Less Lethal Ammo

[HDKorp]

I was curious about the various Less Lethal loads available and was about to ask a question regarding having them as the first load. Then I saw this story on http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com, which made perfect sense.

Self-Defense Tip: Don’t Shoot Less-Lethal Rounds
August 22, 2012

Loads of armed Americans load-up their home defense shotgun with less-lethal buckshot. More than a few owners of the shotshell firing Taurus Judge and Smith & Wesson Governor revolvers do likewise—at least for the first chamber or two. Wrong answer. There’s only one reason to shoot someone: if they pose a credible, imminent threat of death or grievous bodily harm to you or another innocent life. If it’s do or die, you want to stop a threat as quickly, efficiently and completely as possible. Shooting a bad guy with less lethal rounds (or aiming lethal rounds at extremities) to “just wound” an attacker is a dangerously naive plan. Actually, it’s so stupid it’s not really a plan at all . . .

Gun enthusiasts have a standard slam against people carrying small rounds (e.g. .22 caliber) for self-defense: “It’ll just make them angry.” While I don’t suffer from bullet envy—much—it’s no joke, really. There’s nothing makes a homicidal attacker really homicidal like getting shot.

Even if you shoot a perp straight through the heart with a fairly large caliber honest-to-God bullet it can take as much as 30 seconds for them to “bleed out.” Your average bad guy can do a lot of damage, including murder, in that time. Why give them the chance?

Again, you’re not shooting to kill. You’re shooting to stop a deadly threat and, thus, make it possible to GTFO. Wherever possible. A beanbag round ain’t gonna get it done. Not reliably. In fact, one wonders why anyone would even own a beanbag round, never mind confuse it with “proper” shotgun ammo.

There is a potential exception: a TASER. Shoot a bad guy with a TASER and he’s going down. Unless you miss. Or the barbs don’t make it through a heavy jacket. Or you don’t have your slimline C2 in situ or immediate access to the bulkier but more badass X26C or M26c.

Of course, a TASER creates a temporary pause in the action. After the effect wears off, what then? The company readily admits that their ECD units are no substitute for a “proper” firearm.

By the same token, less-lethal rounds are no substitute for lethal rounds. If you use a gun for self-defense, don’t use it until you are within your legal right to do so. If you are, when you do, make it count. The life you save may be your own.

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/0 ... al-rounds/

[Bastard File]

They have no place in a violent encounter IMO! If someone is bent on causing you or your family harm then my contention is use what will likely end the attack...permanently!! Again, this is my opinion.

[reeps]

They are really fun to shoot because they have no recoil.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4

[Synchronizor]

Less-lethal ammo has been discussed here before. The bottom line is that these loads are intended to control unarmed or lesser-armed groups that do not pose an immediate bodily threat; and are employed in controlled circumstances by massed police backed up by others armed with fully-lethal weapons in case the situation changes. This is completely different from one or a few civilians defending themselves from armed, violent attackers that present a serious, immediate threat to life.

For most people, HD is centered on dealing with threats of the two-legged variety. A shotgun is lethal force, no matter what it's loaded with. If you're justified in using it on another human being, it means the situation has come to the point where that person has to be stopped as quickly and effectively as possible. This means using the most effective, fully-lethal ammo available (almost always buckshot); and since life-or-death defensive situations rarely play out in a calm, leisurely manner, this should be the only thing in the gun's magazine. No mortal can count on being able to reliably keep track of mixed loadings in a magazine in the stress of a defensive shooting. In the rare event a situation calls for alternate ammunition, odds are there will be enough time to do a change-over. The 870's design allows for especially quick and efficient change-overs with practice, a shell can be loaded directly into the chamber without involving or removing whatever's already in the magazine.

I can imagine some scenarios where less-lethal ammo could be useful to a homeowner, such as deterring violent animals with reduced risk to people or livestock in the immediate area. However, even in those those very specific roles, fully-lethal ammo should be kept at hand in case pain alone isn't sufficient deterrent.

[Synchronizor]

They are really fun to shoot because they have no recoil.

Just pour the shot out of a cheap target load, and drop in some plastic airsoft pellets (which are the same nominal size as #4 buckshot). Same low recoil, but you won't be spending dollars per shot, and you can keep and reuse the lead.

However, don't even think about using these improvised loads to shoot anything other than inanimate objects. From a legal standpoint, professionally-made less-lethal ammo - with carefully-designed and extensively tested components - is already a gamble comparable to a week of binge drinking in Las Vegas. Handloads that are equivalent to conventional commercial ammo also present enough of a legal risk that they should never be used on another human unless suitable factory loads are completely unavailable. If you use any manner of non-traditional handload on someone, every ambulance-chaser in a thousand-mile radius will sense a great disturbance in the Force.

[dharbert]

If you use any manner of non-traditional handload on someone, every ambulance-chaser in a thousand-mile radius will sense a great disturbance in the Force.

So, if someone breaks into my home I'm not allowed to shoot them in the face with a hornet's nest or dragon's breath round? Darn....