Less than lethal 12ga loads

[BobbyB]

Does anyone have any experience creating less than lethal loads? They sell rubber buckshot and slugs but that stuff is expensive. Is there a more economical solution? Possible uses would be driving out the neighbors dog or a rebellious teenager that isn't really a threat to anyone's life but may be trespassing. God knows there were plenty of times I deserved to get shot with rubber buckshot. Thanks for any input.

[Treeman]

I do not have any experience with such loads. Personally I think that if a I fire a gun at someone I had better have justification to kill them. I know they make "non -lethal" stuff but it is all potentially lethal just the same and law enforcement has to be right at the lethal force threshold before they unlimber that stuff.

[Bzcraig]

If you have a problem with dogs/cats get a Red Rider, but you would be foolish to shoot anyone with less lethal ammo. Expect to be chastised for asking the question.

[BobbyB]

I knew this would turn into a debate... What if I am justified in using deadly force, but out of pity I do not desire to, but still want to drive away a threat from a moderately safe range? An example would be a teenager trespassing and vandalizing but I do not assess said individual to be armed with a projectile weapon so I pop a less than lethal round in to teach said individual a lesson from 50 to 100 yds away. The next round in the chamber would be lethal if said individual wishes to escalate the situation. You may choose to use lethal force in this situation, and that is your decision to make, but I would personally prefer to choose avoiding taking of a life if possible.

[gofastman]

What if I am justified in using deadly force, but out of pity I do not desire to, but still want to drive away a threat from a moderately safe range?


both of these things mean you probably weren't justified in using deadly force.

That said, try some ALS Pen. Prevent bean bags. (http://www.lesslethal.com/index.php?page=ALS1212) they are pretty accurate and are better for up close work than rubber buckshot

[Whiterabbit]

I won't debate what you wanna do. you can go knock yourself out, makes no difference from my house.

Just know that in CA (and like gangreene, what works in CA is seeping across the nation), the prosecuting lawyer will crucify you by arguing that a shotgun under ANY circumstances beyond brandishing is the use of deadly force.

[Jim]

Does anyone have any experience creating less than lethal loads? They sell rubber buckshot and slugs but that stuff is expensive. Is there a more economical solution? Possible uses would be driving out the neighbors dog or a rebellious teenager that isn't really a threat to anyone's life but may be trespassing. God knows there were plenty of times I deserved to get shot with rubber buckshot. Thanks for any input.

To answer your question directly, you can make round balls with hot glue.
Read this thread: http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?17577-Casting-hot-glue-boolits

(http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?17577-Casting-hot-glue-boolits)Lee makes a .690 round ball mold that can be used to cast for a 12 gauge shotgun. http://leeprecision.com/mold-sc-ball-.690.html

You'll need to reduce the powder charge to a suitable velocity. Also, it would be advisable to load the RB in a shot cup or sleeve. If you launch a ball cast of hot glue down the barrel without any seperation, the glue will smear in the barrel and the job of cleaning it will be more trouble than it's worth.

As to the legality of what you're suggesting, I assume you're a grown man and have the common sense of making good decisions. I don't know what state you're in, but in Virginia, if you shoot someone, you better be able to prove it was the only recourse toward the preservation of your life. If it can be proven otherwise, you'll be facing a very serious charge.

[country gent]

I have heard many tales of Rock salt being used in shotguns from oldtimers. Never seen any data or actual loads. If you are justified in using a firearm you are justified in that level of force. If not then the firearm better stay out of sight. Old Farmer here was lossing gas from his farm tank to kids.30-50 gals a month. He pepperd the back quarter on a car. Guess who paid the fines and to repair the car wasnt the thief. Judge told him he should have written down plate number and left the police to deal with it.

[turbo1889]

Against 2-legged trouble less then lethal loads are a bad idea. If we limit the discussion to the use of such loads against 4-legged trouble, I have considerable experience in that both in building such loads, using them, and dealing with the legal repercussions that result (for use against dogs left running loose, a criminal act in my state on the part of the owner, attacking my livestock such repercussions have only gone as far as winning the initial suit usually on dismissal and initiating and successfully winning counter suit and also pester the local animal control into prosecution of the owners of said dogs on criminal charges as well).

Unless dealing with very large, powerful, and persistent 4-legged trouble the easiest and most economical load is to use a hot magnum primer (Fed-209A, CCI-209M, etc . . .) to ignite a small 10-15 grain charge of Bullseye powder with whatever wad-column you desire on top filled up with those plastic pellets they sell in big jugs for the toy guns that shoot them (Walmart toy zone). Anything from a regular 2-3/4" shell with a regular trap load wad with just a small amount of those pellets up to a big 3-1/2" shell with just a couple of nitro cards between the powder charge and a whole bunch of those little plastic pellets.

If you need to step up things beyond that look into online purchase of 68-caliber black rubber balls sold by the bag as re-usable training projectiles intended to be used in large 68-cal paint ball guns for law enforcement non-lethal drills. They are inteded to be re-usable and not make a mess like regular paint-balls and also to hurt a whole lot more when you get hit by one then any paint-ball the idea being to hurt enough to feel nearly like you actually got hit with a real bullet and are only supposed to be used while wearing tactical protective gear or a hit in the wrong spot could be lethal for real or can cause injuries such as bruised or hair-line fractured ribs and such. They are intended for such hard-core training and they are just the right size to turn into rubber slug loads just like loading round ball slugs from lead and if you use a brown paper coil wrap sleave you can also use them in 3-1/2" shells to make rubber triple ball loads. The only dog so far that I had to move up to lethal loads right away and those didn't send running home was a pit-bull everything else if the plastic shot didn't stop them on their first attack run on my stock the big rubber balls did. Some refused to learn and kept coming back so I did have to step up to lethal loads but my policy is if I can teach a dog not to attack my stock without having to kill it through the use of such loads I will do so, and if I have to kill it because it won't learn then I do that as well. Dogs that attack me get the lethal treatment first time around unless I'm on their owners property in which case I leave informing them I will not be back so long as their dog attacks me, some of those people get it and either teach their dog or put it down, some don't and I consider that a good riddance situation - if your so stupid as to believe you have the right to keep a dangerous animal that attacks people without just provocation or in defense of its master or masters property then your too much of a worthless stupid 2-legged wretch for me to be associate with you.

[KCSO]

NO NO NO you as a civilian do NOT shoot at anyone unless you are justified in using lethal force. The whole LESS LETHAL ( what is that anyway, can you be less dead?) is a hoodoo even for L/E and at best will only result in a lawsuit for injuries. Not to mention what will happen is you somehow mix L/L and regular ammo. L/L for L/E is fired in special guns with bright orange stocks and those guns are NEVER supose to be loaded with any other ammo. As to dogs, here again you are either allowed to shoot an animal or you are NOT. You are not allowed to mearly injure someone elses animals for any reason. You are looking to get sued big time if you dent up the neighbor's dog and he finds out about it and rubber bullets will kill a small animal if one pellet or round goes in the wrong place. Most of the L/E in this area have given up on L/L as more trouble than it's worth.

[turbo1889]

. . . As to dogs, here again you are either allowed to shoot an animal or you are NOT. . .

Correct - If the situation allows you to shoot a dog (such as a loose dog attacking livestock in my state) then you can shoot the dog - period. Whether you choose to use lead or rubber loads is up to you.


. . . You are not allowed to mearly injure someone elses animals for any reason. You are looking to get sued big time if you dent up the neighbor's dog and he finds out about it and rubber bullets will kill a small animal if one pellet or round goes in the wrong place. . .

NOT Correct - There are indeed times where you are most certainly allowed to injure someone elses animal. The laws of my state refer to such cases as "force" and "potentially lethal force" in the print of the law just as the same phrasing is used in reference to the justifiable use of force against people as well. It's just there are a whole lot more situations where the use of "potentially lethal force" can be justifiably used against 4-legged then it can against 2-legged. Such "potentially lethal force" can be used against a dog that attacks you anywhere but on the property of the owner or keeper of that animal without any further qualifiers. That is obviously not the case for 2-legged, if a 2-legged predator tries to bite you you are only allowed the use of "force" and not "potentially lethal force" where as with a 4-legged predator so long as you aren't on the owners or keepers property you are allowed the full use of "potentially lethal force". In addition in my state if your dog is attacking or damaging my livestock on my property I am also allowed the full use of "potentially lethal force" against the 4-legged predator where as I am only allowed the use of "force" against a 2-legged predator attacking or messing around with my stock and only if the 2-legged predator escalates the situation to the point of me having to defend my own life or "forceable trespass in an occupied structure" (AKA: Home Invasion) is the use of "potentially lethal force" allowed.


Long story short, regardless of your feelings on the matter, at least in most states with sensible law codes 4-legged is dealt with on a whole different level then 2-legged. As to the use of "less lethal" rubber munitions - I do agree that they shouldn't be used except when the use of "lethal" lead munitions is also a justifiable use of force. The use of "less lethal" munitions should be an act of mercy NOT something that lets you shoot when normally you couldn't or shouldn't.

[9.3X62AL]

Gotta roll with KCSO's caveat here, and others above make good points as well. Your reluctance to use lethal force comes from a good place, and I admire that. As a pragmatic matter, there are just too many lean, hungry lawyers out there looking for an easy sailboat payment. Venturing into the gray areas of the force continuum as either a LEO or a citizen will without doubt cause you legal fees, court time, and possibly jail/prison stretches. Accept as a "given" that the law and its consequences are tilted precipitously in favor of azzhats and their mouthpieces, and that even a blatantly righteous and justified use of force will result in civil action. Been there/done that/got the T-shirt. From several perspectives.

[turbo1889]

As to getting sued for "denting up" my neighbors dog(s) using both "less lethal" plastic and rubber projectiles delivered from a shotgun load as well as the use of "lethal" lead, copper, and steel munitions delivered from not only shotguns but rifles and handguns both with ultimately lethal and non lethal outcomes -----


BEEN THERE ~ DONE THAT . . . . . one of the individuals who sued me not only lost his suit on dismissal but also was successfully prosecuted on criminal charges relating to the animal which attacked me and I also won my counter suit and he got additional fines and additional prison time for an additional Contempt of Court charge after he started screaming into the judges face when he was informed that the cost of the bullets I used to kill his dog while it was attacking me while I was riding my bike on a public road were a legitimate expense that I could charge to him along with me medical costs and he would indeed be paying that as well.

Granted, not all states have the laws and prerequisite case history that allows for pursuing so aggressive of a posture as to demand payment for the cost of the cartridges used to kill their dog in a case of self defense in a counter suit situation when some piece of 2-legged &@$%@&@ keeps a dangerous aggressive dog with a prior history of attacks on people and lets it run loose and it attacks you on a public right of way and then sues you for killing the dog. But almost anywhere with half way sensible laws on the books, especially areas with a long ranching and farming tradition, you are at least allowed to defend yourself and your stock from 4-legged predators and defend yourself in court from their 2-legged masters which are just as bad or worse. I would say worse for sure since rarely is it the dogs fault and if it were properly trained as an animal should be and kept it wouldn't be running around loosing attacking people and their stock !!! Incidents of dogs that truly are just bad dogs are rare and even then its the owners responsibility to put that dog down.

[turbo1889]

And, yes, the use of "less lethal" in response to dogs attacking stock does go back to the "training" part of the responsible ownership of a dog or any other 4-legged animal that can be a dangerous predator if left to its own devices. Heck 2-legged little squirts if left to their own devices without training and discipline will grow up to be dangerous predators much less a 4-legged only partially domesticated creature that has an inbred natural instinct to attack and kill stock animals descendant from its ancestors.

Every dog I shoot with plastic or rubber projectile "less lethal" shotgun loads can kiss its lucky stars that it is getting a second, third, or . . . chance at life and a healthy dose of behavior modifying training and discipline about attacking stock animals that its owner is either too ignorant, too stupid, and or too worthless to have done themselves.

99.9% of all of you dog owners need to go to the library and check out an unabridged original text copy of the book "Lassie" and read the beginning chapters about a how a true honorable gentleman who actually knows something about dogs actually trains one to be a truely domesticated and honorable animal that is a service to man and not merely a means of criminally assaulting they neighbor and his/er property.

[375RUGER]

Making your own buck from hot glue will be the cheapest way. The mould will pay for itself after you 'cast' the first 20. You will be looking for powders like green dot or bullseye for these light loads.
.
You should be using full lethal against any animal that is attacking your livestock. Even if "learns" to leave your's alone he will go on killing your neighbors livestock and if I was your neighbor I'd appreciate you putting a stop to it the first time before it crosses my fence.

[turbo1889]

. . . You should be using full lethal against any animal that is attacking your livestock. Even if "learns" to leave your's alone he will go on killing your neighbors livestock and if I was your neighbor I'd appreciate you putting a stop to it the first time before it crosses my fence.

That is a point of view that I can understand and respect. . . . Don't entirely agree with myself, but I can respect it. We all have our own choices to make and while it is certainly possible that dogs attacking my stock my associate the resulting painful experience with me and not so much the act of attacking stock. I would be surprised if a dog that's had a bad experience when attacking my stock might be a little more hesitant to attack someone else's stock as well, especially if it is the exact same kind of stock.

[Hogtamer]

After you jack one into chamber of a pump gun and get them running, number 9 shot to the hindmost parts will not be lethal at say 30 yards, but will require hours of discomfort getting them picked out at the local ER.

[35remington]

Shooting a teenager that was merely trespassing or vandalizing with any ammo, even nonlethal, would be the height of foolishness. You'll find yourself adjudicated faster than you can say "Perry Mason."

Plan on spending some time in jail and losing considerable savings if you do so. If you have any intelligence or an ounce of self preservation you'll simply not do it.

A gun is an escalation of force not to be employed save when the means justify it (trespassing or vandalizing is definitely not one of those times) and nonlethal ammo will not be seen as a mitigating factor in any involvement with a human being.

It's a gun. A real gun. Think about it. That's all it will be portrayed as at your trial....not what was in it.

[missionary5155]

Good evening
About 50 years ago a neighbor farmer cut loose a load of rocksalt at me and a freind Lee as we were high tailing it off his watermellon patch. I do not know the range but I am guessing about 50 yards. It was summer and I had on a T shirt and blue jeans. I was struck with a couple "chunks" in the back and legs. It stung but did not bodily damage nor left much of any marks. We both got a big laugh out of it. We also were abit more quiet next time we got hungry for watermellow on a hot early night walk.
Mike in Peru

[turbo1889]

^ Unless you have an official uniform, then when your breaking up a lawful and legal protest by shooting first against unarmed protesters you can shoot people in the head with rubber slugs at point blank range and it goes down as an "unfortunate accident" when they are pronounced DOA. On the other hand if you are a civilian and you have a mob of "gang banger" types outside your house your place in full riot mode throwing molotov cocktails at your house fire one shot with any kind of ammo even into the air and they will try to take your every last penny and lock you away and throw away the key.

The main problem I have with "less lethal" against 2-legged is the double standard. Even full on lethal force has a double standard that comes with the uniform but hardly any compared to what comes with the "less lethal". Especially annoying to me is the so called tazzer/handgun "confusion" incidents. Especially the cases where the departments are having the officers carry each on opposite sides of their duty belt and they somehow "accidentally" get them confused and the victim always seems to be someone on our side that the liberal establishment wanted out of the way. There have been over a half dozen tea party leaders killed in that manner in incidents were it was ruled that not even legitimate reason to use the tazzer much less lethal force.

Edit ~ Also, as with all things ballistic as to lethal capability it comes down to muzzle velocity, range, projectile construction, and density. I test my "less lethal" 12ga. loads on styro-foam sheeting at range. With the little plastic "air soft" pellets you are looking for about 1/4" depth of penetration in the styro-foam sheets at the intended range. For the big rubber balls its a dent that is about half of a ball. The white sheets 2" thick in about 18"x18" squares with wood frame around the edges but no support in the middle target area. Anyway, for use on dogs that is about what I tune them too and a load that gives the right amount of styro-foam test penetration at 50-yards out of a shotgun will have a lot more penetration and could be lethal at 25-yards so you have to tune the loads and know your approximate range both when loading and when using them. The big rubber balls are less effected by range and can also reach out to the 100-yard mark just like real slugs and tri-ball loads with a hot load but the same thing applies that the 100-yard load could be lethal at 50-yards or less.

[ROGER4314]

If I had to pick only ONE firearm, it would be a 12 gauge shotgun with multiple barrels and a wide variety of ammo. Years ago, I prowled dumps constantly and shot virtually every conceivable substance, product or part with my reloaded shotgun shells. Consequently, I do NOT recommend rounds like rock salt as they prevent you from using the round for SD if you really need it.

I propose instead, a difference in technique. Shooting the ground in front of an aggressor will cause as much pain as needed and will limit the lethality a lot. Depending on the surface (paved or dirt), you can wreak havoc with anyone in range. Remember, even the wads in blanks can be lethal at close range. It's a bad plan to design less than lethal ammo. If the ground strike doesn't stop them, you still retain a lethal shot if you need it.

Flash

[preparehandbook]

Having used rubber buckshot on both humans and animals I am a big fan. I can also tell you that the people peppered with rubber buckshot absolutely preferred it to lead buckshot or the favorite non-lethal choice in most of the 2nd and 3rd world, ordinary birdshot.

Assuming due caution is used as far as range and method of fire (direct vs skip-shot) it is fairly safe and considerably more forgiving than lead.

Sellier & Bellot rubber buck has been a great ranch round and I have found it worked well on small bear and large dogs, but it is best to shoot when you and the animal are separated by a good 30-50 feet to prevent real injury versus a stinging experience. Also great care must be taken to avoid facial hits as you could put out an eye or have a pellet go up a nostril which can cause aspiration or a very serious hemorrhage.

An animal stung in the butt by rubber buck learns to associate humans with noise and pain and is reluctant to return.

Rioters treated to the sting of rubber buck tend to disperse or at least lose some degree of focus.

A threat too close to safely be addressed with rubber buckshot may have to be dealt with by lethal force, but if you don't own any less than lethal rounds you don't even have the option. Most of the time my ranch shotgun had a round of rubber buckshot chambered, followed by a magazine full of buckshot, when not needed I merely racked the rubber buck out and used the lead.

I am bypassing the whole legal aspects as I am not a lawyer.

I have seen folks load dry soybeans into a lightly loaded shell to drive off pest animals, it seemed to work, though not as well as commercial rubber rounds.

[Duckiller]

Two LEOs have told you DON'T SHOOT GUNS A PEOPLE UNLESS YOU FEAR FOR YOUR LIFE. Shoot your pellet gun at a dog because you don't want it on your properety and it is traced back to you will also lead to big legal trouble. Go visit your local sheriff/ chief of police and have a heart to heart talk about your problems. Do anything else and you are going to be selling all your guns, because felons can't have gun, vote or do lots of things.

[sheepdog01]

I have honey bee hives and we have bears in our area. I have no desire to kill or seriously harm a bear but I do want to defend my bees. I believe I will load some rubber buck as bear deterrent. I could shoot them out of my bathroom window so I will not worry about being attacked. Probably be a good idea to keep it to myself if I need to discharge a round on a honey seeking bruin.

[preparehandbook]

Folks should consider that what you can and can't do varies greatly by region.

Shooting a troublesome dog in many rural areas whether with rubber or lead buckshot would be a non issue.

Try the same thing in suburbia and you'd lose your guns within the hour.

Heck, I've lived in a few remote spots where even peppering a 2 legged trespasser with rubber would not elicit a police response, they'd only come out for a "shots fired" if somebody was dead or seriously wounded.

[9.3X62AL]

Good point, Preparehandbook. Just be aware that Murphy's Law gets no plea bargains, and that once attorneys become involved "Murphy" can be described as being naively optimistic.

[preparehandbook]

I was taught when I was young and stupid, working as a bodyguard

"Always think of a gunfight from the courtroom backwards"

If you start off thinking how the incident will appear to a jury most of the time the whole thing is just best avoided.

I have had a couple friends who chose to shoot in what seemed like a very, very justified setting, and they were not charged criminally..... But the civil suit destroyed them, even the one guy I know who won was buried with legal fees.