View Full Version : Shotguns not for COMBAT use
GodCountryCorps
05-08-08, 13:36
The goal of this thread is to put forth and support the assertion that shotguns are not to be fielded in combat. I did not say home defense within ranges of 0-35yds, I am making the claim for combat scenarios only.
I realize this subject matter may conjure certain uncomfortable feelings in some folks, and it is not my intention to insult anyone's choice of firearm or opinion on the matter, but I think this is a good subject to raise in the spirit of learning more about firearms.
One last note: this posting geared to be a moderately technical/very technical thread, please post accordingly.
_____________________________________________________________
Training and reality sometimes conflict. While the so-called “modern school” of the shotgun seeks to equip the weapon like a rifle (sights, slugs and choking), and promote its theoretical versatility due to ammunition types available, these notions are foolish. I will show you why. The shotgun comes into its niche in "expected" very close range fights, often in reduced light where the tempo of events does not favor traditional rifle marksmanship principles, and where devastating damage needs to be inflicted in as short a time as possible with minimum number of shots. An additional asset of the shotgun is that the nature of buckshot, and its pattern of impact, lends to hitting adversaries in time frames and in situations that might otherwise not allow hitting with a single projectile weapon such as a rifle. The rapidly decreasing velocity and low penetrative characteristics of the ammo tends to minimize collateral damage that may result from rifle fire. This above is what the shotgun is for, and what it has been used for since the first shotgunner picked up his smoothbore to go kill other men and it is what it will always be used for.
The current trend has been to say the shotgun is a versatile weapon. In truth, in combat and most situations it is not versatile at all. The fact that you can load it with a myriad of ammunition types is uninteresting since for shooting human adversaries there are really only two choices – buckshot or slugs. We have all heard the issue of using birdshot for home defense at some point. That may be an option for those who live in thickly populated apartments surrounded top to bottom with neighbors (but even in this scenario a fragmenting rifle projectile like M193 would be better suited for minimizing rounds entering a neighbor's apartment), or for use on the training range so target systems are better preserved. But bird shot is an extremely horrible choice for anything else and produces shallow flesh wounds even at close ranges, bird shot is designed to kill birds, not humans.
Similarly, the police issue of using less-than-lethal or gas rounds has little to do with anything outside that special purpose. Agencies that use such munitions now have specialized dedicated shotguns for them. For the private citizen gas rounds, breeching rounds, and/or less lethal rounds are typically useless. Why would you “bean bag” a man who is trying to shoot you? Even the police only use this sort of thing because of forced policy changes…and even then, only when accompanied by another officer armed with a real firearm. Few people will need to rely on door breeching rounds as I cannot think of a single self defense shooting that has required such a round. In the extreme case where you would need to breech a door, a rifle or a handgun can breech locks as effectively as a shotgun, the only reason the military uses the shotgun in Iraq/Afghanistan for breeching is due to restrictive policies intended to minimize collateral damage.
The specifics of using a shotgun in combat is problematic at best. The use of a shotgun in combat is a violation of the Hague Convention / Geneva Protocols (Convention), if you care about that sort of issue. Additionally, buckshot and slugs can be defeated by even the oldest of body armor, which is a problem as even the poorest countries equip their fighting forces with body armor (as well as a large number of criminals nowadays). Most combat shootings will be beyond 35 yards, outside of the reach of buckshot, according to the USMC M16 training manual the average infantry engagement is 120 to 230 meters --- which is well outside of the range of a shotgun. All these factors combine to tell you a shotgun is not a weapon of choice for combat duty, this is obviously why every military in the world goes to combat with rifles and only a very small handful of countries (most of them NATO members) allow shotguns on the battlefield for extremely limited roles. My biggest point of contention is the over-choking of the shotgun barrel. This is usually done in hopes of tightening the pattern’s impact at longer distances. The trade-off is that one will have in essence the same problem as if he was firing single projectiles. Rather than a fist-sized pattern impact at 15 yards, what we need is uniformity of pattern, and that does not require over-choking the barrel. It can obtained with the purchase of high quality ammunition.
Another point is the use of slugs. When Jeff Cooper began promoting the shotgun at his school in Paulden, AZ, he sought to convert the “erratic” shotgun into a weapon he understood better, the rifle. On came the ghost ring sights, in went the slugs and the chokes…even a shotgun shooting sling, all in the hope of reaching farther and hitting with greater precision…like a rifle. But no matter how you seek to equip a shotgun, it will never do as well at the mission of a rifle, as a real rifle. Eventually someone will ask the very pertinent question – “Why not just forget all of this and simply use a rifle?”
Why not indeed?!
Any attempt to make a shotgun do the rifle’s job makes for a poor rifle and a useless shotgun. Even the poorest rifleman can outshoot the best shotgunner in a rifle problem, and any off the rack shotgun can match the “modern technique” shotgun for true close range shotgun problems. So again…what is the point?
The only viable reason for this forced metamorphism would be for the poor cop whose agency has denied him the ability to have a rifle and must make do with the only long gun permitted: the shotgun. Or the similar situation of some oppressed subject living in a nation or state where rifles are prohibited, but shotguns are allowed. But I would say that those two situations are rather special cases. Unless they are the only folks interested in shotguns, we have left a great number of interested parties out of the discussion. For those with access to rifles, there is no need to so modify the shotgun trying to build a rifle. Doing so is akin to putting a Ferrari body on a Geo Metro chassis.
The natural choice in ammo for the shotgun is buckshot. Buckshot’s pattern impact allows you to hit adversaries in time frames and situations where you would probably miss with any other weapon. Rather than seeking to customize the shotgun to fulfill an impossible demand, we should focus instead on how to use it well and center the bad guy in the pattern of buckshot. Again, this allows you to hit him when you would otherwise miss. That, my friends, is what the shotgun is for. Can you do that with slugs? No.
Please feel free to post your facts, comments, opines, etc. There is more to come...
Failure2Stop
05-08-08, 14:57
I agree with the sentiment of your post, but have issue with some tidbits-
I am not aware of how the shotgun violates the Hague Convention, as their use was defended against the Germans during WWI. A neat little article of the matter here (http://www.tacticalshotgun.ca/content_sub/shotguns/da-pam_27-50-299.html).
If you don't want to bother to click the link, it ends like this from a recent review on the matter:
"The combat shotgun and its lead-and-antimony buckshot (or shot) ammunition are consistent with the law of war obligations of the United States."
M193 does not fragment reliably enough to be considered "safe from over-penetration". Not much in the "serious" category can be claimed to be safe from overpenetration. Rule #5 applies- Be sure of your target and what lies beyond. This is departing from the overall theme of your topic (use in combat), so no need for me to go on a tagent with that.
Rifles and handguns do not breach doors as effectively as shotguns with dedicated breaching rounds. While shooting into a door (regardless of ammunition) will present a hazard to whomever may be occupying space behind that shot, breaching rounds will reduce the probability of ventilating non-combatants. Even absent that concern, a 5.56 does not reliably (or even frequently) cause failure of a door latch with 2 shots (as does a 12 ga), and is definately inadequate if attacking the hinges. While a shotgun is no treat to lug around, it is easier to carry than a hooligan (halligan) tool or sledge, and can be used in extremis as an effective weapon outside arm's reach.
I have voiced my opinion about the M1014 (not a fan), and I am no great fan of shotguns in general as a combat weapon, but there are applications for the tool.
I think in building clearing a shotgun has many uses in combat.ie blasting locks and blasting whoever steps in front that is not a friendly.I use 3 in oo buck it will stop the threat. That weapon will ALWAYS be around it fits many roles in defense situations
The goal of this thread is to put forth and support the assertion that shotguns are not to be fielded in combat. I did not say home defense within ranges of 0-35yds, I am making the claim for combat scenarios only.
What weapon is best for a given combat scenario should be decided by the professionals in the field, not bureaucrats on the home front. Give the professionals a full tool chest, let them decide what tool is best for the job at hand.
The use of a shotgun in combat is a violation of the Hague Convention / Geneva Protocols (Convention), if you care about that sort of issue.
Do you have a source that shotguns are a violation, and that the US has signed off on this? I am unaware, and know shotguns have been used in just about every engagement the US has been a part of.
What weapon is best for a given combat scenario should be decided by the professionals in the field, not bureaucrats on the home front. Give the professionals a full tool chest, let them decide what tool is best for the job at hand.
well put A++++++:D
GodCountryCorps
05-08-08, 16:05
I think in building clearing a shotgun has many uses in combat.ie blasting locks and blasting whoever steps in front that is not a friendly.I use 3 in oo buck it will stop the threat. That weapon will ALWAYS be around it fits many roles in defense situations
Agreed: I am not arguing against home/self defense, simply combat scenarios.
Also, I understand the shotgun has specialized breaching munitions, such as "lockbusters" we've used in Iraq/Afghanistan, which are specialty rounds for a specific purpose; having first hand experience in the USMC and civilian capacities, and second hand knowledge also (my brother, also USMC), they still don't use the shotgun to clear the buildings...they use their M16s. I am mainly arguing for the engagement of human targets and the efficacy of such with shotguns vs. rifles.
I love my Mossberg 500A, and I plan to procure a Mossberg 590 like we used in the Corps. I just keep hearing people at guns shows and gun shops make inaccurate statements about shotguns in combat, I just decided to make a thread about it and see what everyone on M4 had to say.
PALADIN-hgwt
05-08-08, 17:00
xxxxx
Agreed: I am not arguing against home/self defense, simply combat scenarios.
Also, I understand the shotgun has specialized breaching munitions, such as "lockbusters" we've used in Iraq/Afghanistan, which are specialty rounds for a specific purpose; having first hand experience in the USMC and civilian capacities, and second hand knowledge also (my brother, also USMC), they still don't use the shotgun to clear the buildings...they use their M16s. I am mainly arguing for the engagement of human targets and the efficacy of such with shotguns vs. rifles.
I love my Mossberg 500A, and I plan to procure a Mossberg 590 like we used in the Corps. I just keep hearing people at guns shows and gun shops make inaccurate statements about shotguns in combat, I just decided to make a thread about it and see what everyone on M4 had to say.
some of my Army brothers in iraq have told me you didn't see to many Shotguns in building.but they said they started coming on the scene as more cities and urban areas were being controlled
Now as far as a "Hollywood take someone out at 200 meters shot" Now that weapon is no way made for that thats the rifles job .I did read in WW1 there was a big "you are not following the code of good combat:rolleyes: "but the US never signed off and continued to field the weapon in the trenches.A friend that was 88M told me that the shotguns scared the hell out of the iraqis.also in vietnam many point guys carried shotguns .I talk to my uncle that was in the shit.
I would think if someone was to carry a shotgun into combat it would be a secondary weapon .in no way would I make it my main weapon.so I agree with that, but look at the new full auto shotgun that the army is starting fielding in small numbers.I own a saiga-12 and would use it for some urban setting and ZOMBIE attacks :D .
But with the new rounds they are developing,small genade types ,bean bags you name it they got, it will forever be on battlefields .there is just something about that weapon, its a comfort weapon for some, any boob can use a shotgun.Not all can pick up a M-4 and make it do the task at hand
but this is a great point and a good read:)
m24shooter
05-08-08, 20:35
In all fairness the OP should have given Gabe Suarez credit, as that long post was in his last "newsletter".
Paladin
Actually, it looks like the OP blends his own commentary/thoughts in with Suarez, without any credit to Suarez or distinction between the two.
As for Hague/Geneva Accords those are two different things. Once is the Laws of War and the other is basically treatment of prisoners. And even in trying to raise that issue, it's been decided and it didn't go the way the OP thinks it did.
AFAIK, that part was NOT in Suarez's article.
If I ever expect to engage someone at "across the room" distances, I will always choose a 12 gauge with 00 buck over any carbine/subgun/handgun. If ranges will go beyond 50' (yes feet) the M4 is the tool. The trusty shotgun still has its place in very close quarters applications and should always be part of ones tool kit.
As Dirty Harry once said, "a mans gotta know his limitations", a man should also know his weapons limitations.
RogerinTPA
05-08-08, 21:48
As stated above, a weapon is a tool in a tool box. The more weapons selection, the better to select the right tool for the mission or application. Individual application of a particular type of weapon is like opinions and assholes. We should provide our war fighters with as many tools as possible. My opinion of M-4 vs Shotgun for house clearing, M-4 hands down, but only because of the mag cap, you can carry more ammo, rapid mag reloads, way less recoil. But that doesn't mean the shotgun isn't a viable option. Shotguns are tremendously effective weapons for street fighting, house to house and jungle warfare. But it is only a tool. Just don't be one. ;)
Given one foray in Panama and two in Iraq as a Marine I can comment on this subject based only on my experiences. Mossberg 590 in Panama and M1014 in Iraq.
There are several inaccuracies in the first post:
1st) The shotgun is not prohibited by either Geneva or Haque. The Germans tried to prohibit it after U.S. troops started using Winchester M97s in the trenches during WWI. Germany is of course the same country that started using chemical weapons during WWI.
2d) The use of 99% of combat engagements occur inside 300meters with 95% of them inside 70meters. This is from a recent Center for Naval Analysis study done for DOD.
A properly configured shotgun can shoot slugs out to 125 yards well within "minute of terrorist." A .75" diameter (12ga) 1 ounce (437gr) slug moving at 1600 to1800 fps will do significant damage. Even to those wearing body armor with SAPI plates. If you don't think so please volunteer to allow me to test this "theory." May not penetrate, but it will cause significant soft tissue and internal injuries that will definitely get their attention. Of course with a quality combat 12ga with an Aimpoint Micro T-1 and good slugs it is pretty easy to turn someones head in to a canoe at 50yards.
00B inside 25 yards (i.e. CQB distances) will provides 9 .32 pellets at 1600fps, basically nine 9mm rounds impacting the threat simultaneously. If threats wearing body armor at CQB distances is a concern then high centered/lower neck area placed shots with a tight patterned shotgun will help solve that problem quickly.
Ability and flexibility to breach doors has already been addressed. It is not the complete solution but is still the best ballistic breaching system going.
The combat shotgun is definitely not a general issue weapon system, but to dismiss it entirely is to use the author's own words "foolish." I think that issuing combat shotguns should only be done after proper training and the B.S. USMC 25 round "familiarization fire" doesn't count. I saw way too many SNCOs and Officers running around during OIF I with M1014s and very little if any knowledge of how to properly manipulate it. The Marine Corps Security Forces adopted the Gunsite 260 class back in the late 80's and it should be the standard for the rest of the Marine Corps, if not the military, although the MCSF course didn't emphasize the use of slugs at longer distances as much as it could have.
Before any one dismisses the shotgun as a viable combat instrument I recommend they take a shotgun class at Gunsite or from Louis Awerbuck, Yavapai Firearms Academy, Bill Jeans, Morrigan Consulting, Scott Reitz, ITTS, and Rob Haught, Haught Tactical Shotgun. After learning how to properly use the "hammer of God" as Rob Haught calls it, I think their opinion will be far different.
Finally, IMHO a proper combat shotgun is a VangComp 870 or 590. I am not a fan of the M1014, but it is viable. Although the Saiga does interest me, I still prefer the versatility that the 870 or 590 platforms provide when needing to select different rounds based on METT-TSL. My preference is for a VC 870 with a Micro T-1, but then again I am biased towards the Micro T-1.
S/F
Given one foray in Panama and two in Iraq as a Marine I can comment on this subject based only on my experiences. Mossberg 590 in Panama and M1014 in Iraq.
There are several inaccuracies in the first post:
1st) The shotgun is not prohibited by either Geneva or Haque. The Germans tried to prohibit it after U.S. troops started using Winchester M97s in the trenches during WWI. Germany is of course the same country that started using chemical weapons during WWI.
...
The combat shotgun is definitely not a general issue weapon system, but to dismiss it entirely is to use the author's own words "foolish." I think that issuing combat shotguns should only be done after proper training and the B.S. USMC 25 round "familiarization fire" doesn't count. I saw way too many SNCOs and Officers running around during OIF I with M1014s and very little if any knowledge of how to properly manipulate it. The Marine Corps Security Forces adopted the Gunsite 260 class back in the late 80's and it should be the standard for the rest of the Marine Corps, if not the military, although the MCSF course didn't emphasize the use of slugs at longer distances as much as it could have.
Before any one dismisses the shotgun as a viable combat instrument I recommend they take a shotgun class at Gunsite or from Louis Awerbuck, Yavapai Firearms Academy, Bill Jeans, Morrigan Consulting, Scott Reitz, ITTS, and Rob Haught, Haught Tactical Shotgun. After learning how to properly use the "hammer of God" as Rob Haught calls it, I think their opinion will be far different.
Freddie:
Roger that. I too had a foray in Panama with FAST and we put our 590's to good use. I think that some people get caught up in the fallacy of "if it's not applicable to my particular circumstances right now, then it's no good at all". I wonder how many Marines and soldiers consider Iraqi desert and Afghani mountains as the only two combat environments? I'm sure there are many who've never experienced triple-canopy, mountainous jungle; or African bushveldt.
I've been out of the game for a while so, are you saying that the MCSF Combat Shotgun Course never made it to the fleet? That would be highly disappointing.
"The use of a shotgun in combat is a violation of the Hague Convention / Geneva Protocols (Convention)". :rolleyes: Sea lawyers...
Failure2Stop
05-09-08, 09:00
I've been out of the game for a while so, are you saying that the MCSF Combat Shotgun Course never made it to the fleet? That would be highly disappointing.
No it didn't. There have been at least two attempts I know of to stand up a Shotgun Course for the USMC. There are good people working on it right now, and results should be out at some point.
"The use of a shotgun in combat is a violation of the Hague Convention / Geneva Protocols (Convention)". :rolleyes: Sea lawyers...
I still hear this about .50 BMG use against personnel as well. Is BS, was BS, always will be BS.
Gutshot John
05-09-08, 12:56
No it didn't. There have been at least two attempts I know of to stand up a Shotgun Course for the USMC. There are good people working on it right now, and results should be out at some point.
I still hear this about .50 BMG use against personnel as well. Is BS, was BS, always will be BS.
It's kind of a technicality type of situation. Most don't realize that the Geneva Conventions bear no force of law, they are just standards to which nations adhere to varying degrees. This only becomes any sort of issue if you get brought up before the Hague on war crimes and even then they're not going to waste time with shotgun/BMG nonsense.
Yes shotguns/BMG are contrary to the Geneva Conventions to some degree, but so is shooting medics or detaining them as POWs (who are issued Geneva convention cards labeling them as non-combattants)...yet they still get shot and taken POW.
In terms of shotguns being not authorized for military usage... that's a joke. Everyone uses them, even signatories.
As with most things, shotguns have things they do particularly well, and things they don't.
Pro
+They excel at delivering terminally effective payloads at relatively short
distances.
Cons
-Limited magazine capacity
-Slow reloading times
-Easy to fumble the rounds as you are trying to load into the magazine
-Easy to load a round in backwards under stress, esp. in low light
-Very susceptible to user induced stoppages
-In most commonly seen/used form (18 1/4 to 20 inch barrels with full stocks), a most ungainly weapon
-Ergonomics (Rem 870) not well done
-For precision shooting (innocents in close proximity to threat), not the best weapon system, esp. if all you have available to you is buckshot
-Even with slugs, you have a 2d projectile to manage: the wad. It goes whereever it wants, and it can cause significant injury
Most of us who work as either individuals or in small teams will only be able to have only 1 handgun and 1 long-gun available to use when we check into service, leave the wire, or check out that thing that goes bump in the night.
Meaning, no crew served weapons, no indirect fire weapons we can call on, etc.
So, when you obtain that long gun, not knowing exactly what you'll be faced with, a rifle is the better jack of all trades, and even the master of several.
A shotgun, not so much.
Sure, you could use a shotgun with ferret, hatton, wood baton, beanbag, and other rounds, but how many people ever actually do so?
Furthermore, less lethal shotguns are dedicated weapons. They aren't used with lethal munitions, so once you dedicate a shotgun for that purpose, you've removed it from the table, so to speak. You've reduced the flexibility of the system.
This derails the argument that the shotgun is a more flexible system.
Breaching shotguns are also typically dedicated guns. Pistol grips, short barrels, bungee cord stocks, and carried in cond 3. Again, you've created a less flexible weapon system.
Could you use a breaching round as a lethal munition? In a pinch, sure.
Could you use bird, buck, or slug to breach? Sure. There are some big time dangers to the shooter and any non-threats inside the building, though.
Are there exception to the above, such as NFA shotguns, shotguns with short stocks, semi-auto shotguns, shotguns with optical sights, shotguns with rifled barrels.
How about when one of your arms gets torn apart by a bad guy's bullet, and is no longer useful? Kinda hard to operate a shotgun. Real hard to reload it. Ed Mireles showed us how to do that, but it wasn't effective, nor timely. He had to peform head shots with his revolver at the driver's window to stop those threats.
If you can guarantee that all my fights will be from 1 yds to 15 yds, on lone bad guys not wearing body armor, with no innocents in close proximity,,when I have both my hands uninjured, an 870 with buck is the pefect weapon.
Any deviation from the above, we got problems.
FWIW, when I need a long gun (and I have one with me every day I'm at work), I take a 16" 5.56 carbine.
What happens with guys with shotguns go up against guys with rifles?
We have 2 very well known examples.
Anyone remember the N. Hollywood Bank Robbery? 2 bad guys, dozens of LAPD officers, who employed shotguns with buck, and handguns.
What were the results?
What would the result have been had even only 1 officer been on scene with a 5.56mm carbine?
How about Miami in 86? 2 bad guys, 6 agents (2 more arrived late in the fight). Matix was rendered inneffective right away. So now it's 6 v 1.
45 seconds into the fight, 2 more agents arrived so the odds are in the agents' favor, right? There were:
1 bad guy with a rifle
1 agent with a shotgun
7 agents with handguns
Platt, despite taking several rounds (including at least 1 to the arm), killed 2 agents, and wounded 3 more. He
As for me, I'm pick a 5.56mm carbine.
LouDiamond
05-09-08, 15:57
These types of posts make me glad that those who DO have to go into combat and those who DO influence and decide what weapon systems we have in inventory don't subscribe to the mentality outlined in the original post. Using the same logic, replace the word shotgun with handgun/pistol in the thread. With that said, using the OP's logic, we should get rid of handguns/pistols too because they are not effective at engaging targets at longer distances,etc,etc. Either way, the point being made is that its absurd to think that there is one magic weapon for an environment as fluid as combat and or that the shotgun has no place in combat.
A shotgun is a tool, like any other weapon or piece of equipment that I employ to accomplish my mission. Other users have given some good input on why and how shotguns have a place in combat. What I find laughable is that someone who isn't a Joe, regardless of "who" they are in the shooting community or who they have "trained" thinks they can tell the guy on the ground what works best for him or what will/will not work in combat.
The shotgun is a misunderstood and often misused tool in the regular Army/Navy/Air Force and Marines and this is simply a training issue. Within SOF however, it has it's place along with other tools. Which is why I carry a shotgun along with an M4 and pistol when the situation dictates. Use the right tool for the job and let those who are doing the job decide which tools to use to get the job done. The times I have been called on to use a shotgun in combat there have been no complaints about it being "ineffective". YMMV.
It's interesting to read about the shotgun in World War I, as the circumstances there probably made the shotgun more effective than it would have been normally. From Global Security.org:
An infantryman breaking into a trench could sweep both sides of it (to the depth of a passageway) with multiple buckshot rounds. Once leaders understood the 50-meter range of this weapon, it was employed with skill. A soldier with a shotgun, fast to pump and fire, could quickly suppress German trench assaults and clear dugouts with devastating effectiveness. Out of the trenches, the Model 97 cleared Germans out of farmhouses and buildings in French villages with equal effectiveness. On 27 September 1918, Sergeant Fred Lloyd, using a Model 97, advanced alone into a German-held village and began methodically clearing it, pumping and firing the shotgun as he moved. He finally collapsed with exhaustion after routing thirty German soldiers. The combat shotgun had earned its place as an Army secondary weapon.
These types of posts make me glad that those who DO have to go into combat and those who DO influence and decide what weapon systems we have in inventory don't subscribe to the mentality outlined in the original post. Using the same logic, replace the word shotgun with handgun/pistol in the thread. With that said, using the OP's logic, we should get rid of handguns/pistols too because they are not effective at engaging targets at longer distances,etc,etc. Either way, the point being made is that its absurd to think that there is one magic weapon for an environment as fluid as combat and or that the shotgun has no place in combat.
Well said.
-Easy to fumble the rounds as you are trying to load into the magazine
-Easy to load a round in backwards under stress, esp. in low light
-Very susceptible to user induced stoppages
All of the above are training issues. Properly trained users tend not to do stupid things like load shells backwards; much like properly trained users don't often try to load M16 magazines or linked belts or M203 grenades backwards.
Anyone remember the N. Hollywood Bank Robbery? 2 bad guys, dozens of LAPD officers, who employed shotguns with buck, and handguns...
What would the result have been had even only 1 officer been on scene with a 5.56mm carbine?
Probably the same result as if they would have had a few 1-oz. slugs.
All of the above are training issues. Properly trained users tend not to do stupid things like load shells backwards; much like properly trained users don't often try to load M16 magazines or linked belts or M203 grenades backwards.
Probably the same result as if they would have had a few 1-oz. slugs.
+1 to that. You are way more likely to insert a M16 mag backwords under pressure than mistake the tactile sensation of the plasic hull/brass rim. My 11 year old would not make that mistake, dark or light. Mistaking a slug for buck....under fire, who cares. Load that sum' bitchin' boom stick and make mama proud!
As for the No Hollywood incident...accurate head shots would have been difficult but possible...however, one of those 1oz pumpkin balls to thier torso armor I guarantee would have at the very least knocked the wind out of them if not broke some ribs.
And yes, 1 "patrol rifle" with a well trained operator could have put a much quicker end to the situation.
If you have innocents in close proximity (active shooter, hostage taker), it matters a LOT if you use slug or buck.
Mistaking buck for slug can have very bad consequences in those conditions.
Fumbling shells, loading them backwards, not loading them past the shell stops ALL happen when you put stress on shooters, even properly trained ones.
All these problems become more common in low light conditions.
They become even more common when shooters wear gloves.
A simple magpul prevents the insertion of an inverted magazine. Putting a mag in backwards is very uncommon.
Compare to the juggling and dropping that occurs when loading shotgun rounds.
Another thing to consider, with a rifle you have 28 opportunities before you have to reload. How many do you have with a shotgun?
A real life example, at VA Tech, one of the shotgun armed officers lost track of how his shotgun was loaded. He had needed to engage the bad gun, he would have had no idea what was in the chamber.
As the N. Hollywood bank robbers, while blunt trauma from slugs would have had an "impact" so to speak, they wouldn't have penetrated that head to toe kevlar, and cause the internal damage that a 5.56mm bullet would.
As a reminder, Platt's rifle rounds penetrated armor worn by the agents.
As to handguns, they are anemic. We carry them because they are convenient, not because they are effective. If you knew you were going to a fight, you'd take a long gun and employ it as your primary weapon.
Nam vet..11B...shotgun worked very well thank-you....Beemer
lowspeed4u
05-14-08, 10:47
As already stated the USMC has tried 2 times and got shut down for making a shotgun standard, Marine wide. Currently it is being worked again and pushed again. In my own opinion the shotgun is a great breaching tool, I have carried it in other situtions but always had my M4, and most of the time my pistol. As a last resort when M4 and pistol are dry I would switch to the Shotty just to stay with the team and keep pushing.
As already stated if you are going to be a die hard shotgun fan and want to take it to "combat" hopefully your talking about CQB first, and then hopefully you will get some type of training with it.
Some one told me once the trick with the shotgun is to manupliate it fast, thats whats going to save your life. It's just like the 1911 great weapon I own one or two, but in a combat sitution 7-9 rounds just isnt enough, you are always doing speed reloads.
Just what I think on the matter, basised of having used it one or two times :-)
Well, Hell, I just watched the umpteenth re-run of "Commando" and Arnie defeated a small army at the end while using a shotun (coundn't tell what type). I also learned that, when hit by a shotgun blast, a person will take two steps backwards and hurl themselves out of a window :D
Gutshot John
05-14-08, 15:09
I seem to recall something called a "little pig" or SB shottie that could be slung under an M4 a la M203 for breaching.
lowspeed4u
05-14-08, 16:50
yes, you are right there is a under barrel shotgun it's the M26 MASS, it's been in development by the army for awhile now. Never used one but looks like a good idea but sometimes what looks to be good really isn't; it has the CDI (chicks dig it) factor though so it has to be good :-).
LouDiamond
05-14-08, 23:07
yes, you are right there is a under barrel shotgun it's the M26 MASS, it's been in development by the army for awhile now. Never used one but looks like a good idea but sometimes what looks to be good really isn't; it has the CDI (chicks dig it) factor though so it has to be good :-).
Quite simply put, it is a piece of shit developed by those who have no idea what is needed or how it's typically employed by those who do use shotguns in combat. I am not exaggerating when I say that it is made by 2 guys in a garage. If by some miracle this piece of shit does make it into the inventory tax payers should contact their congressman and complain.
Reference a post above, things that make you go hmmmmm?
Shotgun holds about 6 rounds, on average.
Carbine holds about 28 rounds (30 if using a PMAG).
More ammo on tap is a very good thing, no? It's good if you don't have to reload in the first place.
Al U. 5811
05-17-08, 13:22
WOW!!!!
Let us take on the most misunderstood weapon in the U.S. small arms arsenal, the combat shotgun. I did a tour in Iraq and fielded the 1014. While not a fan of that particular weapon, I am an 870 fan, well a pump fan to be specific. I found the weapon to have many uses. I was the OPs Chief for a large ECP and did VCP work as well. My Marines loved the fact that they could carry something with the capability to stop a small vehicle and not have to totally rely on a cover weapon to initialy engage a rolling threat. To me that is a force multiplier. Not to mention the versitility as a CQB weapon as well. I look at it as another supplimental tool in the toolbox. My Marines received the proper training as well. Several of them got to attend the YFA course taught by Mr. Louis Awerbuck, which I myself, got to AI for 3 weeks under Lou at Camp Pendleton. Along with myself and a couple others attending 260 Shotgun at Gunsite taught by Larry Landers and Kirk Scarborough, thanks to the generousity of LTCol. "Freddy" Blish and Group 37 UTF. I had the privilege of then passing this knowledge on to well over 500 Marines during predeployment training.
It boils down to TTP's. As with any weapon system, there is a time and place. I don't feel as though anyone should condemn a peice of gear due to a personal lack of knowledge or exposure to the pro's and con's of said equipment. Let the folks who carry it make that choice. YMMV.
The thing to remember about using any weapon in the military is that with very few exceptions it will be used as part of a larger team, squad, platoon, company - not carried as the lone weapon on a mission. So the same things could be said for the SMAW, mortars, M40, AC-130, artillery and yes even the M4. Are they the ideal choice for every situation? No. But do they have their place? Of course. So does the shotgun. The idea of combined arms brings together a variety of tools and allows the commander to use the best tool for the job at the moment it is needed. So the shotgun has a place in this bigger picture.
Like many have said, those who carry a shotgun need specialized training and all in the unit need to be familiar with its operation. This is the biggest reason I'm sold on the 870 - it is simple and reliable. As long as you keep it fed and don't short stroke it, it will go bang.
The LEO is a different scenario as he may be a lone responder and should have both a carbine and shotgun to reach for as he exits his cruiser.
A skilled person can do very well with a shotgun. That said, rifles have many advantages over shotguns.
For one thing, they are much easier for the average LEO to shoot well.
Of course, over the past 20 yrs, LE has rediscovered the rifle, and come to recognize the advantages of rifles over shotguns.
A LEO responding to a crisis point can carry only 1 long gun. It had best be the one that can best handle a wide range of situations, especially active shooters, a problem which increases more with every year.
Don't know about you, but I would prefer that LEOs responding to an active shooter at my kid's school be armed with rifles, not shotguns.
Failure2Stop
05-18-08, 03:58
Al- while I appreciate where you are coming from (though I happen to disagree with most of your opinions), there is one serious issue you brought up.
My Marines loved the fact that they could carry something with the capability to stop a small vehicle and not have to totally rely on a cover weapon to initialy engage a rolling threat.
It is impossible for a shotgun to stop a vehicle moving over about 10 mph within it's 100m effective range. This is brought up quite frequently, and frankly is urban myth. The same goes for .50 BMG.
Even if the slug/bullet breaks the engine block (which is very unlikely with a 12ga slug), there is more than enough momentum for them vehicle to continue moving for quite some distance. The same applies to bullets applied to tires and even the driver's CNS.
I have been witness and participant to several vehicle shoots. None wound up with a quick stop unless the driver applied the brake.
HolyRoller
05-18-08, 21:13
A LEO responding to a crisis point can carry only 1 long gun.
mmmmmm ... watch me. :p
Don't know about you, but I would prefer that LEOs responding to an active shooter at my kid's school be armed with rifles, not shotguns.
At our last active shooter training, would you believe the instructor told us to just stick with pistols. Looking waaay down the hallways and waaay up to the mezzanine of the high school we were training in, I might have privately decided to sneak along an AR if the balloon ever really went up, but said nothing, forgiveness being easier to obtain than permission. Interestingly, the same instructor then played the bad guy--and HE had an AR. With Aimpoint.
At least I HAD a rifle at that department. Now I have to move to a department where rifles aren't allowed at all. "Those things'll shoot all the way across the lake!"
A skilled person can do very well with a shotgun. That said, rifles have many advantages over shotguns.
A LEO responding to a crisis point can carry only 1 long gun. It had best be the one that can best handle a wide range of situations, especially active shooters, a problem which increases more with every year.
Don't know about you, but I would prefer that LEOs responding to an active shooter at my kid's school be armed with rifles, not shotguns.
You'll get no argument from me on any of these points. But, this is way off track from the original poster's point. He was referring strictly to combat usage and stating that the shotgun could serve no useful purpose.
For one thing, they are much easier for the average LEO to shoot well.
Doesn't the use of "average LEO" and "shoot well" in the same sentence qualify as an oxymoron? :p
Al U. 5811
05-18-08, 23:26
I guess by stop I meant mechanically, as in engine no longer under normal operation. This isn't the movies or a video game. To even get the idea out of what I wrote is ****ing retarded. Obviously bringing any moving object to a physical stop would take a physical barrier with a weight displacement greater that the weight of the object and speed of it's travel. Have you ever seen, in person, what an M2 will do to a vehicle that runs your VCP? The shotgun, even with all it's suppossed limitations, is still my first choice in the scenario I described.
Failure2Stop
05-19-08, 02:52
I guess by stop I meant mechanically, as in engine no longer under normal operation. This isn't the movies or a video game. To even get the idea out of what I wrote is ****ing retarded. Obviously bringing any moving object to a physical stop would take a physical barrier with a weight displacement greater that the weight of the object and speed of it's travel. Have you ever seen, in person, what an M2 will do to a vehicle that runs your VCP? The shotgun, even with all it's suppossed limitations, is still my first choice in the scenario I described.
Chill hombre, you aren't the only guy on this forum to have landed in the sandbox. I've seen the elephant, more than once. I have spent more than a little time there and know of what I speak, though combat experience is irrelevant to the topic- there is pleanty of data from the LE side here at home.
A shot from a 12ga at 100 yards will not crack the engine block. I have seen what all kinds of things do to a vehicle that is in motion, from 5.56 to 25mm. If an HE 25mm round won't stop a moving vehicle within 100 yards, I don't know what will.
But at a VCP the issue isn't what the driver or the passenger is going to do, it's the VBIED you are worried about, right? All of these VBIEDs have a secondary initiator in case the driver freaks or is unable to "allah snackbar" himself. The point is that even if you do destroy the engine block (which the .50+ category do, depending on ammo) the vehicle will still be moving with sufficient speed to deliver the payload, pretty much making weapon selection moot.
If your simply felt better because you and your Marines believed that you could stop a car, fine. But it doesn't mean that you can.
But you are welcome to your opinion.
m24shooter
05-24-08, 20:00
I took the "stop" comment the same way F2S did.
And let's try to keep it civil. This isn't TOS.
Just a reminder to all...
This is a place for the rational discussion of first hand experiences and knowledge… Please be respectful of other members opinions even if you do not agree with their beliefs…
B
Doesn't the use of "average LEO" and "shoot well" in the same sentence qualify as an oxymoron? :p
I'll be your Huckelbarry... ;)
Robb Jensen
05-24-08, 21:09
I'll be your Huckelbarry... ;)
I'll vouch for you Buck............you can shoot and damn well too.
I'll vouch for you Buck............you can shoot and damn well too.
I did say "average". :p From what I've read, I don't consider Buck to be average.
editing I know we put the whole law of war bit to bed, but I'll sneak in a last point. Most people who quote the law haven't read it. I don't claim to know the law, but our Law of War instructor (A JAG Officer) at OCS made it very clear: If the US Army Issues it to you and you don't modify it, it is legal to shoot people with. The Army issuses shotguns.
In the service/sandbox only two things limit the shotgun. Support and Training. Support, we don't get enough rounds, and we don't get the right types. We should have OO,slug, and breaching. We didn't have slings, side saddles, or ammo pouches for the weapons. Standoff devices and lights for our shotguns, none of them either. Training, we did little to no home station training with our 500s. We were told "you'll shoot them in Kuwait". We didn't even get a basic load of ammo for our shotguns in Kuwait. With proper training, the shotgun is one of the most versitle weapon on the battle field.
Stopping power, the 12 gauge has it in spades. While Dade county was a good example of what can go terribly wrong, I'm sure we can find ancedotes where the shotgun has saved the day. Also, human beings aren't the only enemy on the battlefield. I ask our more experienced friends which they would rather shoot an attacking dog with, a 12 gauge or a 5.56?
YMMV
What weapon is best for a given combat scenario should be decided by the professionals in the field, not bureaucrats on the home front. Give the professionals a full tool chest, let them decide what tool is best for the job at hand.
A F-ING MEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
1859sharps
08-06-08, 21:09
I'll vouch for you Buck............you can shoot and damn well too.
I'll vouch for him as well.....that boy can shoot :p
Geneva/Hague address uniformed combatants, not terrorists as we deal with today. Door breaching is not limited to urban LE situations. A 14" bbl 870 with proper technique works very well if applied correctly in hallways, rooms, tunnels, holes & caves. Get the proper training, shoot full power loads & use 00 buck & slugs. Done correctly, 200 - 300 hundred rds. per day in training is easily accomplished without injury. There are certain situations in combat where an M4 or sidearm just don't cut it. Rob Haught is absolutely correct in his "hammer of God" description.
They worked pretty good in WWI didn't they?
"The goal of this thread is to put forth and support the assertion that shotguns are not to be fielded in combat. "
if they're so non-applicable or effective,
Shouldn't we tell all the thousands killed in WW1,WW2,Korea,Vietnam,Gulf1,Gulf2 That they really shouldn't have worried about that big barrel pointed at them?
If I had 3 options in front of me, handgun, rifle, shotgun,
I have to admit I'd likely first choose the rifle. If someone however was in a position of making the choice for me and handed me a shotgun, I wouldn't spend one second pissing and moaning about it's non-applicability.
If I had a squad of men, and most certainly a platoon and didn't have a shotgun available i'd consider it a hole in my options.
QuietShootr
08-28-08, 21:57
In all fairness the OP should have given Gabe Suarez credit, as that long post was in his last "newsletter".
Paladin
Yeah, I was just thinking that myself. Unless the OP's name is Suarez, he didn't write that...and that's plagiarism.
casio02478
08-29-08, 08:42
I agree with the gist of it. Most shotgun I see here in the sandbox are used more as a master key then a weapon. In LE arena shotgun will always have the less-than lethal role. It's traditional role of being a cqb weapon has been largely supplemented by the rifle caliber carbine and development of CQB rifle marksmanship.
I love the "hammer of god" metaphor.......... it truly is to ME at least, the greatest all around firearm and if given one and only one choice for a weapon I would choose the mighty 12ga. as for combat, CQB, I'll take the 12 thanks:D
IroquoisSnakePlissken
09-09-08, 21:53
I think I would rather
Be shot with all matter
of weaponry known abroad
than to take but one blast
from the mightiest of foes -
the 12ga Hammer of God
John Hearne
09-12-08, 13:34
While I'm referring to LE use, the 14" 870 is an awesome tool. I keep mine loaded with slugs because it allows me to shoot THROUGH things like car doors - something that a .223 won't do. We are transitioning to Brinekkes this year and the issue of the wad hitting a hostage will go away. Setup with a side saddle, a Surefire foreend, and a two point sling, it's a damn fine weapon.
FWIW, I had an acquaintence who carried (IIRC) the current derivation of the Benelli set up with an EOTech. He related that he loved the setup and especially the lethality of the ammunition. He also related that the ammunition capacity was an issue and he's back to a rifle as his primary.
As far as USMC, they do seem interested in the shotgun. Tom Givens and I did a three day class for their HRP training cadre and one of the days was spent just on the shotgun per their request.
lowspeed4u
09-13-08, 16:33
As far as USMC, they do seem interested in the shotgun. Tom Givens and I did a three day class for their HRP training cadre and one of the days was spent just on the shotgun per their request.
That's ture the USMC is interested in the shotgun but the HRP training cadre isn't what's pushing it, and HRP isn't a combative school anyway. It is nothing more that of a defencive mindset, nothing Combat about that. what they teach is get your gun out and run away to the nearist safe house. They are only Pistol guys as well so yes they did want some knowledge of other guns but not for anyting more that shooting. They aren't the one's doing anything with the shotgun. Not trying to discredit anything or start an argument but stating what HRP does and what it doesn't do.
Beat Trash
02-05-09, 11:19
The LEO is a different scenario as he may be a lone responder and should have both a carbine and shotgun to reach for as he exits his cruiser.
True.
I am a LEO in a city where every vehicle has a Remington 870 inside of the car. A small percentage of our officers are qualified to check out 16" AR15's (Referred to a "Patrol Rifles"). I am one of those permitted to do so.
I have been using both the shotgun and the M16/AR15 systems since the early 1980's. Have been through various training with both systems.
As an LEO, I can say I feel better being able to chose, depending on the incident, and my perceived needs.
While most times I feel the need to deploy a long gun it's a Patrol Rifle, I would not want to turn in the 870's just yet...
While the shotgun has it's limitations, what the shotgun does well, it does very well.
HAIL-CAESAR
02-05-09, 16:20
:rolleyes:
The shotgun is not the perfect tool for everything, neither is the precious AR. Each have there strong suits and weaknesses.
But to those that declare the shotgun worthless have no idea how much they do not know. Shotguns inside 25 yards are devastating with buckshot under 30 to 40 yards depending on choke. With slugs, with the right gun, you want to be over 200 yards away from a man shooting it or your in serious trouble of becoming a corpse.
The shot gun really shines as a short range man stopper. And stop them NOW.
When was the last time you heard a PH ( Professional Hunter) recommend a .556 to stop a bear, lion, or most other dangerous game?? Never! Poodle attacks maybe. But the shotgun is always up there or their first choice.
Take a 12 gauge slug hunting. Shoot some pigs and deer, shoot a bear. Then come back to tell me how "ineffective" they are against a human target.
The .233 round semi auto, magazine fed system does have it's advantages. But once you leave your errornet Nintendo war game fantasies, most homeowners and LEO's would be well suited with a shotgun with slugs for anything under 50 yards and to 100 in most cases.
Lastly, I want to be able to pick what I use. I don't some boss, General, or errornet commando tell me what is best for me. Give me a shot gun when I need it, and a rifle when I need rifle.
Quite simply put, it is a piece of shit developed by those who have no idea what is needed or how it's typically employed by those who do use shotguns in combat. I am not exaggerating when I say that it is made by 2 guys in a garage. If by some miracle this piece of shit does make it into the inventory tax payers should contact their congressman and complain.
LouDiamond,
Glad to see you again and I agree, but won't comment other to say like some other items the Army got waht they asked for. A bad requirement means a bad solution. How are those MK-23's doing down your way? My unit used the (pre MASS) LSS in OEF back in 2004. None of those systems are still in use.
On the topic of Comabt use of the shotgun here are my thoughts(Originaly published in Infantry Sept-Oct 06):
The shotgun is the most misunderstood weapon in the Brigade Combat Team. The combat shotgun has found new life in the Infantry during the war on terror and through “Modularity” with the BCT being equipped with 178 M-500 shotguns. However, at issue is that no single “doctrinal” resource exists supporting the current combination of roles the shotgun is being employed in. Units are forced to either search through multiple FM’s, depend on unit “SME’s”, or simply make it up. The result is often shotguns being used in improper roles such as a primary weapon without a stock or supporting pistol, or as a secondary weapon with the full stock slung across the soldiers back. Here I will attempt to impart the lessons learned over the last five years of employing shotguns in the 10th Mountain Division.
Methods of Employment:
The shotgun should be employed in one of two methods. In the first method the shotgun is employed as a primary weapon with a full stock. Considerations for the commander when employed in this manner are the limited range and reduced ammo capacity of the shotgun. A soldier conducting house to house fighting at close ranges may be well served by the standard shotgun. However, skills that must be ingrained are: reloading constantly or the “load what you shoot” rule and transitioning to a handgun. With only six rounds at their disposal a shot-gunner may find themselves out of ammo quickly in a fire fight. Reloads must occur at every lull in the fight. Transitioning to a hand gun is one method of staying in the fight if you run out of ammo. Simply put, the shotgun is lowered and the M-9 is drawn and a controlled pair fired when the shotgun is out of ammo. The shot gunner maintains the M-9 until the situation allows him to reload the shotgun. The same process is used for a stoppage that can not be cleared by immediate action.
In the second method the shotgun is employed as a secondary weapon. In this case the primary weapon for the soldier is the M-4 or M-16. The shotgun is then typically employed with a pistol grip and some sort of retention system. The 10th Mountains Infantry ILARM course teaches the shotgun being slung on the firer’s side and to transition from the M-4 to the shotgun, then back again.
.....
Operational Roles of the Shotgun:
The greatest strength of the shotgun and its greatest weakness is the versatility of its ammo. Everything from bird hunting loads, slugs, flares; to 12 ga. High Explosive rounds are available today. Currently the Army only authorizes a few loads: #9 Shot, 00 Buck, M-1030 Breaching rounds, M-1012 and 1013 Less Lethal rounds. Other rounds such as the Action FRAG-12 (USMC), Joint Non-Lethal Warning Munition (JNLWM), XM-104 Non-Lethal Bursting Hand Grenade and the Extended Range Point Less-Lethal Munitions are in various stages of development and should be expected to lead to new training requirements. This leaves a bewildering array of possible roles, anti-personnel, breaching, less-lethal, ect based on the type of rounds at the commanders disposal. Further many rounds can be used in multiple roles. For example 00 buck can be used to conduct breaches, but presents an increased risk of collateral damage to civilians of fellow soldiers. Also, lack of a STRAC that sufficiently supports training with the shotgun has extremely hampered commanders understanding the shotgun.
Currently, the shotguns roles can be divided into three general roles:
1. Offensive Weapon
2. Breacher
3. Less-Lethal Munitions delivery system.
Mod's Please remove this link to the rest of the article if needed:
http://pro-patria.us/full_spectrum_shotgun
Bottom Line, the Shotgun is a Special Purpose Weapon in combat. If you are aware of and use it within it's limitations you will be ok. Carbines such as the M-4 are better general purpose weapons for the Armed Forces. Most Army or Marine shotgun users other then MP's do not have a M-9 availible to them as the shotgun is a "extra" weapon in the MTOE with the M-4 or M-16A4 being their primary weapon.
Just from an observer's viewpoint, none of the Mossberg 500's that I've seen pictured in use in Iraq have the extended magazine. Is this option seen as unnecessary in their current role?
Within it's primary military applications no. You will mostly find shotguns employed as a secondary weapon/tool. Idealy we would be equipping with the 14" Mosseys we are providing to the ANA/ANP. 5 rounds or 6 with one in the chamber cover all the beaching applications including the hinge breach:mad:. The current 18 " shotguns are right at the ragged edge of being to long.
To the best of my research, dispite many believing that the 20" 8+1 590A1's are the standard .mil shotgun, only about 1,000 were actualy purchased. They are classified as Type I shotguns. Most shotguns procured M-500 A1, M-500 A2, M-500 MLS and the M-500 are all 5+1 Type II shotguns, say around 34,000 for DOD. Plus FMS. I have still not confirmed any significant amount of Type III rifle sighted models being procured. That said they have been in procurement by Crane and Rock Island since the 70' s so you will find some variations out there.
Jack_Stroker
02-11-09, 15:10
When it comes to combat shotguns, I think that there are only a few models out there that qualify. I'm fairly certain that people who use the shotgun in combat know when to use it, and when not to. At least, I'd hope so.
While never having seen combat, I do own an M4.
My experiences on the square range/shooting stuff:
Most foster style slugs fragment violently within 25 yards, penetrating 2, and at most 3 milk-jugs of water (meaningful on people/animals? I don't know and wont hypothesize).
Buckshot, up to OO size will penetrate AT MOST 2 2x4's unless the pellets "stack", as in extreme close range.
These 2 above observations make me feel good about using it in my appartment, if need be (brick exterior walls).
I can accurately hit a torso-size target with a slug out to 85 yards. Every time. I have not tested it further.
Buckshot at 25 yards reults in 7-10 out of 12 OO projectiles in a 10" circle using a MOD choke (which will also safely/accurately launch Foster style slugs).
Ammunition in the chamber can quickly and easily be changed out without involving the magazine/ect. using the M4 platform.
My M4 feeds EVERYTHING. Both my M4's have. From VERY light (2.75 dram 1-1/8 oz @1145fps target loads and Win-lite buckshot) to 3" 1oz slugs that kill on both ends.
Basically what I am saying is that with my M4, I OWN 0-100 yards in any direction with a weapon that has proven utterly reliable in my hands. 9 rounds (or 8, depending on the load) are plenty to solve any problems that I may have. You don't exactly have to "fumble" with a 12ga round to get it loaded either.
Body armor? Not for your head, and even IF I were to "only" hit an armored individual in the chest, a shotgun slug could break ribs/knock the air out of/do all sorts of ugly things even through a vest, depending on angle/constitution of the target hit.
I feel that for an urban/heavily wooded area, the PROPERLY equipped and employed shotgun is unbeatable.
In the desert in Iraq? Not so much. In the cities. Yep.
If you have innocents in close proximity (active shooter, hostage taker), it matters a LOT if you use slug or buck.
Mistaking buck for slug can have very bad consequences in those conditions.
Fumbling shells, loading them backwards, not loading them past the shell stops ALL happen when you put stress on shooters, even properly trained ones.
All these problems become more common in low light conditions.
They become even more common when shooters wear gloves.
A simple magpul prevents the insertion of an inverted magazine. Putting a mag in backwards is very uncommon.
Compare to the juggling and dropping that occurs when loading shotgun rounds.
Another thing to consider, with a rifle you have 28 opportunities before you have to reload. How many do you have with a shotgun?
A real life example, at VA Tech, one of the shotgun armed officers lost track of how his shotgun was loaded. He had needed to engage the bad gun, he would have had no idea what was in the chamber.
.
How would this occur? If you have time to aim the weapon, you have the time to run your finger over the tip of the shell, or in a non-sight limited (read:dark) situation, I can tell red from green pretty well (some may not, as they may be red/green blind, but I digress).
Again, with my M4 (not all shotguns are the same obviously), in the second scenario, I simply pull back on the charging handle a bit and see if I see green, or red.
Red=Winchester XX Premium 12-pellet OO Buck
Green=Remington 1oz Slugger slug.
Pretty simple stuff. Yes, I know, it isn't fully idiot/stress proof, but precious little truly is.
Failure2Stop
05-03-09, 10:44
How would this occur? If you have time to aim the weapon, you have the time to run your finger over the tip of the shell, or in a non-sight limited (read:dark) situation, I can tell red from green pretty well (some may not, as they may be red/green blind, but I digress).
Again, with my M4 (not all shotguns are the same obviously), in the second scenario, I simply pull back on the charging handle a bit and see if I see green, or red.
Red=Winchester XX Premium 12-pellet OO Buck
Green=Remington 1oz Slugger slug.
Pretty simple stuff. Yes, I know, it isn't fully idiot/stress proof, but precious little truly is.
Try doing it in limited visibility while someone is trying to kill you.
Try doing it in limited visibility while someone is trying to kill you.
I was referring to a hostage situation, not combat. The reference was the VA tech responding officer who was not sure what round was in his weapon.
Also, NOTHING is foolproof. How would you know your weapon was even loaded? If you can verify that your weapon is loaded, you should be able to verify the type of ammunition in it using the method I described. One is no easier/harder than the other to accomplish.
Failure2Stop
05-03-09, 12:59
I was referring to a hostage situation, not combat. The reference was the VA tech responding officer who was not sure what round was in his weapon.
Sorry, since the topic was shotguns and combat I assumed that you were writing about that.
Also, NOTHING is foolproof. How would you know your weapon was even loaded? If you can verify that your weapon is loaded, you should be able to verify the type of ammunition in it using the method I described. One is no easier/harder than the other to accomplish.
Absolutely, nothing is fool-proof, and I am quite aware of how to perform a chamber check. However- a chamber check is done following initial load. Under stress, as in when trying to avoid getting killed and stopping someone from killing others, remembering how the gun is loaded might not be on the forefront of concern. Further- since the shotgun is low capacity it requires frequent reloads, and in a target rich environment it can be real easy to load the wrong ammo. While it migh not be a big deal (shoot three 00 to get to a slug for a distance shot) it seriously depletes ammo quickly, and can be a very big deal if a low percentage shot is required. To imply that if you have time to aim the weapon you have time to do a chamber check is not correct. If the threat requires immediate engagement (as most lethal treats do) you will probably be struggling for the time to get the sights on target. I don't know anyone that advocates taking the time to do a chamber check prior to engaging a threat.
The shotgun does have it's application, and if you are training and like yours for use in your environment, groovy. It is a tool, one with applications different and distinct from the carbine and pistol. While they have overlapping areas, they each have strong and weak points. It is much more important to be realisitic about the weapons and to train with them than it is to argue about minutia while maintaining a comfortable level of incompetance.
dwhitehorne
05-03-09, 17:08
How would this occur? Red=Winchester XX Premium 12-pellet OO Buck
Green=Remington 1oz Slugger slug.
Our issued ammo is all green Remington. Required to carry only what is issued. I've only been taught the "press check" (what we call it) to see if a round is in the chamber not the type of round. With the heart pounding and scanning the long hallway to try and reduce tunnel vision, I could see loosing track of the load. Especially if the Dept SOP is mandated alternating slug/buck in the tube. David
...I could see loosing track of the load. Especially if the Dept SOP is mandated alternating slug/buck in the tube.
As has been said many times, "candy caning" any magazine, especially a shotgun's, is a bad practice.
As has been said many times, "candy caning" any magazine, especially a shotgun's, is a bad practice.
What is the general consensus of running a slug as the last shot kindof as a "hail mary" attempt at stopping whatever you are shooting at?
Also, are there any departments that could/would mandate loading order of a magazine!? That seems a bit...odd
Do you really think that you are going to shoot something closing the distance with you four or five times with 00 buck and have no effect, and then somehow you are going to shoot it with a magic slug pill and it will stop???
I would suggest that you add a +2 extender to your 18 inch barreled shotgun giving you a working magazine capacity of 6 + 1... Load 5 rounds of Federal Tac 9, 00 buck in your magazine and nothing in the chamber. Have a side saddle with 4-6 or so 1 OZ foster slugs, and you should be good to go…
Just my .02
B
Do you really think that you are going to shoot something closing the distance with you four or five times with 00 buck and have no effect, and then somehow you are going to shoot it with a magic slug pill and it will stop???
I would suggest that you add a +2 extender to your 18 inch barreled shotgun giving you a working magazine capacity of 6 + 1... Load 5 rounds of Federal Tac 9, 00 buck in your magazine and nothing in the chamber. Have a side saddle with 4-6 or so 1 OZ foster slugs, and you should be good to go…
Just my .02
B
That is actually very similar to what I had planned. My titanium 7-shot M4S90 tube should arrive in a month or so, and I just ordered a side-pouch for the buttstock as I abhore the only side saddles on the market for the M4S90 (Tac-Star because I don't like the idea of it being plastic and I have heard of them breaking, Mesa because they fit like crap).
My thought for the last round being a slug was more in the instance of body armor. I used to live in an area where thugs wearing body armor was a semi-common thing, I guess the mentality that I might go up against it has survived in my mindset. A slug would provide a better "focus" for that energy and might do damage that the diffuse buckshot may not.
K.L. Davis
05-04-09, 00:30
At least five characters
What is the general consensus of running a slug as the last shot kindof as a "hail mary" attempt at stopping whatever you are shooting at?
Nope. Just like Buck says:
I would suggest that you add a +2 extender to your 18 inch barreled shotgun giving you a working magazine capacity of 6 + 1... Load 5 rounds of Federal Tac 9, 00 buck in your magazine and nothing in the chamber. Have a side saddle with 4-6 or so 1 OZ foster slugs, and you should be good to go…
Cruncher Block
05-04-09, 20:28
I would suggest that you add a +2 extender to your 18 inch barreled shotgun giving you a working magazine capacity of 6 + 1... Load 5 rounds of Federal Tac 9, 00 buck in your magazine and nothing in the chamber. Have a side saddle with 4-6 or so 1 OZ foster slugs, and you should be good to go…
B
:eek: Wow. Either through logic or dumb luck, that's pretty much what I do.
Having one less than full lets me load and chamber a slug if necessary. Meanwhile, 5 in the magazine is ok if I have to react immediately.
These types of posts make me glad that those who DO have to go into combat and those who DO influence and decide what weapon systems we have in inventory don't subscribe to the mentality outlined in the original post. Using the same logic, replace the word shotgun with handgun/pistol in the thread. With that said, using the OP's logic, we should get rid of handguns/pistols too because they are not effective at engaging targets at longer distances,etc,etc. Either way, the point being made is that its absurd to think that there is one magic weapon for an environment as fluid as combat and or that the shotgun has no place in combat.
A shotgun is a tool, like any other weapon or piece of equipment that I employ to accomplish my mission. Other users have given some good input on why and how shotguns have a place in combat. What I find laughable is that someone who isn't a Joe, regardless of "who" they are in the shooting community or who they have "trained" thinks they can tell the guy on the ground what works best for him or what will/will not work in combat.
The shotgun is a misunderstood and often misused tool in the regular Army/Navy/Air Force and Marines and this is simply a training issue. Within SOF however, it has it's place along with other tools. Which is why I carry a shotgun along with an M4 and pistol when the situation dictates. Use the right tool for the job and let those who are doing the job decide which tools to use to get the job done. The times I have been called on to use a shotgun in combat there have been no complaints about it being "ineffective". YMMV.
Best post so far, and I'm stopping here as this sums it up best for me.
Let me state, out to 100 Yards I prefer a shotgun loaded with slugs. At handgun distances, generally considered 25 Yards and in, I prefer 00 Buck. Then it's slug time baby. :D
Yes, the M4 can do many things well, but so can other weapon platforms. I use an AR at work, when the situation calls for it, but I've used the shotgun more. I prefer the terminal effectivness of the shotgun over double or triple tapping a threat at distance. I'm also partial to bolt action rifles and have even kept a levergun handy for home defense.
No one platform will meet all the perceived needs and everything is a compromise. It's up to the individual to select the proper tool for the job. With that said, the shotgun is, or can be, a very versitle weapon and I think it too often gets overlooked in favor of the "tacticool" crap that's out there.
Take care and stay safe,
Biker
I was told by a MPD officer back in the 1970's, the D.C. Metropolitan Police taught to load a mix of buckshot and slugs. If I recall, the load was two buckshot, one slug, and one buckshot in their four round magazines. MPD supposedly adopted this load from the FBI. I cannot speak to the accuracy of that story.
We authorize buckshot and slugs. We mandate that officers do not dutch load with a mix of ammunition. They may select-load on the street as needed. Quite frankly, I suspect that most officers will fire until the threat is stopped or the weapon is empty before select-loading.
Alaskapopo
05-12-09, 02:52
In all my years I have never seen even a raw recruit attempt to load a round in backwards.
Pat
lowspeed4u
05-12-09, 08:54
In all my years I have never seen even a raw recruit attempt to load a round in backwards.
Pat
You need to come out to our range sometime. We had Marines from PFC to COL out and I saw Sgt, SSgt, LtCol, Maj, CWO3 all attempt to load the shell backward I just sat there at had to laugh.
I read up eairler someone talking about the terminal ballistics of a shotgun. In all actuallaty they aren't that great, yes it has a fairly large perminate wound with the slug, but 2 rounds of good fragmenting 5.56 will get a bigger hole and faster bleed out. Also "00" has the same wounding ballistics of a pistol.
Off of shotguns for a min I've also seen Lt's load pistol rounds in the mags backwards, also with the rifle same thing. It's really funny.
-Derrick
Alaskapopo
05-12-09, 14:55
You need to come out to our range sometime. We had Marines from PFC to COL out and I saw Sgt, SSgt, LtCol, Maj, CWO3 all attempt to load the shell backward I just sat there at had to laugh.
I read up eairler someone talking about the terminal ballistics of a shotgun. In all actuallaty they aren't that great, yes it has a fairly large perminate wound with the slug, but 2 rounds of good fragmenting 5.56 will get a bigger hole and faster bleed out. Also "00" has the same wounding ballistics of a pistol.
Off of shotguns for a min I've also seen Lt's load pistol rounds in the mags backwards, also with the rifle same thing. It's really funny.
-Derrick
Being in the military you have seen more recruits than I have. All I can say is wow.
Pat
Alaskapopo
05-12-09, 14:58
What is the general consensus of running a slug as the last shot kindof as a "hail mary" attempt at stopping whatever you are shooting at?
Also, are there any departments that could/would mandate loading order of a magazine!? That seems a bit...odd
Most departments in my state mandate you load up with all buck shot or slugs. Most load with buck and keep slugs on the side saddle. I load with all slugs because the shotgun is a animal gun for me. (dealing with moose and bear).
Pat
Most departments in my state mandate you load up with all buck shot or slugs. Most load with buck and keep slugs on the side saddle. I load with all slugs because the shotgun is a animal gun for me. (dealing with moose and bear).
Pat
What slugs do you prefer? Are 1oz 2.75" Remington Sluggers good against the bears? Also, do you prefer a 12ga and slugs over something like a lever .45-70? Why?
Alaskapopo
05-12-09, 20:10
What slugs do you prefer? Are 1oz 2.75" Remington Sluggers good against the bears? Also, do you prefer a 12ga and slugs over something like a lever .45-70? Why?
Breneke Slugs 2 3/4 mags. Foster slugs are are too soft.
Pat
It's simple really, a shotgun is the thinking man's second choice for a fight when a rifle is in the offering.
Cameron
It's simple really, a shotgun is the thinking man's second choice for a fight when a rifle is in the offering.
Cameron
It really depends on what kind of fight we are talking about. CQB in my apartment I would take my M4S90 over any other platform. It is THE MOST reliable weapon I have ever owned. Be it AR/LesBaer/Glock/ANYTHING. My M4S90 WILL GO BANG. And unless I totally limp-wrist it (I can fire it 1-handed and it still cycles just fine), it WILL load all 8 remaining shells.
Breneke Slugs 2 3/4 mags. Foster slugs are are too soft.
Pat
That's kinda what I figured.
How would you feel armed with OOO Buck? Totally under-gunned?
Alaskapopo
05-13-09, 02:08
That's kinda what I figured.
How would you feel armed with OOO Buck? Totally under-gunned?
Against bear yes. Black bear sure it would work fine. But we have brown bear in my area as well.
Pat
Against bear yes. Black bear sure it would work fine. But we have brown bear in my area as well.
Pat
I can wiki a black bear and see how sizeable it is, but are they "tough" or not? Like a Coyote, they take a LOT to put down even though they are small.
Alaskapopo
05-13-09, 02:40
I can wiki a black bear and see how sizeable it is, but are they "tough" or not? Like a Coyote, they take a LOT to put down even though they are small.
I had to kill 2 black bear last summer in the line of duty. The first one I had to kill charged me. 2 slugs put it down but it tried to get back up. I shot it 2 more times on the ground, reloaded then shot it twice in the head. Yes they are tough. The second bear I had to shoot had broken into a woman's apartment. When I arrived on scene it was in the laundry room. I waited for it to exit and I waited until I had a safe back stop. It rose up on its hind legs. from about 7 yards away. I shot it in the chest once and then twice more in the back as it turned to run. that slowed it down but it was still moving away. I reloaded and got closer to it. It spun around and started biting at its own mid section. I shot it 3 more times as it spun. This dropped it. I then put two in its head. I used Breneke slugs. Yes bears are tough to kill.
Pat
I had to kill 2 black bear last summer in the line of duty. The first one I had to kill charged me. 2 slugs put it down but it tried to get back up. I shot it 2 more times on the ground, reloaded then shot it twice in the head. Yes they are tough. The second bear I had to shoot had broken into a woman's apartment. When I arrived on scene it was in the laundry room. I waited for it to exit and I waited until I had a safe back stop. It rose up on its hind legs. from about 7 yards away. I shot it in the chest once and then twice more in the back as it turned to run. that slowed it down but it was still moving away. I reloaded and got closer to it. It spun around and started biting at its own mid section. I shot it 3 more times as it spun. This dropped it. I then put two in its head. I used Breneke slugs. Yes bears are tough to kill.
Pat
Wow. And you would also trust OOO Buck within 30-40 yards?
I wiki'ed the BB. It can reach 115-600#...quite the range...
Alaskapopo
05-13-09, 03:09
Wow. And you would also trust OOO Buck within 30-40 yards?
I wiki'ed the BB. It can reach 115-600#...quite the range...
I would not trust buck at all only Breneke slugs. 000 buck lacks the penetration needed to reliably but a brown bear down. Black bear sure but not brown. We do have brown bear here as well so that is the threat I plan for.
Pat
I would not trust buck at all only Breneke slugs. 000 buck lacks the penetration needed to reliably but a brown bear down. Black bear sure but not brown. We do have brown bear here as well so that is the threat I plan for.
Pat
Would OOO down a 600# Black Bear safely/reliably/comfortably for you? (reason I ask is my friends live where Black Bear also live)
Alaskapopo
05-13-09, 03:49
Would OOO down a 600# Black Bear safely/reliably/comfortably for you? (reason I ask is my friends live where Black Bear also live)
I really don't trust buck shot on bears.
Pat
I had to kill 2 black bear last summer in the line of duty. The first one I had to kill charged me. 2 slugs put it down but it tried to get back up. I shot it 2 more times on the ground, reloaded then shot it twice in the head. Yes they are tough. The second bear I had to shoot had broken into a woman's apartment. When I arrived on scene it was in the laundry room. I waited for it to exit and I waited until I had a safe back stop. It rose up on its hind legs. from about 7 yards away. I shot it in the chest once and then twice more in the back as it turned to run. that slowed it down but it was still moving away. I reloaded and got closer to it. It spun around and started biting at its own mid section. I shot it 3 more times as it spun. This dropped it. I then put two in its head. I used Breneke slugs. Yes bears are tough to kill.
You must have some mutant black bears up there! Black bear in the eastern states are routinely taken with .41 and .44 Magnum handguns.
Alaskapopo
05-13-09, 20:54
You must have some mutant black bears up there! Black bear in the eastern states are routinely taken with .41 and .44 Magnum handguns.
Taking an animal when it does not know you are there (hunting situations) vs one that is amped up and charging are two very different things. And yes everything in Alaska is bigger and tougher. :D
Pat
Taking an animal when it does not know you are there (hunting situations) vs one that is amped up and charging are two very different things. And yes everything in Alaska is bigger and tougher. :D
Pat
I can attest to this. Watch any fights you can. Not TV, real fights. The guy that gets PISSED usually gets the living hell knocked out of him before he goes down (or wins). Doesn't even show it. It was the same for me when I fought full contact. After that split second after the first punch (especially when face is involved), you don't feel it anymore until after the fight. Then again, you walk into a door frame or bump into something ogling some chic at the supermarket and it almost takes you out. Good point on mindset.
The thing I love about animals is that they decide to do something, they DO IT. They don't say "OMGZ! I been shotz 10101!!! I need to fallz!!!" like so many people do. They keep trucking with whatever thought is in their head until they physically cannot continue. I respect that a lot.
Alaskapopo
05-13-09, 22:29
I can attest to this. Watch any fights you can. Not TV, real fights. The guy that gets PISSED usually gets the living hell knocked out of him before he goes down (or wins). Doesn't even show it. It was the same for me when I fought full contact. After that split second after the first punch (especially when face is involved), you don't feel it anymore until after the fight. Then again, you walk into a door frame or bump into something ogling some chic at the supermarket and it almost takes you out. Good point on mindset.
The thing I love about animals is that they decide to do something, they DO IT. They don't say "OMGZ! I been shotz 10101!!! I need to fallz!!!" like so many people do. They keep trucking with whatever thought is in their head until they physically cannot continue. I respect that a lot.
A friend of mine calles that goal driven individuals. If a person is goal driven only a hit to the CNS will stop them immediately and same goes with animals.
Pat
K.L. Davis
05-14-09, 12:15
I really don't trust buck shot on bears.
Pat
Which is why they don't call it "Bear Shot" ;)
Which is why they don't call it "Bear Shot" ;)
The buckshot I have is recommended for Black Bear according to the box. 0-000 size. However, I trust this man over a box. Just saying...
PALADIN-hgwt
05-14-09, 19:59
xxxxx
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.