For all those who use birdshot for HD

This is a discussion on For all those who use birdshot for HD within the In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly forums, part of the The Back Porch category; I don't know how you would figure a .12G bore or if it is even a usable figure. Shotgun gauge is the number of lead ...

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 53

Thread: For all those who use birdshot for HD

  1. #31
    VIP Member Array Guantes's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    5,272
    I don't know how you would figure a .12G bore or if it is even a usable figure. Shotgun gauge is the number of lead balls the size of the bore that equal a pound.
    "I do what I do." Cpl 'coach' Bowden, "Southern Comfort".

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #32
    Member Array AWDeanSr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    145
    Quote Originally Posted by Janq View Post
    Going against the grain here, although I am not a fan of using birdshot for self defense...The man in this case though was functional in that he both _STOPPED_ the threat AND he dissuaded him from wanting to fool with him further as in to re-group and come back for a second try in the immediate.

    I sure as heck would not want to be hit int he hand or anywhere with birdshot.

    Since Dick Cheney shot him, Harry Whittington's aim has been to move on
    By Paul Farhi
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Thursday, October 14, 2010
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...101307173.html

    You guys are looking at this as though he is a failure because the birdshot failed to either incapacitate and/or kill him; To which both are secondary to actually STOPPING a threat.
    Had the man chosen to simply hold his gun in hand and tell the man with his voice to 'STOP!...LEAVE NOW!' and if the threat had done so, then that too would be functional and just the same in net end result.
    The threat stopped in the immediate and ceased thereafter.

    Lets not lose sight of the big picture.

    We don't hope to wound/injure and/or kill threats.
    Our primary goal is to STOP the threat as in the immediate, and our hope is to dissuade the threat from continuing/re-grouping toward a follow on effort in the moments and seconds after what is the immediate.

    That said though; Again I like the rest of you would not encourage use of birdshot and/or target loads for defense of ones self against beings that are ostrich sized or larger in mass.

    - Janq
    I 100% agree! I tried to make the same argument on another board after reading about this story. As long as the threat stops it's a win! The shoot to kill mentality, in my opinion, can lead to excessive force.
    1 Corinthians 15:3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:



  4. #33
    VIP Member
    Array OPFOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Nomad
    Posts
    4,706
    But....was this guy actually a capital T Threat? He was certainly NOT a determined attacker. Harsh language is very often enough to stop someone, are you going to rely on that as your SD arsenal?
    A man fires a rifle for many years, and he goes to war. And afterward he turns the rifle in at the armory, and he believes he's finished with the rifle. But no matter what else he might do with his hands - love a woman, build a house, change his son's diaper - his hands remember the rifle.

  5. #34
    VIP Member Array Janq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    6,781
    Quote Originally Posted by OPFOR View Post
    But....was this guy actually a capital T Threat? He was certainly NOT a determined attacker. Harsh language is very often enough to stop someone, are you going to rely on that as your SD arsenal?
    Yes, he was a cap T threat.
    Why? Because he'd made conscious choice to physically break barriers (glass) to gain entry to and physically entered a home that was not his own (criminal trespass), nor was he invited to (home invasion) with ultimate follow on and final goal/intent unknown to anyone.
    By most folks analysis this guy was a Threat.

    His determination as being a threat was clear per his actions leading up to and at the time of being shot.
    Where as _upon and after_ being fired on, with birdshot, his determination in that _follow on_ instant was then modified and whlly changed; As result of being driven away by an equally determined resident in fear of his own life (!).

    This all should be obvious though and not require questioning and detail.
    Why ask the obvious?

    As to "harsh language", please re-read my posting in full and within context...As that is not what I'd said, implied nor advocated as being singularly an item to "rely on" as among mine or anyone SD options.

    - Janq

    P.S.
    It makes no difference what so ever that this guy claims to have been out his mind drunk or claims that he would have been harmless and just in need of a bathroom/phone/ride/Twinkie or whatever else excuse...As at the nd of the day bottom line view of the _victim_ he is an unwanted aggressor acting well within the definition of being a 'Threat'...And to that this Threat suffered in response as a result of his own actions (to break into homes) & choices (to get drunk), greatly.
    "Killers who are not deterred by laws against murder are not going to be deterred by laws against guns. " - Robert A. Levy

    "A license to carry a concealed weapon does not make you a free-lance policeman." - Florida Div. of Licensing

  6. #35
    VIP Member Array Sticks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    3,407
    Thank you Janq for the reminder The object is to STOP the threat. By whatever means necessary.

    An unknown who has forced entry into my home, especially at night, is not going to be asked what their intentions are to determine the level of threat they pose. They forced their way into my home, they are a threat, capital "T", period, dot the end.
    Sticks

    Grasseater // Grass~eat~er noun, often attributive \ˈgras-ē-tər\
    A person who is incapable of independent thought; a person who is herd animal-like in behavior; one who cannot distinguish between right and wrong; a foolish person.
    See also Sheep

  7. #36
    VIP Member Array goldshellback's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    OKC; by way of St. Mayberry, GA
    Posts
    4,750
    Quote Originally Posted by Sticks View Post
    Thank you Janq for the reminder The object is to STOP the threat. By whatever means necessary.

    An unknown who has forced entry into my home, especially at night, is not going to be asked what their intentions are to determine the level of threat they pose. They forced their way into my home, they are a threat, capital "T", period, dot the end.
    I concur with Janq's critique. Birdshot, 000 buckshot, it dosn't matter in the end. The homeowner STOPPED the threat in his home, and a recorded PHONCON with 911 dispatch to back-up his story. For any intent and purpose this was a near text-book home defense sceniro with a positive outcome. Also, our homeowner won't have to 'swallow' the fact that he killed another human being (bad-guy or not)......that's just luck either way.

    Bravo Zulu on our homeowner for taking care of 'bidness'!

    Having said that, I in no way advocate using 'birdshot' for most HD/SD situations. BUT, a twelve gage ANYTHING will most often stop any 'stupid' behavior.....I do not care what's loaded in it or how 'motivated' the suspect really is, the 'bidness' end of a 12 gage is STILL the wrong end to find yourself staring down.
    "Just getting a concealed carry permit means you haven't commited a crime yet. CCP holders commit crimes." Daniel Vice, senior attorney for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, quoted on Fox & Friends, 8 Jul, 2008

    (Sometimes) "a fight avioded is a fight won." ... claude clay

  8. #37
    VIP Member
    Array OPFOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Nomad
    Posts
    4,706
    May as well use blanks, then. I think THIS guy, in THIS instance, would have high tailed it out of there as soon as something went boom...

    Janq, you know I almost always agree with you, but in this case I simply don't. A BAD decision that happens to turn out well doesn't mean that the decision was good... If I get drunk and drive, but get home safely, does that mean that my choice was ok? I achieved my goal - to get home - and nobody got hurt. So, obviously driving drunk is fine, right? That this guy (homeowner) got lucky against this threat (who was, obviously, not a determined attacker) doesn't change the fundamentally poor nature of his choice of defensive ammo. It's a shame that some folks may use this as evidence to SUPPORT using a substantially less than optimal choice.
    A man fires a rifle for many years, and he goes to war. And afterward he turns the rifle in at the armory, and he believes he's finished with the rifle. But no matter what else he might do with his hands - love a woman, build a house, change his son's diaper - his hands remember the rifle.

  9. #38
    VIP Member
    Array 64zebra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Panhandle of Texas
    Posts
    6,436
    piece of garbage

    he says the homeowner was trigger happy......ummm....you were in his house uninvited, you're dang lucky your able to do the interviews .....tool
    then he says "I don't think you can shoot someone that is unarmed"....ummm.....I beg to differ, if this heap of bovine excrement could read he would know there are numerous cases of people (LEO and non) that shoot unarmed people when its justified, and he needs to get over it
    "I was probably there asking for a ride"....is he really that stupid to think thats a defense to his actions? oh wait, no need to answer that; what a complete moron

    If someone is in your house uninvited they have disregarded your walls, windows, doors, and locks....and you HAVE to assume they are not there for tea or collecting for the red cross
    just because they are not spraying bullets everywhere does not mean they are not armed or are not going to actively attack you
    If someone breaks into my house they will be met with deadly force...period, no questions asked
    My life, my wife, and my 7yo son depend on it

    as for the birdshot....I've said on here numerous times....use whatever you have a available at the time, but I prefer 00 and thats what I use
    as others have said...he got shot in the butt, side and hand, we don't know what range it was either, if the shooter had been using 00 the wounds would have been a little more severe but there were no hits center mass, center mass combined with 00 would have been devastating and we wouldn't have had the tool giving interviews to the press
    LEO/CHL
    Certified Glock Armorer

    "I got a touch of hangover bureaucrat, don't push me"
    --G.W. McClintock

    Independence is declared; it must be maintained. Sam Houston-3/2/1836
    If loose gun laws are good for criminals why do criminals support gun control?

  10. #39
    VIP Member
    Array OPFOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Nomad
    Posts
    4,706
    A technical point, but these hits may, in fact, have ALL been "center of mass." Center of mass, does NOT mean the middle of the chest - it means, quite simply, what it says: the center of the mass (area) presented to you as a target. If all that was available as a target was his hand/side/butt, and the homeowner aimed at and hit these targets, then he indeed hit "center of mass." That said, it seems extremely unlikely that the hand hit was a COM hit - unless, of course, his hand was in front of his upper torso (traditionally the COM of a standing, front-facing target).
    A man fires a rifle for many years, and he goes to war. And afterward he turns the rifle in at the armory, and he believes he's finished with the rifle. But no matter what else he might do with his hands - love a woman, build a house, change his son's diaper - his hands remember the rifle.

  11. #40
    VIP Member Array paaiyan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    2,071
    Quote Originally Posted by Guantes View Post
    I don't know how you would figure a .12G bore or if it is even a usable figure. Shotgun gauge is the number of lead balls the size of the bore that equal a pound.
    Not to completely derail the conversation, but technically you could use it. You'd just say that .12 of the mass of the ball that fills the bore is a pound. Using that math, I approximate the bore to be about 3.4" in diameter.

    As an example, your average punt gun (see picture below) will have a bore of 2" or so.

    My blog

    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.

  12. #41
    VIP Member Array Janq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    6,781
    Agreed OPFOR, we do usually agree.
    In fact very much so as against averages.

    But why that's of consequence one way or another here...Nobody agrees with everyone on everything nor are they required to do so....Is lost on me.
    I don't know why people comment this.
    It's not like if you disagree with me I will like you any less, nor for that matter more if you do.
    Personality is what makes a person likable or not...Not their views on a specific topic of this or that randomness.
    And besides; You and I we are both are on the same team so to speak. ; )

    I do not though agree at all with your analogizing a drunk driver to this case.
    I don't even remotely see a connection there....Though I read your post twice (with a break) thinking okay maybe I'm just not uptaking this well and being dense right now.
    Sorry I just don't get it, and by that cannot agree to the analogy.

    Whether the guy might have boogied out had he not been hit (i.e. common scenario where resident makes one of those bogus 'warning shots') is an unknown item that never will be known.
    I haven't the first clue there, nor does the victim in this case...And for that matter the allegedly drunken threat doesn't know this either as he has no recollection of the event at all per his commentary and thus was operating on a level of mindset not within his alledged norm. There is just no way to hazard a guess on that.
    And myself if I were the victim I would not at all choose to hazard that guess and in kind _gamble_ my life on ehh this guy in my hallway who just broke into my home with effort and violence may be nothing more than a wayward lamb lost & confused.
    Some folks would take that route and have, and came out okay. I for one would not. That's me and would be on me.

    As to his ammunition choice, that is a dead horse.
    Everyone including myself twice (!) have said that birdshot is not optimal, by far, toward _combat_ use against beings with mass and/or fight capability beyond that of a bird.
    This to my view is like those folk who run with .22LR pistols and .380 ACP who state having any gun is better than no gun at all...And that people have been stopped and even killed with .22LR & .380 so it meets minimums for defense purpose that is non offensive (police & military).
    To that I would use your view & term with slight modification and say; 'Good LUCK with that!'
    Clearly birdshot is not optimal even as it is well reported to suck being shot with same by many humans throughout history.
    Even still this man cannot be faulted as at the end of the day he did successfully engage and repel as fact an invading (!) threat. Threat being defined as I'd stated prior by view of his _actions_ leading up just prior to trigger pull and from that the homeowners best guess at this invaders mindset.

    Did he need to kill this guy? No.
    Did he need to repel this invader from his home? Yes.
    Might could he have used as you say harsh words toward him in lieu of a gun? Maybe. Nobody but God knows the answer to how that might have played out.
    Did this man succeed in defending _himself_ (primary) and/or his property from further damage (secondary)? Most defintiely yes he did.
    Could he have fired a warning shot into his own property (wall, ceiling, or floor) and incur even more damage to ostensibly scare the intruder away and out of his home? Possibly.

    - Janq
    "Killers who are not deterred by laws against murder are not going to be deterred by laws against guns. " - Robert A. Levy

    "A license to carry a concealed weapon does not make you a free-lance policeman." - Florida Div. of Licensing

  13. #42
    VIP Member
    Array OPFOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Nomad
    Posts
    4,706
    Yes, we agree that he succeeded. But that doesn't mean that his plan, choices, or actions were the best, or even GOOD, for the scenario.

    My drunk driving analogy was simply this: I can make a dumb decision and have it turn out ok. That doesn't mean that the decision was any less dumb. How about this one? I'm playing black jack, and I have 20. I could draw to the 20, and hit an ace - so I win! Great decision, right? I should always draw to a 20! Of course not - drawing to a 20 is in almost every conceivable scenario a stupid, stupid move. That it COULD turn out ok (and will, about 8% of the time) doesn't mean that it's a smart thing to bet (so to speak) your life on.

    I'm not arguing that this guy didn't succeed in his task. Millions of people succeed at things every day that they could have had a much BETTER chance of succeeding at (how many folks get home alive drunk every Saturday night?) had they chosen another course of action... Using his success as a basis for future choices is my only real issue here, and I know thay you (and most) are not doing that.
    A man fires a rifle for many years, and he goes to war. And afterward he turns the rifle in at the armory, and he believes he's finished with the rifle. But no matter what else he might do with his hands - love a woman, build a house, change his son's diaper - his hands remember the rifle.

  14. #43
    VIP Member Array Janq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    6,781
    Yes...Let me be very clear here;

    I am not at all supportive of using any type/gauge birdshot toward defense of self against IMHO beings of any sort.

    Moreover to my view if a person, be it me or another, gets to the point where they take up arms then well they do have intent to make use of it. Defensive purposed arms are not for show and to scare/intimidate people; e.g. I'll just work the action and the click clack of my pump/lever gun will scare the burglar into submission & retreat. That is some BS, even as for some crazy reason it is a popular view and position.
    Defensive arms are a _worst case scenario_ do or suffer disability if not death tool for defense. Period. No exceptions as in application of them.
    With that said birdshot is for birds.

    As to his decision to shoot this human being per the conditions and totality of the situation as reported; I do not feel it was dumb or even wrong.
    We'll have to agree to disagree on that specific item for this condition...While remaining to be largely agreeable .net friends. : )

    With respect,

    - Janq
    "Killers who are not deterred by laws against murder are not going to be deterred by laws against guns. " - Robert A. Levy

    "A license to carry a concealed weapon does not make you a free-lance policeman." - Florida Div. of Licensing

  15. #44
    Senior Member Array Phillep Harding's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    821
    Most people, if they hear a "BOOM" and feel something hit them, they are not going to stick around to see how big what hit them was, so bird shot would get the job done. Then, there's those "others"; slugs and buckshot for them.

    Supposed to be not much difference between bird and buck at real close ranges, though, so maybe it's not so important inside the typical house?

    BTW, I found a formula for converting shotgun gauge to inches. "0.12G" works out to about 3.4". What's that? A 10 pound cannon?

  16. #45
    Ex Member Array JOHNSMITH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    somewhere
    Posts
    1,726
    ^^ They'd certainly feel that.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Anyone with an 11-87? Need birdshot recommendation.
    By kazzaerexys in forum Defensive Rifles & Shotgun Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: December 7th, 2009, 11:51 AM
  2. Gunsite guy suggesting birdshot on PDTV???
    By wht06rado in forum Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics
    Replies: 73
    Last Post: March 2nd, 2008, 08:48 PM
  3. Lethality of 22 Rimfire CCI Sabot Birdshot
    By Rock and Glock in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: June 15th, 2006, 01:10 PM

Search tags for this page

32 s&w birdshot

,
birdshot failure to stop
,
birdshot jeff cooper
,
birdshot used in battle
,
burglar shot with birdshot
,
compact 22 pistol/birdshot
,
don't use birdshot
,
dont use birdshot for hd
,
failure to stop with birdshot
,
glock failure to fire cci birdshot
,

jeff cooper birdshot

,
strongest bird shot
Click on a term to search for related topics.