For those that advocate birdshot

Guys, even just a tiny .410 shotgun loaded with birdshot is deadly at close range.

Here is an autopsy photo from the FBI's website showing a man who was shot in the head with just a .410 using birdshot:

http://www.fbi.gov/hq/lab/fsc/backissu/april2004/images/research2_10.jpg

I would venture to say that this fellow died very quickly.

Now if you want to see a bunch of EXTREMELY graphic photos of what 12 gauge loads to the human body, buy a copy of this book:

StressfireII.jpg



Shotguns are extremely destructive at close range, no matter what size shot is in the shell.


P.S. - This news story at the start of this thread does not mention what gauge of shotgun this fellowed stuffed down his pants. I don't think that one can assume that it was a 12 gauge. A smaller gauge sawed-off shotgun would be easier to conceal.

.
 
There is no question that bird shot can be deadly at close range.

But advocates of the shotgun for home defense often make two claims that don't stand up to testing.

The first is that "you don't have to aim or anything, the room will be filled with a cloud of shot that will kill anybody in there." Since the average spread of a shot charge is about 1" per yard, the shot spread across an average room will be about 3-4 inches, hardly a "cloud of shot" that eliminates any need for aiming or even pointing the right direction.

The second claim is that "birdshot will not penetrate dry wall or anything else so your loved ones will be safe." Not true. Any shot load with the power to kill or seriously wound an intruder will have enough power to harm innocent people, even behind dry wall.

Jim
 
Jim that's absolutely true, but although a 7.62 round will go through several walls and remain lethal, bird shot won't. If your kid is on the other side of the wall and you shoot they're getting peppered, but if the shot has to go through 2 walls (4 layers of sheetrock plus insulation) and whatever furniture is in the room in the 25 ft between you and your kids it's a different matter.

Bird shot wouldn't make that trip. Buck shot might, a pistol round almost certainly would. An AK round definately would.
 
There is no question that bird shot can be deadly at close range.

But advocates of the shotgun for home defense often make two claims that don't stand up to testing.

The first is that "you don't have to aim or anything, the room will be filled with a cloud of shot that will kill anybody in there." Since the average spread of a shot charge is about 1" per yard, the shot spread across an average room will be about 3-4 inches, hardly a "cloud of shot" that eliminates any need for aiming or even pointing the right direction.

The second claim is that "birdshot will not penetrate dry wall or anything else so your loved ones will be safe." Not true. Any shot load with the power to kill or seriously wound an intruder will have enough power to harm innocent people, even behind dry wall.

Jim
Click to expand...

That is very true. You still have to aim a shotgun. You cannot just point it in a general direction, and hope to be successful.

A shotgun would be most useful in protecting your home in case of a riot or other type of breakdown in civil order as took place during Katrina, or the LA riots.

But against an intruder inside your home, a good handgun is still your best option.

.
 
That is your opinion Lance, I feel that it depends on the situation which is my opinion. I own a large two story home with a basement. If I hear something downstairs, I'll go for the scattergun, and the pistol on my hip. If it takes place upstairs where my kids rooms are adjacent to my bedroom, scattergun first is likely, but millions of scenarios will dictate different opinions. I know my Hornady TAP 00 buck can penetrate walls and keep going, as with my TAP .45 ammo. If I miss upstairs from my place in bed, I will likely hit one of my kids. This is why I have motion detectors set up to alert me in bed when someone nears any entrance point of my home. I also have a camera, and will be adding more. If somehow they make it upstairs without me knowing about it first, I hope I remember to drop to one knee and fire up at the dirtball so that if I miss all I hurt is my property.
 
I think the Darwin Awards normally require one to kill oneself in some stupid way. Maybe this can qualify, however, given the nature of the injuries.
Click to expand...
No, they only require that the person looses the ability to reproduce. Be it death or otherwise.
 
Well I have worked in a level one trauma hospital for almost 20 years. With the bird shot, it is like any defensive weapon, it can be devistating or not. I have seen a case where bird shot was used at a distance with only a few pellets hitting the side of the head, but one happened to penetrated the suture of the skull and transversed the brain killing the individual. In another case, the patient tried to commit suicide with a 410 under the chin and lived. Both of those were the exception.

Birdshot can be very effective and I do not hesitate to use it. That being said, as with any defensive weapon, don't stop until the BG is no longer a threat.
 
I worked as a Paramedic in central Georgia for 13 years. I saw many gunshot wounds. Besides the cases I worked, I went over to the ER to check out any GSW that came in, as our barracks was in the parking lot out behind the ER, and I was particularly interested in gunshot wounds.
I was fascinated by the lethality of birdshot wounds to the torso.
In the course of my career I saw 14 close range birdshot wounds to the torso and every one of them died.
Most of these injuries occurred inside a house, so you are talking 10 feet to maybe 25 feet max.
We did have one sad case, a teenage boy was crossing a barbed wire fence. He had a .410 with number 6 shot. The gun went off and hit his brother in the back of the neck, ten feet away.
The kid was dead when the ambulance arrived.
Most of the shotgun torso wounds I saw were like that, we would get there ten minutes after the shooting and the guy would be graveyard dead.
I saw hundreds of gunshot wounds and close range birdshot was the most lethal gunshot injury I saw.

If any of y'all doubt the effectiveness of birdshot, it is easy to do a penetration test.
I had heard that birdshot would not penetrate a leather coat. I doubted this so I made a test. I got a pair of old workboots, the sole was worn out but the ankle leather was still good, easily as thick as the leather of a coat.
I got a 20 gauge shotgun loaded with number 8 shot. At fifteen feet I shot the boot. The shot went right through the leather, and went right out the other side. The pattern was familiar, about 1 1/2 inches wide, a rough jagged hole.
Then I put a pine 1x4 into the other boot. I figured that 3/4 inch of pine was a pretty good simulation of human bone.
I fired again. The shot went through the leather and blew right through the board. This time, only a few shot exited the other side of the boot.
I had the feeling that if someone had been wearing this boot they would have had their foot blown off, it would have given the orthopedic surgeon a very long night to try to save it.
 
I will agree on the general effectiveness of birdshot

At very close range. I think it is a fine load for inside the house use in an emergency. As to the lethality of bird shot, I don't care. It is often very lethal, but in a defense situation, I don't care one bit about killing the attacker. What I care about is stopping them. If they die as a result of being stopped, they die. But killing is not my primary concern.

A stray pellet or two is unlikely to be lethal, and may not even cause serious damage, but the full shot charge (and wad) certainly can. I have read many folks on the Internet discounting birdshot as a viable defense round, always claiming the lack of penetration as "proof" of its inability to be a good stopping round. If you have a large house, and fire across the length of it, you just might get a shotgun pattern to open up enough to start to lose some effectivness, but under 40 feet (and in my house that is farther than any distance I can shoot) the shot column hits like one large bullet, no matter what the shot size.

Those idiots who tell novices that they need not aim ought to be beaten bloody, as this "advice" is not only incorrect, it is potentialy dangerously harmful. Patterns do open up, but not instantly, and even the most open choked gun will only be 4-5 inches spread at max inside the house range. You MUST AIM a shotgun! You just don't aim it like a rifle or pistol. But you still need to aim, or you WILL MISS!
 
A stray pellet or two is unlikely to be lethal, and may not even cause serious damage, but the full shot charge (and wad) certainly can.
Click to expand...

When its my life and the life of my family on the line, I'm not going to put my eggs in the "certianly can" basket.

There is more than enough evidence out there that shows the ineffectiveness of birdshot for stopping the attacker. Add to this some tweaker who hasn't come down yet and you have serious problems.

With low recoil loads there is no excuse for using buck in your shotgun.
 
I don't think so.
Click to expand...

Again, it is interesting to see people state their opinions, yet have absolutely nothing to say to back up their remarks with.

As I have stated in a similar thread in the shotgun section of these forums, handguns offer definite advantages over a shotgun when it comes to home defense. In your average home, unless you live in a "mansion", you are operating in very tight quarters. A shotgun is going to be far more cumbersome to handle and deploy effectively.

Accessibility, though, is really the clear advantage the handgun has. It is going to be far easier and more practical to store a handgun in a safe and accessible location where you can easily retrieve it, than it will be for the far larger shotgun.

And a handgun in your hand far away beats out a shotgun in a nearby closet or safe.

.
 
Lance, it is funny, the guys who have never seen a person shot with birdshot are full of info about how ineffective it is.
Those of us who have seen the effects of close-range birdshot know the truth.
 
I'm trying to think of an informal test that I could do, to compare the two types of loads. Maybe even video tape the two shots for comparison. I'm specifically considering comparing a magnum 12 gauge 2 3/4" load with 12 00 Buckshot in it, with a magnum 12 gauge 2 3/4" Turkey hunting load of #5 Birdshot.

Within home defense type ranges, I can't see there being any practical difference.

I wish I knew someone here in Western Oregon that had ballistic gelatin available.

.
 
Answering my own post

Yes he did but only with various buck loads and at 12 feet. I don't think this answers the question as in the house the distance is going to be closer or is at least likley to be.
I am inclined to believe being on the recieving end of a load of bird shot is going to slow down aggressive behaior appriciably and there is always the option of follow up shots:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top