Defense loads and the law

[lrlsaxd45]

The State of Florida is a state where no one can be sued in civil court

[tattedupboy]

Originally Posted by lrlsaxd45

I am told that you can use reloads if you do according to the manual of the load you use .per state attorney. When asked about your ammo say exactly what you use to reload, winchester,hornady,etc If you are very specific and detaied ,I am told that you will be alright.I also suggest that you read articles by Massad Ayoob, He is the leading expert witness in this topic and the one many attorneys and LEO hires for their defence.We can hear everything from those that aren't up to date, Seek advise from the state attorneys office, defence, and LEO, then you can make a fair decision.A excellent book to read is COMBAT HANGUN. Look in the statutes. Get a book by Attorney Jon H Gutmacher Florida Firearms Law, Use & Ownership.This is what I believe is the most important book an ccw can own other than the Holy Bible.

Not that this should matter, because right is right, regardless of whether you're using reloads or some super big caliber.

[netentity]

Originally Posted by lrlsaxd45

I am told that you can use reloads if you do according to the manual of the load you use .per state attorney. When asked about your ammo say exactly what you use to reload, winchester,hornady,etc If you are very specific and detaied ,I am told that you will be alright.I also suggest that you read articles by Massad Ayoob, He is the leading expert witness in this topic and the one many attorneys and LEO hires for their defence.We can hear everything from those that aren't up to date, Seek advise from the state attorneys office, defence, and LEO, then you can make a fair decision.A excellent book to read is COMBAT HANGUN. Look in the statutes. Get a book by Attorney Jon H Gutmacher Florida Firearms Law, Use & Ownership.This is what I believe is the most important book an ccw can own other than the Holy Bible.

As I stated before in this thread Ayoob does NOT endorse the use of reloads; see this article for why.

What Gutmacher has in his book appllies to Florida only. It will not apply in other States. I can attest it will not apply in Nevada as we only have civil suit immunity in defense of your residence per NRS 41.095.

[netentity]

Originally Posted by lrlsaxd45

The State of Florida is a state where no one can be sued in civil court

And so is MO. However I live in Nevada plus there are 48 other States plus DC and US territories. You have over 50 sets of laws to worry about plus federal law. On top of that you have case law which may or may not apply in the jurisdiction the self defense incident took place. If you don't travel, then all you have to worry about is your State and federal law. If you do travel then you have a labyrinth of criminal and civil law to worry about.

[netentity]

Originally Posted by tattedupboy

As for using the bazooka argument, I was just being sarcastic. Couldn't you tell?

I can, but a judge or jury might not.

Don't get me wrong I'm all for using whatever gets the job done, but seriously, who uses a bazooka for home defense?

The same idiot who probably uses the word bomb or gun while going through TSA screening in an airport and delays everyone's flight.

[tattedupboy]

As for netentity's arguments in support of the ridiculous reasons one can get sued for defending themselves using a caliber other than what the police use, I'll just take my chances. Any reasonable civil jury should be able to see past the caliber and type of ammo someone uses to defend themselves and release them from any and all liability as a result. That is if the suit doesn't get dismissed before it reaches the jury.

[Palmach]

and finally, in my opinion, anyone who is going to spend that much time concerning themselves over the potential civil liabilities involved in the justifiable use of deadly force should probably not be carrying in the first place.

It just seems from what I am reading that they are more concerned with the potential loss of stuff, then they are for the potential loss of life. The split second needed to make the decision to present and fire could more than likely be delayed by the concern for a possible civil suit. Not the person I want backing me up in a gun fight.

We all have our opinions, and this great country affords us the ability to agree to disagree.

BTW, I could care less about losing an argument, especially a silly one. I also learned a long time ago that it is often difficult to teach the unteachable, regardless of their supposed desire to be taught.

What I care about is losing my life or that of a loved one.

[netentity]

Originally Posted by tattedupboy

As for netentity's arguments in support of the ridiculous reasons one can get sued for defending themselves using a caliber other than what the police use, I'll just take my chances. Any reasonable civil jury should be able to see past the caliber and type of ammo someone uses to defend themselves and release them from any and all liability as a result. That is if the suit doesn't get dismissed before it reaches the jury.

That is your choice. Hopefully you won't end up at a 341 meeting (BK suit).

[netentity]

Originally Posted by Palmach

and finally, in my opinion, anyone who is going to spend that much time concerning themselves over the potential civil liabilities involved in the justifiable use of deadly force should probably not be carrying in the first place.

And motorists who have bare minimum statutory motor vehicle liability (15K/30K) insurance shouldn't be owning or operating a motor vehicle in my opinion.

It just seems from what I am reading that they are more concerned with the potential loss of stuff, then they are for the potential loss of life. The split second needed to make the decision to present and fire could more than likely be delayed by the concern for a possible civil suit. Not the person I want backing me up in a gun fight.

What lack of civil suit immunity does in my case is make me evaluate the situation with more scrutiny and make more civilly acceptable choices with respect to my caliber and firearm selection. Also keep in mind that if you are a civillian armed professional (non-LEO) in Florida, you are limited to carrying only .380 ACP, 9mm or .38 special in a .357 magnum per FL Statute 493.6115 (6) unless you have special approval from the Department issuing your license. Can you imagine the legal ramifications if you were an armed civilian professional in Florida and were carrying a non-approved caliber?

If we had civil suit immunity across the board for all self defense acts such as in FL and MO, I wouldn't be concerned about it. We don't. You don't need to be concerned about civil suits FL, IN or MO, I wouldn't care about civil liability as it's not an issue. I looked up IN and civil suit immunity is part of IC 35-41-3-2.

What needs to be done is civil suit immunity in all right to carry or right to self defense States. That will solve the issue. It will also relieve the burden on our judicial system.

There have been so many lawsuits associated with firearms, the firearm industry and use of force. Fortunately you and tatt live in States with civil suit immunity. That's what is causing your complacency. Travel to a State that does not have civil suit immunity and you may be in for a rude awakening as your home is getting foreclosed on after you lose a civil judgment. Get involved in a self defense act during an election year and the sheriff, mayor, DA and judge may want to make an example out of you to keep in office.

Open up the phone book to the attorney section. In your major metropolitan areas you'll find that it's the biggest section in the phone book. Here in Vegas, it's bigger than the adult entertainment and casino section combined.

[Palmach]

Originally Posted by netentity

And motorists who have bare minimum statutory motor vehicle liability (15K/30K) insurance shouldn't be owning or operating a motor vehicle in my opinion.

I didn't want to get back into this, but you seem to want to continue to use ridiculous argumentation to support your flawed argument. This is as silly as your OJ comment. Totally unrelated and irrelevant to concealed carry.

What lack of civil suit immunity does in my case is make me evaluate the situation with more scrutiny and make more civilly acceptable choices with respect to my caliber and firearm selection. Also keep in mind [that if you are a civillian armed professional (non-LEO) in Florida, you are limited to carrying only .380 ACP, 9mm or .38 special in a .357 magnum per FL Statute 493.6115 (6) unless you have special approval from the Department issuing your license. Can you imagine the legal ramifications if you were an armed civilian professional in Florida and were carrying a non-approved caliber?

It goes back to the point I made in an earlier post. If there is a statute then follow it. We are not, and have not been speaking about non LEO professionals. We are speaking about the regular CWL holder who chooses to carry for self defense.

If we had civil suit immunity across the board for all self defense acts such as in FL and MO, I wouldn't be concerned about it. We don't. You don't need to be concerned about civil suits FL, IN or MO, I wouldn't care about civil liability as it's not an issue. I looked up IN and civil suit immunity is part of IC 35-41-3-2.

Now we are getting somewhere. Perhaps instead of arguing here as to what would be an acceptable caliber to avoid civil liability, you should be putting your energies towards contacting the politicians in your area who could make a difference regarding this issue in your state.

What needs to be done is civil suit immunity in all right to carry or right to self defense States. That will solve the issue. It will also relieve the burden on our judicial system.

Completely different issue unrelated to the OP. Maybe you ought to start a new thread to discuss this.

There have been so many lawsuits associated with firearms, the firearm industry and use of force. Fortunately you and tatt live in States with civil suit immunity. That's what is causing your complacency. Travel to a State that does not have civil suit immunity and you may be in for a rude awakening as your home is getting foreclosed on after you lose a civil judgment. Get involved in a self defense act during an election year and the sheriff, mayor, DA and judge may want to make an example out of you to keep in office.

Complacency? What do you know? What you read on an internet forum. Spare me. You don't know me. You don't know my background, where I have lived, or my experiences with concealed carry.

You think you understand Florida gun laws, but I assure you that these statutes have not been sufficiently tested to make one feel safe from civil liability in Florida.

Bottom line now, as it has been from the beginning of our discussion is mindset. You either have it or you don't. The scenario you describe above is not going to change based on the caliber you use, and this has been my contention from the beginning.

If the sheriff, mayor, DA and judge want to make an example of you it would not matter if you used a sling shot with a pebble. Further, as you have noted several times in this thread, your argument is not about what the DA, judge, sheriff, or mayor does, but what is done by the family who sues because you killed their felonious relative.

Open up the phone book to the attorney section. In your major metropolitan areas you'll find that it's the biggest section in the phone book. Here in Vegas, it's bigger than the adult entertainment and casino section combined.

I don't use phone books, and if I ever need an attorney related to a gun defense, I have just the guy living right in my city. Again, an irrelevant point.