Re: Supreme Court will hear another gun case
- From: "Ed Huntress" <huntres23@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 02:23:04 -0400
"William Wixon" <wwixon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:nbfxm.19082$As.9762@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Ed Huntress" <huntres23@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4ac520c9$0$22533$607ed4bc@xxxxxxxxx
Here are two questions for you: 1) What is the size of a shotgun
pattern at 15 feet?
Depending on the shot load, roughly 3" to 6", maybe less.
Right. And that's the point -- or almost a point. There's no real
advantage in your ability to hit a human-size target.
2) If you're going to get fancy with cardboard "splitters" or other
tricks to open up a pattern, why do you not want to use such a handload
for self-defense?
I can't think of a reason to use such a load, spreading the pattern so
much is likely to make it less effective. Some warn about using
handloads for self defense because of an imagined liability at trial,
but it's not likely to happen if it ever has.
Well, I'd like a pattern of 20". I can't think of how one would survive
that, with BB or similar-size shot at 15 feet. As for the liability, that
was my point, but I don't know of any actual cases. People who claim to
be authorities on the subject frequently say not to use handloads for
that reason. I'm not worried about it enough to check into it.
--
Ed Huntress
huh. i would've guessed the pattern at 15 feet would be 1 1/2 inches,
even with an 18" barrel. i'm guessing the consensus is non-lethal loads
are considered a joke. i wanted to buy some bean bag shells but they're
expensive, i can't remember, $5 each? i don't necessarily want to kill
the sonofabitch, only disable him.
'Better talk to a lawyer about that one. Believe it or not, you may be
better off killing him. "Disabling" may not be considered self-defense.
I'm not an authority on this but you will find legal discussions about it if
you look or inquire with an attorney.
i'm wondering, how is a "handload" different than a factory loaded shell?
is there more powder in it? less?
The claim is that if you handload your self-defense ammo, you're actively
seeking to shoot someone. David says this isn't the case; I have no
experience or knowledge of it one way or the other. But the claim is made
often by people who claim to know what they're talking about.
very quick google search brought up this...
http://www.cheaperthandirt.com/AMM813-5.html
i'm guessing a question about rubber buckshot will get me hounded off this
list. i actually like the idea. i don't want to kill the sonofabitch,
just stop him. at 10 feet it probably would kill 'em anyhow though.
i like some of the comments, (at the above link)(something like) "what if
you make a mistake?" (if you shoot someone with lead shot instead of
rubber)
just curious.
b.w.
They're good questions to ask -- before you shoot. <g> Are you an NRA
member? They may be able to help answer these questions. I think they have
some forum for asking questions like these, either by mail or on their
website. Someone here should know.
--
Ed Huntress
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Re: Supreme Court will hear another gun case
- From: Buerste
- Re: Supreme Court will hear another gun case
- From: Ed Huntress
- Re: Supreme Court will hear another gun case
- From: Buerste
- Re: Supreme Court will hear another gun case
- From: Ed Huntress
- Re: Supreme Court will hear another gun case
- From: Buerste
- Re: Supreme Court will hear another gun case
- From: Ed Huntress
- Re: Supreme Court will hear another gun case
- From: David R.Birch
- Re: Supreme Court will hear another gun case
- From: Ed Huntress
- Re: Supreme Court will hear another gun case
- From: William Wixon
- Re: Supreme Court will hear another gun case
- Prev by Date: Re: what is this thing part of? actual metal content
- Next by Date: Latest movie news
- Previous by thread: Re: Supreme Court will hear another gun case
- Next by thread: Re: Supreme Court will hear another gun case
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading