Self Defense Ammo Law

[RetiredUSNChief]

Spats, I'll take that PM. Sounds like something that'll expand my horizons.

I suppose one could also say that the type of ammo used is an insignificant consideration until it's YOU on trial.



I think that, if one should prioritized things in accordance with their relative importance (and people really SHOULD be doing this), one should start with the basics first. Namely, understand what THEIR jurisdictional law says about what constitutes deadly force and when its use is justified.

"Understanding" means not only knowing what the law SAYS, but what it MEANS.

If that foundation is not there, then the house of defense one may have to build later on will be in danger of collapse.


Too many times, even on a firearms forum like this where the general forum population is considerably more knowledgable than the average citizen, we run across people who obviously do not have a firm grasp on the basics, judging by some of the glibe postings. Comments like "just shoot 'em with a load of rock salt" or "break his legs with a basebat bat", for example, which are STILL applications of deadly force in the eyes of the law.

 

[gun_with_a_view]

the prosecution tried to incriminate the plaintiff by saying that they used hollowpoint rounds and that it was justification for premediated intent to do harm

The cops use hollowpoints to reduce the incidence of bullets passing completely through a suspect and striking bystanders. That is somewhat of a false god as cops traditionally miss their intended tagets by over sixty percent.

I use hollowpoints because they have a higher percentage of stops and a lower percentage of kill due to the fact the suspect will be bleeding out of one hole instead of two if the hollowpoint expands and stops the bullet.

That last point is a little iffy, however, as I have never found a cop who could affirmatively say that hollowpoints fully expand in the human body.

 

[basicblur]

Posted by basicblur:
Quote:
But I've yet to find anything on the net quoting any kind of argument from the prosecution about ammo type, and I've been searching/reading for the last hour.

What makes you think that there would be anything on the net about it? Do you somehow think that all prosecution comments, including opening and closing arguments, in all trials in all courtrooms in the country, are for some reason transcribed by people and entered into some database somewhere?

If you're going to take issue with a quote made, in the future please reference said quote to the person that actually made it.

I PO enough folks in here without help...

 

[Kleanbore]

My mistake--should have attributed it to Good Ol' Boy.

In a later post, Spats McGee gave a more complete answer:

Trials are not automatically posted to the internet. I'll bet that tens, if not hundreds of thousands of trials occur every year in the US, some (small) fraction of which might be SD cases, that never show up in the internet in any way.

Typically, the only cases that can be located in the major legal databases are the ones that go up on appeal, at least at the state level. At the federal level, trial-level decisions have begun to show up in Westlaw the last few years. (Chief, somewhere I've got a post detailing some of the finer points of how things show up in appellate cases. I can dig it up and PM you if you'd like, but I don't really want to derail this thread with that.)

That means that while the type of ammo may have been a factor in cosidering whether to charge, and may have been a big issue for the jury, it may only be glossed over by an appellate court.

Besides, if I'm ever in a SD shooting, I'm not going to care whether ammunition choice is a trending issue nationwide. What I'm going to care about is whether it's going to be a problem for me and my (possible) trial.

 

[danez71]

I saw one court case published online about a year ago where a guy used a 10mm to defend himself against an attacking dog while hiking and ended up having to shoot the dog's owner as well. The jury focused on the caliber more than the ammunition type saying that he used a caliber way in excess than was necessary (if there's such a thing as knowing what caliber will be just enough for an unknown event that may or may not happen sometime in the future). I believe he lost the case because he could not articulate why he used such a caliber.

That sure sounds like the Fish case in AZ mentioned earlier. While there was much more focus on the caliber, I believe it was Frank that noted, one of the jurors was influenced that hollow points were used.

 

[CapnMac]

I am reminded that a well-known wag once opined that LLD stood for Long Lengthy Discussion, and JD for Justified Discourse.

The profession of law require precision in language, it can behoove a person to be careful how one argues with attorneys.

 

[GEM]

Jury Decision Making: The State of the Science (Psychology and Crime)
Devine.

Forensic and Legal Psychology: Psychological Science Applied to Law, 2nd Edition2014
by Mark Costanzo and Daniel Krauss

Not being a lawyer but a psychologist - I recommend these two books for the serious student of the jury process.

The various factors that influence juries are well laid out. These will probably never get references in 'case law'. Asking for cases is a touch of red herring, as pointed out.

The models of jury decisions - a net sum of factors or the most cogent story model - both suggest that appearance factors influence the decisions.

 

[TimSr]

Not being a lawyer but a psychologist - I recommend these two books for the serious student of the jury process.

The various factors that influence juries are well laid out. These will probably never get references in 'case law'. Asking for cases is a touch of red herring, as pointed out.

The models of jury decisions - a net sum of factors or the most cogent story model - both suggest that appearance factors influence the decisions.

I think this is a greatest factor. The media is a great example of how choice of words can impact perception, especially of the ignorant. There are certain buzz words used all the time to incite an emotional response from people who really know their significance, or lack thereof. Words like "semi-automatic", "tactical", "assault weapon", "hollow points", "Saturday night special", "high capacity magazine", "magnum", and many others invoke a response from people who don't know what they mean, but just know they sound like something devastating. Even a metric designation caliber seems to invoke more fear from the ignorant. Imagine the perception of an ignorant jury looking at a situation in which an AR15 was used for defense as opposed to a 30-06 bolt rifle compared to how a gun person would look at it. Imagine presenting a jury as evidence a pistol grip 18" 12 gauge Defender shotgun as opposed to you 10 gauge goose gun. Even gun enthusiast can arrive at different conclusions based on appearance. Do you have the same subconscious reaction to seeing a 50 year old man with a revolver on his belt as you do when you see a 20 thing in Starbucks with an AR strapped over his shoulder? We can't see the logic in "hollow points" even being a factor, but have you ever tried to explain it to a non-shooter who thinks a "hollow point" turns your 9mm into an elephant gun? For that matter, "full metal jacket" sometimes means the same thing to a person who is ignorant of firearms.

It's hard to make serious tactical choices if you try to weigh in how it would be perceived by an ignorant juror who is not yet named. Throw in the potential anti-gun juror, and it's easy to see how jury selection can be more important than the facts of the case.

 

[CDW4ME]

We will not get into the issue of handloaded ammunition for self defense in this thread.

If anyone is interested in that topic, it's already been discussed extensively on this board. See the thread entitled Carrying Handloads for Self Defense and also following the links set out in that threard.

Would not surprise me if people partially read the initial post and hit reply, missing this.

 

[steve4102]

Not trial transcripts, simply an interview.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/15199221/ns/dateline_nbc-crime_reports/t/trail-evidence/#.VyimuoQrKUk


...But Prosecutor Michael Lessler argued this case was not about character—it’s about behavior.

He urged the jury to follow the law in their deliberations.

Michael Lessler, prosecutor: Mr. Fish shot him three time in the chest with this high powered gun, hollow point bullets and caused his death. That’s murder....

...And this juror was disturbed by the type of bullets Fish used.

Elliot:
The whole hollow point thing bothered me. That bullet is designed to do as much damage as absolutely possible. It’s designed to kill.