Uteridge
Member
Circumstances where state of mind is more important than tangible facts are few and far between. To be clear though, I am making the same argument that you are. Using a gun that could be used against you in a case in court is not a good idea unless it can be readily justified. I am an active duty Marine and my nightstand gun is an M-4 that is set up exactly like my duty weapon because it is what I am familiar with and best trained on. I own it because practicing with it makes me better at what I do for a living and could contribute to me making it home the next time I am overseas. Anyone trying to attack my use of an M-4 as a self defense weapon would be fighting a steep uphill battle in any court of law.
I would have a hard time justifying why, of all the guns I own, I decided to shoot an intruder in my home with a 45 Colt loaded with heavily duty, kill anything on God's green earth Buffalo Bore ammo. That weapon/ammo combo makes it look like I am out to kill someone, not stop them. Coupled with some internet post telling everyone how much I would make someone suffer if they ever broke into my house then I might have a bad day in court. If I was a cowboy shooter and a pair of Colt SAA .45's were all I owned then that would be an easy sell.
Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics. One thing I hate about survey analysis, that makes it practically useless in my opinion, is that there is no argument/counter argument giving context to the discussion. Real case study is the only way to accurately tell what a jury is going to think. The prosecutor will go after your gun if he thinks it helps his case or if he just hates guns and wants "500 S&W Magnum" in the headlines of all the newspapers. If he can convince the jury through your weapon or your post that you are unreasonable and looking for violence then you will not fare well in court. On the flip side, your lawyer gets to talk too so it depends whether or not his story is better than the prosecutor (and the composition of the jury). I would not personally arm myself with anything that is out of the ordinary or expected for my area/occupation/hobbies because it is one more issue that I don't want to have to deal with if I am forced to defend myself. It is already hard enough to deal with the aftermath of a shooting; (probably much more so as a civilian because you don't have the support system that we do in combat) the last thing I want to deal with is having my name in the paper and in the courtroom being thrown around as a bloodthirsty vigilante because I used something that normal people might find excessive. Add to that the fact that I believe that any modern handgun that is accurate and allows quick follow-up shots is better than shooting my 3 inch 41 Magnum for defense purposes. It just makes no sense to put something out of the ordinary on my nightstand in case I hear a bump in the night.
I would have a hard time justifying why, of all the guns I own, I decided to shoot an intruder in my home with a 45 Colt loaded with heavily duty, kill anything on God's green earth Buffalo Bore ammo. That weapon/ammo combo makes it look like I am out to kill someone, not stop them. Coupled with some internet post telling everyone how much I would make someone suffer if they ever broke into my house then I might have a bad day in court. If I was a cowboy shooter and a pair of Colt SAA .45's were all I owned then that would be an easy sell.
Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics. One thing I hate about survey analysis, that makes it practically useless in my opinion, is that there is no argument/counter argument giving context to the discussion. Real case study is the only way to accurately tell what a jury is going to think. The prosecutor will go after your gun if he thinks it helps his case or if he just hates guns and wants "500 S&W Magnum" in the headlines of all the newspapers. If he can convince the jury through your weapon or your post that you are unreasonable and looking for violence then you will not fare well in court. On the flip side, your lawyer gets to talk too so it depends whether or not his story is better than the prosecutor (and the composition of the jury). I would not personally arm myself with anything that is out of the ordinary or expected for my area/occupation/hobbies because it is one more issue that I don't want to have to deal with if I am forced to defend myself. It is already hard enough to deal with the aftermath of a shooting; (probably much more so as a civilian because you don't have the support system that we do in combat) the last thing I want to deal with is having my name in the paper and in the courtroom being thrown around as a bloodthirsty vigilante because I used something that normal people might find excessive. Add to that the fact that I believe that any modern handgun that is accurate and allows quick follow-up shots is better than shooting my 3 inch 41 Magnum for defense purposes. It just makes no sense to put something out of the ordinary on my nightstand in case I hear a bump in the night.