Defense loads and the law

[netentity]

I find it interesting that those who posted on this thread that caliber would not be a factor made personal statements to the contrary in this thread here.

The statement that really drove the point home was this one.

I definitely would not carry this caliber in a heavily populated urban area, as the chance of overpenetration, even with HPs, is simply too great to justify carrying it there. I could see carrying it in bear country or in a thinly populated rural area.

It all boils down to what 12 think in the jury deliberation room. Get 12 that think along those lines during the civil suit and you've lost the farm and then some.

[tattedupboy]

Originally Posted by netentity

I find it interesting that those who posted on this thread that caliber would not be a factor made personal statements to the contrary in this thread here.

The statement that really drove the point home was this one.



It all boils down to what 12 think in the jury deliberation room. Get 12 that think along those lines during the civil suit and you've lost the farm and then some.

I made that statement, but on another thread. Yes, I have previously stated on this thread, that no reasonable person would take caliber into consideration when determining a person's liability in a self-defense shooting. However, I also believe that it is generally understood that the biggest self defense caliber that is practical for carrying is the .45. I did not say that it should not be carried; I was only suggesting that its size makes it impractical for everyday carry. And, yes, it is risky in that it can overpenetrate; how is that being contradictory? Would you carry a caliber that you know is capable of overpenetration, and run the risk of killing or injuring a bystander, particularly in a densely populated urban area?

[netentity]

Originally Posted by tattedupboy

I made that statement, but on another thread. Yes, I have previously stated on this thread, that no reasonable person would take caliber into consideration when determining a person's liability in a self-defense shooting. However, I also believe that it is generally understood that the biggest self defense caliber that is practical for carrying is the .45. I did not say that it should not be carried; I was only suggesting that its size makes it impractical for everyday carry. And, yes, it is risky in that it can overpenetrate; how is that being contradictory?

Anything you do or say in any context can be used against you in a criminal or civil trial. You're in private security, if you get involved in a shooting off duty in a jurisdiction that has no civil suit immunity do you think your personnel records or the very firearms you own that you did not use in the self defense act may come into play during a civil suit. Absolutely.

It is being contradictory by your blanket statements that caliber is not a factor. You've just pointed out a civil liability factor in the other thread. The plaintiff will be asking that very same question to a jury in a civil trial. It's much easier to win a civil judgment.

We also have an HI instructor that has first hand information from his DA's office that the shooting would be put under much greater scrutiny if the caliber is in question. I also pointed out that a NC DOJ attorney who is an expert in defending LEOs in use of force in his State and teaches NC CHP instructors suggests using the same caliber as what LEOs carry. If it can be twisted by a good attorney, it will. If you do or say anything that can be used against you in court, it might happen.

Would you carry a caliber that you know is capable of overpenetration, and run the risk of killing or injuring a bystander, particularly in a densely populated urban area?

Exactly. You do not want a prosecutor or plaintiff to be asking that question of a jury. If that question is put into the minds of the majority of the jury then you may end up losing the case, especially a civil case.

[wuzfuz]

I keep seeing the statement that you can't carry anything over .45 calibre, but is that really a law anywhere but Oklahoma, and is it even a law there? While in San Diego, I attended a security academy and one of the instructors was a SDPD detective who carried a Desert Eagle in 50AE in a shoulder holster. He was 6'4" and was able to conceal the wepaon, I would have to have aq wagon to carry it. I carry a compact .45 that is the same size as a Colt Commander, and i still have a bit of trouble concealing it at times. As for the statement someone made about an 80 year old woman with a .45, that is absurd. I used to compete in combat shooting, and most of the weapons were.45 Colt 1911s or clones. The 1911 is the most carried, andavailable pistol arouind, and one of the easiest to use. We had a kid who competed with us, and he was a whiz with a full-house .45 Govt model, and he was 12 years old. I also keep seeing people say not to use reloads for liability and reliability reasons. Liability, mayb, but reliablility? Horse puckey. I had more malfunctions with factory ammo than i ever had with my hand-rolled rounds. Our department at one point issued WW Silvertips in the calibre you carried. One day, while reloading my magazines, I picked up a rond that just didn't feel right. I took it to the department armorer and we discovered that the aluminum jacket had no lead in it. The armorer said it would have gone like a bat out of you know where if fired, but would probably bounce off the guy I fired it at. I have no problem with the dicision between criminal and civil. I worked with a man whose fiance was dragged into a doorway by a guy intent on raping her. She had a French-made .32 auto and shot the guy through the neck after he broke her arm. She was not prosecuted or sued, she got her gun back and the illegal alien who tried raping her is serving his time in the California penal system prior to his being deported. there was a woman in Ruidoso, NM who found a bear in her living room and got a neighbor to take care of it. the guy shotthe bear with an 8mm rifle, and the game warden criticized him for using such a big gun. The guy said, If I had had an anti-tank gun, I would have used it. It's what you got when TSHTF that counts.

[netentity]

Originally Posted by wuzfuz

I keep seeing the statement that you can't carry anything over .45 calibre, but is that really a law anywhere but Oklahoma, and is it even a law there?

Yes; OK Statute §21-1290.6. In other states it's an issue of what is mainstream practice. Part of what's mainstream practice is cost. While the 10mm was a mainstream LE caliber at one time, I don't have my three 10s on my NV CFP or shoot them regularly because of ammunition costs. When I start reloading again that may change for my practice ammo.

While in San Diego, I attended a security academy and one of the instructors was a SDPD detective who carried a Desert Eagle in 50AE in a shoulder holster.

Was the detective's name Smith or Harrigan by any chance?

[45fella]

Originally Posted by festus

It is only a matter of time before some dirtbag ACLU (anti-Christ's Legal Unit) atty. brings it to the jury that you loaded that round to be a MORE EFFECTIVE killing machine. It ain't worth the hassle.

Really though, all attorneys have that bad side.

If you go to a defense attorney for advice on what gun/ammo to use he will tell you the best combination so he will have the easiest time getting you off in court.

But take that same attorney.......A guy walks into his office that used a 12 gauge shotgun and put 5 shots into someones torso that came after him with a bat, with 50 witnesses saying the first shot killed him. That same attorney, as long as he's making money, will fight and say that that loser career criminal was totally in the right, and try to get him off.

Attorneys are necassary for us who try like hell to follow the law and get caught up in a bad situation, but attorneys are also responsible for the thousands of scumbag career criminals still waliking our streets.

[toreskha]

Originally Posted by 45fella

But take that same attorney.......A guy walks into his office that used a 12 gauge shotgun and put 5 shots into someones torso that came after him with a bat, with 50 witnesses saying the first shot killed him. That same attorney, as long as he's making money, will fight and say that that loser career criminal was totally in the right, and try to get him off.

Who is it that's coming at you with a bat so that you need to use more than 2 rounds of buckshot to put them down?

[tattedupboy]

Originally Posted by toreskha

Who is it that's coming at you with a bat so that you need to use more than 2 rounds of buckshot to put them down?

Most likely it is somebody who is hyped up on drugs.

Deadly force is deadly force. You are either justified or you are not. Try very, very hard to pay attention to what your ccw instructor tells you concerning when you can and can not shoot. Do not shoot them after they have fallen down and are begging for mama. Do not ever pull your pistol if you can run away without getting yourself killed. Caliber that may or may not be carried in NC is not specifierd, so it is a non issue. Shooting when deadly force is not authorized is very clearly a crime. Davy crockett had the best advice on this matter" Make sure you are right, then go ahead." enough said.

[tattedupboy]

Originally Posted by docmagnum357@yahoo.com

Deadly force is deadly force. You are either justified or you are not. Try very, very hard to pay attention to what your ccw instructor tells you concerning when you can and can not shoot. Do not shoot them after they have fallen down and are begging for mama. Do not ever pull your pistol if you can run away without getting yourself killed. Caliber that may or may not be carried in NC is not specifierd, so it is a non issue. Shooting when deadly force is not authorized is very clearly a crime. Davy crockett had the best advice on this matter" Make sure you are right, then go ahead." enough said.

This is what I've been trying to explain to netentity. If you shoot in self defense, the caliber used to defend yourself will not matter.