Perception is reality - does it matter what you carry?

[webrx]

Not a caliber war

Just a little food for thought here to maybe start an open and reasonable discussion.

This may be a causal argument (Causal fallacies are informal fallacies that occur when an argument incorrectly concludes that a cause is related to an effect) but I could be wrong - your thoughts?

In today's society should we consider this?

I have read many times that you should not carry reloaded SD ammo, and that you should carry whatever ammo your local Police or Sheriffs department carries as far as ammo is concerned so that if you ever have to defend yourself the prosecutor can't say you were carrying mankillers, or whatever.

So, following that logic, does it matter what pistol/revolver you carry if involved in an SD shooting?

I.E.
1. If you have to defend yourself, and you do so with the latest and greatest high capacity firearm, with optics that make it easier to hit what you aim at, in a larger caliber than your local LEO carries (10mm or .45 ACP etc) will that make a difference in court?

2. Should you only carry what the local LEOs are carrying (15 round 9mm) or something that is "less" like a .38 5 shot revolver instead of your HiCap 15 shot optics enhanced large caliber super whamadyne polymer pistol?

Prosecutor:
He was carrying a "44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world, and it can blow your head clean off"

Defense attorney:
He was carrying the same gun and defensive load our local Sheriff carries

Food for thought?

d.

 

[.455_Hunter]

Whatever you select will be wrong if the DA wants it to be.

 

[WrongHanded]

It seems to me that if it's an obviously justifiable use of deadly force, with witness to confirm such, it probably doesn't matter what a person used. Because the case probably won't make it to court.

For the ones that do make it to court, prosecutors don't seem to care about the truth; they appear to care about chalking up another win. So might they use anything the can about your choice of gun, choice of ammo, accessories, modifications, brand of holster, etc against you? Sure.

So let's say you carry the exact same pistol make and model that the cops carry with the same ammo, and you even asked some of the local cops what concealment holster they prefer for off-duty use. Now the prosecution may argue that you were trying so hard to emulate the local law enforcement because you believed you had some right/duty/responsibility to "clean up" your town, just like you see the cops do.

Maybe I'm pessimistic, but I see right and wrong and the truth, taking a back seat to creative narratives and emotional manipulation of juries. Along with a heavy dose of political ideology and media spin before a court case even begins.

 

[scaatylobo]

Not a caliber war

Just a little food for thought here to maybe start an open and reasonable discussion.

This may be a causal argument (Causal fallacies are informal fallacies that occur when an argument incorrectly concludes that a cause is related to an effect) but I could be wrong - your thoughts?

In today's society should we consider this?

I have read many times that you should not carry reloaded SD ammo, and that you should carry whatever ammo your local Police or Sheriffs department carries as far as ammo is concerned so that if you ever have to defend yourself the prosecutor can't say you were carrying mankillers, or whatever.

So, following that logic, does it matter what pistol/revolver you carry if involved in an SD shooting?

I.E.
1. If you have to defend yourself, and you do so with the latest and greatest high capacity firearm, with optics that make it easier to hit what you aim at, in a larger caliber than your local LEO carries (10mm or .45 ACP etc) will that make a difference in court?

2. Should you only carry what the local LEOs are carrying (15 round 9mm) or something that is "less" like a .38 5 shot revolver instead of your HiCap 15 shot optics enhanced large caliber super whamadyne polymer pistol?

Prosecutor:
He was carrying a "44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world, and it can blow your head clean off"

Defense attorney:
He was carrying the same gun and defensive load our local Sheriff carries

Food for thought?

d.

In my case your asking a retired cop this question.

I try to err on the side of caution and the law.

So that generally means I will try HARD to emulate what my local [ and my ex ] agency carries.

Or at least what is carried by at least one decent sized agency in MY state.

In my case of New York State, that actually gives me a great deal to chose from.

9MM,.40 S&W,.45GAP,and even a few older & smaller agencys [ and even the Correctionals ones ] that still issue a .38 special.

At the very least,I can verify that my ammunition is NOT scarier or more deadly than the Po Po carry.

You might also want to train as the police do as to shooting your choice of hand cannon.

The old drill of "fail to stop" is 2 to the chest and one to the head.

And that has had a few names that are not now P.C.

You might even keep a journal of your training to show you actually do train and shoot these drills.

I carry a 9MM [ my agency still issues a .40 ] and I train and document my training too.

One lesson I try to pass on is,do not shoot "targets" when you train with your carry gun !.

You are shooting "THREATS",not targets.

You are allowed to miss targets,your are NOT allowed to miss a threat.

 

[Kleanbore]

I have read many times that you should not carry reloaded SD ammo

That has to do with the admissibility of GSR evidence that may necessary to support expert testimony.

and that you should carry whatever ammo your local Police or Sheriffs department carries as far as ammo is concerned

That goes back to a time in which JHP ammunition was a rather new thing.

So, following that logic, does it matter what pistol/revolver you carry if involved in an SD shooting?

Doesn't follow.

 

[CDW4ME]

No such thing as "caliber war" it is a nonsensical term invoked when one doesn't like a caliber discussion.

Carry the same ammo as the police would at least avoid people carrying 22/25/32 when (assuming) they could do better; police is 9mm minimum.
In before someone defends 380 because its approved for off duty by police wherever, don't use "better than nothing" as a goal if you don't have to.

 

[webrx]

So, following that logic, does it matter what pistol/revolver you carry if involved in an SD shooting?
Doesn't follow.

Maybe i was not clear i.e. if the Sheriff carries a 9 shot semi auto, and you carry a 15 shot - then why do you need more ammo than a cop - etc.

This post was about pistol type, not really ammo type or caliber - but what I meant is I have read that if police are carrying 9mm silverpoint HPs, then you should carry 9mm silver point HPs also. so some over zealous prosecutor cant say - Why do you need something larger or more deadly than what the police carry? etc.

I get the expert witness point of using factory vs reloaded as well as the potential forensics issues.

d

 

[armabill]

Sometimes reloads don't go off.

 

[Fine Figure of a Man]

The things you do, the company you keep and the places you go are far more important than the gun and ammo you carry.
Don't put yourself in bad places with bad people doing bad things and you are much less likely to be in a self defense situation.

The topic of carrying reloaded ammo has been beat to death. I carry my own reloads. I don't care what anyone else carries and am not interested in opinions on what I carry.

 

[redcon1]

Whatever you select will be wrong if the DA wants it to be.

That is 100% true but, at the same time, he still has to convince every juror that what you did was wrong and it would be my preference to make that task as difficult as possible if I were ever in the unfortunate position of having to defend myself in a court of law after a SD shooting. And I will definitely walk to the other side of the street to avoid that hell.

 

[redcon1]

Doesn't follow.

Doesn't hurt and the point is, the PoPo carry 9mm with standard JHPs. If you're carrying a .44 magnum with hardcast 250 grain semi wadcutters that you personally loaded yourself and which would be suitable for killing a large bear, I guaranfreakingtee you, you're gonna have some splainin to do in front of a jury and you brought that on yourself and the further you get away from what a prudent reasonable law enforcement type person would carry, the more difficult your splainin' will be. edit: and if there are any other elements of the shooting that may have been questionable somehow, this will just stack on top of that and might potentially be the thing that tips the scales of justice on the side of the prosecution. That's all I'm saying.

 

[Kleanbore]

Don't put yourself in bad places with bad people doing bad things and you are much less likely to be in a self defense situation

Good thinking. BUT---should the situation arise, the questions become ones of what things may prove important.

I do not know what ammunition the police carry here. It id likely to be different three miles from here. I carry premium defensive factory ammunition.

I do not expect to ever have to use any. I do not expect to ever need to introduce GSR test results to counter unfavorable witness testimony or other evidence, but I do not want to preclude my ability to do so, should the need arise.

 

[Jeff White]

I carry the same weapons and ammunition I carried on and off duty before I retired. But honestly I don't worry about it. The thing that is going to matter most is that your actions were lawful. I know of incidents where someone successfully defended himself with an illegally possessed weapon. The fact that the firearm was illegally possessed wasn't a factor in the self defense case. That is a completely separate issue.

 

[WrongHanded]

This post was about pistol type, not really ammo type or caliber - but what I meant is I have read that if police are carrying 9mm silverpoint HPs, then you should carry 9mm silver point HPs also. so some over zealous prosecutor cant say - Why do you need something larger or more deadly than what the police carry? etc.

Why do the police carry ammo brand and type X? Because it passes the FBI testing. So does mine.

 

[Fine Figure of a Man]

Good thinking. BUT---should the situation arise, the questions become ones of what things may prove important.

Should the situation arise for me; I will be sober, I will not be engaged in illegal activity, I won't be in the company of people who engage in illegal activity.
My ammo won't a relevant factor so I'll take the nonexistent risk of carrying my reloaded ammo.

I would bet that no person has ever been sent to prison for defending themselves against death or serious bodily injury simply because of the ammunition they used.

 

[redcon1]

Should the situation arise for me; I will be sober, I will not be engaged in illegal activity, I won't be in the company of people who engage in illegal activity.
My ammo won't a relevant factor so I'll take the nonexistent risk of carrying my reloaded ammo.

I would bet that no person has ever been sent to prison for defending themselves against death or serious bodily injury simply because of the ammunition they used.

I wouldn't make that bet. And even if true, it's a matter of the totality of the circumstances. Your reloads probably won't matter taken by themself however you can be sure they will be discussed at length but you can't possibly foresee what else that DA might have to talk about. I just don't see why anyone would want to give the DA anything to talk about. Is it really that important to carry reloads? That smells like some kind of pride to me and pride is the deadliest sin.

 

[redcon1]

I carry the same weapons and ammunition I carried on and off duty before I retired. But honestly I don't worry about it. The thing that is going to matter most is that your actions were lawful. I know of incidents where someone successfully defended himself with an illegally possessed weapon. The fact that the firearm was illegally possessed wasn't a factor in the self defense case. That is a completely separate issue.

This is just a pretty entertaining discussion to me and I don't really care what anyone carries. It's all good to me. Carry a .50 AE desert eagle if you wish. That being said, it does seem like the times are a changin' and the legal scrutiny for exercising the right to defend oneself is at a higher standard today or, at the very least, is being challenged by activist SJW lawyers so as to implement a higher standard and because of that, I'm inclined to not deviate too far beyond what a reasonable LEO would carry. If they're carrying super duper make 'em bleed out in 5 seconds expanding fragmenting ultra chaos antipersonnel rounds, then I'll carry those too. If they aren't, I'll stick with my HST JHPs and Gold Dots because that seems reasonable to me.

 

[starling]

This is just a pretty entertaining discussion to me and I don't really care what anyone carries. It's all good to me. Carry a .50 AE desert eagle if you wish. That being said, it does seem like the times are a changin' and the legal scrutiny for exercising the right to defend oneself is at a higher standard today or, at the very least, is being challenged by activist SJW lawyers so as to implement a higher standard and because of that, I'm inclined to not deviate too far beyond what a reasonable LEO would carry. If they're carrying super duper make 'em bleed out in 5 seconds expanding fragmenting ultra chaos antipersonnel rounds, then I'll carry those too. If they aren't, I'll stick with my HST JHPs and Gold Dots because that seems reasonable to me.

I think I could pull off a Desert Eagle if I made a good shoulder holster for it. 357 or 44 wouldnt be too bad.

 

[JeeperCreeper]

I truly think this is an unanswerable question.

Or at least, the answer is "no matter what, get the best lawyer you can".

I would argue that it shouldn't matter what someone uses for lethal force as long as lethal force is justified.

It's the "justified" part that circumstantial evidence comes into play to show intent/motive/etc.

We saw it with the Rittenhouse case (playing Xbox, just having an AR is a threat, FMJ bullets, etc) as well as with that cop with the "you're effed" dust cover. Right or wrong, petty details will be used against you. Those are just recent ones.

We live in a media and mob driven world, where evidence is filtered through the internet. Sadly, courts are not immune. (That's probably a little harsh).

Make believe time:

I can imagine (imagine not prove) that a veteran could use a Beretta 92 for self defense.

The defense could argue that the vet was trained with the Beretta so it was a responsible choice.

The prosecution could argue that it was a weapon of war that the vet wanted to relive combat just like in desert storm.

I could imagine (again, imagine) an off duty cop using a different gun than his duty gun.

The prosecution could argue that it was irresponsible to use that platform as he was not trained or verified competent with it like this duty gun.

Similar situation, different twist.

Obviously these are make believe. But anything can be twisted and any argument can and will be used against you if the prosecutor is willing. We have seen judges sit back and let crazy arguments go forward, due to ignorance or apathy, I do not know.

At least that's my hot take.

I just know... darned if you do, darned if you don't.

 

[Kleanbore]

Should the situation arise for me; I will be sober, I will not be engaged in illegal activity, I won't be in the company of people who engage in illegal activity.

Good. That would not begin to defeat either a criminal prosecution or a civil suit.

My ammo won't a relevant factor

that isn't the issue at all.

so I'll take the nonexistent risk of carrying my reloaded ammo.

The risk is very low indeed. But should a defense of justification require the defense to introduce GSR test data, that risk could become a very important one indeed.

I would bet that no person has ever been sent to prison for defending themselves against death or serious bodily injury simply because of the ammunition they used

If you insert the word "solely", you would likely win. The outcome will hinge on the totality of the evidence: what does this witness say, what did that witness not see, what is the forensic evidence, how does all of that compare to the defender's account of the incident. One additional piece, or one lacking piece, can tip the scale one way or the other.

That's where GSR could become key; should the distance of the shot become an issue, tests of the defendant's ammo could become key. The rules of evidence define whether or not the judge may allow the data to be admitted.

How likely is that risk? It is remote. How important might it be? You decide how important life imprisonment might be to you.

 

[Fine Figure of a Man]

How likely is that risk? It is remote.

It is non existent. If anyone can prove otherwise, I'm listening. I have no interest in hypothetical scenarios, heard them all.

I support everyone's right to carry the gun and ammo of their choice.

 

[Kleanbore]

It is non existent. If anyone can prove otherwise, I'm listening.

It is impossible to prove a negative.
GSR testing is a routine and well known forensic method.
The applicable rules of evidence stem from SCOTUS rulings.

 

[Fine Figure of a Man]

it's a matter of the totality of the circumstances.

That was part of my point

Is it really that important to carry reloads?

No, it is just something I choose to do. Is it important to you?

 

[Jack Ryan]

Not a caliber war

Just a little food for thought here to maybe start an open and reasonable discussion.

This may be a causal argument (Causal fallacies are informal fallacies that occur when an argument incorrectly concludes that a cause is related to an effect) but I could be wrong - your thoughts?

In today's society should we consider this?

I have read many times that you should not carry reloaded SD ammo, and that you should carry whatever ammo your local Police or Sheriffs department carries as far as ammo is concerned so that if you ever have to defend yourself the prosecutor can't say you were carrying mankillers, or whatever.

So, following that logic, does it matter what pistol/revolver you carry if involved in an SD shooting?

I.E.
1. If you have to defend yourself, and you do so with the latest and greatest high capacity firearm, with optics that make it easier to hit what you aim at, in a larger caliber than your local LEO carries (10mm or .45 ACP etc) will that make a difference in court?

2. Should you only carry what the local LEOs are carrying (15 round 9mm) or something that is "less" like a .38 5 shot revolver instead of your HiCap 15 shot optics enhanced large caliber super whamadyne polymer pistol?

Prosecutor:
He was carrying a "44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world, and it can blow your head clean off"

Defense attorney:
He was carrying the same gun and defensive load our local Sheriff carries

Food for thought?

d.

If I could predict the future, I wouldn't be involved in a shooting. Period.

Since I can't predict the future, I am going to carry what ever I want in any manner I want. Meaning what I feel gives ME the best chance to survive. How it affects someone else is something they must decide when they choose to become a viable threat to ME or my family. THEY decide something is worth the risk to their life when THEY DECIDE to attack, steal, or harm. Not me.

 

[Jack Ryan]

Sometimes reloads don't go off.

SOMETIMES factory ammunition "don't go off".
Shoot what you trust to bet your life on it.