Concealed Carry Overkill?

[Lawdawg45]

Lawdog45:


And local shooting conditions. However, most of that is banned by the rules.

What we can discuss is the wide variety of different court systems, since CCW shootings generally fall under state law, their different court structures, appellate structure, if the judges are elected, if the LEO and prosecutors are elected, and the general past history of the area involved.
After typing that, I realize a lot of these general issues are useless in discussion. It's going to come down to your town, your sheriff, your DA, your judges, and your peers in the jury box. So the general read is the ENTIRE process that determines your shooting being justified is a political process, specific to one particular town, county, or state.

Nothing could be harder, or less valuable to discuss on an across the board basis.

It gets even thicker when you bring up a park shooting. Was it a Federal park? Different law
State park?
What state, what law? What area?
KNOW YOUR AREA, KNOW THE PRIOR COURT CASES. Base your CCW
on what has happened in the past, in your area. If you live in Alaska
it's probably going to be different then New York, or California.

The only thing these kinds of discussions make crystal clear is your situation is likely to be unique, and any advice given in general, is most likely going to be wrong for your area.
For example I would have thought Fish in Arizona would have been fine with his carry selection, yet it was made an issue at trial.

Perhaps, but understanding what could possibly be skewed against you in court only prepares you for the ugly reality of litigation. Those vague generalities can go both ways. When a new shooter asks for carry advice and is told how to carry multiple weapons, reloads, and practice for long distance shots, that advice could make him a hero or a life long prisoner depending on the region.

LD

 

[SharpsDressedMan]

Any attorney that could not counter a challenge in court to the wisdom, competency, etc of a civilian defending himself over how much or how he practiced probably should not be practicing law. If a legit CCW who ends up being challenged in court had practiced self defensive shooting anything CLOSE to what the police do, or more so, should probably do alright, given any kind of competent defense. As we know, when the police practice to a higher level of handgun competency, they are LESS DANGEROUS, as a whole. If you DO NOT PRACTICE, you are more of a liability. And that would include longer range shooting. Would police administrators be happier if their officers COULD be competent at longer ranges, and have that skill available to them if needed? Of course. Why would it be different for a civilian, as long as the situation was deadly, and the stopping of the assailant possibly saved other lives, or reduced the risk from the assailant?

 

[fastest45ever]

I agree.
However that is a bit complex for the average newbie, and that certainly appears to be the HighRoad mission, to bring in and have a nice place for
people to discuss guns, without being stomped on by moderators or senior members.

JohnSKA made an excellent post awhile back that got into the specifics of number of attackers, accuracy of shots fired in CCW cases, and it opened my eyes a bit. My area has always had guys that operated in packs. We have two notorious gangs not more then 10 minutes away, 13's, and 14's, and they fight over turf. They also do gang attacks on non-members, forcing the non-members to organize, and move in groups. These in turn can also buy into being a violent group, attacking people as the chances arise.

So the likelyhood of multiple attackers, if they come into our area is high.
That combined with the shooting accuracy stats for people under the pressure of attack changed my carry patterns. That extra magazine goes with me now. The rare attack I was subjected to had three attackers.

Somewhere inbetween minimal, ok for court carry, and Mac 10 with two extra 32 round magazines is a compromise for your area that is going to work.

Mas Ayoob, my idol, does have a good idea in using the same ammunition and weapon that your local police carry. This is a wonderful way to promote Glock sales, since most LEO are now Glock buyers, I think.

I'm lucky in that my friend picked Sig Sauer P220's, and Federal HydraShocks, and the combination has worked flawlessly in all our areas shootings, few as they are.

I think this is an excellent website to start with for new folks, to understand the complexity of SD shootings:

http://www.haroldfishdefense.org/

It clearly establishes how much politics is a part of Self-defense, and CCW.

From my view, Fish picked a caliber for CCW that was a perfect choice for his rural walks. He was run over hot coals by the prosecutor for that choice.

Also the complexity of the case shows the necessity of knowing your state laws, and how fast they may change, due to the laws being political in nature.

It also clearly shows the cost of being what appears right and yet getting run over by a prosecutor, DA wanting to make a name for himself.

At least he finally got out.

 

[smalls]

I'd better quit going to the range, then. Some prosecutor is going to say I've been training to kill people.

They can say almost anything, yes. But stuff like that is worthless crap spewing out of their mouth, and A) your defense attorney should be able to point that out, and B) a reasonable jury should be able to detect that.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by LawDawg45: No Sir, I was referring to a Defense Attorney involved when the suspect shooter survives and he and/or his family are litigating for 7 figures.

If the "suspect shooter" is suing, he or she will be represented by a plaintiff's attorney. The defendant will be represented by a defense attorney.

 

[Trent]

Overkill on concealed carry..

Reminds me a scene in the movie "I'm gonna get you sucka!"

I have to hike down to the lake to shoot, and often on the way back take a longer (but MUCH less steep) route back to my house, through my neighbor's property a couple houses down. (I have a 65 foot 60 degree incline to the lake behind my house; making it DOWN is easy.. back up.. bit tougher. Using his property is much easier to circle around to get to where I shoot)

Anyway I head down there one day with a backpack, and spend an hour or so shooting. I had ...

* A drop leg holster with a Glock 21
* A shoulder holster with a Taurus PT92
* A right-side OWB holster with an FN Five Seven
* A left-side OWB holster in cross draw with an H&K USP
* An IWB holster with a Springfield 1911
* A load bearing vest with an FS-2000 clipped on it in front

I brought down about 600 rounds of ammo with me, and a backpack full of magazines.

Made it DOWN the hill fine, but on the way back I was so overloaded that I took his property on the way back and walked up the road back to my house.

Halfway home, he's outside washing his truck and waves at me. I wave back, then notice the dumbfounded look on his face.

I won't repeat what he said next, but it was funny stuff. We both got a good laugh out of it.

 

[fastest45ever]

Platitudes about what is worthless in court is a VERY dangerous road to go down. As is usual, YMMV with the area you live in, or the situation you face.

And it's NOT worthless stuff.

One of the jury in the Fish case said, besides everything else, said that the prosecutor was effective painting hollow point bullets as being deadly designed only to kill. Why would someone carry such deadly ammunition.:banghead:?

Given that jury pool, all of a sudden H.P.'s are the LAST bullet I'm carrying in Arizona.

 

[David E]

Why not carry the exact same JHP the local police carry?

 

[fastest45ever]

Good question. They have used, to a very limited extent, two shootings that I know of, Federal Hydrashocks.

As ammunition goes not exactly cutting edge, but effective.

There are certainly a whole lot of browny points for using the Hydrashocks over 260 grains at 800 fps in a SA. Plus, I'm not real bad with a 1911.

 

[David E]

My point being, if you use the exact same ammo as the local PD or the FBI, what hook can they hang that "JHP's are only for killing!" hat on?

"Why did you load your gun with Widget brand JHP's?"

"Because I thought the local PD knows more about that stuff, so I chose the exact same load they issue to their officers."

 

[fastest45ever]

It's a good point, a very good point. However, Fish made the decision to use a 10MM, a perfect trail caliber for his area, in a Glock 29, with proper HP ammunition. That choice, perfectly practical, was never refuted properly.
He did need another attorney, and another expert.

My requirements as a SD/CCW person are considerably different then my LEO.

What if lets say I was very accurate with a SA 45 and very fast.
I like LFN style bullets since I can load and shoot thousands for the cost of a few hundred factory Hydrashocks. So to be safe I'm forced to use a handgun
I'm not as accurate with, and a round that is not as accurate?

Your right. Doesn't mean I have to like the situation.:banghead:

 

[Lawdawg45]

Any attorney that could not counter a challenge in court to the wisdom, competency, etc of a civilian defending himself over how much or how he practiced probably should not be practicing law. If a legit CCW who ends up being challenged in court had practiced self defensive shooting anything CLOSE to what the police do, or more so, should probably do alright, given any kind of competent defense. As we know, when the police practice to a higher level of handgun competency, they are LESS DANGEROUS, as a whole. If you DO NOT PRACTICE, you are more of a liability. And that would include longer range shooting. Would police administrators be happier if their officers COULD be competent at longer ranges, and have that skill available to them if needed? Of course. Why would it be different for a civilian, as long as the situation was deadly, and the stopping of the assailant possibly saved other lives, or reduced the risk from the assailant?

A great question. Read through the current thread on open carry in Indiana.....the people they mentioned that were frightened by people OC'ing.......they also become Attorney's, Judges, Politicians, and most importantly Jury members. Society is crazy and illogical, and they often don't see a trained civilian as anything other than a "gun nut", a sad sign of the times. Let me reiterate that I'm a 100% for open carry, BUG's with as much ammo as you want to carry, and if I was that Officer pinned down by gunfire, I'd defend your shot in court with all that was in me, just be aware of the crazy world we live in and some of it's inhabitants!

LD

 

[Lawdawg45]

If the "suspect shooter" is suing, he or she will be represented by a plaintiff's attorney. The defendant will be represented by a defense attorney.

Pardon my semantic violation, I use the word as a category designation. Allow me to say that Attorney's on both sides will take the smallest detail and use it against a shooter.....LEO or civilian.

LD

 

[David E]

I agree that Fish needed a better attorney. However, when I frequent my neck of the woods where there are wild hogs, black bear and pot growers, I may very well take my Glock 20 and load it with JHP's, regardless of what happened to Mr. Fish.

 

[PabloJ]

In United States only the rich can shoot in self defense the poor can too, but they will have to live in cardboard box and use soup kitchens after the "dust settles".

 

[scaatylobo]

Firmly believe

I am of the FIRM belief that any round that is carried by ANY agency is a GTG cover in any court case.

No attorney will take on a P.D. as to their choice of a particular round.

That being the case I carry what my agency did/does.Happens to be the old Black Talon,renamed Ranger SXT.

I happen to have seen a few uses of that round and it did all that it was supposed to.

If your insistant on carry a caliber that is not carried by any agency,then I suggest you carry that same brand and as close to the same bullet and use that as the 'logic' if questioned as to why that "horrible bullet" that harmed Mr. perfect [ my client ] as he tried to kill you.

You can also research ALL agencys and all their choices to see if any carry a round that is GTG in your opinion.

Then ask for their research and the name of their officer that chose that round,keep it in your personal papers in case it ever becomes a court issue.

OK, so I am overly cautious,but I have been to court MANY times for both myself [ was LEO ] and as witness and [acting] courtofficer [ O.T. assignment ].

If you carry AND actually intend to use your ccw for a S/D situation,please use your head PRIOR to having to appear in court.

Its just part and parcel of preparing for a S/D issue.

The first part is getting a gun,then training = then be prepared for the aftermath of a shoot.

 

[David E]

Jeff Cooper observed that: "Problem One is successfully defending your life. Problem Two is explaining it to the boys with the bracelets (handcuffs)."

He further opined that many people naively place Problem Two ahead of Problem One.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by Lawdawg45: When a new shooter asks for carry advice and is told how to carry multiple weapons, reloads, and practice for long distance shots, that advice could make him a hero or a life long prisoner depending on the region.

?

If you are contending that carrying a reload could be presented as an indication of state of mind, that is possible, but a good defense would bring to bear the fact that most experts hold that it is prudent to carry a reload.

The same applies to the other issues.

Proper risk management would identify and address all of the potential risks--a malfunction, having to engage someone at more than seven yards.....

I wouldn't place too much importance on the region. The Fish case occurred in Arizona, as did the case of Larry Hickey.

Posted by SharpsDressedMan: If you DO NOT PRACTICE, you are more of a liability. And that would include longer range shooting.

Yes indeed. Should someone be injured unintentionally, a case of negligence could hinge upon the degree to which the actor recognized risk and the way in which he or she handled it. Demonstrated skill in long range shooting could prove pivotal.

 

[Old Fuff]

Frankly, the Old Fuff is appalled to learn that 100 feet is now considered to be "long range." That comes out to just a bit over 33 yards! Police qualification courses used to extend to 50 yards (150 feet). The distance was sometimes reduced to 25 yards (75 feet) for detectives, administrators, and others with .38 snub-nosed revolvers or those qualifying with off duty/back-up guns. That said, it was not unusual for some to go ahead and shoot the full-length course.

I am not under any illusion about the inability of some CCW holders to shoot anything close to a decent group beyond 15 feet due to a combination of inexperience and minimal training; but I would hope they would strive to do better. Hopefully a 100 foot limit won’t become a general rule or expectation, to be imposed on all of us.

 

[Guillermo]

Hopefully a 100 foot limit won’t become a general rule or expectation, to be imposed on all of us

As the Universal Arbitrator of Absolute Reality and the authority vested in me from the Galactic Overlord I hereby decree that Old Fuff may no longer shoot rifle or handgun farther than 30 yards...

unless he quits cutting trigger guards off of Colt Double Action Revolvers.

 

[Old Fuff]

Sir:

You are badly mistaken... Again.

I would never, ever cut the trigger guard off of a Colt double-action revolver.

I am a gentleman....

With a bench grinder....

 

[fastest45ever]

I can see it now:
You are forced to defend yourself.
You come into court. You explain that studies you found on a gun forum indicated that 70% of attacks are by multiple bad guys, 2-3.
Your accuracy rate under pressure is predicted to drop, as it does for the studies done on LEO, to 30% at less then 7 yards.
Due to living on the Arizona border, where the likelyhood is much higher due to
arms and illegal immigration, I carry a Mac 10, full auto, with 4 32 round magazines. For my situation it's perfectly logical.
It only gives me 8 seconds of actual firing time, so I have to be very careful, and practice a lot.

Better yet:
70% of attacks take place in dim light. Yes your honor, since I don't see well I considered the flame thrower the weapon of choice. It's carried
by the United States military, therefore it has the United States stamp of approval.

I write in jest, but our arguments were obviously viewed by a couple jury members in a similar matter on the issue of hollow points, and 10MM.

 

[Guillermo]

Hopefully a 100 foot limit won’t become a general rule or expectation, to be imposed on all of us

As the Universal Arbitrator of Absolute Reality and the authority vested in me from the Galactic Overlord I hereby decree that Old Fuff may no longer shoot rifle or handgun farther than 30 yards...

unless he quits removing trigger guards from Colt Double Action Revolvers.

 

[Old Fuff]

Picky, picky... All I do is the front part, and I've learned to take the trigger out first...

 

[Guillermo]

all kidding aside

your point concerning 100 feet is, spot on.

while most of us think about encounters as happening very close, it is not always the case