43Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Any bullet good enough for police use is good enough for personal protection and I see they use hollow points.
In Virginia, we have no such concerns about which ammunition to use so it is up to us, those who choose to make use of a defensive firearm, to take the right decision as to type and design of defensive ammunition. If I found myself in a situation where I had to use my sidearm and in the encounter one of my rounds struck an innocent party, I cannot be held legally liable for that. My attacker(s) would be charged with this. Now it is possible I could be sued but unlikely as long as my actions were deemed excusable... but still possible.Originally Posted by stevenmetzger
In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
| |  |
Any bullet good enough for police use is good enough for personal protection and I see they use hollow points.
"Those who would trade liberty for security, deserves neither liberty nor security."
"The original point and click interface was a Smith & Wesson".
This is sooooooo frustrating!!!!
You can get sued today for just about anything. Whether or not the suit will stand or be dismissed is based on how good your attorney is. Once you're sued the financial damage is already done.
Best to remember there's a lawyer attached to every round you fire., whether at the range, hunting or in defense.
CERTIFICATIONS - NRA Pistol - NRA Refuse To Be A Victim - NRA Personal Protection In The Home - NRA Personal Protection Outside The Home - NRA Chief RSO - Tactical Handgun I & II - Urban Assault - Child Abduction Prevention - ISAFE - K9 Trainer
Exactly what the "victims" attorney may bring up in a civil lawsuit. Prosecutor may even use it in a criminal trial. Pretty damning stuff for the jury to hear, isn't it?
*"Chief Smith, can you tell The Court what kind of ammunition is issued to your officers?" "Yes. Every officer is issued Federal Hydra-Shock hollow points for their duty and off-duty handguns." "Why?" "Because we need to STOP criminal acts, while firing the fewest number of shots possible and law enforcement studies have shown that this kind of ammunition does that reliably." "Did your Departments' investigation find out what kind of ammunition was used by the defendant?" "Yes. Federal Hydra-Shock." "your Departments' mission is to protect and serve?" "Yes." "With Federal Hydra-Shocks?" "Yes".
*Fictional. Burden of proof is held to a higher standard in a criminal trial than in a civil trial.
Best to safe-side that to at LEAST two lawyers - yours and the "victim's" - and perhaps more than once (criminal and civil cases)!
In my state, suits brought by the assailant or his family against the victim for having used deadly force are quite rare. I posed this very question to a commonwealth's attorney and a candidate for county sheriff and neither one of them could recall such a case in the commonwealth. Not saying it can't happen but with our affirmative defense case law, it's pretty darned rare.
In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
I can agree with the rarity of the lawsuits actually happening in such cases and can see where it would probably be the exceptions rather than the rule. If you think about what all it would take you can imagine what the likelyhood of a attacker's family suing the victim. When ther is such a shooting you often hear that there will be lawsuits but usually things get changes. First there would probably have to be some evidence that it was not a "clean shoot". People run their mouths about "he was such a good boy" but the truth usually starts to creep out. Even though it only takes a few dollars to file a lawsuit you will need a lawyer. Unless it is a good case now lawyer is going to take the case on a contigency basis and require some money up front. Since it is unlikely that the family of the BG had much to start with or he would not have been out committing crimes of that type, it is doubtful that the family will have the funds to pay a lawyer up front. If they do pay the lawyer up front how much can they expect to get out of the "victim" if they win the case. If it is such that they have a chance of winning the case then probably the "victim" is already broke from paying his legal fees in the criminal case. So the fact is seldom would it be worth the family suing the victim. However there is an exception to every rule so it is always possible and you never can be sure of anything so even if there has never been a case of it happening there is always the possibility and I doubt anyone on here wants that distinction.
Winchester Ranger Law Enforcement Ammunition .45 ACP 230gr SXT will get tried next time at the range in the Sig C3.
NRA Life Member.
Your points are right and I should have added in my post to which you responded that the victim's use of deadly force was either no billed or found to be excusable. If the victim overstepped his legal bounds then the use of deadly force would be questionable and he could be in hot water, which could open him up to a possible winning civil suit.
In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Posting Permissions
