Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 125
Like Tree14Likes

Thread: Why use shotguns over other guns?

  1. #91
    Staff Emeritus
    Join Date
    06 Aug 03
    Posts
    21,965
    Quote Originally Posted by FOG3 View Post
    Box O' Truth indicates even #4 Buckshot has inadequate penetration, and all other reputable information sources that have looked into it agree that bird shot is not capable of reaching organs, or rapidly incapacitating humans.
    At ten feet? At the very least, I knock the wind out of you and a bruise that you will not readily forget, let alone getting up to continue a fight. God help you if it's a head shot.
    Last edited by Officer of Engineers; 22 Feb 12, at 11:52.
    Chimo

  2. #92
    Reformed Kiwi Military Professional
    Join Date
    03 Nov 08
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    719

    Cheney Shooting

    Ok, so I got curious about this claim that the Cheney shooting proved the ineffectivness of birdshot for self defence situations so I looked it up. These captions from a Wikipedia article summarises multiple sources on the incident and the second injuries sustained from the incident.

    The events

    Cheney had a televised interview[8] about the shooting on February 15. On February 22, the Sheriff's office released statements from Katherine Armstrong, Sarita Armstrong, Williford, Oscar Medellin, Gerado Medellin and Andrew Hubert. Cheney’s statement and all six of the other hunting party members' statements specify that:

    Cheney, Whittington and Williford had first shot birds together in a covey
    While Whittington was searching for a downed bird, Cheney, Williford and an 'Outrider' (Guide) walked towards another covey about 100 yards (100 m) away
    Whittington approached to within 30 or 40 yards (40 m) of the shooters
    A single bird flew up, around and behind Cheney in the direction of Whittington
    Cheney shot at the bird and hit Whittington
    The shooting occurred somewhere around 17:30 hours and 18:30 hours.

    Armstrong, the ranch owner, claimed that all in the hunting party were wearing blaze-orange safety gear and none had been drinking,[9] and that at lunch they drank beer,[10] which contradicts her later statement that "there may (have been) a beer or two in there [the coolers at lunch], but remember not everyone in the party was shooting."[11] Cheney has acknowledged that he had one beer four or five hours prior to the shooting. Armstrong said she never saw Cheney or Wittington drink until later at the house, when Cheney had a cocktail.[12] Armstrong did not actually see the incident happen, believing that the reason Cheney's security detail was running was that Cheney had a heart problem,[11] although Cheney described her as an eyewitness in his Fox interview.[8]

    Secret Service agents and medical aides, who were traveling with Cheney, came to Whittington's assistance and treated his birdshot wounds to his right cheek, neck, and chest. An ambulance standing nearby for the Vice President took Whittington to nearby Kingsville before he was flown by helicopter to Corpus Christi Memorial Hospital in Corpus Christi.


    and,

    Whittington injury

    Whittington was injured in the face, neck, and upper torso. Whittington was reported to be in stable condition at Corpus Christi Memorial Hospital and had been moved from intensive care to a "step-down unit" on Monday. Doctors had decided to leave up to 200 pieces of birdshot pellets lodged in his body rather than try to remove them. Each pellet is less than a tenth of an inch (2.5 mm) in diameter. Because of their small size, it is hard to pinpoint the precise location of each pellet with medical imaging.

    On February 14, 2006, at 0630 hours, Whittington suffered a minor heart attack and atrial fibrillation due to the shot pellets lodged in or near his heart.[3] Additionally he experienced a collapsed lung.[14] He was immediately moved back to the intensive care unit. At about 0900 hours, Whittingon underwent a cardiac catheterization test to detect blocked or leaky arteries. From the test, doctors found a single lead pellet.[15][16]

    Hospital officials said Whittington was alert and stable[17] and that he did not experience chest pain or other symptoms of a heart attack.[15] Doctors reported signs of inflammation, and Whittington was treated with anti-inflammatory drugs.[18]

    Whittington was subsequently discharged from the hospital on February 17, 2006. At a press conference, he said: "My family and I are deeply sorry for everything Vice President Cheney and his family have had to deal with. We hope that he will continue to come to Texas and seek the relaxation that he deserves."


    Dick Cheney hunting incident - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Here is Whittington's account of the incident

    "All I remember was the smell of burning powder," he says. "And then I passed out."

    Since Dick Cheney shot him, Harry Whittington's aim has been to move on


    So 2.5mm pellets (number 7 or 7.5 quail pellets - on the smaller end of the birdshot scale) fired from 30 to 40 yards were enough to collapse this guys lung, lodge one pellet near his heart and immediately render him unconcious. And FOG3 is seriously telling us that firing birdshot, especially the larger varieties, from a much closer range isn't going to penetrate deeply enough to incapacitate or even kill a protagonist? My suggestion is that you be serious mate and while you are at it, be careful about quoting incidents that you haven't properly researched.
    "There is no such thing as society" - Margaret Thatcher

  3. #93
    Field mechanik Senior Contributor omon's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Nov 06
    Location
    bk
    Posts
    3,276
    Killer Butts

    Myth: Three cigarettes shot from a rifle at 7 feet can be lethal

    As the story goes, a couple of good 'ole boys decided to get drunk and mess around with guns. One of them put three cigarettes down the barrel of a muzzle-loading rifle and shot it at his buddy, killing him.

    Adam brewed up a clear ballistics gel dummy (new mixture) with a pig heart embedded in the center. They didn't bother with a rib cage as they were going with the assumption that the butts were able to squeak through the gaps in the rib cage. They found an exact replica of the muzzle-loading rifle in the myth and went down to the South San Francisco Police Department firing range, where they met up with their old testing buddy Master Sgt. Alan Normandy.

    For their first two tests, they used 80 grains of black powder and shot cigarette filters at seven feet. The first shot sprayed the dummy with filters, wadding, and black powder, but caused no real damage. The unburnt black powder lead them to believe that the rifle wasn't packed tight enough, so they tried again with more wadding. The next test didn't fare any better, with just more shotgun damage-less spray.

    They reasoned that the cigarette filters they were using were incorrect. An actual smoked cigarette butt weighs three times as much as a cigarette filter and is closer to what would have probably been used. They repeated their tests, this time with 'pre-smoked' cigarette butts. At seven feet they had a little more damage than before, but just non-lethal flesh wounds. At point-blank range, the shot went straight into the pig heart. At that distance, the cigarette butts definitely could be lethal.

    confirmed (from point-blank range, not 7 ft)
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!" B. Franklin

  4. #94
    Battleship Enthusiast Defense Professional USSWisconsin's Avatar
    Join Date
    05 Dec 08
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    4,288
    At 3 to 5 yards, the typical range involved, the "birdshot" is going to be a single mass with some outlyers, it will hit like shotgun slug, but transfer all its energy much quicker - in a shorter distance, leaving a terrible wound, it may not penetrate all the way through, but it will leave a grapefruit size hole with lots of trama. It will probably knock the target down. It would be lucky to survive such a wound.
    "If your plan is for one year, plant rice. If your plan is for ten years, plant trees.
    If your plan is for one hundred years, educate children." -- Confucius

  5. #95
    JRT
    JRT is offline
    Patron
    Join Date
    14 Apr 09
    Posts
    194
    Quote Originally Posted by USSWisconsin View Post
    At 3 to 5 yards, the typical range involved, the "birdshot" is going to be a single mass with some outlyers, it will hit like shotgun slug, but transfer all its energy much quicker - in a shorter distance, leaving a terrible wound, it may not penetrate all the way through, but it will leave a grapefruit size hole with lots of trama. It will probably knock the target down. It would be lucky to survive such a wound.
    Controlled experiments using ballistic gelatin have demonstrated that upon entry, the birdshot pellets are not behaving as a single mass. There is nothing holding them together as a single mass. Rather each birdshot pellet behaves as a separate mass, and as the birdshot pellets spread into the wound, they are not likely stacked in line behind one another. A few of the many small pellets may temporarily share a path, penetrating a little deeper than the others until they separate. But most of the birdshot pellets will crush their own individual wound track and will not penetrate deeply.

    Not long ago there was a news story about a guy who was waterfowl hunting. He stepped out of his boat in shallow water, left his loaded shotgun in an unsafe condition on his boat. His dog stepped on the trigger and shot the hunter in the ass at close range of only a couple of yards. The hunter's waders stopped most of the shot and prevented serious injury. As birdshot goes, waterfowl hunting loads tend to be largest birdshot at high velocity. He was not seriously injured. If I find a link, I'll edit this later and add it here. Right now I have to leave for work...

    edit: Here are some promised links:

    Here is a link to a brief scholarly article on ballistic gelatin, including some discussion of its limitiations.
    http://www.firearmsid.com/Gelatin/Ba...n%20Report.pdf

    Quoted below is one of the news stories on the aforementioned hunting accident. The bolded text emphasis is mine.


    Dog shoots man: Medics remove 27 pellets from hunter's buttocks
    By MSNBC staff and The Associated Press

    A bird hunter in Utah was shot in the buttocks after his dog stepped on a shotgun laid across the bow of a boat.

    Box Elder County Sheriff's Deputy Kevin Potter says the 46-year-old Brigham City man was duck hunting with a friend 10 miles west of the city when he climbed out of the boat to move decoys.

    Potter says the man left his 12-gauge shotgun in the boat and the dog stepped on it, causing it to fire.

    It wasn't clear whether the safety on the gun was on at the time.

    The men called 911 and walked to the main road to wait for emergency crews.

    Potter says the man was hit from about 10 feet away. He says the man wasn't seriously injured, in part because he was wearing waders.

    The Salt Lake City Tribune said the wounded hunter was transported to Brigham City Community Hospital about 9 a.m. Sunday, where doctors removed 27 pellets of birdshot.

    It said neither the dog, nor any ducks, were injured.

    Potter did not have information on the type of dog that stepped on the shotgun.
    Last edited by JRT; 23 Feb 12, at 17:06.
    .
    .
    .

  6. #96
    Senior Contributor 2DREZQ's Avatar
    Join Date
    05 Aug 03
    Posts
    889
    That does it.

    March 1st (my first day off) I'm going out to the range with of the big cans of tomato soup and a few different 12 gauge loads. 00-buck, 4-buck and #6 heavy game loads. The range will be the length of my house. I can't afford a dummy made of ballistic gelatin, so a thin steel can filled with red liquid will have to do.
    USS North Dakota

  7. #97
    Field mechanik Senior Contributor omon's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Nov 06
    Location
    bk
    Posts
    3,276
    Quote Originally Posted by JRT View Post
    Controlled experiments using ballistic gelatin have demonstrated that upon entry, the pellets are not behaving as a single mass. There is nothing holding them together as a single mass. Rather each pellet behaves as a separate mass, and as they spread into the wound, they are not stacked in line behind eachother. Each separate pellet does not penetrate deeply.

    Not long ago there was a news story about a guy who was waterfowl hunting. He stepped out of his boat in shallow water, left his loaded shotgun in an unsafe condition on his boat. His dog stepped on the trigger and shot the hunter in the ass at close range of only a couple of yards. The hunter's waders stopped the shot and prevented serious injury. As birdshot goes, waterfowl hunting loads tend to be largest birdshot at high velocity. He was not seriously injured. If I find a link, I'll edit this later and add it here. Right now I have to leave for work...
    there is no need to penetrate, your goal (inside the house from almost point blank) is to stop the guy, a blow with a sledgehammer to the chest wont make a deep wound, but it'll knock you down, instantly, clay shot might not kill you, (but most likely will, there are videos on you tube, single pellets go thru 1" of wood from 15 feet or so), but you sure as hell will be out for sometime.

    hey , a good punch in a face will knock a person out, there is no need to poke holes in his internals.
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!" B. Franklin

  8. #98
    Reformed Kiwi Military Professional
    Join Date
    03 Nov 08
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    719
    Quote Originally Posted by JRT View Post
    Controlled experiments using ballistic gelatin have demonstrated that upon entry, the birdshot pellets are not behaving as a single mass. There is nothing holding them together as a single mass. Rather each birdshot pellet behaves as a separate mass, and as the birdshot pellets spread into the wound, they are not likely stacked in line behind one another. A few of the many small pellets may temporarily share a path, penetrating a little deeper than the others until they separate. But most of the birdshot pellets will crush their own individual wound track and will not penetrate deeply.

    Not long ago there was a news story about a guy who was waterfowl hunting. He stepped out of his boat in shallow water, left his loaded shotgun in an unsafe condition on his boat. His dog stepped on the trigger and shot the hunter in the ass at close range of only a couple of yards. The hunter's waders stopped most of the shot and prevented serious injury. As birdshot goes, waterfowl hunting loads tend to be largest birdshot at high velocity. He was not seriously injured. If I find a link, I'll edit this later and add it here. Right now I have to leave for work...

    edit: Here are some promised links:

    Here is a link to a brief scholarly article on ballistic gelatin, including some discussion of its limitiations.
    http://www.firearmsid.com/Gelatin/Ba...n%20Report.pdf

    Quoted below is one of the news stories on the aforementioned hunting accident. The bolded text emphasis is mine.
    Cool story, thanks for posting. Remember however that heavy duty waders are probably on par with the layering on cloth bullet proof clothing and the buttocks are a very muscular region backed up by a lot of bone and no vital organs, so it isn't that surpising that he just got reletively superficial injuries. Through normal clothing into the torso you would expect more damage. Remember that the lungs back right on to the ribs and in any blast you would expect at least some to get through.
    "There is no such thing as society" - Margaret Thatcher

  9. #99
    Battleship Enthusiast Defense Professional USSWisconsin's Avatar
    Join Date
    05 Dec 08
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    4,288
    The dog wasn't aiming for him either, he may not have gotten a solid blast.
    Aussiegunner likes this.
    "If your plan is for one year, plant rice. If your plan is for ten years, plant trees.
    If your plan is for one hundred years, educate children." -- Confucius

  10. #100
    Colonist Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    02 Mar 08
    Location
    Adelaide, Australia
    Posts
    1,611
    Quote Originally Posted by USSWisconsin View Post
    Did the hunter empty his long gun at the boar?
    Whisky - I am not sure. The conversation was about 6 years ago - but the thing that stuck in my head was about how the magnum was useless.
    Ego Numquam

  11. #101
    Regular
    Join Date
    03 May 09
    Posts
    115
    Some Myths to debunk.

    "Shotgun spread pattern make it significantly easier to hit an assailant"

    And

    "Shotguns do not penetrate walls as much, making collateral damage a lesser consideration"

    From this video we can see that the shotgun pattern is pretty insignificant even at 15 feet. You still need to aim and the spread is only about a 5 inch group. You basically are as prone to missing with a shotgun as you are with a handgun. Also from the video you can see it blew through the wall with ease even though it was very thick plywood. Now obviously i am not saying that a Pistol is easier to hit someone with or that the penetration is less (definitely not). But the idea between the advantage of the shotgun being the perfect home defense weapon is pretty much mitigated by these points. Pistol or carbine's can be loaded with frangible ammo's which limit the chance of over penetration.

    Let's get this straight.

    "There is no bullet, pellet, or slug that can be both lethal to a human being and not penetrate a wall at the same time."

    If we are loading our shotguns to have birdshot for lower penetration, what exactly are we getting back in return that a pistol or carbine loaded in frangible doesn't give us? Like I said shotguns have lower capacity, more difficult to use (pump actions are fairly complex and heavy compared to pistols), heavy, low capacity (compared to something like glock 17 or 21), difficult to reload, and are long which every army knows is a bad thing in CQC, because it telegraphs the users position, longer fulcrum to aim, ect ect.

    And to those who believe round count doesn't make a difference because most engagements end quickly and involve less people. "if you have 30 rounds and need all of them you shouldn't be in that position in the first place." That's true. But 17 rounds vs 8 rounds gives you options, and there have been situations where it has been like 1 vs 4 home invaders, like here. Yes they ran away, but what if they didn't? If you knew there could be 4 gang members up at your door invading your house wouldn't you want more rounds? heck I want a 100 round c-mag or surefire in an AR-15. I know I certainly don't want a 8 round shotgun that takes a long time to reload.

    Shotguns do have their advantages namely price and value. But for the most part they are relatively bigger, more complex, heavier, limited in firepower/round count, and more difficult to use in lethal chamberings (recoil).
    Doktor likes this.

  12. #102
    Global Moderator
    Military Professional
    Chogy's Avatar
    Join Date
    28 Apr 09
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,648
    What the report doesn't mention is that shotgun blasts of bird shot simply do not carry more than 20 yards or so with any lethality, whereas a rifle or pistol bullet can still be deadly at a mile.

    The article's overpenetration explanation is chock full o' fail. It ignores the fact that a human body will stop bird shot, whereas a pistol or rifle bullet, especially FMJ, which many people use because it is cheap, can pass through a person, then a wall, and kill another person in the next room.

  13. #103
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    30 Mar 07
    Location
    Mission Viejo, CA
    Posts
    148
    Besides the previously mentioned pro's to a shotgun, I think psychologically it is easier for someone to use a shotgun/rifle then a pistol on another person. In the same way it is easier for the common person to shoot a person then stab a person.

    1. I feared for my life.
    2. If cops can shoot to kill so can I.
    3. I cannot aim for the crotch because that is where my rottweiler is!
    4. I will lead with my shotgun, but wife will be holding my pistol.
    5. Dead men do not sue.

  14. #104
    Contributor
    Join Date
    01 Mar 10
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    434
    "If cops can shoot to kill so can I." Quick point of order here - Police Officers are not trained to "shoot to kill". With the possible exception of Police tactical team members, especially marksmen they are taught to shoot at the visible centre of mass of the target. While this can and often does result in the death of an assailant, that death is not in and of itself the intention of the officer. The goal is and always will be to remove the threat of imminent death or serious injury to oneself or another, not to kill but to remove a lethal threat in situations where no other option is avialable. One course of action is murder the other is acting in defence of members of the public and/or yourself and other officers.

    Cheers.
    Last edited by Monash; 01 May 12, at 09:32.

  15. #105
    Field mechanik Senior Contributor omon's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Nov 06
    Location
    bk
    Posts
    3,276
    Quote Originally Posted by Monash View Post
    "One course of action is murder the other is acting in defence of members of the public and/or yourself and other officers.

    Cheers.
    idk about au, but here cops don't protect anyone but themselves. it is not their job. all that protection stuff, is a myth

    so when cops shoot someone, that is defense, and if homeower shoots someone it is murder, right??

    also, makes no difference if they are trained to kill or not, they kill, there are plenty of examples in nyc alone, where unarmed ppl were shot and killed by cops, and the best part most had 30 to 40 shots fired at them. and they are bad shots too, the best example was about 10 years ago, a guy was shot at 45 times only 11 hits, 3 in the foot.
    but wait there is more, a undercover cop was shot by a uniformed cop, while he was down, 8 or 9 times, it is a miracle the cop survived. 99% of other ppl cops shoot at don't make it, so are cops trrained to kill or it just a coincidence?
    Last edited by omon; 01 May 12, at 15:13.
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!" B. Franklin

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. I like guns!
    By gunnut in forum Multimedia & Jukebox room
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01 Feb 10,, 15:07
  2. T-38 guns F-22?
    By Tin Man in forum Military Aviation
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 21 May 09,, 17:24
  3. Shotguns and the Geneva Convention
    By Ironduke in forum The Field Mess
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 20 May 09,, 22:03
  4. Cifsan (turkish) shotguns
    By dundonrl in forum Small Arms and Personal Weapons
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10 Dec 07,, 15:17
  5. Philippine police set to replace M-16s with shotguns
    By troung in forum Small Arms and Personal Weapons
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 31 Jul 06,, 05:54

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

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