Suppose you shoot a BG in your home...

[marklbucla]

Suppose you justifiably shoot a BG in your home in California with as many rounds/shells you needed to stop the attack. Assuming that you survived the attack, which would make the courts more likely to rule in your favor- if you used a handgun OR a shotgun in your defense? I guess there are two cases in this general scenario: BG dies, BG survives.

 

[HBK]

I don't think it should matter as long as you did what you needed to do to defend your life. What I think carries little weight in California though, so it probably does matter. Maybe some Cali THR members can help you out.

 

[marklbucla]

Vic, I take it that you're excluding the unarmed BG who's wetting himself begging for you to not shoot or someone trying to get away?

 

[Hkmp5sd]

I don't think the handgun vs rifle vs shotgun will have much effect on whether or not the shooting gets declared justified. The only gun I would not use is a registered machinegun.

It is my understanding of Florida law, the castle doctrine means you do not have to retreat if possible, but it does not give blanket permission to shoot an intruder in your house. The requirement that you fear death or great bodily injury still applies. If you catch a thief crawling out the window with your VHS/DVD player, there is no justification for shooting him in the back.

Even if such a law exists, it would still be in your best interest to let a fleeing intruder go. Supposedly, even in a justified homicide, you are going to lose $20,000+ in legal fees (plus the civil lawsuits from the BG's family suing you for wrongful death).

 

[six 4 sure]

I don’t think the long gun vs. handgun is that relevant. What is relevant is shooting until there is no longer a threat. This is in lieu of the double tap shotgun incident several years ago (I’m sure others have the specifics). The short version of that story is the local PD policy was to double tap with their shotgun no matter what the circumstances. PD answers domestic call BG attacks with knife/bb bat, LEO follows training and double taps BG. BG dies. However, first shot blows his arm off (the one holding the weapon) so he supposedly was no longer a threat. BG’s family sues PD and LEO for heap big cash. The LEO got off because he followed his training, I’m not sure what happened with the rest of the lawsuit.

So the moral is shoot until you no longer perceive a threat. It may take one shot, it may take a clip you won’t know until you’re in that horrible situation. Just my opinion FWIW.

six

 

[Hkmp5sd]

No, I'm not ok with him in my house. But you shoot someone to protect yourself from death or injury, not because you're PO'ed at him because the he is crawling out the window with your VCR.

If he decides to come back in the house, knowing it's occupied and there is a high probability the homeowner is armed, I would interpret that to mean he is planning to attack me and deadly force is justified.

 

[marklbucla]

So people are generally saying that as long as you're justified with each shot, then it does not matter legally whether you use a shotgun or handgun?

 

[Don Gwinn]

As long as both are legal for you to own, it doesn't matter. If shotguns are legal and handguns are not, a good lawyer can help, but the handgun will still cause you much more grief.


Personally, I live in a rural enough area to have an "unofficial" no-retreat policy. However, if a thief is on his way out of my house, the last thing I'm going to do is pick a fight. If he wants to leave, he's doing what I want. Replacing my DVD player is the insurance company's job, assuming I don't get it back when the police catch the idiot. If he decides to come back for more, I can always shoot him then. Your law may not require that, but it's what I can live with.

 

[Baba Louie]

2 Scenarios eh?

BG lives, BG dies... right?

Handgun vs. shotgun also a given point of debate...
Which would make the courts rule more favorably... California courts right?
Criminal or Civil?
Who's Prosecuting? Is he/she running for office? Judge's background? Jury Pool?
You claimed it was justifiable, either it is or it isn't. Assume IS, factor in you stopped the attack (your word) and survived.
BG in your home. Why, how, when, invited or familiar guest, stranger?

OK, there's the basis with its variables...

What was the question?

Which...

Now, did you use your Uzi with a 30 rd stick and forget to tell your trigger finger to stop or did you use grampa's .38 and only two rounds? And was BG right on you, still attacking you or was he attacking you from across the room as he waltzed right out of there carrying your whatever in both hands (here's where, if you're a Scottish Rugby man, you tackle and subdue the bad guy and await the bobbies)

If the BG lives through the first 30 rds. of 9mm or .45 from the Uzi, you'd better get the 12 ga. NY reload and prepare to get medeivel or call Buffy.

If the BG dies... whats the question again?

Conversely (did I spell that right?) Substitute differing types of smoothbores, using a single shot 20 ga. $79 Wally World special at one end or a Black street sweeper with pistol grip, folding stock, bayonet lug and tactical black heat shield and the latest laser/red-dot sight system at the other end of the spectrum.

Criminal court, show affirmative defense; ability, opportunity, jeopardy...

Civil court... If you can afford a $2000 1911 you surely can afford to compensate the poor victims family a few hundred thousand, neh? Or conversely, you're just a college student with a used .38, where's the money in that?

While it'd be fun to ponder on those points and argue it every which way, bass-ackwards and on Sundays too, we all know the right thing to do is...

(Extra Brownie points for you if you know enough First Aid to save the BG's life, or show you attempted to do so anyway, or show you could have, if you weren't worried about HIV and legal malpractice)

Have a good lawyer...

After the attack is over, make the calls... don't get too talky.

Never admit you gave this or any other advice on a firearm oriented board on this subject matter...

Whichever gun you used, can you show you took lessons and were trained with it and are currently proficient?

How bad were you hurt during the attack?

What if BG grabs you and gets control of your left or right hand/arm?
Where was your gun then?

Did you hunt him down in your darkened house/apt or did he break down your locked bedroom door while you crouched behind bed, wetting your pajamas, on cell phone waiting on 911 Dispatch? (have you ever tried to hold a little bitty cell phone in one hand while holding a 12 ga. pump in the other whilst things are going south too fast in a dark room?... me neither)

And the answer is...

I don't know, whadda you think?

When the five dogs all wake me up at 2:30 AM with frenzied barking at the front or back door, the first thing I grab is... shorts, then nightstand gun. Others might get the pump action in the corner.

When the pack does go beserk in the wee hours, it warrants a dog release and look see, you're not gonna go right back to sleep anyway till they know whats up. They might as well get a little exercise.
I can't imagine NOT having a dog or five.

But its usually a small 9mm austrian in my left hand... (right hand opens doors and turns light switches on/off) Who cares what the courts are gonna say, as long as I'm alive to hear it. I'll let the legal guys worry about their stuff if I can answer the above questions and sleep at night with the answers.

But just to be safe, I'd say in California, the answer is... no.

Adios

edited to add: Oops, I forgot, in CA no 30 rd. anything, change that to 10 rd. We here in NV don't have to deal with that particular limitation...yet

 

[CWL]

I live in CA so I'll answer this. My information is gleaned from firearms training with active and retired CA LEOs and hearing their experiences and recommendatons on how to act and what to expect during and after a SD situation.

Let's assume that it is a legitimate 'shoot' and no one was shot in the back while running away, shot & dragged back into the house, executed after lying down, etc...

It would be up to the local DA to decide whether to charge you or not. Contrary to what the other 49 states believe, the right to self-defense here in CA is well accepted. Great chance you will probably be no-billed by the DA.

However, you WILL get sued, either by the wounded BG or members of their family of deceased, or both. Typically the suit amount will be for whatever your homeowner's insurance or similiar insurance is worth. It is common knowledge that insurance companies will settle automatically rather than take this type of suit to court.

The weapon will not matter that much as long as it is a legally acquired and owned firearm. Magazine storage capacity, ammo or type of firearm wouldn't matter.

What will be held against you is IF you used a banned assaut-weapon style firearm which was not registered during the grace period.

In any situation requiring deadly force, financial repurcussions should be secondary.

 

[BerettaNut92]

Mark, IMO the lawyers may try to mess with you w/ the type of weapon (you hear this about handloads and custom pistols a lot) but I haven't heard of it making a difference if the shoot was righteous....

 

[sw442642]

If the shooting is ambiguous and you look like a gun nut, then the weapon might be a
problem.

I've seen trials where the type of weapon is emphasized by the DA. These are usually in
clear crimes though.

Just make sure you know what you are doing.

An ambiguous shooting might be one where you shoot the gun in the back as he is going out
the door with your VCR. Then you proclaim to the law that "I sure killed that
mf with my tactical Benelli. Guess that load sure messed him up darn Good!"

 

[Double Naught Spy]

As noted, the weapon of choice does not matter in criminal law. Either you were justified in using lethal force or you were not. The type of gun will not change the circumstances of the shooting that made the shoot justifiable. In fact, the type of gun used, type of ammo used, type of modifications to the gun, the name of the gun, name of the ammo, etc. will not change the circumstances of the shooting.

As with cases in New York and Chicago, if you use an illegal gun in a situation where lethal force is justified, the use of the illegal gun does not change the circumstances of the shooting. You did get arrested or cited for the illegal gun, but not for the shooting, assuming it is pretty clear at the time that the shooting was justified. Unfortunately, the event will draw the police's attention to your illegal gun and that is what you get charged for.

In civil court, all bets are off. It is very easy to make any aspect look bad. Let's say you have been to a gun school.

It could be argued that you had the proper training and skill to handle the situation properly. It could also be argued that you are now a trained killer who was just waiting for the opportunity to put the learned skills to work. Why would you go to a defensive shooting gun school if you didn't want to shoot people? So obviously you want to shoot people.

Let's say you use hollowpoint ammo. It could be argued that it is the best choice as the round poses the least threat to potential bystanders by mushrooming in the bad guy and not over penetrating to hit a bystander. It could be argued that you chose hollowpoint to cause the most pain and damage possible with the caliber and to not just stop the bad guy, but help make sure you kill him.

Say you use ball ammo. You use it because it feed reliably and penetrates well and has good stopping power. The counter argue would be that you chose ball to do the most damage possible to the skeletal system by choosing a bullet shape capable of bone crushing.

Any choice made by a gun person that is proper in all respects can be turned around and made to look bad.

Its all crap. Just pick the best weapon you can handle for defense and use it. Choosing some other weapon that has lessor abilities may look better in civil court, but that won't matter if you are dead. For handguns, the largest caliber you have handle VERY WELL in a gun that is very reliable is what you should go with. Between a shotgun and handgun, the shotgun is tremendously better for stopping people, especially larger calibers. If you can handle a 12 ga., then it will do a better job for you.

Remember, for YOU to be sued in civil court, you have to have survived the encounter.

 

[Hkmp5sd]

There are some instructors that recommend using the same handgun and ammunition the local law enforcement uses or at least the same ammo. It is the ultimate political correctness to be able to say you use the same thing because no one, especially the police or DA is going to attack you for using the same "high-power, hollowpoint, FMJ, teflon coated, armor piercing, designed to cause massive damage and instant death" cartridge they use to protect themselves while avoiding civil liability and bad press.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

And those people who say to use the same ammo as the cops have absolutely no proof that somehow it will make things better for you.

So just which agency do you choose for your ammo? Police, sheriff, constable, dog catcher, MP, Border Patrol, FBI, or Secret Service? (all depending on where you live and if you have said offices nearby).

It is rather short-sighted to pick some ammo just because some LEOs use it. The question should not be to ask what ammo the LEOs use, but to ask if the ammo they have chosen was chosen for the same needs and reasons as you need ammo. Keep in mind that for many agencies, the ammo chosen is not necessarily by brand and performance, but by the best deal they could obtain.

The next question to ask if you choose their ammo is if you get to have immediate backup by getting on the radio and yelling "shots fired" or "officer down" which will draw in every available officer for miles to your rescue. Chances are, you don't have that luxury.

A local area department carries 9 mm Speer Gold dot. They actually carry a powered down version so that their guns have less recoil and so that all of their officers are able to handle their guns better. So basically is was the largest caliber in a powered down version that appealed to the lowest common denominator of officer abilities. The down side is that the rounds don't penetrate as far. Is that what you want?

Why did they choose 9 mm guns? That came about as a result of the manufacturer at the time that gave them the best contract for several hundred guns, guns that they no longer offer recruits, but they are stuck with the caliber.

Picking a caliber based on what some local agency uses without knowing if they have the same needs as you is simply not wise and the idea that it will make things okay in court is just oft repeated gun myth.

 

[Hkmp5sd]

Double Naught Spy,

So just which agency do you choose for your ammo? Police, sheriff, constable, dog catcher, MP, Border Patrol, FBI, or Secret Service?

All of the above. That's why I have an MP5 w/ 147 gr. Black Talons in it.

Actually, though, it would be interesting to see a debate over the subject between you and someone like Ayoob, who does make that statement.

I've read articles, books and have attended classes for many years on the subject of guns & self defense and there is always someone arguing both sides of every variable. It always comes down to the same answer, use whatever you think is best in your situation.

 

[Standing Wolf]

I doubt the weapon involved would make any difference legally; I've got a hunch, however, there'd be less blood to clean up afterward with a hand gun.