminally liable for an unlawful assault or homicide. "​

So basically give him a warning and make sure he really does want to hurt you before you do anything. We could get more detailed and talk about how use of a firearm is lawful (in CA anyway) when one has reason to believe that a felony has been committed and is attempting to take said suspected felon into custody, and how burglary is a felony and all, but I'll leave that to the lawyers. :)

Quotes above are from California Firearms Laws 2004, Pages 30-31, published by California DOJ. HTML Version by Google of the PDF. More technical version here, search Penal Code for 197, click first link, then see Sections 197 and 198.

[edited to fix broken link to findlaw.ca.gov]
 
elsdude you didn't seem to listen to my argument at all. I said that #6 birdshot would be ideal for the first shot, because that would stop any normal person not high on PCP without killing them. Think about it, if you got hit by a 1000 fps pellet gun 50 times in your stomach or face, wouldn't you want to lay down and go to sleep for a while? Also, birdshot has a very low chance of penetrating walls or ceilings. In the small chance that your assailant is supernaturally resistant to pain or high on a soup of PCP, meth and coke, the #1 buck penetrates 12 inches of ballistic gelatin rather reliably, and this means that the goblin will have several large holes in pretty much every one of his vital organs and possibly his spinal column.
 
Nope, the heatshield is to keep my meathooks from getting burned after 8 rounds.

Is the heat shield for fighting off zombie wave attacks?!
Click to expand...

I learned the hard way, doing some HD drills vs. a simulated Bad Guy. Thin shotgun barrels get hot pretty darned quick.

If it's zombies bustin' their way inside, and 00 Buckshot doesn't do it, then the other part of that USMC 870 comes into play:

870mk1leftblade.jpg
 
cobraycommando,

I listened, I just don't think it realistic.

I do think it realistic that any normal person may stop from birdshot. But any normal person isn't going to be breaking into your house without some ulterior motive.

Also, hunters know well that there is a big difference in game shot without being spooked, and game being shot after being spooked. The adrenaline makes them much harder to bring down. Any normal person who knows they are in someone else's house will necessarily have a big adrenaline dump when the realize they have awakened the occupants of this house. And more so when commanded to stop and drop to the floor. So I cannot say for certain how much of the sting of birdshot they will feel. I think the most stunning part of it will be the huge flash and deafening blast. Unfortunately that blast will also be stunning to the person behind the gun as well.

Have been in a car wreck where shattered glass caused many cuts and lacerations. Didn't even notice them much for nearly 15 minutes. None were terribly deep though some bled a good bit. While they hurt a great deal later, at the time, nothing. Don't know if that is comparable to birdshot or not.

If you ever need it, and I hope none of us do, I hope you get the reasonably normal intruder you need.
 
A few years ago, shopping for my son an 870, I found a Beretta 12 ga police shotgun.

As it is my backup HD weapon, . . . first three are 00 buck, . . . last 4 are slugs. I live 800 feet from the nearest other home and could fire slugs safely in about 340 degrees of the full circle around my house.

My reasoning is based on previously mentioned police policies, and VietNam experience where a 12 ga and a box of 00 buck could be traded for any M16 on the block if one was going on nite recon.

May God bless,
Dwight
 
I use a #4 turkey loads and aim at the thighs. I am not sure how deep the femoral artery is, but I am sure you will bleed out quickly if hit there. I load this way, and shoot this way, because I have learned from law enforcement that some BG's are wearing bullet resistant vests. I personally know of a person that had a break-in, my acquaintance was sleeping in a chair was awakened, and got off 1 shot with a .410 with birdshot. The BG was hit in the thighs, dropped unconcious, bleeding profusly. My other loads are federal #4 non-plated buck. I have at hand 3.5 #4 w/54 pellets, and various 00 and 0 buck loads. I also have a .40 glock 27, and for close encounters a gerber BMF. My house along with most housed uses a backerboard, and plaster on top of that it is tough material. Use what you have to use, but when figuring it out think about your neighbors, before the adrenaline starts flowing. I like #4 because I get about 270 pellets, and decent penetration, I doubt that the BG is going to be walking.
 
Ok, fair enough, I see your point of view. Your basically saying that it would be safer to just load and shoot to kill than chance wounding an attacker and risk getting killed? If that's the case, then normally I would completely agree with you. This logic would make sense in some states and the old west, but unfortunately I spend a lot of time in Los Angeles. If you have seen some of the actual cases prosecuted succesfully here, you would just laugh. The burglar basically has to shoot you in the leg and rape you to justify you killing him. Oh, and he still has to have the gun in his hand and pointed at you for you to legally take the shot.

If I lived in a state like Montana or Utah I would just load my gun up with #1 buck and saboted slugs. But since I don't, I would rather take reasonable measures to prevent my going to jail and my attacker dying. In all likelihood you must admit that birdshot does present a good chance of stopping someone, and you can get off a quick second shot lloaded with #1 buck that if it hits almost certainly will stop someone whether they want to or not.

Somehow I really doubt that a robber that isnt high would enter a house fully expecting to be shot and coming mentally prepared to be shot. Especially in a state like California.
 
P.S. Nice shotgun/bayo man! How would everybody feel if I started a post asking what your favorite anti-zombie loadout would be? Just for kicks and all...
 
T Pistolero, I am sure that the British used a 3 ball shot system in the .577/.450? martini and Henry rifles. I thought they used them against colonial uprisings. I know that the rifle was used for many years, and I think enfield built some with the new .303 cartridge, and a rn 220gr bullet. All the history buffs please correct, I hope I did not botch it too badly. :)
 
#1 buck and saboted slugs
Click to expand...

Use buck, and foster slugs from a smoothbore, and a skeet, or small constriction. Make sure your gun can use slugs in the smoothbore, my moss 835 is backbored to .775(10ga), and slugs are not recommended
 
The 500's have a normal Dia 12ga barrel. You can usually get a combo mossberg with a smoothbore, and rifled barrel. I know brenneke? makes some good slugs for rifled and smoothbore barrels. They even have rifled chokes and slugs made for them. I am pretty sure that the box will have what type of barrel for the slugs. The sabot slugs are very powerful, and are soupposed to be very accurrate. You may be able to use a sabot slug with a rifled choke. Anybody use the new partition gold slugs? or platinum tips. I hvw heard bad thingd about the BRI slugs. They use a multi part sabot, and if it does not come off the same way every time, the round can be very erratic. I shot slugs out of a full choked .410, but it is not recomended. www.shotgunworld.com has a lot of info on shot guns and choke recommendations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top