Shotgun Capacity in Real World Use

[Cory]

@Cory, I can think of another couple of examples.

I believe that one of Scott Reitz’s shootings involved using a shotgun against a suspect seated at a table during the execution of a search warrant. The suspect reached for a gun on the table and Scott shot him, almost amputating the arm reaching for the gun. The suspect then began reaching for the gun with his remaining arm and had to be shot again. This one was detailed in his The Art of Modern Gunfighting book but it’s been a little bit since I’ve read it so I might not have the details 100% correct. I also remember reading about a NYPD Stakeout Squad shooting in which a suspect needed multiple rounds in the torso from a shotgun before he ceased hostilities.

No single gunshot is a guarantee of stopping a threat, some are just more likely to than others. I can understand why some members want a side saddle and a butt cuff on their gun. I personally think a second on-board source of ammunition is past the point of diminishing returns when looking at value gained for additional weight but other’s mileage may vary.

I'll add the book to my amazon list, thank you. While no single round is a guarantee of ending a threat would you agree that the odds of requiring a 7+1, side saddle, and butt cuff is gecko45 level ridiculous to stop a threat? While one member here has done some warzone room clearing with a gauge and might have actually needed that much, at what point does ammo carriage become ridiculous for our given task whatever that may be? I get the what ifs, but for me the statistics inform or give depth to my choices. Somewhere there is a line of reasonably prepared for most issues with liklihood of need vs prepared for everything to the ignorance of reality.

For me, and others may differ of course, in the type of hunting I do or defense I draw the line at whats in the gun plus a butt cuff or side saddle. It seems like fantasy SHTF stuff for me to picture needing more to batter turkeys or defend my home. Possible, but highly improbable. I could see needing more if duck hunting or playing more clay pigeon games... but I wouldn't likely carry all the ammo on the gun in either case.

If I should adjust my ideas of what's reasonable, I'm open to that.

[Phaedrus]

I tossed you a like just for name dropping Gecko45! Those were the wild west days of the net! At any rate, looking at the excellent meta-study by Ellifritz the 12ga does have excellent stopping power but doesn't seem to quite live up to the myth/legend that it will blow a guy into the next country. Anecdotally I have heard of a couple cases that required multiple rounds but as was pointed out we don't always have good information from shootings. If left to rely on media accounts we may not know the actual gun used, the ammo, the amount of rounds expended or sometimes even the number of people involved. While I do believe the 12ga 00 Buckshot loads are very effective, I do know it's pretty easy to miss at bad breath distance. In most cases I'm in favor of more ammo capacity vs less, but I'm still on the fence about adding a mag extension to my 1301. I love how light and nimble it is right now. Maybe a one shot extension? Of course, 922r gets discussed endlessly with no really authoritative conclusion presented.

At the moment I'm relying on a 5.56 carbine for HD. I wrecked my shoulder back in March and had surgery in April; so far I can't get my wallet in my back pocket or zip my pants with my right arm. The surgeon would stroke out if he saw me mounting a 12ga loaded with full powder buck! But once I'm healed up enough to work out the Beretta it will probably take over for my PWS Mk114 as primary.

[WobblyPossum]

I'll add the book to my amazon list, thank you. While no single round is a guarantee of ending a threat would you agree that the odds of requiring a 7+1, side saddle, and butt cuff is gecko45 level ridiculous to stop a threat? While one member here has done some warzone room clearing with a gauge and might have actually needed that much, at what point does ammo carriage become ridiculous for our given task whatever that may be? I get the what ifs, but for me the statistics inform or give depth to my choices. Somewhere there is a line of reasonably prepared for most issues with liklihood of need vs prepared for everything to the ignorance of reality.

For me, and others may differ of course, in the type of hunting I do or defense I draw the line at whats in the gun plus a butt cuff or side saddle. It seems like fantasy SHTF stuff for me to picture needing more to batter turkeys or defend my home. Possible, but highly improbable. I could see needing more if duck hunting or playing more clay pigeon games... but I wouldn't likely carry all the ammo on the gun in either case.

If I should adjust my ideas of what's reasonable, I'm open to that.

I wouldn’t say it’s Gecko45 level ridiculousness to mount a side saddle and butt cuff to a shotgun at the same time. It’s more than I feel is needed for my circumstances, for sure, but I’m comfortable with a 5-shot 1301 with a 6 shot side saddle on it. That should be enough to deal with a typical home invasion but if someone else isn’t comfortable with that and wants a little more, I’m not going to push back.

The usual recommendation for people to defend their homes is to pick a strong-point room, like their bedroom and shelter there. If the bad guys breach your strong-point, engage. Under those circumstances, where you’re likely aimed in at your bedroom door while kneeling behind you’re bed or something, the added weight of the loaded butt cuff should matter.

[BehindBlueI's]

I never worked a home invasion where the homeowner discharged a shotgun *from a distance from the suspect* and subsequently lost the encounter. Regardless of how many intruders, regardless of level of injury to the intruder, regardless of type of shotgun. The only people who lost with a shotgun either didn't fire it or got entangled prior to firing. One guy lost while frantically trying to remove a trigger lock. A few lost because they postured but didn't fire. A few lost because they ran into the bad guy and got into a fight over the gun. One guy got shot by bad guy #2 while wrestling for his gun with bad guy #1, for example.

People who fired the shotgun prior to entanglement universally removed the intruder's ability or desire to continue their intrusion. The same was true of rifles.

[GJM]

I really like extra shotgun ammo in Velcro cards. I can carry them in an AR pouch, attach them to the Velcro on my belt, attach them to Velcro on the action or stock of my shotgun. That allows me to easily add, change type or remove ammo from my person or shotgun.

That said, in most circumstances, my immediate reload would be to draw my pistol, since I get 15 or more rounds in the time it takes to load one shot shell.

[TGS]

I'll add the book to my amazon list, thank you. While no single round is a guarantee of ending a threat would you agree that the odds of requiring a 7+1, side saddle, and butt cuff is gecko45 level ridiculous to stop a threat?

I think it enters territory of ridiculousness when you're carrying so much ammo to the detriment of something else. A double-barrel or typical hunting pump with a plugged tube should get the job done for 99% of home defense encounters, but I would place a side-saddle in the category of "best practice" instead of "required". It side saddle seems entirely reasonable to me.

I'm also framing my view not just with the use of a single home intruder, but other needs as well. You can make the list as long as you've got time to spend writing it down, but civil disorder is a big one. Floyd riots, superstorm sandy, '92 LA riots, whatever, you name it.....I'd much rather have a side-saddle in those situations than just what's in the tube. I find it entirely reasonable to make a small modification to your gear that makes you much better prepared for those situations if done so not at the detriment to your routine use of the weapon. I also don't consider that to be LARPing like some people given the repeated use of long guns by citizens throughout our history in times of civil disorder, as to me that viewpoint gets into the category of "anyone more prepared than me is paranoid, and everyone less prepared than me is a helpless commie sheep".

Using one of those sling bandoliers is something that I would consider ridiculous, since it brings more ammo than you realistically have the chance of needing while also 1) being poor for the job of ammo management, and 2) being a detriment to the use of the sling in its basic use as a sling. Requiring one of those stocks that stores shotgun shells would seem ridiculous to me since they 1) have a longer LOP that what's optimal and 2) being poor at ammo management.

Signed,

Someone that doesn't have a side-saddle on my shotgun

[Quasimojo45]

I really like extra shotgun ammo in Velcro cards. I can carry them in an AR pouch, attach them to the Velcro on my belt, attach them to Velcro on the action or stock of my shotgun. That allows me to easily add, change type or remove ammo from my person or shotgun.

I am a fan of the cards as well, it also allows me to to run the gun "naked" when I like. I'm quite happy to carry it on woods walks for example without the card attached.

[HCM]

I'll add the book to my amazon list, thank you. While no single round is a guarantee of ending a threat would you agree that the odds of requiring a 7+1, side saddle, and butt cuff is gecko45 level ridiculous to stop a threat? While one member here has done some warzone room clearing with a gauge and might have actually needed that much, at what point does ammo carriage become ridiculous for our given task whatever that may be? I get the what ifs, but for me the statistics inform or give depth to my choices. Somewhere there is a line of reasonably prepared for most issues with liklihood of need vs prepared for everything to the ignorance of reality.

For me, and others may differ of course, in the type of hunting I do or defense I draw the line at whats in the gun plus a butt cuff or side saddle. It seems like fantasy SHTF stuff for me to picture needing more to batter turkeys or defend my home. Possible, but highly improbable. I could see needing more if duck hunting or playing more clay pigeon games... but I wouldn't likely carry all the ammo on the gun in either case.

If I should adjust my ideas of what's reasonable, I'm open to that.

Hunting and self defense are very different in one big regard - initiative. Hunting done right is one sided. Hence why hunting is not a good model for fighting.

Assaults /fights start generally start as unequal initiative events.

In hunting you are the initiating party meaning you have the time and opportunity to choose when/where/how things will begin, and if done right, how they will end. This is a significant advantage.

In defense you are reacting, meaning if your assailant(s) are any good at all, you are playing catch up, at best. You are reacting to their actions and they get a vote in what happens. They also doing things like moving snd shooting to disrupt your reactions.

If you are familiar with the OODA loop (Observe Orient Decide Act) think of a fight as a series of competing OODA loops with concurrent attempts by you and your opponent(s) to interrupt each other’s loops.

Getting an effective hit under those conditions can be far more challenging than ambushing a deer.

[Cory]

Hunting and self defense are very different in one big regard - initiative. Hunting done right is one sided. Hence why hunting is not a good model for fighting.

Assaults /fights start generally start as unequal initiative events.

In hunting you are the initiating party meaning you have the time and opportunity to choose when/where/how things will begin, and if done right, how they will end. This is a significant advantage.

In defense you are reacting, meaning if your assailant(s) are any good at all, you are playing catch up, at best. You are reacting to their actions and they get a vote in what happens. They also doing things like moving snd shooting to disrupt your reactions.

If you are familiar with the OODA loop (Observe Orient Decide Act) think of a fight as a series of competing OODA loops with concurrent attempts by you and your opponent(s) to interrupt each other’s loops.

Getting an effective hit under those conditions can be far more challenging than ambushing a deer.

I'm aware of Boyd's concept of OODA. I've had my ass handed to me from a deficit before. I'm aware that "the bad guy gets a vote". My point was more that in my experience with shotguns, hunting or otherwise, the level of ammo being discussed was overkill.

That being said, I'm not advocating that the shotgun's capacity is unimportant. My own 1301 has a nordic +2 and a side saddle. My 1187 has a buttcuff. My 835 sling holds a few extra shells (parallel to the sling). I'm in no way against having the ability to reload or top off.

Deficits and OODA asside, where do you think is the point of diminishing return of ammo on gun? My preference is generally enough to reload an empty gun on me. Regardless of the task at hand. Unless training, or playing games where I have a few boxes around. So enough to reload an empty gun to capacity is kind of my personal theshold of reasonable. What shell count is that for you, and does it vary with task? I meant it when I said I was open to adjusting my thoughts on shell count.

While were on the topic, what do you guys perfer to carry extra ammo on gun? I feel like I've dabbled in butt cuff, sling, and now side saddle. I haven't got any real preference so far. Has any carry position proved consistantly better?

[RancidSumo]

I am a fan of the cards as well, it also allows me to to run the gun "naked" when I like. I'm quite happy to carry it on woods walks for example without the card attached.

This is why I ditched my QDC (well, also the unavailability of additional carriers). Nothing beats it when you want a side saddle, but I hated not being able to remove it and have a slick-sided gun.