• Mossberg Owners is in the process of upgrading the software. Please bear with us while we transition to the new look and new upgraded software.

Less than Lethal shotgun shell for the first round.

oli700 said:
yes it does, what does that story have to do with less lethal rounds ?

Maybe he didn't need to shoot the trespasser but he didn't belong there. He should have pulled him over the fence and beat his ass and tossed him back over.

OK I will pass that advice on to my wife for then next time I am working out of town overnight.

I was just saying that this example was one of those shoot/no-shoot grey areas where rubber buckshot could have meant the difference between a citation for illegal discharge and 20 years in prison for the homeowner.

Personally I would have stayed in the house and called 911, then ordered a pizza because Domino's would be more likely to show up in 20 minutes or less than the cops. If there appeared to be any danger from the intruder we could set off the car alarm from inside the house to try and scare him off.
 
who's to say your wife didn't just blind a 14 yo kid for life with rubber buck shot ? How much better is that than what happened in the story ?......and you still think LTL guarantees a person lives ? LTL kills too, just not as often
 
Had this been me I probably would have kept watch on the kid and called 911. I don't think the homeowner did anything illegal by confronting him in the yard, but he possibly put himself at more risk than he needed to. Sometime being a good witness is the best course of action, but it is always easier to see this in retrospect then when it is going down.

All else being equal if the guy had used non-lethal rounds and gave the kid a nice welt on the head, it would still end up in court as excessive use of force or some other charge. People don't like guns so if one is used, even in a non-lethal capacity, you will most likely be in a legal battle unless the circumstances are blatantly obvious it was in SD, (and even then it is often an uphill battle).
 
According to Landry, as he approached teen, Coulter made a “move, as if to reach for something.” Landry, fearing that Coulter was reaching for a weapon, shot him once in the head.

To me it looks like this is where this case will be decided. If he is believed that the kid made a move then he may get off. If not, they will fry him. It seems that the police often face someone making a move and they shoot them. I do not fault the police in that example nor would I a homeowner. I believe they are almost always exonerated even if the person was unarmed.

I try and look at things and remember that I am not a trained professional. While I am usually calm and keep my head in a crisis I have never had to face someone down while armed with a gun. If my or my families lives were in danger would I remember that the first round is not lethal? I also would not want to face someone down with a less than lethal first round and realize that the situation required otherwise, especially if they turned out to be armed. I'd rather keep it as simple for me as possible and that means not having to think about options. In the end we all have to do what works best for us be it lethal or non lethal first round.
 
If I load my gun with Less Lethal rounds can I still call it a shotty?

I love that name.

For real.
 
I've always thought of LTL rounds of something the police use... in which case there's usually back up behind you with brass waiting in the chamber in case the LTL round didn't do its job. I can appreciate their place, but I think if you're gonna have that "shotty" you've got to be willing to use it.

As for the aforementioned case... not many situations are black and white. It sucks that not all states have good stand-your-ground laws in place that would make these obscurities within the law less prevalent. If the bad guy's on your property... it's you right to choose how to take care of the threat. But I also don't think you should just go guns blazing at anyone who's in your yard.

Layering your protective systems where ever possible is the best choice... by all means... if you can keep the intruder out of your house as you sit back eating pizza waiting for police I'm a fan (I'm partial to Papa John's though)... every situation will call for a different set of actions, and as a responsible gun owners it's our responsibility to make the right choices, or be willing to live with the consequences.
 
aksavanaman said:
I've always thought of LTL rounds of something the police use... in which case there's usually back up behind you with brass waiting in the chamber in case the LTL round didn't do its job. I can appreciate their place, but I think if you're gonna have that "shotty" you've got to be willing to use it.

As for the aforementioned case... not many situations are black and white. It sucks that not all states have good stand-your-ground laws in place that would make these obscurities within the law less prevalent. If the bad guy's on your property... it's you right to choose how to take care of the threat. But I also don't think you should just go guns blazing at anyone who's in your yard.

Layering your protective systems where ever possible is the best choice... by all means... if you can keep the intruder out of your house as you sit back eating pizza waiting for police I'm a fan (I'm partial to Papa John's though)... every situation will call for a different set of actions, and as a responsible gun owners it's our responsibility to make the right choices, or be willing to live with the consequences.

Great post, Sir.

+1 Rep point for you.... oh.... wait
 
nitesite said:
aksavanaman said:
I've always thought of LTL rounds of something the police use... in which case there's usually back up behind you with brass waiting in the chamber in case the LTL round didn't do its job. I can appreciate their place, but I think if you're gonna have that "shotty" you've got to be willing to use it.

As for the aforementioned case... not many situations are black and white. It sucks that not all states have good stand-your-ground laws in place that would make these obscurities within the law less prevalent. If the bad guy's on your property... it's you right to choose how to take care of the threat. But I also don't think you should just go guns blazing at anyone who's in your yard.

Layering your protective systems where ever possible is the best choice... by all means... if you can keep the intruder out of your house as you sit back eating pizza waiting for police I'm a fan (I'm partial to Papa John's though)... every situation will call for a different set of actions, and as a responsible gun owners it's our responsibility to make the right choices, or be willing to live with the consequences.

Great post, Sir.

+1 Rep point for you.... oh.... wait

Ditto. I'll even share one layer of my system. They handle the small pond out front, which a bad guy may try to use as cover/concealment. Good luck with that. ;)

cottonmouth-snake.jpg


Btw, I don't mind sharing this with any potential adversaries that may be lurking here. One of the objectives of a defense in depth is to force the opposition into predetermined kill zones/routes.
 
Stag1 said:
Family members are questioning the death of a 95-year-old WWII U.S. Air Corps sergeant who killed by cops at an assisted living center last month after resisting medical treatment.

John Wrana died from injuries sustained in an incident, which was later ruled as a homicide by the medical examiner, by Park Forest police on July 27. Police were called to Victory Centre, according to the Chicago Tribune, when it was reported by faculty that he was being “combative,” resisting medical treatment to which he was being “involuntarily” committed to.
john wrana and wife helen

John Wrana with his wife Helen in 2005. (Photo Nick Grapsas via Chicago Tribune)

A press release from the police department emailed to the Chicago Tribune stated that Wrana was threatening staff and paramedics with his metal cane and a 2-foot shoehorn. The report states he later picked up a 12-inch knife.

The Tribune reported that police ordered the man to surrender, but his failure to do so and continued threats resulted in them using a Taser on him and then shooting him with small bean bags. Wrana dropped the knife and was taken to the hospital at this point.

Wrana was conscious when he arrived at a local hospital but died in the early morning hours. The Southtown Star reported the Cook County medical examiner’s office conducting an autopsy that found Wrana died from being shot in the stomach with the 12-gauge shotgun with bean-bag ammo.

The family now has an attorney looking into the case.

“This was a literal war hero,” attorney Nicholas Grapsas told the Southtown Star, noting that the family has not yet decided if it will file a lawsuit. “It’s outright insulting when you have such lack of respect for someone who served our country to the extent he did.”

According to Grapsas, staff and family who were at the assisted-living center at the time of the incident said they didn’t see Wrana pick up a knife. They also noted that he was sitting a chair during the altercation.

John Kass with the Chicago Tribune reported Maria Oliva, an executive with Pathway Senior Living, which runs the center, saying staff was not in the room after police arrived to subdue Wrana. This, Kass said, shows “there was no imminent threat to staff.”

Kass also reported Grapsas adding to the story that staff had wanted to be allowed into the room to try to calm the man.

“At some point, I’m told there were between five and seven police officers, they went back to the room with a riot shield in hand, entered the door and shot him with a shotgun that contained bean-bag rounds,” Grapsas said, according to Kass.

With police saying one thing and the family’s attorney presenting other information to the case, Kass reported veteran cops stating they believe unnecessary force was used.

“I’ve never met a police officer who couldn’t handle a 95-year-old man in a walker. And John Wrana wasn’t Jason Bourne. He was an old war veteran who didn’t want to be pushed around,” Kass wrote.

Wrana’s step-daughter Sharon Mangerson described Wrana as a “very vital 95-year-old” and “as independent as they come,” but she didn’t think he was dangerous.

Still, Kass reported a senior police official, who too thought at first the tactics used by police in this instance might have been excessive, saying that we don’t know exactly what law enforcement was faced with in the moment they made these decisions.

“If you don’t have all of the facts, it’s hard to judge someone. … Anyone can be dangerous,” Kass reported the official saying.


http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...atment-tased-and-shot-with-bean-bags-by-cops/

Stag posted this in another thread but It's certainly appropriate to add here... just another set of data to form an opinion.
 
The police shot a 95 year old man with a bean bag AFTER they tazed him?

Those rounds have something like 5/8 an ounce of #8 lead shot in a ballistic nylon bean bag so they won't penetrate. Rubber weights next to nothing.
 
blunt force trauma , shock, internal bleeding.......common nick you cant be that sheltered
 
I can say that seeing the picture of that lady beat up by some punk really puts thing in prospective. I load my Mav 88 with 2 00 Buck and rthen 2 slugs the fill it up with 00. I can only say Nick I understand your concern, killing someone is final and it may be hard to live with. we all say to hell with the bad guy, but killling someone will be on your mind forever. You also have to deal with the LAW on this when you pull the trigger...
All of that said I would pull the trigger if someone enters my home unwelcome.. PERIOD. Why? because my wife and kids are the most precious things on this earth.... AND NO harm will come to them if I can stop it.
Like it has been said above, train and shoot your weapon. Make love to it and know it well and you will know what to do if the time comes....
 
cnctruckeic said:
...... All of that said I would pull the trigger if someone enters my home unwelcome.. PERIOD. Why? because my wife and kids are the most precious things on this earth.... AND NO harm will come to them if I can stop it.

You might want to establish some very critical and crucial parameters beyond just "entering your home" unwelcome, such as are they a perceived threat and do they exhibit any harmful intention and have the means to do so.

And posts like yours will be used against you in a questionable shooting during the grand jury phase if the DA gets a hold of it. Be careful.
 
Vagen said:
Wouldn't the fact that they entered my home be reason enough to perceive them as a threat?

Short answer, No, not in a court of law.
 
Nick Burkhardt said:
The police shot a 95 year old man with a bean bag AFTER they tazed him?

Those rounds have something like 5/8 an ounce of #8 lead shot in a ballistic nylon bean bag so they won't penetrate. Rubber weights next to nothing.

If you take the standard velocity of bird shot (i.e 1300 ft/s) and a 5/8 oz bean bag which equals about 273 grains... that's 1024 ft/lbs of energy at the muzzle... and I'm sure he was shot within 20 ft... sounds like it could cause some internal bleeding to me.. add in a 95 year old's decreasing health=.... dead veteran :evil:
 
Vagen said:
Well, I'd perceive it as a threat. I guess they'd just have to persecute me.

Okay. I see your position. Stick with that pardner, if you wish. Swagger. Bravado.

But if you come home to find a homeless man rummaging thru your refrigerator for food and he turns and puts his hands up and says "I'm sorry I was just hungry and thought no one was home..."

And it's prosecute, not persecute. A dictionary can be your friend. Look both of those words up, and add swagger and bravado as well.

You are entitled to your opinion. Even when it is horribly misguided.
 
cnctruckeic said:
Wouldn't the fact that they entered my home be reason enough to perceive them as a threat?

Short answer.... YES. But it goes beyond that.

nitesite said:
You might want to establish some very critical and crucial parameters beyond just "entering your home" unwelcome, such as 1 are they a perceived threat 2 and do they exhibit any harmful intention 3 and have the means to do so.

And posts like yours will be used against you in a questionable shooting during the grand jury phase if the DA gets a hold of it. Be careful.
 
Back
Top