Public Opinion: Effect of Being a Gun Forum Member in a Self-Defense Shooting?

[coalman]

The clearly biased media handling of the most recent high profile (claimed) self-defense shooting got me thinking about this idea again. Regardless of what you feel regarding guilt or innocence in this case - and I don't think we have all the facts yet - the media's reporting on this case has been clearly bias.

However, I remind myself that the media, and the bias it represents, is reprensentative of a mindset in our country. And, like it or not, a "jury of peers", in public or at trial, does not mean people of the same mind. That's just a reality.

Anyway, see poll. This is not about whether you agree with a perspective or perception. It's not about 2A, or race, or anything else. And, it's not about what you said or did not say on the gun forum that could be used against you. It's simply about the effect of gun forum membership, if any, in a similar case in forming early public opinion or at trial. So, please try to grasp the spirit of the poll question instead of getting hung up on an "it all depends" response or other beefs.

Thanks.

 

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

How would anyone find out?

 

[Trebor]

It could come up in discovery.

 

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

How? Search your house and take your computer, then have CSI check your logins? Ok, then prove it was me who logged in. Right now it's just a screen name and an IP/MAC address combo. Prove it's me.

 

[don p]

All I'll add is be careful of what you post with regards to like, I don't care shoot until the mag or cylinder is empty type responses.
I'll add this, if you are a firearms instructor would that be held against you in a SD shooting????

 

[BK]

Having nothing more than a login to a sight could only affect the atmosphere of a case if the content of the site was suspect. Even if you didn't have any radical post material on the site, if you were a member of a forum that lets loose with blood lust and chest beating, it could obviously be perceived that you were of like character.

 

[beatledog7]

If they can access your account, and all your posts start with something like, "What is the minimum justification I need for a good SD shoot," you might have an issue.

 

[Cosmoline]

I think the OP is suggesting that THR membership *itself* might be held up like Stormfront membership or something in the media circus. I suppose it's possible, but I don't see examples of it even in the current media circus. The media is much more likely to focus on pictures of you with firearms on myspace, fb or youtube. So maybe erase the ones where you're saluting Hitler while making gang signs, wearing a KKK hoodie and throwing LOL cats into the river.

I suppose an argument could be made that if you want to look good in a media storm you shouldn't have any pictures or videos of firearms posted. But even in a SD shooting the chances of getting caught up in such a mess are really remote.

 

[JesseCohen]

I don't think mere membership in a gun forum like this makes any difference at all. In fact, if you were here checking out the legal section it could be argued that you were someone with high interest and respect for the law.

You do have to be careful what you post however. I had a client whose license was pulled based on statements made on the forum. The discretionary licensing in Massachusetts allows one official to strip someone of their FUNDAMENTAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS because they don't agree with what someone says. My argument was that the chief was violating the First and Second Amendments at the same time.

What the chief specifically took exception with was my clients "excessive interest in the use of deadly force". My argument to that was that everyone in my criminal law class in law school must be unsuitable as well because we weren't just interested in it, we studied and memorized and wrote papers on it.

 

[Odd Job]

Membership by itself doesn't mean anything. I can register on the forum and never visit again.
What matters is whether there is proven activity on the forum and whether that activity can be linked to me.
Then there is the can of worms about the nature of the activity/posts. I don't know if the posts themselves could be harmful, I guess that is a different matter not in the scope of this thread...

 

[Sam1911]

A couple of things come to mind:

1) You mention the media and media bias. Unless you say something to the media about gun forum membership, that's really unlikely to come out in the press during the initial media storm that surrounds the average defensive shooting. For one thing, most "guy A shoots guy B" stories have a very limited run in the press, and only in the local press anyway. If you happen to be so unlucky as to fall into what becomes a high profile and very controversial case, of course that's different. But if someone breaks into your home and you shoot them in your hallway, or if you get mugged and manage to plug the robber during the attack, that's really not incredibly news-worthy in most places. Yeah, might be front page news in the Podunkville Gazzette for a day or three, but that stuff is just too common to be BIG news.

Why that matters is that the discovery phase of a criminal investigation usually takes a while. The kind of rooting and digging that might uncover your "secret" identity here at THR is going to take more time than that. And the investigators probably won't be making detailed statements about your posting habits to the press before the trial. I'd imagine the delay between the incident and such details coming out at trial will represent quite a bit more time than the attention span of any semi-major news outlets will have for a simple homicide.

2) The folks that matter -- the prosecution -- are going to need a pretty compelling reason to go looking for unrelated associations you might have. The fact that you are an NRA member, or a shooting club member, or a THR member for that matter, really doesn't inform the case much at first glance. And while they COULD investigate every single thing about you back to your kindergarten records, they generally need some reason to feel that it is relevant to what happened. If you're mugged and shoot the guy who attacked you, and your story matches the evidence at the scene, and witnesses don't say anything too hinkey about what happened, the police aren't going to have much reason to go digging through your sock drawer at home, your email records, phone records, credit card receipts, etc. Or at least, not much reason to drag it all out in court.

Now, if it comes out that you and the dead guy knew each other, had some kind of relationship that must have gone sour, might have had some business dealings, or an argument or something -- then yeah, they're going to try and piece together anything that could speak to why you and he were there, then, and why you really shot him.

Or, if something about the way you present yourself or what you say in your statement gives them the impression you make a habit of seeking out trouble, or maybe that you have some kind of vendetta against some person or persons that could have affected the events... then yes, they'll dig.

But as for just BEING a member of a gun forum? How does inform the events? What would be the point of bringing it up in court? It shows you're a gun guy? Well, duh! You had a gun. You were carrying a gun. You're probably a gun guy.

I don't think I'd worry about it much.

 

[kopcicle]

Personally I'd be more concerned about my service , professional and personal history . That said There are plenty of words that I've written that taken out of context could "change the atmosphere of a case" , and just as many to refute them .

I''l go with none as personally I have other issues

~kop

 

[Trebor]

How? Search your house and take your computer, then have CSI check your logins? Ok, then prove it was me who logged in. Right now it's just a screen name and an IP/MAC address combo. Prove it's me.

I was thinking more of the discovery phase of a civil trial. During that process you are required to respond to inquiries from the opposite attorney. Gun forum membership could certainly come up there and, if asked, you'd have respond honestly.

During a criminal case it could come up in the course of on investigation. It might, it might not, no way to tell for sure until it happens. (Like, say, someone you know in real life mentions you are on a forum, etc,)

 

[Yoda]

If they can do this, they can do that

If the media can try to taint the jury pool by reporting how many times Zimmerman has called 911 during his life (something a neighborhood watch guy would actually do a lot of), then they can pervert membership in a gun forum as an indication of an obsession with guns and a hope for a chance to shoot someone.

During a trial, an ambitious prosecutor might try to bring it up, only to have it overruled as immaterial. In the meantime, the jury's imagination would fill in any blanks.

Think this is far-fetched? It's not any different than media reporting that Zimmerman "disobeyed the orders" of the 911 operator.

Face it: There's a lot stupid people out there, and a lot of them end up on juries. I heard one guy on a radio call-in show say that Martin was "justified" in initiating an attack on Zimmerman "in retaliation" for Zimmerman calling 911 on him. How do you think such a person on a jury would respond to information that a shooter frequented a forum dealing with "shooting people?"


- - - Yoda

 

[Tcruse]

While I agree that membership is not an important consideration in any SD investigation, I do think that most people are way too casual about what they include in e-mail, Facebook and forum posting. All of these are really public postings. Email and Facebook are really NOT PRIVATE. So, do not post or email anything that you would not want your boss or neighbor to know. For example, in self defense we do not "use force to kill" but "use force to stop the agression".

 

[MattMesa]

This is my first post so go easy on me...

I'm not trying to sound presumptuous or to brag because I am sure there are a lot of people on this forum that are a) way more highly educated than me, and b) have an infinite amount of more experience than me in the subject of firearms in general.

But, as a little background I live in Georgia and I'm 27 years old. I have a degree in business, and I'm finishing my second in finance right now at which point I will probably be applying for law school. The reason I mention this is because pistols have been a point of very intense debate on my campus right now because Georgia is considering whether or not to allow people with concealed carry permits to actually carry on campus.

Because of certain family members that are highly involved in both the judicial and legislative side of the law and being pretty intimately involved in it most of my life; and, having spent way way too much of my life as a university student: I would argue that any prosecutor (whether civil or criminal) would eat something like this up to use against someone involved in any case involving a firearm. Even living in south east Georgia (near SC) which is a traditionally highly conservative area firearms (especially pistols) are a highly sensitive subject. One would think because of my geographic location most people would own pistols - but if they don't, they are a very vocal minority.

I have never been convicted of a crime but I do know many DA's, ADA's, and prosecutors and in my experience very very few of them are out for objective justice. By the time "your" case is in their hands they will hem you up in any way they can, they are focused on one thing and one thing only: conviction rates. If they can't get you on some charge they will find another. Obviously this is not true for EVERY one of the aforementioned professionals but it sure seems to be norm.

I am very sorry in advance if this post is offensive to anyone because I've spent quite a bit of time reading through posts on this forum and it is a nice BB. Everything I have read on here has been generally constructive, respectful, and well thought arguments. Everything I have stated above is of course anecdotal and purely my opinion - and not that of any one connected to me. I would like to continue participating on this forum and would not like to seem out-of-line or disrespectful in my first post!

Also, thank you all for the information I have gleamed reading through the archives on this forum because I just recently made my first pistol purchase and it was partly influenced by information on here. Just to start the argument: it was a 9mm and not the .45 lol!

-Matt

NOTE: I wholeheartedly agree that putting any pictures up on any of the major social networks is a TERRIBLE idea. I, again don't know for a FACT, but would bet A LOT that any half-decent prosecutor is going to go looking through facebook immediately for any picture or status they can easily cast in a negative light. ESPECIALLY any picture that could be typecast as you being a "gun fanatic" or some thing of that nature. I.E., don't be showing off your new sidearm in a picture with your sleeveless "no fear" t-shirt lol

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

I voted "Some." It depends on what you learn on those sites - like this one - and how you use that education.

Woody

 

[fuzzyjon79]

I think this would greatly depend on whether or not you have a District Attorney that is strongly anti-gun. If they want a prosecution badly enough, they're probably going to do everything in their power to show that you are ruthless and maniacal. If you live in a more gun friendly area and it looks as though you indeed did shoot in self defense, they're probably not going to dig very deep, if at all.

 

[BUCKrub91]

For just being a member no... but if you post something stupid and they find it better believe it will get used

 

[Yoda]

Join the real world

A lot of you who maintain that posting on this forum "shouldn't" make a difference are discounting how an anti-gun prosecutor and jury might view this. It's your right to post here, just as it is your right to weat a T-shirt with some way-out pro-gun logo. What ought to be isn't what often is. If a prosecutor can use it against you, he will, and if his only goal is to plant the impression in the jury's mind that you were pre-disposed to shoot, he will probably succeed.

Even though I have many heartaches with the moderators cutting off discussions on The High Road as the posts start to go wide, I have to acknowledge that they do keep most of us on a reasonably elevated path, minimizing the chances that some out-of-control legal system will use what is posted here to put you at a disadvantage.

And keep this in mind: It may not matter what you yourself say. Even if all you're doing is frequenting a site where others say some outlandish things, you may get tainted by what the others say.

Remember that self-defense shoot out in Arizona, where the fact that the defendant was carrying a super-deadly 10mm was used against him? He had every right to carry the most effective caliber he could find, but when it came time to make him look like a cold-blooded killer, his caliber choice was used against him. Same-same applies with what you put on this or any other forum.

- - - Yoda

 

[Hypnogator]

None, at least for me.
The fact that I teach judgmental use of force and gunfighting tactics to law enforcement agencies would be orders of magnitude more important!

 

[Neverwinter]

The media is much more likely to focus on pictures of you with firearms on myspace, fb or youtube. So maybe erase the ones where you're saluting Hitler while making gang signs, wearing a KKK hoodie and throwing LOL cats into the river.

I suppose an argument could be made that if you want to look good in a media storm you shouldn't have any pictures or videos of firearms posted. But even in a SD shooting the chances of getting caught up in such a mess are really remote.

The likelihood of you being caught in the kind of media storm that would invite that level of scrutiny is extremely small in a standard self-defense situation. If you do find yourself in that situation, these days you can anticipate your social media and email accounts being hacked by some racist. http://gawker.com/5897485/white-supremacist-hacks-trayvon-martins-email-account-leaks-messages-online. However, censoring your own life about some fear of something you would not be likely to encounter as a result of a justified shooting seems like going overboard.

 

[AirForceShooter]

how do they know? Google yourself sometime.
An aggressive DA will use anything to nail your hide to a wall.
The gun you used. The ammo you used. Membership in any gun club.
Discussion with your neighbors as to how often you shoot. Portraying you as a gun nut.
Being on a board just adds to it.

AFS

 

[mortablunt]

Being on THR wouldn't add anything to the prosecution's case. It would probably get objected for relevance. Now if your favorite hobby on THR was SHTF, posting about the most effective calibers, and how to take people down and get away with it, you'd have a problem. Forum memberships are not very likely to come up in anything short of an intensive FBI investigation.

 

[rajb123]

How about the use of gun ranges....?

...Mine is owned by NYS and every time you visit you are required to sign in and provide your name, address, date, phone, time you are shooting, gun(s) used, which gun range you are using, the distances of your targets, and any applicable and required gun license numbers.

These records are kept on file and in a computer data base indefinately. I am told, the state police use these records for investigations frequently.

I did not respond to the poll since I do not understand the question. Yeh, I read the intro six times.