Bill DeShivs
New member
If the deer was in your living room, birdshot would work just fine.
Why can't people understand this?
Why can't people understand this?
ugh. SD ammo
- Thread starter Kyo
- Start date
- Status
If the deer was in your living room, birdshot would work just fine.
Why can't people understand this?
Just curious, I've never actually hunted but I watch the shows on tv where they shoot the deer and then it runs for 10+ seconds.
If you shot that deer with birdshot in your living room, would it still be able to run?
Would it be able to run more often or farther than if you shot it with buckshot instead?
Why can't people understand this?
Just curious, I've never actually hunted but I watch the shows on tv where they shoot the deer and then it runs for 10+ seconds.
If you shot that deer with birdshot in your living room, would it still be able to run?
Would it be able to run more often or farther than if you shot it with buckshot instead?
I think I know why so many people cling to birdshot as a viable (or prefered) SD round.
Lots of people (myself included) remember their dads or granddads some years ago talking about their shotguns and bragging that if anyone ever broke in, they'd use this on them (showing you the birdshot) and saying "it'll blow their head clean off their shoulders, leave nothing left of it". Their proof of this would be the big ole hole the birdshot left in the paper, or the watermelon that exploded after being shot from 10 feet away. And dear old dad or granddad, who had no concept of equations like F=ma and P=mv, would equate that big ragged hole in the paper target or the exploded watermelon to mean that anything in the path of that cloud of pellets would be completely obliterated.
And us kids, inclined to believe whatever our dad or granddad says as the truth believe this. Much like if your father tells you as a kid "Ford makes the best trucks, never buy anything but a Ford" you'll more than likely develop the same opinion and keep that opinion later in life, some kids grew up thinking that birdshot is the best thing to come out of a shotgun for self defense. And just like the guy who's love for Fords was instilled in him by his father will argue with a Chevy lover over which truck is better no matter what the facts are, the guy who grew up thinking that birdshot will blow a man's head clean off his shoulders will argue with anyone who says otherwise.
Anyone who uses birdshot is making a compromise. You're settling. Some argue that birdshot is better because its less likely to penetrate walls. Why would I want my life to depend on something that can't penetrate a wall? Sure, if you're extremely close and you're completely accurate birdshot could work. But why rely on something that only could work under the most optimal of circumstances? Why bother handicapping yourself?
Lots of people (myself included) remember their dads or granddads some years ago talking about their shotguns and bragging that if anyone ever broke in, they'd use this on them (showing you the birdshot) and saying "it'll blow their head clean off their shoulders, leave nothing left of it". Their proof of this would be the big ole hole the birdshot left in the paper, or the watermelon that exploded after being shot from 10 feet away. And dear old dad or granddad, who had no concept of equations like F=ma and P=mv, would equate that big ragged hole in the paper target or the exploded watermelon to mean that anything in the path of that cloud of pellets would be completely obliterated.
And us kids, inclined to believe whatever our dad or granddad says as the truth believe this. Much like if your father tells you as a kid "Ford makes the best trucks, never buy anything but a Ford" you'll more than likely develop the same opinion and keep that opinion later in life, some kids grew up thinking that birdshot is the best thing to come out of a shotgun for self defense. And just like the guy who's love for Fords was instilled in him by his father will argue with a Chevy lover over which truck is better no matter what the facts are, the guy who grew up thinking that birdshot will blow a man's head clean off his shoulders will argue with anyone who says otherwise.
Anyone who uses birdshot is making a compromise. You're settling. Some argue that birdshot is better because its less likely to penetrate walls. Why would I want my life to depend on something that can't penetrate a wall? Sure, if you're extremely close and you're completely accurate birdshot could work. But why rely on something that only could work under the most optimal of circumstances? Why bother handicapping yourself?
Bill DeShivs
New member
Not to mention landing on the moon!
Damn, we were stupid!
Damn, we were stupid!
armsmaster270
New member
It all comes down to either one can and cannot work how about the guy NYPD hit 13 times with 9mm's and lived. If you don't hit the sweet spot it may not work I don't care if your using a .44. If you have placement a bic pen will work.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ievbU3xIYGQ
About 8:58, they demonstrate #4 buckshot against a windshield at 7 yards. Through and through. I expect 000 buck would penetrate at 15.
Ah yes. Everybody, and I mean everybody's parents and grandparents had a hand in designing those things, right? Every single person had a deep understanding of all that stuff, right? Not just the small subset of professionals in those fields right? I mean thats the only way your comment could make sense. I think my grand parents were cheated, they didn't know a thing about designing atomic weapons!
You landed on the moon? I didn't see you there. Everyone else in the world must have landed on the moon too, because thats the only way your comment could make any sense. You didn't need to be a rocket scientist or an engineer, or an astronaut, just regular old Joe walking down the street and BOOM all the sudden you're sending people to the moon.
People who say anything to or take anything out of context to try and hold on to their silly point make me laugh. And I'm laughing at you 2 right now. If you're going to purposely be disingenuous, then why even bother posting? Just leave.
Last edited:
ADB...
... informative video, but on the windshield they didn't use an optimal camera angle. Looked like some of the pellets may have deflected upward and not gone through, but it's hard to tell.
What would have been better would have been a crash test or gelatin dummy in seat, with the camera inside the vehicle showing what the shot did.
Guess beggars can't be choosers, though.
Cheers,
M
... informative video, but on the windshield they didn't use an optimal camera angle. Looked like some of the pellets may have deflected upward and not gone through, but it's hard to tell.
What would have been better would have been a crash test or gelatin dummy in seat, with the camera inside the vehicle showing what the shot did.
Guess beggars can't be choosers, though.
Cheers,
M
The closest thing I could find is just pistol ammunition through the windshield, couldn't find anything on shotgun buck shot. It's still an interesting article though!
http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/buickot2.htm
http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/buickot2.htm
I know I said I was done with this one...but I can't help myself.
Regarding the moon...there are a growing number of people who believe it never happened...just thought I'd throw that out there. (You know, pictures of the flag blowing in the wind...on the moon!)
Not to mention the invention of the suburban lifestyle...genious!!
It think maybe this generation was best at smoke and mirrors...just an opinion.
Cheers!
Bill DeShivs
New member
Cedjunior-
Have you ever even SHOT a shotgun? If so, have you shot one at anything besides a paper target? Exactly what is your experience that makes you such an expert?
I didn't go to the moon, but I read about it. That makes my moon expertise about what yours is regarding shotguns as HD weapons.
I doubt I'll leave anytime soon, but thanks for the offer.
Have you ever even SHOT a shotgun? If so, have you shot one at anything besides a paper target? Exactly what is your experience that makes you such an expert?
I didn't go to the moon, but I read about it. That makes my moon expertise about what yours is regarding shotguns as HD weapons.
I doubt I'll leave anytime soon, but thanks for the offer.
oneounceload
Moderator
Guys - the bravado of youth through the ages has always lead to the attitude that their parents don't know anything and they know everything. In time, they learn just how stupid they really are.........
Anthropology 101...
... it all comes down to the ability for the colony to breed, and to sustain its numbers, Oneounceload.
As my prof explained it, a couple decades ago, with the example of a baboon colony, for female vs male risk taking, and mature vs immature risk taking relative levels.
Female vs Male
You have 10 females and 10 males. Kill 9 females. There can now be at most one baboon (assuming no twins, etc) born next season, and 10 males are fighting over the one female, possibly leading to further deaths in the colony; or
Kill 9 males. You can potentially have 10 young baboons (again assuming no twins etc) born next season, replenishing the colony. The females may fight, but will be busy with the young baboons. The male is probably quite content.
Conclusion: In a basic, small colony, males are more expendable, and thus are the ones who should primarily explore, hunt, and gather.
(Note: these are baboons, in a small colony, with no technology - as a practical matter, it doesn't apply in our modern society, but evolution can be slow to catch up with technology and social developments)
Young vs Old
You have 10 immature males, and 10 males of breeding age.
Kill 10 mature males; the immature males can't breed yet, Colony numbers stay down for the next season or more, breeding age females may have to hunt and gather, increasing their own risk; or...
Kill 10 immature males; the mature males are typically happy to work with the females at replacing them. Replacements born next season.
So, if one believes in evolution guiding behavioral tendencies, one would expect young males to be the most oriented toward risk-taking behavior. They're the most expendable.
Cheers,
M
... it all comes down to the ability for the colony to breed, and to sustain its numbers, Oneounceload.
As my prof explained it, a couple decades ago, with the example of a baboon colony, for female vs male risk taking, and mature vs immature risk taking relative levels.
Female vs Male
You have 10 females and 10 males. Kill 9 females. There can now be at most one baboon (assuming no twins, etc) born next season, and 10 males are fighting over the one female, possibly leading to further deaths in the colony; or
Kill 9 males. You can potentially have 10 young baboons (again assuming no twins etc) born next season, replenishing the colony. The females may fight, but will be busy with the young baboons. The male is probably quite content.
Conclusion: In a basic, small colony, males are more expendable, and thus are the ones who should primarily explore, hunt, and gather.
(Note: these are baboons, in a small colony, with no technology - as a practical matter, it doesn't apply in our modern society, but evolution can be slow to catch up with technology and social developments)
Young vs Old
You have 10 immature males, and 10 males of breeding age.
Kill 10 mature males; the immature males can't breed yet, Colony numbers stay down for the next season or more, breeding age females may have to hunt and gather, increasing their own risk; or...
Kill 10 immature males; the mature males are typically happy to work with the females at replacing them. Replacements born next season.
So, if one believes in evolution guiding behavioral tendencies, one would expect young males to be the most oriented toward risk-taking behavior. They're the most expendable.
Cheers,
M
i keep coming to this thread, and I keep wanting to post, but then I say to myself, if i dont post, i wont perpetuate the thread, thus, the sooner the thread dies.
now we are talking about buck shot and windshield penetration, forefathers walking on the moon, nuclear physics, deer in the living room, young vs old, and now, baboon colony.
I'd like to throw my random ass opinion into the mix.
Jennifer Love Hewitt did well in portraying Audrey Hepburn in "The Audrey Hepburn Story"
now we are talking about buck shot and windshield penetration, forefathers walking on the moon, nuclear physics, deer in the living room, young vs old, and now, baboon colony.
I'd like to throw my random ass opinion into the mix.
Jennifer Love Hewitt did well in portraying Audrey Hepburn in "The Audrey Hepburn Story"
- Status