Stop carrying Winchester Ranger RA9T


July 30, 2007, 07:47 PM
hey guys and gals,
Just wanted to get a few opinions on this.
I have been carrying the Win. Ranger RA9T in my Kahr PM9. Well after reading a few articles today about court cases that Massad Ayoob had some capacity in as a expert witness or just helping the defense team I think I am going to switch back to the Speer Gold Dot 115gr. that I was using.

Now I know that there is nothing wrong with civilians carrying this ammo. I just thought It would make sense to not carry it for a couple reasons.

1. It is promoted by Winchester as "Law enforcement ammo".
2. The Reverse taper design. Most of you Im sure know the bad rap of the original black talons with the same basic design.

So with other good ammo choices out there and having to defend using hollowpoints in the first place, along with the 2 reasons above does it make sense to anyone else to just carry something different to protect yourself from liberal anti-gun attorneys

If you enjoyed reading about "Stop carrying Winchester Ranger RA9T" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!
July 30, 2007, 08:29 PM
How bout using the "Cop ammo = the best for defense" argument?

July 30, 2007, 08:49 PM
I still fail to see what the problem with them is.

I haven't seen where Ayoob has stated such, either.

July 30, 2007, 08:56 PM
I personally think that would be a big mistake to switch for the reasons stated.

I have talked to an attorney friend here in Texas about this and he thought the defense of using the exact same ammo as the police choose would go over very well. After all, the government and their experts have spent thousand of your tax dollars to determine the best bullet for policeman to use to defend themselves. Why wouldn't it be best for the average citizen?

Although certainly not an expert like Ayoob it just feels to me that sometimes he plays things up a little to get a good story. As an example there was the PD TV section where he showed how to drive up to a bank ATM. Put down your visors so you have 2 extra rear view mirrors, then slowly circle the bank twice while scanning, then pull up to the ATM. Puleeeeese don't tell me anyone actually does this.

And by the way, I run Business Development and Marketing for my company, so I've told a few "stories" myself over the years.

July 30, 2007, 09:12 PM
I would guess that the liberal anti gun attorneys would go after everything reguardless of what you used, FMJ or HP ammo. They'd just put a different spin on it no matter how you made it to the courtroom. The only suggestion I'd have would be to make sure you make it to the courtroom first by living through your encounter then deal with the attorneys later.

July 30, 2007, 09:22 PM
Ranger T-Series was developed to correct the short comings of the old SXT ammo.

I would feel better with RA9T in a short barreled gun over the BT.

If I was a hired mouth piece and wanted to get you on ammo choice I would play up the hollow points and I could get a 50 box of Speer 115 and promote it as LE ammo.

July 30, 2007, 09:39 PM
The Ayoob articels was called 7 myths that could hang you in court. I dont have it in front of me its at work. He basically just gave cases about how in self defense shootings the prosecuting attorney would go after the defendant for using hollowpoints, handloads, etc.

July 30, 2007, 09:49 PM
Well if you used ball ammo thats bad too.

Thats the ammo the military carries to kill people with!

Life is funny at times


July 30, 2007, 09:55 PM
Mas' point is to understand where the threat will come from and 1) avoid it or 2) have a plan for dealing with it.

I use Ranger because 1) it is designed to meet the FBI standards for bullet design, 2) it is one of the most highly rated rounds currently available, and 3) it is accurate and reliable in my weapons. I am aware of its design history and how it is related to Black Talons (albeit a few generations newer) but I'm also aware that the hype about Black Talons was just that, media hype and lies, and that Winchester withdrew the ammunition from market and repackaged it to avoid further media attention. I am also aware that the LEO markings are placed on there because 1) historically, it was a means of restricting ammunition that was loaded to higher than normal standards to entities (i.e. agencies) which have waived product liability if damage occurs, 2) there are excise tax considerations not applicable in a defensive shooting and 3) the LEO markings are of no legal consequence or effect.

Given that I am currently aware of that information, my state of knowledge is absolutely admissible in a legal proceeding and I am in a perfect position to explain why my choice of Ranger ammunition was both reasonable and prudent.

July 30, 2007, 10:15 PM
It works well in my favorite CCW, my Kahr PM9.

July 30, 2007, 10:17 PM
My CCW instructor told us that LEO ammo was the way to go. Very little room to argue against it in court. He went so far as to say you should call your Sherrif's department and ask them what they carry so you can purchase the same brand for your carry gun.

July 30, 2007, 10:46 PM
I use it in .45, usually +P, and will continue to do so. A crap-weasel prosecutor can find fault with any ammo or gun you might have.

July 30, 2007, 11:03 PM
You would not believe how many people, even gun owners themselves, think hollow point = armor piercing. :banghead:

Deaf Smith
July 30, 2007, 11:33 PM
I use the +p+ 127gr Winchester ammo and I ain't changing. JHP ammo in Texas is fine and dandy. Now maybe in the Peoples Republic of New Jeresy, but I ain't in North Korea... ops I mean New Jerkie.. ops I mean, well you know where I mean.

If you can justify the use of JHPs, then it ain't no big deal. Just make sure your lawyer knows why you picked what you picked.

July 31, 2007, 09:04 PM
You are standing trial for shooting someone (multiples, maybe) and the issue of your chosen ammo comes up.

If I was on the jury (of your peers, right?) I'd say you chose well as evidenced by your surviving to stand before us unwashed on the jury. And, your shooting skills must have been up to snuff (or at least good enough) too.

As long as the reasons that precipitated the use of lethal force are justified, I contend that it doesn't matter what particular form was used to end the threat.

We can get into 'caliber wars', but realistically, does this ever enter into a Court proceeding? "He used a .45 when a .38 would have sufficed?"

If this argument isn't prevalent in actual trials, I'd not worry about what particular flavor of bullet I used.

Us 'Peers' have to be staunch in our resolve about these things. Remember Jury Nullification if things get out of hand while you are serving.

July 31, 2007, 10:11 PM
If I ever came into the position of having to actually use my handgun to defeat an attack.. the LAST thing I would worry about is my ammo choice and how it would stand up in court. There are very few reasonable people that would convict me in a court of law if I used my handgun in self defense. I will wait to use deadly force until it is the absolute last thing that can happen to save my life. In that situation, it doesn't matter if you use FMJ or 50BMG.. that should be secondary to the situation you found yourself in... any good lawyer can take care of that if you use common sense.

Deaf Smith
July 31, 2007, 11:05 PM
Ok, don't use RA9T. Use a 12 guage and tell the court you felt the 9mm ammo was to powerful so you used your shottie.

Double Naught Spy
July 31, 2007, 11:09 PM
If you are choosing between equally performing ammo, then going with an ammo most likely to NOT cause you additional legal hassles sounds like a valid idea in theory, but the perception of possible legal hassles for the reasons stated are not substantiated.

Now, if you are going to a poorer performing ammo because of perceived potential legal hassles, that is just plain dumb. That means you are putting potential legal concerns ahead of your own safety.

How bout using the "Cop ammo = the best for defense" argument?

Has anyone ever actually seen this ploy work? I am not talking about some sort of hypothetical or perceived claim that it made a difference, but actual juror statements or statements from cops who expressed that because the ammo used was what cops used, that the shooting was therefore valid in some way?

While folks can suggest shooting what the cops carry will keep you out of trouble, it can just as hypothetically be argued that because you are carrying what the cops carry, you are trying to emulate the cops, a cop wannabe.

Also, the notion that carrying what the cops carry as saving you from legal hassles is naive. It assumes that what the local cops carry has somehow passed some sort of legal litmus test and been deemed appropriate. In many departments, the decision as to what the cops carry is based on the vendor that offers the best deal, not what ammo is most liability free or ammo that is the absolute best performer.

Also something to consider is whether or not your needs are those of the cops. For example, our local SWAT guys carry ultra lite .223 rifle ammo (35 gr. as I recall). Why? Because they are concerned with overpenetration, specifically in the possibility of missing a target and having the round penetrate walls and hitting an unintended target. As such, the ammo they choose is severely limited. Would you make the same rifle ammo decision as them?

Cops also have the option of wearing ballistic vests, sometimes having partners, being able to call for backup, being able to call for help and having every officer available respond at top speed without the worry of going through 911 and having the call be evaluated, assigned a response priority, etc. In many areas, top priority calls may still take 10-20 minutes for a cop to arrive on scene, but cops making a call for help can get near immediate responses.

What I am getting at here is that the situation for most cops comes with a plethora of different advantages, needs, and disadvantages than the situation for a regular citizen. Just because they use a given ammo that suits their needs does not mean it will suit yours.

Look at it another way. Dallas PD used subsonic 9mm ammo fired from a 4.4" barreled gun. Do you really think that is the best ammo to use for self defense if you were living in the Dallas area? Would it be the best performing ammo out of your 3" barreled Kahr PM9? The answer to this latter question is definitely NO.

The primary concern of carry ammo (caliber, brand, model) should be to pick the best performing ammo that works reliably in your chosen firearm that you can handle extremely well. If there are two or more choices that are equal, then choose the ammo you feel is less likely to cause legal hassles.

August 1, 2007, 03:09 AM
What is this Country coming to when you have to worry about being put in jail because you used ammo that was "too good" Sad, very sad!

August 1, 2007, 04:33 AM
Now, why did you use the particular ammonution you used?"

Uhhhhh It was all I had with me at the time.....

August 1, 2007, 05:16 PM
I wouldn't make the switch based on this "issue".

If you are being prosecuted the prosecutor is going to try and strengthen his/her case by going after every choice you made in the situation.

Also, Ayoob (and I not denigrating him for this) is in the business of generating controversy so as to have something to write about and to get paid for writing about.

Sniper X
August 1, 2007, 05:23 PM
I will NEVER get the illogical idiocy of the left and the court system trying to make a guy who used a firearm as self defense into a criminal, and not being laughed outta court! If I was on a jury and some idiot lawer said, he had KILLING bullets in his gun! And said something idiotic like these bullets were made for nothing but killing, I would laugh out loud at him!

I also don't understand why someone would think a hollow point is not more dangerous than a FMJ to use as a defense round!

Jorg Nysgerrig
August 1, 2007, 05:25 PM
Wait, let me get this straight. You are going to quit carrying Rangers and go back to the Gold Dots because Rangers are marketed as law enforcement ammo?

Perhaps Gold Dots wouldn't be a good choice either since they market it as the top law enforcement duty ammo in the country.

"SPEER® Gold Dot® is designed to deliver the high performance today’s law enforcement officers demand."
"The result is a cartridge that provides officers the ultimate defense in lethal force confrontations."
"That’s why SPEER Gold Dot is the #1 choice for Law Enforcement Professionals."

No LE marketing there. :rolleyes:

August 1, 2007, 05:55 PM
can anyone tell me why black talon is no longer made?

Jorg Nysgerrig
August 1, 2007, 05:59 PM
can anyone tell me why black talon is no longer made?

Winchester/Olin caved to pressure regarding how scary it was.

You can, however, get the same (or perhaps better) peformance without the scary black coating or name in their other offerings.

August 1, 2007, 06:53 PM
Much ado about nothing.

August 1, 2007, 07:44 PM
Wait, let me get this straight. You are going to quit carrying Rangers and go back to the Gold Dots because Rangers are marketed as law enforcement ammo?

Perhaps Gold Dots wouldn't be a good choice either since they market it as the top law enforcement duty ammo in the country.

"SPEER® Gold Dot® is designed to deliver the high performance today’s law enforcement officers demand."
"The result is a cartridge that provides officers the ultimate defense in lethal force confrontations."
"That’s why SPEER Gold Dot is the #1 choice for Law Enforcement Professionals."

No LE marketing there.

Winchesters Ranger is marketed by them as Law Enfocement Only. It is not even shown on there regular site. You have to go to there Law Enforcement specific site to view it. Winchester now markets this as a law enforcement only ammunition even though it is legal for civilians to purchase. Unlike speer who just says theres is the #1 choice of law enforcement.

Also, the 3 cases that Ayoob listed in the article where someone had to defend themselves for the TYPE of bullet they used. 2 where found guilty.

I am in no way shape or form saying that I think Winchester Ranger ammo is realy any better or worse than any other ammo out there. Im just saying if the time comes and I have to defend my decision in a trial, whether it be civil or criminal do I really want the added question of ....."so why did you have to use the bullets that when they expand have razor edges that cause more destruction than even a normal hollowpoint bullet." Or something like that.

Now carrying this round may seem logical to you and me. But I deal with alot of ilogical people everyday when it comes to firearms.

Im also not saying that no one should carry it. Im just pointing out that I read an article written by a man who was giving accounts of court cases that he had been part of and It started to make me think.

August 2, 2007, 12:26 PM
1) The idea is to be alive to answer at trial if need be, use the best for defense.

2) Dead men tell no tales. If you shoot with a bullet that is more likely to kill then only one person is heard from, you.

Stick with the ammo you are using.

August 2, 2007, 10:36 PM
There are plenty of excellent options, why take the chance?

August 3, 2007, 02:31 AM
If you use a rock instead of bullets. Would they investigate the type of rocks texture and the original volcanic activity from which it originated from? I think if it is good enough for the Police then it is good enough for you as well. You are the tax payer with rights who deserves to carry what is with in reason of the law for your own personal protection. No laws are being broken then you should be allowed to carry it. I refuse to be a victim just like the Police do and will use what works not what I hope works.

August 3, 2007, 01:11 PM
Well I wasn't carrying them anyway. I'm loading with Federal HSTs.

August 3, 2007, 01:58 PM
upgrade your lawyer instead of your ammunition :p

Double Naught Spy
August 3, 2007, 06:59 PM
FYI Ford, "For Law Enforcement Only" is a marketing scam. The ammo isn't anything unique or special and there is no law against you having it or any restrictions against such ammo other than the standard restrictions of some states like NJ. LEO Only ammo isn't just sold to LEOs, you see. That is the scam.

Think of it as the manufacturer's suggested use that they think a product line is good enough to be trusted by LEOs, even though the ammo is likely no better than other similar lines they offer or other companies offer that are not offered with that moniker.

Your concerns over possible legal problems are silly in this regard.

massad ayoob
August 4, 2007, 12:24 AM
Ford, I wouldn't worry about carrying "LE-only" jacketed hollowpoints. (Obviously, armor piercing and other prohibited ammo would be another story.) At a Winchester ammo seminar earlier this year, I expressly asked the assembled execs if they had ever heard of a case where an armed citizen's choice of their LEO/Ranger ammo had been used against them in court, and they replied that they had not.

Sir Aardvark
August 4, 2007, 01:01 AM
SXT means Same eXact Thing

August 4, 2007, 01:03 AM
Thanks for the enlightenment, Massad.

I was always of the general impression that you did advocate the use of whatever load local law enforcement used.

Houston Tom
August 4, 2007, 08:22 AM
Use what you think is the best round to get the job done. You have to survive in order to get taken to court.

August 4, 2007, 08:29 AM
You have to take anything Massad Ayoob says with a grain of salt......he's a legend in his own mind and thinks he's a lawyer. Use whatever ammo you want in your gun and don't worry about it. Who knows what he'll be telling you to do in next months article.

Robert Hairless
August 4, 2007, 08:48 AM
Your personal attack on Massad Ayoob is uncalled for. It's especially nasty because Ayoob hadn't said what you've attacked him for, and because six hours and three messages before you posted the attack he had corrected the original poster's misunderstanding.

August 4, 2007, 08:58 AM
If you are worried about being attacked by allegations of carrying ammo that is too effective, I heartily recommend leaving your fireams locked in the safe, unloaded, as mere collector's items. Or better yet, turn them in at a gun "buy-back" so they can be destroyed. Get real. Carrying the same ammo as police has long been promoted by Mas Ayoob as a GOOD thing.

August 4, 2007, 01:18 PM
Rather than edit out the ad hominem in post #38 I will just remind members not to engage in such - Mass' - think of him what you will - is a member here and other boards.

Personal attacks are not encouraged. It is not too difficult to simply write that you don't agree with someone.

August 4, 2007, 03:33 PM
And I bet that if you used FMJ ammo and had to shoot 10 times to stop the threat you would be in trouble for using too many shots and being vindictive.

August 4, 2007, 03:38 PM
You're gonna get slammed no matter what you do, liberal prosecuting attorneys will attack you no matter what you do, what you used, whether or not your attacker lived or died. If you keep worrying about it you'll drive yourself insane.

Pick one plan, stick with it, work out the legal details later with your lawyer. And above all have the Castle Doctrine in your state.

August 4, 2007, 05:24 PM
Thanks for the post Massad. I will go ahead with the WInchesters.

Either I was not doing a good joob of getting my point across in my posts or people where just taking things and running with them. Probably a little of both.

Basically my point was after I read your article it just made me think if carrying the Winchester Ranger ammo was worth it versus a more normal type of hollowpoint. Which I am comfortable with anyway because I use Hydra Shocks in my 1911.

So again thanks for the reply.

If you enjoyed reading about "Stop carrying Winchester Ranger RA9T" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!