Straight talk about shotguns

[MeMelYup]

With all due respect, I will not take a hostage rescue shot with any weapon unless no reasonable alternative exists.

think hearing loss and flash burns.

[thatguy]

I here on a regular basis THE home protection firearm is a 12 gauge shotgun but I'll admit I struggle with a shotgun, especially after 50 rounds or so and it gets heavy but that's just me. ANY personal self defense firearm comes down to knowing what the weapon was designed for and each persons own abilities are through proper instruction followed by proper practice.

Thanks for the video, it was nicely done.

PS. Did I see a compensator or brake?

[VMI77]

With all due respect, I will not take a hostage rescue shot with any weapon unless no reasonable alternative exists.

Absolutely. But in order then to do it you have to have confidence that you can do it.

[VMI77]

A few points to ponder on doing the hostage rescue/head shot with a shotgun.

Even with extensive testing of a particular buckshot or slug load in a particular shotgun, the flight of all of the components of a buckshot or slug round, even at close range, cannot be 100% predicted.

Unlike a rifle or handgun that shoots one single projectile, the buckshot or slug round contains not only the payload, but the wadding and/or shot cup that flies through the air immediately after or with the projectile. Even with tight patterning buckshot or a slug, the flight of the wadding and/or shot cup can fly in a drastically different manner once it hits the air. This could result in serious bodily injury or even death when the wadding or shot cup, some of which are hard plastic or fiber and traveling at 1600 fps, strikes the hostage instead of striking the hostage taker along with the buckshot or slug.

Even with being a Peace Officer for 20 years, being a Firearms Instructor both privately and for my agency, shooting the shotgun on a weekly basis with 99% of that shooting being with buckshot and slugs, I will not take a hostage rescue shot with a shotgun unless no reasonable alternative exists.

Just my .02,
LeonCarr

I think you may be looking at it from a different perspective than I am. I'm not really referring to what I'd call a hostage rescue shot. I'd be content with a standoff in that case, or better, would hope that police would be on the scene before shooting even had to be considered. What I won't allow though is for someone to abduct a family member...remove them to a location over which the abductor has complete control....if there is anything I can do to stop it. I'm also not planning to use a shotgun for that purpose and furthermore would only even consider it within a range of about 10 feet.

I do want to understand exactly what the risks are and what the probable outcome would be if such a desperate act had to be taken and have shot many many rounds to experiment. In any case, however unlikely the situation is in the first place, it is even more unlikely that I'd ever find myself in such a situation with a shotgun. But even with a rifle or a handgun, and no matter how accurate I am on the range, I can't predict whether I'd have the necessary control to be able to take such a shot if I was facing the situation in reality. What I do know is that without certainty on the range my chances under stress are greatly diminished.

[Pawpaw]

Just to add a little more perspective, this is when I tested my Mossberg 930 SPX with my chosen home defense load... Federal FliteControl #1 buck (LE132-1B). That's 15 pellets in each round.

[C-dub]

I think you may be looking at it from a different perspective than I am. I'm not really referring to what I'd call a hostage rescue shot. I'd be content with a standoff in that case, or better, would hope that police would be on the scene before shooting even had to be considered. What I won't allow though is for someone to abduct a family member...remove them to a location over which the abductor has complete control....if there is anything I can do to stop it. I'm also not planning to use a shotgun for that purpose and furthermore would only even consider it within a range of about 10 feet.

My thoughts, as well. I would probably take the shot on out to 15-20 feet (inside the house distance) with a handgun or rifle. I do not keep a shotgun loaded for home defense. It will be hollow point either .45ACP or 5.56.

[VMI77]

Just to add a little more perspective, this is when I tested my Mossberg 930 SPX with my chosen home defense load... Federal FliteControl #1 buck (LE132-1B). That's 15 pellets in each round.

[ Image ]

I was recently shooting 3" Federal FliteControl Magnum 00 Buck through a Saiga 12 from about 10 feet away. The wad was consistently striking the target within an inch of the buck --pretty much making one big hole in a paper target, but outside the shot. In your image it looks like that didn't happen until you got out to 15 yds. I thought it was a little odd because I hadn't seen this with the 2 3/4 inch buck --then again, that time I was using a KSG. At the same distance the cheap low brass Estate 00 buck (9 pellets) patterned something like your 20 yard shot (and failed to eject every time but once until I changed the gas setting).

[Deltaboy]

I trust myself with my 870 cause I shot several Thousands of rounds through it from 1982-1992 duck hunting and other animals. Now since thing I hit the range with it once a year.

[KD5NRH]

With all due respect, I will not take a hostage rescue shot with any weapon unless no reasonable alternative exists.

I think that's pretty much a prerequisite of the shot. OTOH, once the BG has the hostage at their mercy, can any reasonable alternative exist? Essentially, you're trusting a person who has already proven themselves to be severely untrustworthy with the life of another person.

[The Annoyed Man]

Just to add a little more perspective, this is when I tested my Mossberg 930 SPX with my chosen home defense load... Federal FliteControl #1 buck (LE132-1B). That's 15 pellets in each round.

[ Image ]

I was recently shooting 3" Federal FliteControl Magnum 00 Buck through a Saiga 12 from about 10 feet away. The wad was consistently striking the target within an inch of the buck --pretty much making one big hole in a paper target, but outside the shot. In your image it looks like that didn't happen until you got out to 15 yds. I thought it was a little odd because I hadn't seen this with the 2 3/4 inch buck --then again, that time I was using a KSG. At the same distance the cheap low brass Estate 00 buck (9 pellets) patterned something like your 20 yard shot (and failed to eject every time but once until I changed the gas setting).

I've seen a few people shot with shotguns, and in only one case did the wad penetrate the victim. In that case, the victim was executed on his knees, shot from behind, with the muzzle at contact distance at the base of his neck. We found the wad at the bottom of his chest cavity resting against his diaphragm. He did not survive beyond about 20 minutes after arrival in our ER. But nobody else I ever saw who had been shot with a shotgun had any injury from the wad that I'm aware of. Wads make an impressive hole in paper, but I don't think you can count on them playing much of a factor in the wounding potential of a shotgun in most cases.

[VMI77]

Just to add a little more perspective, this is when I tested my Mossberg 930 SPX with my chosen home defense load... Federal FliteControl #1 buck (LE132-1B). That's 15 pellets in each round.

[ Image ]

I was recently shooting 3" Federal FliteControl Magnum 00 Buck through a Saiga 12 from about 10 feet away. The wad was consistently striking the target within an inch of the buck --pretty much making one big hole in a paper target, but outside the shot. In your image it looks like that didn't happen until you got out to 15 yds. I thought it was a little odd because I hadn't seen this with the 2 3/4 inch buck --then again, that time I was using a KSG. At the same distance the cheap low brass Estate 00 buck (9 pellets) patterned something like your 20 yard shot (and failed to eject every time but once until I changed the gas setting).

I've seen a few people shot with shotguns, and in only one case did the wad penetrate the victim. In that case, the victim was executed on his knees, shot from behind, with the muzzle at contact distance at the base of his neck. We found the wad at the bottom of his chest cavity resting against his diaphragm. He did not survive beyond about 20 minutes after arrival in our ER. But nobody else I ever saw who had been shot with a shotgun had any injury from the wad that I'm aware of. Wads make an impressive hole in paper, but I don't think you can count on them playing much of a factor in the wounding potential of a shotgun in most cases.

I thought that would be the case but it's good to hear it from someone with experience.

[LeonCarr]

It is not about the wad penetrating the victim. Many victims have been killed by blunt force trauma with objects that never penetrate the victim. The fact is that direction of travel or wads, shotcups, etc. cannot be accurately predicted.

With all due respect to TAMs experience, being struck in the head with a piece of plastic moving 1600 fps can cause serious bodily injury or death. Yes it may be a one in a million type of thing, but there is still a risk of it happening and that has to be factored in.

Just my .02,
LeonCarr

[KD5NRH]

With all due respect to TAMs experience, being struck in the head with a piece of plastic moving 1600 fps can cause serious bodily injury or death. Yes it may be a one in a million type of thing, but there is still a risk of it happening and that has to be factored in.

Pretty sure that being taken hostage by an armed assailant has a higher probability of lethality.

[ShootDontTalk]

It is not about the wad penetrating the victim. Many victims have been killed by blunt force trauma with objects that never penetrate the victim. The fact is that direction of travel or wads, shotcups, etc. cannot be accurately predicted.

With all due respect to TAMs experience, being struck in the head with a piece of plastic moving 1600 fps can cause serious bodily injury or death. Yes it may be a one in a million type of thing, but there is still a risk of it happening and that has to be factored in.

Just my .02,
LeonCarr

I would think some supporting documentation would be required here. Shot cups weigh next to nothing and decelerate far faster than any shot.

I also have seen quite a few people shot with shotguns. Perhaps the most telling evidence that disproves your theory are the people I have seen shot at almost point blank range (<10 feet) with various loads of birdshot. In each case they were hit by the wad, but I have yet to ever see anyone killed with birdshot. If the cup by itself were lethal, at least a few of these should have been. The shot is far more lethal than the wad.

Scientifically speaking. 12ga wads weigh around 30 grains and at 1600 fps develop 171 ft/lbs of energy. However the wad moving at that speed, due to its flower like shape and lack of mass, is more like a whiffle ball than a projectile. Deceleration is dramatic because the sectional density is extremely low.

There is a huge difference between the energy and wounding capability of blunt force trauma caused by something like a hammer compared to the shot cup of a shotgun.

[Deltaboy]

Slugs have put down every thing I shot them with from deer to bulls so I am fully assured those Remington 1oz hollow point rifled slugs will stop any 2 legged thing I shoot with them.