Spoke to a Judge... What is he talking about? - Page 7
Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 90

Thread: Spoke to a Judge... What is he talking about?

  1. Quote Originally Posted by kohjor80 View Post
    So, I had an interesting conversation with a local district magistrate. He informed me that if I were to use my .40 cal Taurus for self defense (which is what it is for), with a full magazine of federal HydraShocks, I could be charged with manslaughter?

    Does it matter how many rounds are in your self defense carry gun? Does it matter what type of ammunition it is? I am confused by the whole deal. Is he just telling me something so he can hear himself talk or what? I have never found any type of written rules to govern such a statement.

    Anyone help me out? I am just trying to find the truth. Has anyone ever even heard of soemthing like this?

    Also what are the rules for a properly permitted concealed carry weapon? are they to be unloaded when carried or is it ok to have a concealed carry cocked and locked?

    Thanks for any input.

    Jordie

    I have NO idea.

    In order to be guilty of manslaughter, you have to have killed someone via some type of negligence-- i.e. you shot wildly and hit the wrong person.
    However when you discharge a firearm, it's a given that you are USING DEADLY FORCE-- and so you can't be held accountable beyond that. If your plea of self-defense is upheld, then you are ABSOLVED from your use of deadly force against the person in question; and so it wouldn't matter WHAT type of weapon you used.

    You might get collared if the weapon was ILLEGAL for you to have in the first place; but that would be for the charge of possession-- not manslaughter: deadly force is deadly force.

    Now if you used it recklessly and killed the attacker AND an innocent person, then yes, you could be found for manslaughter due to negligence, if it was reasonably forseeable that this coudl result from that type of weapon and ammo. However that's the ONLY way; again, you can't be absolved for using deadly force, but still found guilty for KILLING the person you were permitted to use it AGAINST-- that's just too retarded even for the government.

  2.   
  3. Quote Originally Posted by xzeler8 View Post
    from what i've read and gathered, your best bet is to carry what your local law enforcement carries, whether that be sherrif, local pd, or state pd. They usually carry different ammo, so find which one works best for you and carry that. It's just another "precaution" you can take in an effort to eliminate BS claims by the prosecutor should you ever be in the unfortunate situation that requires you to use your gun. It's really hard for a lawyer to even attempt the "crazy super killer bullet" angle when he'd be lumping your local law enforcement in the same bunch...my .02
    If that were true, no one would need gun-permits, since no jury would convict an innocent person for carrying WITHOUT one. Believe it or not, however a jury wil often convict you for doing ANYTHING that the cops are permitted to do; they see the cops as the "guardians of justice," the "good guys" etc who "know what they're doing, etc; meanwhile they'll consider you to be just a plebian idiot who shouldn't even HAVE a gun. So they judge by a double-standard.

    First rule of law: it doesn't HAVE to make sense; the jails are FILLED with people who were locked up for NO good reason. A simple trip to traffic-court should clear up any such illusions.

  4. Quote Originally Posted by Booga View Post
    Depends on the state.
    Let me use Washington state as one example of where the judge the OP quoted is absolutely correct.

    In Washington state, homicide is a crime. If you shoot someone dead, you have just committed homicide. State law provides an exemption to the penalty of that crime when it has been shown that it was justified.

    If it is not 100% obvious to the DA that it was justifiable, you may very well be charged with homicide or even murder, as the bar incident mentioned a few posts up shows us. At that point a judge might toss out the charges if it is clear enough to the judge that it was justifiable. If he doesn't think it's clear enough, he's going to let a jury decide.

    MOST of the DA's out there look at the situation and not so much at the tools used. There are some that will be clueless and assume "scary/macho named bullet" shows prior intent to kill. Others will say to themselves, "I can get another conviction for my scorecard if I play this just right. I'll be running for mayor soon if I can keep this pace up."

    The problem isn't necessarily the judge, but the DA in your area.
    That would apply to ANY use of deadly force, not just the gun and ammo mentioned in the OP.
    If you discharge a firearm, that's DEADLY FORCE; and either it was justifiable self-defense or it wasn't.

    NO prosecutor is going to argue that you can only discharge a firearm with NON-deadly force-- it would just defy all credibility. Even the stupidest jury wouldn't buy it.

  5. Lets all be very careful not to violate the criminals rights.... or, even worse, hurt their feelings.
    Retired US Army Medic
    Proud Husband, Dad and Christian
    www.nationofshooters.com

  6. #65
    Look at it this way...any time you shoot someone in self-defense and he dies you wil probably be charged with something. That does not mean you are going to get convicted. Just a way for the courts to find out all the details of the event.
    Why are you worried about holding up the targets for me? It' s a 9mm!

  7. My carry weapon is a .40 cal loaded with 180 gr Winchester Bonded PDX-1, which is the duty ammo for the FBI. A local prosecuter told me if it is issued by a law enforcement dpeartment for their protection, it is a good ammo for personal protection.
    Sam Ragsdale
    AGCM(AW/SW) USN-Ret

    NRA Life Member

  8. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by fiasconva View Post
    Look at it this way...any time you shoot someone in self-defense and he dies you wil probably be charged with something. That does not mean you are going to get convicted. Just a way for the courts to find out all the details of the event.
    I agree with this statement.

    In addition, if you are using "specialty rounds" it is something for the prosecutor to go off of when he tries to paint the picture of us being a vigilante. "the law is seldom logical, but always legal."

    Most officers that I know use plain ole hollow-points for this reason.
    -Austin

  9. Quote Originally Posted by fiasconva View Post
    Look at it this way...any time you shoot someone in self-defense and he dies you wil probably be charged with something. That does not mean you are going to get convicted. Just a way for the courts to find out all the details of the event.
    Where the HELL did you get this idea? They have to be able to show cause to believe that you were guilty of a crime. Discovery comes BEFORE charges are filed-- NOT after!
    It's the police and prosecutor's job to decide if they have enough evidence to make an arrest press charges-- NOT the court's; by that time, it's too late. They can't charge you based on a mere suspicion, they need PROOF.

    Once they charge you, then unless they can show that they have proof, you can sue for malicious prosecution.
    Chances are, you won't even be arrested.

    And if it's obvious that you were attacked with deadly force (or had due cause to use it), then there's no way they can make a charge stick, and so they have no cause arrest OR prosecute you.

    You ONLY need to show that you had reasonable cause to fear for your life or safety-- that's all. And if you're in your house at night, you don't even need to show that.

  10. Quote Originally Posted by Austin View Post
    I agree with this statement.

    In addition, if you are using "specialty rounds" it is something for the prosecutor to go off of when he tries to paint the picture of us being a vigilante. "the law is seldom logical, but always legal."

    Most officers that I know use plain ole hollow-points for this reason.
    Again, if you can reasonably show that you were in fear for your life or safety, then there is NO WAY they can charge you. Like if you shot an armed person who had a history of armed robbery, they're not going to make him a choir-boy who was trying to sell you a knife.
    They have to prove that YOU were guilty, not the other way around.

  11. Quote Originally Posted by kn1080 View Post
    Lets all be very careful not to violate the criminals rights.... or, even worse, hurt their feelings.
    Again, if they have a record of violent criminal behavior, then you probably won't be charged, unless there's evidence to show otherwise.

Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast