Home defense round

Status
Not open for further replies.
I like #1 buck low brass. That makes a big, big mess, has a good ratio of pellet size to quantity and doesn't have the same problems with wall penetration that larger sizes do. Their lower velocity lets them effectively hit harder by pushing material out of the way rather than flying through it as a high brass shell might. Smaller sizes have good quantity, but their small mass prohibits them from going deep. They make a mess, but are only painful in the short term - can't stop an attacker with the massive deep tissue trauma that larger shot provides.

I like the home defense rounds in theory, but they would look bad in court. I imagine that they might be presented in court in much the same way as 'cop killer' rounds were/are. By using conventional shells, you're just using a standard hunting round that is commonly available. Anyway, we're talking about a shotgun blast. How much power do you need? I guarantee that I could shoot a man from across the house with #8 low brass bird shot and he'd be reduced to a screaming crying defenseless mess - likely blind, too. The buck shot just makes sure he isn't getting back up.
 
Originally Posted By: Spazdog
Why not use a combination?

If the first two Glasers from my revolver don't discourage a home intruder, the next 4 jacketed hollow points should.


Why waste two shots? If you're justified in shooting, then shoot. If you're using a firearm as a warning or a scare tactic, then you shouldn't be using it at all.

The problem with many people in using a firearm in home defense is that they're not ready to use it in the way that it's intended and deal with the consequences of their actions. If you have a firearm for home defense, you have to have the same attitude as a police officer in the line of duty (and I've been a police officer for 10+ years, so I know a little about it)...you have to be prepaired to stop the threat (and, realistically, the consequences of using a firearm to do this is that you may take another person's life) if it's necessary to defend your life or someone else's. If you're not prepaired to do this, then you shouldn't have a firearm for home defense...make yourself a "safe room" with a phone line where you can barricade yourself and your family. Use pepper spray or a Taser (just know the failure rate of such tools). Anything besides a firearm unless you can use it properly and deal with the consequences.
 
Originally Posted By: greenaccord02
I like the home defense rounds in theory, but they would look bad in court. I imagine that they might be presented in court in much the same way as 'cop killer' rounds were/are. By using conventional shells, you're just using a standard hunting round that is commonly available. Anyway, we're talking about a shotgun blast. How much power do you need? I guarantee that I could shoot a man from across the house with #8 low brass bird shot and he'd be reduced to a screaming crying defenseless mess - likely blind, too. The buck shot just makes sure he isn't getting back up.


It really depends on your state and the applicable laws. For example, here in Ohio we have the "Castle Doctrine." State law says that there's no duty to retreat from an intruder in your home and such an intruder is automatically a threat of death or serious physical harm to you, justifiying deadly force. It's highly unlikely you'd even be criminally charged in such an encounter. I'd imagine that, if you get into the more liberal states, you might have some issues (but I'd never live in such a state).

As for using birdshot and hoping that it takes the bad guy down, I think you're underestimating the resiliency of the human being. Anybody who advances on a shotgun is a scary mofo. There are plenty of illegal drugs out there that have effects of making a bad guy pretty much impervious to pain. Even without drugs, adrenalin is a powerful thing. People don't just drop when shot. The proper round with the proper weapon is totally necessary for home defense (and, IMHO, birdshot is not it).
 
Originally Posted By: bingoh
Originally Posted By: greenaccord02
I like the home defense rounds in theory, but they would look bad in court. I imagine that they might be presented in court in much the same way as 'cop killer' rounds were/are. By using conventional shells, you're just using a standard hunting round that is commonly available. Anyway, we're talking about a shotgun blast. How much power do you need? I guarantee that I could shoot a man from across the house with #8 low brass bird shot and he'd be reduced to a screaming crying defenseless mess - likely blind, too. The buck shot just makes sure he isn't getting back up.



It really depends on your state and the applicable laws. For example, here in Ohio we have the "Castle Doctrine." State law says that there's no duty to retreat from an intruder in your home and such an intruder is automatically a threat of death or serious physical harm to you, justifiying deadly force. It's highly unlikely you'd even be criminally charged in such an encounter. I'd imagine that, if you get into the more liberal states, you might have some issues (but I'd never live in such a state).

As for using birdshot and hoping that it takes the bad guy down, I think you're underestimating the resiliency of the human being. Anybody who advances on a shotgun is a scary mofo. There are plenty of illegal drugs out there that have effects of making a bad guy pretty much impervious to pain. Even without drugs, adrenalin is a powerful thing. People don't just drop when shot. The proper round with the proper weapon is totally necessary for home defense (and, IMHO, birdshot is not it).



I'm from Texas, and we have a pretty nice set of gun laws here, too if I do say so. The castle doctrine and all that. However, while deadly force is able to be used, the intent should not be to kill. It should be to stop. That's why they call it stopping power not killing power, though for most intents and purposes they are the same. If they show in court that you were using some heinous, crazy, ninja throwing star type round that is designed to leave nothing but a gruesome pile of guts, they'll make the case that you were just waiting, wishing, and hoping to kill somebody and this poor hapless misguided criminal was your victim. When a man gets killed, they don't just throw it out of court because he was a criminal - there will be a trial and despite our wonderful castle doctrines you can still get caught up. Aside from a criminal case, many times the dearly departed criminal's family will seek a civil action against you, and you better bet some crooked lawyer is going to be out to paint you as the grim reaper.

Now, you're right about the bird shot. I was using that as an example, but I think your average man is going to be hollering to beat the band and you'll at least break his concentration with some birdshot. After all, it's little pieces of metal flying at 1250 feet per second. My point was that anything coming out of a shotgun isn't something you just shrug off.
 
bingoh, you've hit the nail on the head with your posts.

greenaccord, I think you should know the only way an opposing lawyer would know you "shot to kill" would be if those words came out of your mouth, either before or after the event. You never shoot to kill. You may shoot two loads of double ought or two handgun rounds center mass to neutralize the threat, with a follow up head shot if the threat still is present. When interviewed, even by friendly police, anything you say might be used against you (especially later in a civil trial). The only words out of your mouth should be "I was in fear for my life, so I neutralized the threat." Anything else should be cleared by your lawyer. I agree with you completely about not using specialized rounds that can be sensationalized in court after the fact.

People who think of loading a variety of rounds in a single handgun load don't shoot them much, and certainly don't use their combat loads at the range. Look at the pros - military and police. They don't use a variety of rounds in the same magazine, and you shouldn't either. And regardless of what training rounds you use, you should intermittantly practice with your combat loads.
 
I like to use #3 or 4 buckshot. Plenty of hit at short range but the small pellets will have less chance for over penetration.
 
Originally Posted By: greenaccord02
I'm from Texas, and we have a pretty nice set of gun laws here, too if I do say so. The castle doctrine and all that. However, while deadly force is able to be used, the intent should not be to kill. It should be to stop. That's why they call it stopping power not killing power, though for most intents and purposes they are the same. If they show in court that you were using some heinous, crazy, ninja throwing star type round that is designed to leave nothing but a gruesome pile of guts, they'll make the case that you were just waiting, wishing, and hoping to kill somebody and this poor hapless misguided criminal was your victim. When a man gets killed, they don't just throw it out of court because he was a criminal - there will be a trial and despite our wonderful castle doctrines you can still get caught up. Aside from a criminal case, many times the dearly departed criminal's family will seek a civil action against you, and you better bet some crooked lawyer is going to be out to paint you as the grim reaper.

Now, you're right about the bird shot. I was using that as an example, but I think your average man is going to be hollering to beat the band and you'll at least break his concentration with some birdshot. After all, it's little pieces of metal flying at 1250 feet per second. My point was that anything coming out of a shotgun isn't something you just shrug off.


Texas is a great state for firearms laws...you guys had castle doctrine long before it was passed in much of the rest of the country.

In any self defense scenario, the intent while using a firearm is to stop the threat. Like I mentioned, I've been a police officer for 10+ years, so I know the legal jargon. The reality of self defense shooting is, to most consistantly stop the threat, you have to do sufficient damage to structural or vital areas of the human body and be able to do so realistically with a firearm in a high-stress situation (no shooting guns out of hands or other such Hollywood [censored]). The most effective locations to shoot someone realistically to accomplish that is center mass (from chest to groin). Because of the high concentration of vital organs, circulatory structures (major arteries and such), and vital central nervous system structures (specifically the spine), shooting someone center mass runs a significant change of killing them...but that's also exactly why you shoot them center mass, because hitting those structures is more likely to stop the person.

The legal reality is, if you shoot someone in self defense within your home in most conservative states (and assuming you didn't do it with an RPG), you'll probably face a Grand Jury who won't indict you. You're almost guaranteed to face a civil suit, but that's a fact of the US tort system...you can sue anyone, for anything, at any time. Using a "home defense round" really won't effect that...most such rounds are just low recoil rounds with improved round performance on the other end (and are usually similar in type to those used by police across the nation).

And, your "average man" isn't the type to hang around when faced with a shotgun in the first place. Anyone who doesn't retreat in the face of a shotgun is a serious threat. But, then again, the "average man" doesn't break into a occupied residence, either. Statistically, even the average burglar doesn't break into an occupied residence...they prefer unoccupied residence and will generally run when confronted. No, someone who will enter an occupied residence and stand firm when confronted by the occupants should rightfully be considered a deadly force threat.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: bingoh
Originally Posted By: Spazdog
Why not use a combination?

If the first two Glasers from my revolver don't discourage a home intruder, the next 4 jacketed hollow points should.


Why waste two shots? If you're justified in shooting, then shoot. If you're using a firearm as a warning or a scare tactic, then you shouldn't be using it at all.

The problem with many people in using a firearm in home defense is that they're not ready to use it in the way that it's intended and deal with the consequences of their actions. If you have a firearm for home defense, you have to have the same attitude as a police officer in the line of duty (and I've been a police officer for 10+ years, so I know a little about it)...you have to be prepaired to stop the threat (and, realistically, the consequences of using a firearm to do this is that you may take another person's life) if it's necessary to defend your life or someone else's. If you're not prepaired to do this, then you shouldn't have a firearm for home defense...make yourself a "safe room" with a phone line where you can barricade yourself and your family. Use pepper spray or a Taser (just know the failure rate of such tools). Anything besides a firearm unless you can use it properly and deal with the consequences.


Overpenetration is my concern. I don't want to go shooting through an intruder and into my kids' rooms.

The Glasers make big nasty surface wounds. They look way more lethal than they actually are and should be a big discouragement to those that would do harm. If not, rounds with a greater lethal capability are "on the way". If you can get two big nasty surface wounds like that and don't go into shock or run away you are probably on PCP or something and your intent to do harm justifies the possibility of overpenetration.

I was a 19K in the Army. I never qualified with an M4/M16 (familiarized but qualification isn't necessary when you have a 105/120mm gun,coax,.50 cal and loader's 7.62 at your disposal...no room for a rifle on the track anyway.)I always qualified Expert on the combat pistol range. I also taught classes on the M9 and pistol safety and marksmanship. I later carried this over to the National Guard where we used the M1911 .45. Firearms that were probably older than my dad. I would have an M9 if it had a longer service life. My dad is a cop. I believe myself to be better versed than many police officers in this area after seeing the haphazard way they maintain their sidearms and their ability at the range.

to support my opinion, I offer Ron White:
Quote:
You ever see tape of the Kehoe brothers from Ohio, those two guys that get out of that white Suburban, it's been on COPS a few times? Those guys, folks, have a shootout with the police, at point, blank, range...nobody gets hurt. I would love to have been at that office the next day when that guy's being interviewed by the police...(imitates the chief)And then what happened? (imitating officer) Well, at that point I unloaded my semi-automatic 9 millimeter weapon at point blank range. (imitating chief) And then what happened? (imitating officer) They left... (as himself) Nice shooting, Elmer Fudd. There was a kid in Detroit a few years ago, shot 8 bullets, hit 9 people. These cops fired 22 shots, didn't even hit the [bad word] Suburban!
 
Originally Posted By: Spazdog
Overpenetration is my concern. I don't want to go shooting through an intruder and into my kids' rooms.

The Glasers make big nasty surface wounds. They look way more lethal than they actually are and should be a big discouragement to those that would do harm. If not, rounds with a greater lethal capability are "on the way". If you can get two big nasty surface wounds like that and don't go into shock or run away you are probably on PCP or something and your intent to do harm justifies the possibility of overpenetration.

I was a 19K in the Army. I never qualified with an M4/M16 (familiarized but qualification isn't necessary when you have a 105/120mm gun,coax,.50 cal and loader's 7.62 at your disposal...no room for a rifle on the track anyway.)I always qualified Expert on the combat pistol range. I also taught classes on the M9 and pistol safety and marksmanship. I later carried this over to the National Guard where we used the M1911 .45. Firearms that were probably older than my dad. I would have an M9 if it had a longer service life. My dad is a cop. I believe myself to be better versed than many police officers in this area after seeing the haphazard way they maintain their sidearms and their ability at the range.

to support my opinion, I offer Ron White:
Quote:
You ever see tape of the Kehoe brothers from Ohio, those two guys that get out of that white Suburban, it's been on COPS a few times? Those guys, folks, have a shootout with the police, at point, blank, range...nobody gets hurt. I would love to have been at that office the next day when that guy's being interviewed by the police...(imitates the chief)And then what happened? (imitating officer) Well, at that point I unloaded my semi-automatic 9 millimeter weapon at point blank range. (imitating chief) And then what happened? (imitating officer) They left... (as himself) Nice shooting, Elmer Fudd. There was a kid in Detroit a few years ago, shot 8 bullets, hit 9 people. These cops fired 22 shots, didn't even hit the [bad word] Suburban!


Overpenetration can be combated with the proper round choice (and is actually an overstated problem, realistically). Lower velocity self defense buckshot has a very low chance of overpenetration. On the same token, hollowpoints in .38, .40 or .45 are also unlikely to overpenetrate.

My opinion stands that, if you're justified in shooting, you don't go half way with an intentionally ineffective round. That you are following up with JHP's indicates that you know that they're ineffective. With my life on the line (and, if you're shooting, you better believe that your or your family's lives are on the line), I want a weapon that will stop the threat quickly and decisively.

I'll ignore the jab at police training and effectiveness.
 
#4 buckshot, 12 ga, 3-in mag with 18" open choke. Bad guy ... your toast.
 
Can you tell me what 18" open choke means?


Best I got is an 18" barrel (which 18.5" is the legal minimum)

open I don't know

Choke tube is where the shells go


????????????????????????
 
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
#4 buckshot, 12 ga, 3-in mag with 18" open choke. Bad guy ... your toast.


BTW ... with #4 buckshot, there are typically quantity of 41, 0.24" projectiles in a 3" magnum 12 gauge shell. Not something I'd like to be on the receiving end of!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shotgun_shell
 
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: mjoekingz28
Can you tell me what 18" open choke means?


Legal ~18" barrel with no choke for max pattern spread ... sometimes referred to as "open choke".

http://www.chuckhawks.com/where_pattern_today.htm

http://www.academy.com/index.php?page=content&target=sports_tips/hunting/shotgun_chokes



Thanks, a choke is simply a restriction built into the barrel making it a smaller diameter, meaning a tighter spread. My shotty is all barrel..

Is it a gradual slope so you dont get any backfire?
 
Quote:
Hornady makes a home defense round that was mentioned before with some discs and pellets.


Hornady specializes in this sort of stuff. Anything they make, I would trust
 
Glasers along with Xtreme Shock ammo are poor Self Defense Rounds. Surface wounds, do not Incapacitate generally. You NEED Penetration first, and then Expansion. Above those of course if Shot Placement. For a good pistol round you need a min of 11-12" of penetration per FBI studies, to make it to vitals or to make a CNS hit.

Any loading that meets those min penetration requirements is going to have no trouble at all going through building materials (drywall, plywood, etc). Again Shot Placement above all.

Originally Posted By: Michael_P
Quote:
Hornady makes a home defense round that was mentioned before with some discs and pellets.


Hornady specializes in this sort of stuff. Anything they make, I would trust


They make some good stuff, but there are quite a few other manufacturer's that make better, and not everything Hornady makes is the greatest, like their Critical Defense Ammo.
 
Last edited:
#1 Buck is the only thing I will use in a home defense shotgun. I selected #1 buck based on the number of pellets(Not too many and not too few).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

C
Eyeballing a Ruger Security. 380
2 3
Replies
57
Views
2K
MParr
burbguy82
Smokeless Muzzleloading............at Mach 3 and beyond
Replies
16
Views
590
Mach3Muzzleloader
billt460
Powder Prices & Availability
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
thastinger
A
20 gauge or 12 gauge
2 3
Replies
59
Views
4K
North to Alaska
John Galt
Browning BPS shotgun initial cleaning recommendations and walnut care advice.
Replies
14
Views
1K
John Galt
Back
Top