Rubber Shot/Slug Use

[culpritish]

I have been searching the Shotgun threads looking for anyone who has actually used rubber shot, rubber slugs, or any other "less than leathal" round in a self defense or law enforcement incident. I'm wondering if it is worth the hassle of trying to find it, and the legal ramifications if it is used (I live in Calif.),and the reaction of the person shot(stunned,immobilized, no effect) Any info would be greatly appreciated.

 

[Kimber1911_06238]

Don't bother....less lethal rounds can still kill, but they probably won't disable anyone for more than a few seconds. (after all, the goal is to stop an attacker) When the police use them, the suspect is shot, and then jumped on by several officers. If all you have is another beanbag or rubber sabot, then you might be in trouble. Also, you can only shoot if deadly force is necessary....the prosecution may play word games..."if deadly force was necessary, then why did you use a less lethal round?"

 

[Fred Fuller]

From a similar thread recently (edited slightly):

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=280145

Less-lethal shotgun loads include things like bean bags, rock salt, rubber shot, OC rounds, and so on. While there is no question that they are not as effective as stopping threats as lead shot and slugs, given the utility of pepper spray for individuals, I'd like to know if these loads have any value to the average individual, namely:

1. Are there reasonable scenarios where a private individual would want to have a ranged, less-lethal force option?


In a word, no. Police officers differ from private citizens in that they have no duty to retreat in ANY situation in ANY jurisdiction I know of. When confronted with an individual who is a threat but not a potentially lethal threat, police officers are still required to deal with the situation. Thus their use of force can legally and appropriately be more broad than that available to private citizens. Tools available to police officers in this continuum include a number of things that might not be legal to citizens in a given jurisdiction.

In addition, there are specific departmental policies in place to regulate use of force, and adequate supervised and certified training in the application of less lethal (LL) force modalities as well (at least in theory). As a rule this sort of thing is not available to private citizens, save in areas where it is required to use some of these modalities (like pepper spray training requirements in some jurisdictions).

Importantly, as has been pointed out earlier, whenever less than lethal modalities are brought into use by police, lethal options are always available. Less lethal options are also pretty much always limited to specific delivery mechanisms as well, they are NOT mixed in the same delivery mechanism- like mixing lethal and LL ammunition in the same shotgun.

As a private citizen, you do not have the responibility of confronting situations that evolve in public places, nor do you have the training/certification to do so. If confronted by the need to deal with an unruly individual in public, you have the option of retreat when not cornered or violently attacked. Police have no such option, in fact the opposite is true- they must deal with the situation. In private/in your own home, circumstances change to some degree in many jurisdictions. Still, in order to apply lethal force legally, even in your own home, you must be confronted with an unavoidable situation which justifies the use of such force.


2. What are the legalities of shooting somebody with one of these loads? How does the law look upon a deadly force weapon that is loaded with less-lethal ammunition?

It should go without saying that I hope this board can discuss this topic with a minimum of invective and bravado.


In point of fact, ANY time you fire a shotgun at another person, no matter what it's loaded with, you are using lethal force. Anything fired out of a shotgun can be lethal, including blanks (a LEO near here was killed a few years ago in a training exercise by a blank fired from a shotgun by another officer). You must be in an unavoidable situation where the use of lethal force is justified if you are to fire a shotgun at another person without legal consequences arising out of your action.

With that being the case, there is no good reason to attempt the use of LL munitions by a private citizen. You gain nothing by doing so, except to open yourself up to charges of using a level of force not called for by the situation. After all, it isn't possible for you to 'shoot him just a little bit' no matter what load you use, any more than it is possible to be a little bit pregnant.

Either you are justified in using lethal force or you are not- there is no halfway point where you would be justified in using LL munitions as might a police officer in some relatively narrow situations. That being the case, it is advisable for you to use munitions likely to cause your assailant to cease and desist his attack on you as quickly as possible should you have to fire your shotgun in legitimate self defense. As has been previously stated, you might only get one chance to fire a shot in a life and death struggle.

In short- if you as a private citizen are justified in shooting, you are justified in killing. There are no half measures legitimately available to you as there are to police officers. You should not mistakenly seek to claim those half measures no matter what apparent justification offers itself.

For more on similar issues, see Skip Gochenour's lecture notes at http://www.teddytactical.com/archive/MonthlyStudy/2006/02_StudyDay.htm .

hth,

lpl/nc

 

[coelacanth]

check with Massad Ayoob - he is a THR member. . . . .

That said, I have used rubber shot in a 12 guage as loaded by Fiocchi and found it to be useful in situatiuons where metal projectiles could penetrate to another dwelling - ( apartment complexes for instance ). It's a point of conjecture whether a facefull of rubber shot would serve as well as a load of No. 4 buckshot when the chips are down but you cannot know for certain that conventional rounds will stay inside your dwelling at all times. My thinking has always been that the non lethal alternative is an acceptable risk when my butt is on the line because the back up gun is a Smith&Wesson revolver loaded with the real thing. I have no interest in killing anyone - BG's included - if I can help it and the rubber buckshot gives them one more chance to rethink the issue before the police start drawing chalk lines.

 

[CZ52GUY]

Less lethal loads

I can't speak for the legalities in CA.

I concur with Lee's comments. I keep some Rubber Slugs/Shot, and a couple Bean Bag's for 4-legged "trespasser persuasion". The two-legged critters would require a different load.

I'm fortunate to live in a state where the right to defend ones life and property are constitutionally protected. Even at that, the use of force laws don't make less lethal rounds a "safe haven".

A respectful alternative perspective to the over-penetration argument (and put forward by another member in another thread to whom I'd give credit if I could remember) is that the intruder may also be armed. Their concern about over-penetration is in most instances largely exceeded by the lawful occupant defending themselves. For each round used to engage an armed intruder which does not "end the fight", the intruder has opportunity to fire off yet another round from your dwelling which you can't control it's final destination.

Fair question, good discussion. The right load for the right job is the take-away.

Keep Safe,

CZ52'

 

[ArmedBear]

AFAIK it's legal in CA. Local shop sells it here. http://www.discountgunmart.com/

Anyway, inside your home, it's lethal force. If you want something with knockdown power that will dissipate quickly if it hits a wall, it could be useful.

However, I'd only use it in a situation where I had the legal and moral right to use deadly force.

 

[Mainsail]

This may seem like a dumb question, but would they bounce back at you if they hit a cement wall?

Ouch

 

[Jeff F]

I've a few rounds left of rubber slug loads. They work pretty well to chase bears out of the yard and away from the garbage cans. I got them on recommendation of a game warden when I lived in Truckee. As for using them for self defense, not me, I'll use the real thing if needed.

 

[junyo]

Keep in mind that the proper use of some of the less lethal rounds isn't readily apparent, especially some of the rounds with larger rubber or wooden projectiles. IIRC, some of those are not direct fire rounds(You're supposed to skip the projectile off another surface), or have stringent minimum firing distance requirements, and are very likely lethal if used improperly. Without proper training your results could be sub-optimal.

 

[CWL]

If you are ever in a situation serious enough that you need a firearm to defend yourself, make sure that your threat is stopped. You aren't obligated to keep the BG alive.

The DA/Court system won't give you special consideration because you used less-lethal; to them, a firearm discharged is a firearm discharged.

Less-lethal is for special applications, typically police activities where there is armed back-up.

Follow Lee Lapin's link for a lengthy discussion about this subject.