For those who swear by birdshot as a home defense load.?

"I have long hair and tattoos, so automatically I'm the bad guy". That, and you clearly broke in and entered into the guy's home. Yeah, that makes you the bad guy.

Don't know how many times he hit him, could have been one shot, if I remember right. Hit in the hand, butt, and....where else? Anyway, doesn't sound like shot placement was great. Anyway, I would prefer buckshot. The last thing you want to see, after shooting someone to defend yourself, is to see the person still able to fight back. I'll have to read the article again. I'd like to know how far away he was, what type of shot he used, etc. But yes, I use buckshot in my shotgun.

How about someone who took two rounds in the upper right chest and just kept on, 'motorboating' along!

This is exactly what I've been saying to people on this board since the day I signed on; however, (1) nobody else seems to have any real world experience with birdshot and people. (2) Everybody thinks he's the one who's right; and (3) nobody seems to actually listen. (Or, maybe, it's the general membership's sub-par literary comprehension and language skills - I really don't know?)

If nothing else, former Vice-President Dick Cheney's hunting accident should prove - beyond any shadow of doubt - that birdshot ain't made for self-defense.

At self defense distances of 25-40 ft., birdshot fired from an 18.5" barrel 12ga. is mkre than adequet, if properly placed. The shot pattern doesn't spread until about 45-50 ft., so you can do plenty of damage with bird shot at close range.

It doesn't matter. slug or shot, if you don't hit the guy, he will not be injured badly. Nobody has 40 foot rooms in their house and a dead center load of even #9 shot will tear a hole you can stick your hand it. If he had been using anything else, he probably wouldn't even have hit the guy at all. If they wanted a sensational story some photos of the room where the shot went would be great. I guarantee something that stopped the shot had way more damage than the crook. A one ounce load of shot @1200 fps from a shotgun has more energy than a 230gr .45 @ 850 fps.

2 quick responses come to mind.

- Most gunshot incidents result in no fatalities. (only 10% fatality is what I've read for statistics and you have to figure the shooters in that 10% bracket were usually very determined or made a chance shot.)

- The intent of self defense should always be preservation of self and home. The home owner accomplished that. How would he feel with a fatality on his hands and an unarmed intruder and what would the legal repercussions have been? (nothing in Colorado, just emotional aftermath) Even cops get pretty torn up when they kill someone in the line of duty.

Wait: doesn't the story say he was shot in the hand, buttock, and side? If you hit the wrong spots, it doesn't seems to me that it matters what you're shooting. Birdshot in the hand isn't going to put down an assailant, but neither is a 600 NE bullet.

He is lucky the intruder did not have a gun to shoot back with.Four shots to stop the crook, WOW! Still good job homeowner. Calling the police first probably helped his court case. Never a good thing to need to shoot someone and hope the homeowner gets through this ok. People look at you different after you have shot somebody lucky for this homeowner the guy did not die.

THe reporter has little to no knowledge of shot guns. The shot may have been OO for all we know. The reporter called it a .12 gauge, not a 12 gauge. So the reporter just put bird shot up in the article, and may have not knowen there were other options.

Just something to think about.

The worst part about it is, the perp doesn't think he did anything wrong! Clearly birdshot didn't get the point across. Buckshot or a slug is needed.

This is why my shotgun is loaded with a round of birdshot, then increasingly deadly amounts of buckshot.