Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Legal ramifications of using any 'special' weapons in home defense

Discussion in 'NFA Firearms and Accessories' started by Dr_2_B, Oct 8, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Dr_2_B

    Dr_2_B Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2006
    Messages:
    1,850
    Location:
    midwest
    Whether it's a suppressor or a short barreled shotgun or even a full auto, what do you believe the legal ramifications to be for a justified home defense shooting?

    Any of you who have these class weapons, do you use them for home defense?

    BTW, I'm not planning on doing this (at least not any time soon) but I'm interested in your thoughts.
     
    Last edited: Oct 8, 2011
  2. Sam1911

    Sam1911 Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2007
    Messages:
    33,736
    Location:
    Central PA
    There are lots of threads available here if you do a search on "home defense silencer." Same for SBRs. We've discussed the question lots.

    The question gets a little thornier when machine guns are brought into the picture as their practical value and appropriateness to the task is questionable at best.
     
  3. Dr_2_B

    Dr_2_B Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2006
    Messages:
    1,850
    Location:
    midwest
    Oh, sorry Sam, I should've done a search. My bad.
     
  4. Jim K

    Jim K Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2002
    Messages:
    17,609
    In theory, none. A justifiable shooting is a justifiable shooting no matter what kind of gun is used.

    In practice, the press would have a circus if a homeowner stitched up an intruder with a submachinegun, legally owned or not. Since few NFA weapons owners have only NFA weapons, why not use something else? Unless you just want to make trouble for others for the hell of it.

    Jim
     
  5. pikid89

    pikid89 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2009
    Messages:
    1,556
    Location:
    The Gator Nation
    I think this is one aspect of firearms usage that we should take a hint from the Brits (probably the ONLY hint) in that as hard as it is to get a gun there, once you have it, they ENCOURAGE the use of suppressors
     
  6. Gunnerboy

    Gunnerboy Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2011
    Messages:
    1,131
    Location:
    Over the hills and far away
    Kinda on and off subject but my uncle ran a plantation over in africa in the 70s and he always had a full auto uzi for his self defense gun.
     
  7. mortablunt

    mortablunt Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2011
    Messages:
    2,590
    Location:
    Deutschland
    Well, if you use an MG for an HD shooting, that could get you a bit on incredulity, because machine gun = ton of money and work to get. It might scream ax crazy.
     
  8. FIVETWOSEVEN

    FIVETWOSEVEN Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2009
    Messages:
    5,056
    Google Gary Fadden, that is the best example on why you shouldn't use a full auto for self defense. No clue on Silencers though.
     
  9. Kiln

    Kiln Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2011
    Messages:
    2,465
    Wow...for once I agree with you on something. :neener:

    Good call, never heard of the incident but it gives good reasoning why you shouldn't do this.

    Here's the article for easy access:

    http://www.davehayes.org/2006/02/10/the-gary-fadden-incident
     
  10. wyocarp

    wyocarp Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    1,453
    Location:
    Laramie, Wyoming
    The Gary Fadden shows more of what can happen after an incident than how the weapon makes a difference. Gary feels it might have made a difference to have killed the attacker with a shotgun. If the prosecutor was as bent as he was to make a name for himself it wouldn't have made a difference what the weapon was. We have to accept that our current legal system does a poor job at best and it is heavily laced with those who only want to make a name for themselves, play god, get rich, or all three. Our legal system is more broken than our health system, with justice for those who can afford it. For those of us who feel like we want to be able to protect ourselves it might be more prudent to live in an area of the country that generally agrees with us than to worry about which gun we happen to have access to when a life threatening situation occurs.
     
  11. husbandofaromanian

    husbandofaromanian Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2008
    Messages:
    336
    Location:
    Nashville, Tn
    I carry a .223 suppressed Contender pistol (single shot) in my vehicle. I carry it because no other pistol is going to give me a first round hit up to 150 yards.
     
  12. WardenWolf

    WardenWolf member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Messages:
    5,884
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    It depends on the weapon. A short-barreled rifle would probably be the "safest" NFA weapon, with a short-barreled shotgun after it. There's no real negative public connotation coming from short-barreled rifles. Everyone's heard of a "sawed off shotgun" before, although it also doesn't have a hugely negative connotation.

    Between a silencer and a machine gun, I'd actually say the silencer would be the hardest to defend in court. Why? Because it could be argued the intent was to kill without alerting the neighbors. That it was a setup, or an assassination. At least with a machine gun, there's no hiding the fact that you shot them. Every man and his dog will know it. But a silencer creates the appearance that you have something to hide.
     
  13. Sam1911

    Sam1911 Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2007
    Messages:
    33,736
    Location:
    Central PA
    Well, that's one possible way of looking at it.

    The other would be, I use a suppressor because I try always to limit my hearing damage due to gunfire. A good defense attorney would probably also take the opportunity to educate the jury about the true effects of "silencers" and that the concept of "stealthy" shooting with one is a Hollywood myth. And would probably point out that their use is actually required or greatly encouraged in other parts of the world for these reasons.

    Now, using a machine gun? That's going to be a harder sell, depending on what machine gun we're talking about and what collateral damage was caused by any wild shots. Between the weapon's general unsuitability for the task and the increased possibility of risk to the neighborhood, I don't think that's a choice I'd want to have to try and defend.
     
  14. dannyr3_8

    dannyr3_8 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2011
    Messages:
    171
    Location:
    louisvillekentucky
    wow i wonder if the others where ever charged for attepted murder
     
  15. Double Naught Spy

    Double Naught Spy Sus Venator

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    9,631
    Location:
    Forestburg, Texas
    You know, I don't see anything particularly terrible about the Gary Fadden incident that hasn't happened with all sorts of other firearms in self defense shootings where the folks were actually just defending themselves but some overly aggressive DA dramatically and in some cases quite wrongfuly pursued prosecution.

    Given the options available to him, Gary Fadden used the best weapon he had available and stopped his attackers in spite of naively firing warning shots first. The alternative would have been his and his bride's death. He and his bride survived despite being attacked by superior numbers of determined attackers and he survived well enough to court and receive due process and he was vindicated.

    For some reason, a lot of people think due process is a penalty for being a good guy and it isn't. It is in place for reasons that can be traced back to an Founding Fathers and prior.
     
  16. NoAlibi

    NoAlibi Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    Messages:
    500
    Location:
    Boca Raton, Florida
    Not a penalty?

    The ability to access the process certainly is not a penalty - not many countries afford their citizens that right.

    However, Gary Fadden may not think so. Because of the over zealousness of a prosecutor in his case his family probably had to ante up $6,000 in cash for his bail bond and that he had to pay HK $45,000 back at 10% interest might be construed on his part as a bit of a penalty.

    The fact that he was tried indicates to me that the incident passed the probable cause test and therefore insulates the state from a civil suit by Fadden to recover the costs of an alleged malicious prosecution unless he can prove some misconduct by the police or the prosecution.

    It would be worth $51,000 to me to stay out of a state prison for what could amount to a life term. You can bet that it wouldg naw at my gut for a very, very long time.
     
  17. wyocarp

    wyocarp Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    1,453
    Location:
    Laramie, Wyoming
    I was just speaking with member of our esteemed legal system about this case. His opinion was that Gary Fadden and these types of cases come about more because of the political climate of an area or the personal agenda of the prosecutor more than the type of ammo or firearm used.
     
  18. JTW Jr.

    JTW Jr. Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2006
    Messages:
    1,384
    Location:
    Henderson NV
    Having had the pleasure of meeting Gary a few times , it sucks knowing what all he had to go thru over this ordeal.
     
  19. Double Naught Spy

    Double Naught Spy Sus Venator

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    9,631
    Location:
    Forestburg, Texas
    Fadden is still thinking after being attacked by superior numbers? So is his wife?

    Overzealous prosecutors suck, but such events happen with firearms other than Class III firearms as well. The prosecution is going to dig where s/he can dig to get the most impact. In some case, the prosecution rants about the capacity of the firearm, the "fact" that it was designed for the military or designed to do maximum damage, that the ammo was particularly deadly.
     
  20. NoAlibi

    NoAlibi Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    Messages:
    500
    Location:
    Boca Raton, Florida
    I never said nor did I insinuate that he would not be thinking about those things or that he is not glad that he is still alive in one piece and has the ability to think about those things.

    To reiterate, what I did say is that the same system that allowed him to defend himself is not occasionally without some great unfair cost -- nothing more, nothing less.

    I also have a Ruger AC-556 in SS with a folding stock and if that was the most efficient weapon available to neutralize the threat I wouldn’t hesitate to use it either given the adage that it’s better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6.

    Having been a homicide investigator for a large metropolitan PD, I noticed a couple of details offered by Fadden that raised some questions in my mind. I tried to go back to the link that Kiln provided to get the info to continue this discussion, but the link now indicates that the account was suspended. If someone has a link to the same article I would appreciate a heads up.....Doc
     
  21. zedsdead

    zedsdead Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2006
    Messages:
    27
    Location:
    Houston, TX
  22. barnetmill

    barnetmill Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2006
    Messages:
    583
    But when all was said and done the fellow fadden with the fullauto min-14 certainly did effectively stop his opponent. His bad luck was to draw a low life as his prosecutor. What was interesting was that the first two prosecutors did not want to touch the case. The case was also unusual because of the persistence of the motorcycle gang bangers that he was attacked by. My only criticism of Fadden was that he did not do society a favor by killing more of them. They chased him for 22 miles past a gate and yet the prosecutor went after him. This something that is unusual. Unlikely to happen where I live.
     
  23. FIVETWOSEVEN

    FIVETWOSEVEN Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2009
    Messages:
    5,056
    especially if you use a silencer home defense or even a short long-gun (oxymoron lol).
     
  24. Sebastian the Ibis
    • Contributing Member

    Sebastian the Ibis Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2008
    Messages:
    1,817
    Location:
    "The Gunshine State"
    The problem with using machine guns in SD is that there is a 30 year mandatory minimum if you make a mistake. If you keep your booger hook on the bang switch an instant too long and put rounds 9-10 into the guys back, you open up a case for a zealous prosecutor.

    Problem with a 30 year mandatory minimum is that a 1 year plea bargain starts to look really good. If your worst day in court results in a 5 year sentence for involuntary manslaughter you can roll the dice, 30 years is a completely different story. It is better to grab anything else so your worst day in court is not as terrible.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page