less lethal 12ga loads

[camerl2009]

ok so im looking for some 12ga less lethal stuff
i know theres always the onld stand by rocksalt

but how about maybe home made rubber slugs and buckshot

or maybe some thing like airsoft bb's

how much powder and what type i need a starting point

[wills]

http://www.deltaforce.com/catalog/lesslethalammo.html

[camerl2009]

http://www.deltaforce.com/catalog/lesslethalammo.html

<cant be sent here and i cant find any here

[turbo1889]

Air-Soft plastic 6mm pellets are the perfect thing, load as follows:

----- Any 12ga. Hull You Want to Use from 2-3/4" to 3-1/2"
----- Fed 209A, CCI 209M, Fio 617, or Federal's New Core Burner Primer
----- 10-15 grains of Bulls-Eye Powder
----- Wad Column as Follows:
----- ----- Take a WAA wad and cut the cushion section out with razor knife
----- ----- Gas Seal from Bottom of WAA Wad Over Powder
----- ----- A Single 12ga. Nitro Card Next
----- ----- Shot Cup from Top of WAA Wad Next
----- "Fill Err Up" with the Air-Soft plastic 6mm pellets; figure out how much gives you a good crimp and then weigh the shot charge on a powder scale so that you get the same number of pellets in each load.

[2wheelDuke]

I don't think "less lethal" shotgun rounds are a good idea for a civilian at all. You're setting yourself up for all sorts of bad things. Police only deploy weapon systems like that with another one standing by with a traditional firearm in case it doesn't work or the situation changes. The police are also required to be trained to use those weapons systems and qualify with them.

Basically as a private citizen, if you're justified to pull a trigger at all, put real rounds on them. As far as they know, you're shooting at them anyway.

[turbo1889]

For 2 legged trouble you may have a point, but for four legged trouble like all sorts of stray critters that get into garbage cans, harass livestock, etc, etc. to first use less than lethal loads in an attempt to teach a lesson rather then destroy the four legged trouble at least initially is the right thing to do.

As to saying that any particular thing is not wise or safe for civilians to have; I absolutely appose you in ever sense and application of that statement on every front and every possible topic. Civilian operated nuclear power plants have a better safety and environmental record then government (any government, I don't care) operated nuclear power or arsenals have. Cops have a worse safety and "don't shoot innocent bystanders" record then the civilian population has.

The so called "experts" when it comes to safety have a worse record on average then the civilian population does on average.

The "not safe for civilians to have" line of thinking is the same line of thinking that gave us the USSR, Red China, and every other tyrant in all of history. I will oppose that line of thinking and all the "useful idiots" who espouse it in any form to my dying breath and preferably to their dying breath first.

[camerl2009]

I don't think "less lethal" shotgun rounds are a good idea for a civilian at all. You're setting yourself up for all sorts of bad things. Police only deploy weapon systems like that with another one standing by with a traditional firearm in case it doesn't work or the situation changes. The police are also required to be trained to use those weapons systems and qualify with them.

Basically as a private citizen, if you're justified to pull a trigger at all, put real rounds on them. As far as they know, you're shooting at them anyway.

thats way thay get a face full of airsoft bb's
and the next round is a BBB lead shot

here we cant shoot and one unless i have a bullet in me first
but the less lethal round is gives them time to think about moving or not

[KCSO]

Less Lethal? Not lethal maybe but how do you get less than dead? Sorry a pet peeve.

Gluelets in 00 buck and 10 grains of Unique are good for chasing away dogs.

[turbo1889]

Now that I know you’re talking about shooting the two legged variety of pests; please note that I do agree with what 2wheelDuke had to say specifically about that. If its two legged using less then lethal doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me unless you’re in a rural area where blasting juvenile delinquents with rock salt or similar is still socially acceptable and you don't have to worry about their parents paying you a visit a couple hours later with AKs. I don't think there are any places like that left in the states though and most places I think you’re going to have to worry about them coming back at you with either AKs, lawyers, or both.

4 Legged pests; as I explained I'm all about less than lethal lesson teacher loads the first few times around especially when they are peoples pets. When someone lets their dog run loose off their own property (a criminal act in my state) and it tries to tear apart the rabbit hut or the chicken coop then I have every right to blast the darn thing lethal or less than lethal loads my choice. I try to be a nice guy so less than lethal is what I use at first but I will step up to lethal loads for repeat offenders.

Do I think you shouldn't be allowed to own, posses, build, or use such loads because you’re a civilian; absolutely not. To say so is no different than saying guns, kitchen knives, screw drivers, or shoe strings should be banned. To me one who would even suggest you shouldn't own, posses, build, or use such loads is no different than someone espousing gun control and I will respond to them as such.

However, I will certainly try to educate you about the possible perils and potential problems involving lawyers if you plan on using them on 2 legged pests and depending on where you live and how trigger happy you are you could run into those problems with 4 legged pests as well. Either way, my final advice to you would be not to use less than lethal loads unless the situation is such that you would be within your rights to use lethal loads. Choosing to use a less than lethal loads should be an act of mercy not something that allows you to shoot sooner, quicker, and with less thought and/or legitimate provocation.

[camerl2009]

[QUOTE=turbo1889;1052037]Now that I know you’re talking about shooting the two legged variety of pests; please note that I do agree with what 2wheelDuke had to say specifically about that. If its two legged using less then lethal doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me unless you’re in a rural area where blasting juvenile delinquents with rock salt or similar is still socially acceptable and you don't have to worry about their parents paying you a visit a couple hours later with AKs. I don't think there are any places like that left in the states though and most places I think you’re going to have to worry about them coming back at you with either AKs, lawyers, or both.

well less lethal is what im going for im in a city
so no 4 laged pest but 2 leged you bet and the first shot will be
maybe a rubber slug and if thay want to get aggessive affter that then
thay get the BBB shot. but dont have to worry about ak's here there prohibited
even the semi and pump ak's

[turbo1889]

. . . dont have to worry about ak's here there prohibited
even the semi and pump ak's

Was mainly using “AKs” as a figure of speech indicating that you don't want to stir up a hornets nest an have them come back at you armed to the teeth in force. I wouldn't count on them not having AKs or similar even if they are banned. If they don't respect the law concerning home invasion what makes you think they respect the laws about what guns they can or can't have? This is why gun control (or ammunition choice control) doesn't work and never will.

If you choose to use less than lethal loads on two legged pests that is your decision and you have been warned of the potential problems with doing so. That is what Liberty means you are free to make your own choices but you will also bear the consequences of those choices (For the Record: I said Liberty not Freedom there is a heck of a lot of difference between those two words; they are not synonyms). Good luck, stay safe, and exercise your liberty with prudence and through doing so preserve and expand that Liberty for your children and grandchildren.

[bohica2xo]

From a purely technical standpoint, we got the best results from .625 diameter neoprene discs.

Buy 5/8", 50 durometer "O" ring stock ( 9864K41 from Mcmaster-Carr), and slice it into discs. The length of the disc determines the mass of the projectiles.

A 1.3 inch long slug tumbles quickly. .500 thick discs seem to work well, as do the .625 thick discs. .250 discs seem to spread quicker.

Just stack the discs in a regular shot cup.

Have fun, shoot plenty at paper before you decide on any other application.

B.

[camerl2009]

i think i got what i need some .68 cal rubber ball's for paintball gun's
these things are nice


http://www.rap4.com/paintball/store/...lls-bag-of-500

[turbo1889]

Nice find; I saved your link and will probably get a bag or two of those myself. 68-cal. is the absolute perfect size for dropping inside a 12ga. shot wad as a RB wad-slug for lead balls and should work just as well for less than lethal rubber ball slug load as well. With a single wall home made paper roll wad set-up one should be able to build double and triple ball loads as well with those although a triple ball load might not fit in anything other then a 3-1/2" load.

[hk33ka1]

You aren't allowed to shoot people with plastic bullets any more than lead ones in Canada or any nation. Self defense is allowed when justified as defined in the criminal code. Shooting someone with a real gun and plastic bullet when you shouldn't will still be treated as attemped or actual murder as far as the law is concerned.

No offence meant, but along with rock salt myths I would be careful about any legal or firearms defence, and less lethal ammo, advice found floating around, even my own.

[turbo1889]

I think I've made my personal position on this very clear:

Personally Pro ~ Less than lethal for four legged pests.
Personally Anti ~ Less than lethal for two legged pests.

In regard to what other people decide to do ~ It's their free will choice and they will do what they will do. The only thing we can do is warn them that every free choice comes with a set of consequences in a society built on the principles Liberty that being freedom of choice with resulting consequences that follow the choice.

Absolutely and Completely Anti ~ Regulation, Prohibition, Socially Imposed Inhibitions, or any other in the long term worthless actions designed to constrict or limit free will choice regarding this issue or any other. A society that strictly followed the principles of Liberty would make no attempt to limit free will choice but instead focuses strictly on providing advance known and clear consequences based on the choices made and the structure of these consequences is based upon an honorable and logical code of moral behavior. Unfortunately, both the U.S. and Canada as well as most of the free world nations although having the basic principles of Liberty built into their society and code of law have had those principles considerably eroded and diluted both in terms of moral choices being punished with negative consequences and immoral choices rewarded with positive consequences or a lack of consequences altogether. One is advised to be aware of this unfortunate fact when one makes ones choices.

[trevj]

hk33ka1 has it in a nutshell.

The only times you are justified in shooting at people at all, you are justified in shooting them with the real thing. If yer gonna do it at all, do it right.

"Less than lethal" is still has lethal risks. It has all the legal liabilities as any shooting.

Shooting anyone with anything, when you are not legally entitled to use lethal force, is asking to be chucked in jail. Figure out how long you can afford to spend there.

Have that chat with a Lawyer, before you do anything stupider than you already have. Have him explain what exactly you will be on the hook for, if you shoot someone with you carefully crafted "less than lethal" ammo. Have him explain what the legal definition of "Lethal Force" is.

Cheers
Trev

[jsizemore]

If the argument in court that your handloads show your intent to be 'more lethal', then how can a rubber ball be held in the same light? I don't know about your lawyer, but mine can handle that. And I'd like to see a ballistic expert make a jury believe that it's the same.

[trevj]

They don't have to here.

It's, among other things, Assault with a Weapon. And it's a Firearm, no less, for which there are prescribed minimum sentences for using in the commission of a Crime.

We, as Canadians, do have some rights to self defence. It'd better be clear that that is what it was, when the time to explain yourself to the folks that'll be askin' comes about, though. Again with the requirements to be perfectly clear on what the legal definition of Lethal force is. And when it is warranted.

The Judge does not really give a twinkle what exactly was in the firearm for ammo, and it like as not will not come up during the investigation of the case. Ask a Lawyer. Better, ask the bottom feeding scum sucker of a lawyer that will be assigned to prosecute the shooter, on behalf of the low life piece of excrement that may or may not have actually deserved to be shot, but was injured instead, by some less than lethal hobby load.

But as long as we are playing the 'convince the jury' game... How do you convince the jury that you were competent to properly apply a less than lethal solution to this problem? Training? Refreshed when? How do you convince the jury that a rubber ball travelling at 500 or so feet per second, was not supposed to take the guys eye out, or penetrate his skull, or chest? How are you qualified to assess these things, or were you simply reckless and liable?

Enquiring minds wanna know... Not me, I pretty much have an opinion already about how that will turn out. I can't afford Johnny Cochrane's rates, much less what it would take to hire the talent it would need to baffle that many jurors. Guys that have that kind of money, don't hang around talking about how to homebrew this stuff. They already have "disposal" folks on staff.

Until you are in a clear self defence situation, the firearms stay out of it. Then they are used to full advantage with the real thing, not half assed home made almost bullets.

I'll leave the "less" stuff to the guys that are stuck having to use it, and to the bear conditioning pest control folks.


Cheers
Trev

[rtracy2001]

Civilian operated nuclear power plants have a better safety and environmental record then government (any government, I don't care) operated nuclear power or arsenals have.

Doing great right up until that gem. Case in point the US Navy. Comercial nuke plants can't even compare to the Navy's safety and exposure record. Not saying that just 'cause I have worked for them for the last 5 years and my cumulative radiation exposure from work is less than what I would receive in a single trans-continental flight. Compare that to folks coming in from commercial plants with more than 1000 times my cumulative exposure for approximately the same time period.

I have to judge based on my experience and certified records available to me.