No choice but Birdshot?

7 1/2's are nothing like 4's, the penetration is going to be much greater. Hell I can tell them from 6's just looking at the wounds on game.

And who cares about pellet size at the ranges you shoot indoors. How many of you own a house where you can grt more than 15-18 feet away from someone in the same room?

Pellet size aside the impact of 1 1/4 oz of lead going at least 1250 fps is going to create the kind of shock that will make a real difference. Deep penetration to a vital is not as important as that hydrostatic shot. And look at the width of the wound channel. None of that energy went to waste. Nothing blew out the other side to expend its energy on your flat screen TV. Even given a less than perfect shot I'd much rather use a shotgun.

Regarding penetration we already had a poster (with xrays to prove it) demonstrate the penetration of individual pellets. But if you want another source Dick Cheny who personally tested 7 1/2's on a well dressed lawyer in heavy shooting clothes and the pellets ended up in his heart, and you know how tough a Texas lawyers heart is.

If the old men at my local skeet club ever get in a shoot out with the local pistol club in my house, I'm betting on the old guys. I'll use my winnings the to pay the sheet rock guys to patch things up.
 
Last edited:
They didn't penetrate to the heart, they penetrated his neck area and a pellet eventually followed an artery to the heart. I believe he was 30+ yards away, and that seems consistent with the diameter of the pattern. The penetration was rather shallow, and perhaps 0 where there was clothing.
 
Deep penetration to a vital is not as important as that hydrostatic shot.
Click to expand...

This assertion is laughable. First of all, shotguns operate at pistol velocities, or slightly higher. Therefore, penetration and expansion is all that most agree matters, as the current doctrine dictates that most vital organs are too elastic to be damaged by shock produced at those velocities. Secondly, even those experts in the field that still suggest hydrostatic shock matters at those velocities will admit that it still has to be put where it belongs, and does best when it is deposited deep in the body where most of the crucial organs and arteries are. To suggest that penetration is not as important as shock with any projectile shows an incredible lack of understanding of how both projectiles and the human body operates.

The energy deposit theory has the same problems. Energy is just the capacity to do work. The work we need done is to destroy vital tissues. The primary methods a projectile does this is first and foremost through penetration. Bullets poke holes in things. So that is the most important thing energy does. Secondly, they can expand, deform, or fragment. This allows them to destroy tissue in a wider or more lateral path from that of the penetration being achieved. Energy causes bullets to expand. This has to do with equal and opposite...you know, that guy named Newton. Given two identical bullets, the one with the most energy is most likely to expand. But bullets that completely penetrate do not waste energy. A living target is unlikely to be able to tell the difference between a bullet with 500 foot pounds of energy that stops in its chest and a bullet with 700 foot pounds of energy that blows an inch wide hole out its back and lodges in a tree/wall/TV/ect as long as both bullets expand and make it at least to the vitals. This is esp true at handgun/shotgun velocities, where, as previously mentioned, most evidence suggests any shock forces are too weak to damage most organs and arteries. The only difference is that the one with the exit wound bleeds out faster.

This why the FBI requires 12 inches of penetration from any weapon it issues through a variety of common barriers. Regardless of expansion, fragmentation, shock, and all those other things that are nice to have, if a bullet or projectile doesn't make it to a vital organ or blood vessel with enough energy to poke a hole in it, everything else is pretty much useless. Penetration is more important than anything else you can have, save for accurate shot placement.
 
>>The only difference is that the one with the exit wound bleeds out faster.

Or the one with the 3" diameter entrance wound.......A shotgun with #4 shot may not penetrate deeply ( over 5-6" ) but it will make it easier to track them after you shoot them.

:D :D
 
The comparison to police and military specs is off base. They have to be effective at a huge variety of ranges and conditions, not the limitations of in home confrontations.

4's are good but in an emergency I'll grab whatever shell is within reach and not even think about shot selection. A couple extra seconds of preparation will be more valuable than shot size in an indoor confrontation.

I'll feel perfectly comfortable even if I have my pussy cat load of 7/8 oz of #8's (with a kernel of puffed wheat to fill the shot cup) in the chamber. If someone is farther away than that shell is an effective deterrent I should probably not be shooting anyway.

I might even have fun when the coroners can't figure out what the crumbly white stuff is in the hole along with shot and wad.

Jeff
 
Those shooting tests are for #4 shot and from about 10 feet away. I just am not comfortable with that level or performance. I have shots I can take in my house that are two to three times the distance. That is not adequate in my book. You can protect your butt with whatever you choose. But you'd be better off with #4 buckshot than you would with #4 birdshot.

LEO might have to deal with greater ranges and conditions than the average home owner, but they don't drop the hammer on any different type of person and the vast majority of times, you can bet if they grab the gauge they are expecting ranges similar to yours. A quarter of the people in this country are obese and over half of them are overweight. If one of these guys busts down your door and comes at you with a Smithy, you could easily expend every bit of penetration that birdshot is going to offer you just making it to the rib cage. With buckshot, you stand a much greater chance of making into the chest cavity to destroy something vital. You may have some influence over the ranges at which you engage, but not on the body type of the person you are engaging, his angle, or his clothing. Heavy clothing, a thick torso, an akward angle, and a little bit of meth, and you might find yourself wishing you had some 00 buck with a little bit of a chance to make it to the spinal column. Chances are it will be some barely pubescent punk looking to score something to pawn for beer money and you won't have to fire a shot, but I don't plan for the average break in. It's the dangerous ones I keep a rifle next to me bed for.
 
At in the house ranges, an ounce and a quarter of lead will hurt you real bad at 1250 fps. unless you have a house that belongs on "Lifestyles of the rich and famous", your ranges to realistically being able to shoot are 6 to 18 feet in the house. You may get a diagonal, front to back, up to downstairs shot of a bit more, but in reality that is prolly what you are going to see. Next time you are out shooting, set up a test with something like a road kill and let loose at it with a 12 from 4-6 yards.

That said. I would still load the gun with the heaviest pellets you can legally use in your area. I have my HD shotgun loaded with Luballoy 2's x 1 5/8 ounce 2 3/4 inch SuperX's. I am fully confident that it will stop any fights inside my house.
 
If I set up in bed and look out the door into the living room I can see 30 feet. If I go upstairs and stand in the hallway by the guest bedroom I can shoot at least that far into the upstairs living room. We don't live in a mansion, just a nice suburban house.

And I am fully qualified to judge the terminal effects of birdshot. I have plenty of experience with birdshot and small game, and plenty of it tells me that it isn't worthy of defending me against anything larger than a rabbit unless I have absolutely no other choice.
 
k

thought i would give my two cents (again).

When i go to the range i shoot birdshot, usually #6 at distances of 21 feet. After one shot the paper is completly covered with smaill holes, this is on a normal silhoutte target. there is a hole in the center, but that is the shot cup. I would not want to use that at 21 feet, it spreads out so much that a tiny pellet will loose its energy very quickly.

i have been pelted a few times dove hunting by pellets (allbeit from 100 or so feet) at that point they don't feel like much.
 
A lot of good advise from knowledgable folks. My solution? 12 ga. pump, 5 shots at 5 yards as fast as you can pull the trigger. If you have the time to take the first shot, it will surely slow him down enough for the other 4. Many times there is only time for one shot. But I tell my wife if someone threatons her or the kids, Keep firing until it clicks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top