Modifies/built firearm for CCW

[300_whisper]

This is a good topic. What about ammo? Prime example, hornady has the green zombie ammo which is just a novelty version of their TAP ammo. Could the courts use that against you? The home owner was so caught up in zombie hype he thought the intruder was a zombie. Therefore, the home owner was unreasonable in his use of force. Gross simplification, I know, but thats a simple one off the top of my head.

What about AR15s? I have 3 that have clever engravings on them. If I use one in self defense in my home could they use the silly writing against me? I have a no step on snek, deplorable 15, and and a storm trooper holding an AR on my receivers.

 

[Sneakypete]

 

[gh1950]

This is a good topic. What about ammo? Prime example, hornady has the green zombie ammo which is just a novelty version of their TAP ammo. Could the courts use that against you? The home owner was so caught up in zombie hype he thought the intruder was a zombie. Therefore, the home owner was unreasonable in his use of force. Gross simplification, I know, but thats a simple one off the top of my head.

What about AR15s? I have 3 that have clever engravings on them. If I use one in self defense in my home could they use the silly writing against me? I have a no step on snek, deplorable 15, and and a storm trooper holding an AR on my receivers.

It's still going to come down to what a reasonable person would have perceived in the same situation.

If you believe in zombies to the extent that you think you are shooting one, there are bigger issues there than what bullet you thought you were using to kill your zombie.

The one thing you can take away from any shooting is that each one is fact specific, and you can stretch the discussion out with infinite "what if's", but what a prosecutor is going to look at is "what wuz".

Going back the Ayoob induced hysteria, a few years ago, I surveyed all of the reported cases in the USA, which you can assume includes about 99.999% of shooting fatalities where there was a conviction. There were exactly two cases where the ammunition used was an issue, and in one of them, there was a false positive on a test because the inexperienced handloader had put TOO LITTLE powder in the shell.

A similar situation exists with regard to modifications - the issue simply doesn't exist in reported cases, although there are a fair number of references to modified shotguns.

 

[spencer60]

There's a simple answer for handloads for self-defense... and that's 'never'.

It's always better to have the ammo company be able to send the cops a sample of the ammo you used. The story above probably cost the handloader an extra $20K in expert witnesses, and he ended up using worse ammo than he could have simply bought. There's simply no good reason to handload your SD rounds these days.

I'm also a big fan of leaving a SD gun as stock as possible, but I'm guessing that building a gun from stock parts would probably be pretty safe. the things you hear most on this subject is triggers and logos. Things like the "You're F'd" verbiage that a cop had on his AR dust cover. His department spent tens of thousands trying to suppress that little nugget when he 'accidentally' shot a guy with that AR.

It's not that you can't overcome these things. In the Martin/Zimmerman case they tried to make a point of his using hollow point ammo. Zimmerman's atty. was ready for that, showed that they were commercial loads recommended for self defense and in wide use by police, and the prosecutor dropped that line and moved on.

That's how it should go. Now imagine if he had to admit that Zimmerman used handloaded ammunition. Suddenly the nature of that ammo becomes 'intent' even if it has the same specs as commercial ammo. It's something that the DA can hang a narrative on, and that's not ever going to help you.

The average self-defense case costs $60-80,000 these days, and you don't get that back if you win. Every single person involved with self-defense cases has the same advice, make the legal system spit you out as soon as humanly possible.

Sure, you can win in court, but if your case looks good enough to prosecute at all you've already lost. Cars, houses, college funds, marriages. Again, look at Zimmerman and see what his life looks like today.

Is that really worth the risk of a DA thinking that your 'hair trigger' gun with it's extra-deadly 'custom' loads makes might get them a win in court, or even just make you ripe for a plea?

You want the DA to see the same type of gun he sees on the court bailiff's hip every day, and using the same ammo the local PD uses. It doesn't guarantee that they still won't go after you, but it definitely makes you a less of a juicy target.

 

[GAgunLAWbooklet]

...the things you hear most on this subject is triggers and logos. Things like the "You're F'd" verbiage that a cop had on his AR dust cover. His department spent tens of thousands trying to suppress that little nugget when he 'accidentally' shot a guy with that AR...

Who ever claimed officer Brailsford (of Mesa, AZ police) shot pest control guy Daniel Shaver accidentally? That's the case where officers made a hotel guest crawl on his hands and knees down the hallway of a hotel, and when he paused to pick up his falling-down shorts with one hand, the cop shot him five times with an AR-15 for not obeying his instructions.

No accident there. The cop said that he followed his training and he killed this guy deliberately because he wouldn't listen to his instructions. The cop said he do it again, and he was acquitted of all charges. As far as I know he's still a cop, out there, working the job today.

 

[GAgunLAWbooklet]

I agree that prosecutors will try, and sometimes even SHOULD TRY, to show that your choice of accessories or modifications to your gun(s) are evidence tending to show that you were bloodthirsty and looking for an excuse to kill somebody. That this idea fascinated you as a fixation, an unhealthy and dangerous one.

I was disappointed that Brailsford's customized AR that had the "YOU'RE F***ED" message on the dust cover was not allowed to be argued in court as evidence of his depraved mind.

 

[300_whisper]

I agree that prosecutors will try, and sometimes even SHOULD TRY, to show that your choice of accessories or modifications to your gun(s) are evidence tending to show that you were bloodthirsty and looking for an excuse to kill somebody. That this idea fascinated you as a fixation, an unhealthy and dangerous one.

I was disappointed that Brailsford's customized AR that had the "YOU'RE F***ED" message on the dust cover was not allowed to be argued in court as evidence of his depraved mind.

Sorry to derail, but the officer was medically retired for PTSD AFTER shooting shaver. He now gets $2500 a month for the rest of his life after killing an innocent man.

 

[gh1950]

I agree that prosecutors will try, and sometimes even SHOULD TRY, to show that your choice of accessories or modifications to your gun(s) are evidence tending to show that you were bloodthirsty and looking for an excuse to kill somebody. That this idea fascinated you as a fixation, an unhealthy and dangerous one.

I was disappointed that Brailsford's customized AR that had the "YOU'RE F***ED" message on the dust cover was not allowed to be argued in court as evidence of his depraved mind.

Agree.

Some folks seem to get fixated on the prosecutor making a big deal about a trigger modification, or using handloads, even though it's never happened in 259 years of American jurisprudence.

The "born to raise hell" tattoo on your arm (or better yet your neck) will have more effect on your future than something you did to your gun.

Ironically, poor ol' Tex McIver got convicted in part because he didn't do anything to his gun. I believe we are talking about a S&W Model 36. Ol' Tex swore that he was napping, the car hit a bump in the road, and he accidentally pulled the trigger and shot and killed his wife.

The prosecutor brought in an expert who showed that the trigger pull on THAT PARTICULAR WEAPON was 13 lbs. and virtually impossible to fire accidentally in the manner to which Ol' Tex testified.

So for all the keyboard experts who can conjure up scenarios where the "prosecutor could do this", and "the prosecutor could do that", well yes he can, and he can take a plain vanilla absolutely stock gun and use it to convict you. I must sound (or read) like a broken record record, that each one of these cases is very fact specific. If Ol' Tex had slicked up that trigger to a 4-5 lb. DA pull, or had him a $3000 Wilson SA 1911, he probably would still be a free man and living the good life.

And based on Ol' Tex's personal experience, we can start another discussion about how a .38 SPL is not adequate for personal protection. It was adequate enough to completely penetrate a car seat, mostly penetrate his wife, and do her in with one shot.