testtest

Buffalo Bore Ammo

Blackmesa96 said:
Good information. Still would view what is mentioned here in light of where you live. A trial in blue states isn't necessarily going to unfold the same as one in a more conservative one, despite what should happen.
Click to expand...
Each individual should have a good, clear understanding of the laws of the state. It is also important to get basic understanding of other states when traveling. The number one thing I realize and accept is I am not Law Enforcement or someone's savior. The gun I'm carrying is for me / family. I don't feel society as a whole is looking for heroes. I might be naive but I believe as long as I stay within my guidelines I will be fine criminally but civilly is a totally different story. I purchased a gun owners insurance coverages more for the civil action than criminal. Very informative article BTW
 
Tonopah said:
If you're talking about self defense, you owe it to yourself to imagine yourself in a courtroom later. The prosecutor is telling the jury about your "Hellcat" pistol, or your modified 1911 with the "hair trigger" while your defense attorney is back peddling trying to explain these things away. Take those inflammatory issues off the table by using a common, unmodified, sidearm shooting the kind of ammo that law enforcement uses, like Gold Dots. And don't say a darn thing to law enforcement -- just contact your lawyer before anyone else. Your lawyers' 24 hour number should be in your cell phone.
Click to expand...
(n)

As BB said there's no proof that this has occurred in court.

There's no manufacturer that says any of their commercially-sold LE or extra-power loads are only for LEO/Mil use.

And there's no NFA restrictions on "commonly-used" rifle and pistol ammo.
 
Blackmesa96 said:
I understand your point, but I still would expect a prosecutor to mention these sort of items simply to sow seeds of doubt in juror's minds. Their intent would be to make the jury consider the possibility of a defendant looking for a chance to fatally shoot someone.

In any debate, arguments are offered strategically. The plan isn't to win each point, it's to win the debate (or the conviction).

That's what I mean by not giving them fuel for the fire. I would expect a prosecutor who is determined to win a conviction to mention that someone was using "extra lethal" ammunition and that was the reason that Joe Scumbag died when he was shot while breaking into your house. Poor Joe would still be alive today if you hadn't used that extra deadly stuff.
Click to expand...
There is no such thing as extra lethal.
All ammunition is lethal.
 
Blackmesa96 said:
Good information. Still would view what is mentioned here in light of where you live. A trial in blue states isn't necessarily going to unfold the same as one in a more conservative one, despite what should happen.
Click to expand...
Heck, in central Va. the politics of the prosecutor as well as those of the jury changes at each city/county line! For that reason I do not frequent the City of Richmond. Also know if you have to defend your life in an urban area there will be cell phone videos out the wazoo that are sure to be used against you in court.
 
A lot of good points raised in this thread. Note that there are, of course, two kinds of cases: criminal and civil. Two different standards of proof: beyond a reasonable doubt and preponderance of the evidence.

In criminal cases the standard of proof is much higher but you also have a district attorney who may be politically motivated to convict you, no matter what. The prosecutor may have even used George Soros money to get elected. The less ammunition you give him/her to paint a negative picture of you, the better.

In civil cases, the standard of proof is much lower and appealing to the jury’s emotions can easily influence the outcome, especially when the plaintiff is an allegedly grieving widow, mother, sister or brother of the deceased.

In either case, appealing to a jury is like a beauty contest and the most attractive side generally wins. Don’t go in front of a jury with Punisher hand grips on your pistol.
 
I have found myself asking this question on this forum no less than 10 times and each time there is no answer. I want to hear about one case, just one besides the cop with his personal weapon that said " You're F'ed" on it where a modified trigger or handloaded ammo resulted in extra damage to a litigant in a justified shooting.

in Missouri and several other states there is a pre-emption clause which makes it impossible to sue someone civily if the shooting is justified.
 
If it is a justified shooting, then the gun modifications are irrelevant as is type of ammo used. Agreed.

But sometimes you have to get a favorable jury decision before you can breathe a sigh of relief that the shooting was, indeed, justified. You thinking it was justified really doesn't count for much. It's the DA who is going to decide whether to charge you, or the jury which is going to decide whether to convict you.

And juries are swayed by perception — which is why defense attorneys always recommend that their clients wear a coat and tie (even if they have never worn those clothes before in their entire lives). And why prosecuting attorneys always try to drag into the evidentiary record anything that they think will reflect poorly on the defendant.

You are not going to find a case where as a matter of law the defendant was found not guilty even though his pistol was modified. It doesn’t work that way. He is just found “not guilty.” That’s it.

And you also will never know if a jury convicts on facts that we might think amount to a justifiable shooting, but they convicted because the prosecution convinced them that the defendant is a bad guy who deserves what he gets — in part because he intentionally modified his gun to make it a more effective killing tool — and/or used reloads because factory ammo is just not lethal enough. He will just be found “guilty.” And that’s it.

If you conceal carry, you do that in anticipation that you might have to use it. And if you use it, you might end up in front of a jury. Increase your odds of a favorable verdict by using a common type of handgun, unmodified, and factory ammo — preferably the type favored by law enforcement in your area.
 
Tonopah said:
If it is a justified shooting, then the gun modifications are irrelevant as is type of ammo used. Agreed.

But sometimes you have to get a favorable jury decision before you can breathe a sigh of relief that the shooting was, indeed, justified. You thinking it was justified really doesn't count for much. It's the DA who is going to decide whether to charge you, or the jury which is going to decide whether to convict you.

And juries are swayed by perception — which is why defense attorneys always recommend that their clients wear a coat and tie (even if they have never worn those clothes before in their entire lives). And why prosecuting attorneys always try to drag into the evidentiary record anything that they think will reflect poorly on the defendant.

You are not going to find a case where as a matter of law the defendant was found not guilty even though his pistol was modified. It doesn’t work that way. He is just found “not guilty.” That’s it.

And you also will never know if a jury convicts on facts that we might think amount to a justifiable shooting, but they convicted because the prosecution convinced them that the defendant is a bad guy who deserves what he gets — in part because he intentionally modified his gun to make it a more effective killing tool — and/or used reloads because factory ammo is just not lethal enough. He will just be found “guilty.” And that’s it.

If you conceal carry, you do that in anticipation that you might have to use it. And if you use it, you might end up in front of a jury. Increase your odds of a favorable verdict by using a common type of handgun, unmodified, and factory ammo — preferably the type favored by law enforcement in your area.
Click to expand...
As long as I do the right thing I will be able to survive the outcome. The pistol is common (all of mine are) and the ammo is factory (Idaho, Utah, Mississippi, Georgia). My Glock 31 (have carried 2x) has a Timney Glock 3-4 Alpha trigger purchased legally. I will finish with I have zero concerns about the legality of my carry gun / guns.
 
Tonopah said:
If it is a justified shooting, then the gun modifications are irrelevant as is type of ammo used. Agreed.

But sometimes you have to get a favorable jury decision before you can breathe a sigh of relief that the shooting was, indeed, justified. You thinking it was justified really doesn't count for much. It's the DA who is going to decide whether to charge you, or the jury which is going to decide whether to convict you.

And juries are swayed by perception — which is why defense attorneys always recommend that their clients wear a coat and tie (even if they have never worn those clothes before in their entire lives). And why prosecuting attorneys always try to drag into the evidentiary record anything that they think will reflect poorly on the defendant.

You are not going to find a case where as a matter of law the defendant was found not guilty even though his pistol was modified. It doesn’t work that way. He is just found “not guilty.” That’s it.

And you also will never know if a jury convicts on facts that we might think amount to a justifiable shooting, but they convicted because the prosecution convinced them that the defendant is a bad guy who deserves what he gets — in part because he intentionally modified his gun to make it a more effective killing tool — and/or used reloads because factory ammo is just not lethal enough. He will just be found “guilty.” And that’s it.

If you conceal carry, you do that in anticipation that you might have to use it. And if you use it, you might end up in front of a jury. Increase your odds of a favorable verdict by using a common type of handgun, unmodified, and factory ammo — preferably the type favored by law enforcement in your area.
Click to expand...
Is this longhand for I don't have an example of anyone being convicted for an otherwise justified shooting because he had an aftermarket trigger or hand loaded ammo ?
 
Just stop reading my post after the first line: "If it is a justified shooting, then the gun modifications are irrelevant as is type of ammo used. Agreed" and you will be happy. The rest of the post is a little complicated.
 
Tonopah said:
Just stop reading my post after the first line: "If it is a justified shooting, then the gun modifications are irrelevant as is type of ammo used. Agreed" and you will be happy. The rest of the post is a little complicated.
Click to expand...


Not really. I read it. I agree with a lot of it, though it wasn't really my point.

Most of the people on the internet telling people not to use handloads in carry guns or not to modify their triggers either claim to be criminal attorneys or "Experts" or they are parroting recommendations from same. And I have straight up asked some of these attorneys and experts ( Including Assad) for an example and none have been able to provide one. And as a person in a room while a trial is taking place you absolutely would be able to tell if that sort of thing helped get someone convicted of an otherwise justified shooting.

Other than that, which really was my initial point, I agree with you. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top