Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Posted: 8/7/2004 9:05:59 PM EDT
Anybody ever heard of someone getting charged with anything because they shot a intruder in a totally legal fashion but used a caliber deemed unfit to shoot people with? I got into a small arguement with a guy over usi9ng .454 casull as my bedside gun, just wanted to clarify if something like that could actually happen. For the time being Im using .45LC handloads.
Link Posted: 8/7/2004 9:13:58 PM EDT
Yes, they have been charged because of caliber, type, make or model of firearm, how many firearms they have or had on them, even based on the condition it was stored in.
Link Posted: 8/7/2004 11:09:41 PM EDT
Its true... people have been charged for all kinds of stupid reasons... but like any other CCW law abiding citizen will tell you... its better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

Check with LEO in your community and ask what the county prostituter (yes pun intended) is like, and where he stands on home defense. Lucky for me here in Fla we have the castle doctrine which basically means we can use any force necessary to repel a home invader as I understand it.

Go to the gun range and ask around... there are usually a few LEOs around that are pretty good about answering the questons of a concerned citizen.

the only thing I could say about using that heavy of a caliber weapon as a home defense is that you will be deaf after shooting it indoors... No you will not notice it during the shooting but after you will proably have perm hearing damage.
Link Posted: 8/8/2004 4:58:16 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/8/2004 4:59:21 AM EDT by SGB]
Link Posted: 8/8/2004 5:00:44 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/8/2004 1:26:38 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SGB:
As long as it is a good self defense shooting, (especialy in your own home) caliber is a mute point. No law saying that you can't use your 458 winchester magnum safari rifle to defend your home if that's what you have. Your 454 loaded with 45 Colt is no different than a 44mag loaded with 44spec or a .357 loaded with 38's.

The reason Im using the .45 LC's is to avoid any lawsuit that could happen due to use of the .454 rounds. The noise thing is a good excuse also, I dont have ear muffs at my bedside.
Link Posted: 8/8/2004 1:30:11 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/8/2004 1:31:12 PM EDT by Lumpy196]
Link Posted: 8/8/2004 1:44:16 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/8/2004 6:41:36 PM EDT
According to my shooters bible04' edition, the rounds I have in my home for .454 have around 1900 FPS and 1900 ft lbs out the muzzle, and theyre a hollowpoint variety. It may be excessive, but then I can always argue the point that theres some big ole boys here in Texas too.
Link Posted: 8/8/2004 6:51:05 PM EDT
"If your going to shoot someone, shoot them alot, cause we dont get to do it very often. Just dont tell that to the Grand Jury."

Link Posted: 8/8/2004 7:36:08 PM EDT
I don't mean to stereotype, but the size of your caliber and power behind it shouldn't be a scandal in Texas. When I get a chance to visit my familiy in Texas and Oklahoma it's pretty much a firearms vacation.
The most serious part has already been mentioned; whether or not it's a justifiable shooting. In the meantime I don't think anyone is going to laugh after getting shot with a .45LC.
Link Posted: 8/8/2004 8:21:44 PM EDT
I personally have never heard of a case of someone being charged for using too large a caliber in a shooting. Generally, in Texas, a person gets into trouble for negligence, i.e., missing the intended target and hitting a third person, or shooting a person when the threat was no longer present.
Link Posted: 8/8/2004 10:01:35 PM EDT
as long as you don't shoot them with your 'gun show conversion M16" you should be alright
Link Posted: 8/8/2004 10:06:23 PM EDT
The charge officially has nothing to do with the weapon used, but sometimes the difference between a prosecutor calling it justifiable homicide or murder is the weapon used. If you dont believe me, Google Massad Ayoob, he writes extensively about this.
Link Posted: 8/9/2004 12:12:23 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/9/2004 9:12:41 AM EDT
I dont remember the terminology I heard, but it was something like willful intent to kill a intruder, which is what should be your mindset anyways when someone barges into your home at 2am trying to kill your kids and rape your dog while you sleep. With how a lot of prosecutors are these days I wouldnt be surprised if they did try to say that I used the weapon with the intent to mutilate or disrespect the bad guy by shooting him with a overly excessive round, but I dont think I have any reason to lose sleep over it either. As long as the shooting is justified it probably wont matter, Im still sticking with the .45 LC's for the sound thing though.
Link Posted: 8/9/2004 12:09:54 PM EDT
Let's see....any handgun round OR a charge of buckshot or rifled slug out of a 12 ga shotgun? Which one would be excessive force?

Lumpy is exactly right. The entire issue is whether or not the homeowner is justified in using deadly force at all. If the use of deadly force is legally justified, what the homeowner uses would only be a legal issue if the weapon itself was illegal (i.e., unlicensed full auto, SBR, sawed-off, grenade launcher, etc.). Under NC law, violation of a "public safety" statute, which covers some firearms laws, such as carrying a concealed weapon, or negligently discharging a firearm (i.e., no backstop), would support a charge of involuntary manslaughter. But neither of these statutes would apply in a home-defense situation.

I would not put it past some politically correct, ambitious District Attorneys to try to show that the homeowner had a "killer" mindset because he had a customized handgun, or an "evil assault weapon" or had (horror of horrors) actually received training with his firearm. But juries in NC tend to be rather conservative on firearms issues, so most DAs don't even bother to raise such issues.

So it's not worth worrying about WHAT you use for self-defense, rather you should know your state's laws concerning use of deadly force well enough to know WHEN you are justified in shooting. After that, it's just a matter of marksmanship.....
Link Posted: 8/9/2004 12:40:58 PM EDT
A couple of other things to consinder. As a general rule of thumb, you can only apply as much force as necessary to stop an immediate threat. If you put an intruder down with the first two/three rounds and then continue putting holes in them you've got a problem. Likewise, if you pop a guy with a "cannon" and kill a child or a little old lady across the street peacefully sleeping in bed, you've also got a big problem.

So, in that sense, calibre can come into play.
Link Posted: 8/9/2004 1:02:02 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/9/2004 1:22:35 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/9/2004 7:03:06 PM EDT
I'll stop shooting when they stop twitching.
Link Posted: 8/9/2004 7:39:22 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/10/2004 4:16:58 AM EDT
While an unscrupulous prosecutor may, indeed attempt to use various things such as caliber, etc. to sway a jury or Grand Jury (face it...a decent prosecutor can get a Grand Jury to indict a hamburger!) the info from Lumpy and SGB, etc. is correct. Me? I mostly would be very careful about using reloaded ammo, but these days that's kind of a no-brainer anyhow with so much good defense ammo available.

"Problem #1" is staying alive and unharmed..."Problem #2" is all the other stuff that comes after...and the very real possibility of at least a civil lawsuit or worse. Problem #2 is very real, and most certainly not something to sneeze at, but the correct priority is to resolve Problem #1 FIRST!
Link Posted: 8/10/2004 4:28:57 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/12/2004 8:28:33 AM EDT
Why stop at .454 and just step it up to a 500 S&Whoot.
Link Posted: 8/12/2004 6:17:02 PM EDT
I actually thought about buying a S&W 500 with the 4" barrel for CCW, but it would be tapping into my next rifle buying funds so Ill ahve to wait a while...
Link Posted: 8/13/2004 4:08:14 PM EDT
Recently here in Arizona, a guy capped an attacker 3 times in the chest with a 10mm. He's gotten a lot of grief about other aspects of the shooting, but they haven't even mentioned the caliber. My guess is it doesn't matter unless it sounds big and scary from references to pop culture. Such as the word Magnum.
To invision the way the uninformed think, you must realize that they receive 90% of their information from movies, and the rest from rumors and bogus newpaper articles.
I recently worked with a former gang member from Flordia, and they were carrying "Nines." They were mesmerized by the "four five."
If it were truely about the destructive firepower, they'd cry about the use of a 12 gauge. Remember in WWI when the Germans wanted to ban the use of the shotgun because of its destructive nature?
Ask some non-gun folk which is bigger, 12 or 20 gauge? The 20 must be a weapon of mass distruction for sure.
Remember, you will be judged by a jury of your peers. Be afraid.
If you find yourself carrying a Desert eagle (I've met a few who do,) and you are forced to shoot someone, start packing your things, and bring the anal ease.
Link Posted: 8/15/2004 8:13:28 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SGB:
...No law saying that you can't use your 458 winchester magnum safari rifle...

My Pop kept his behind the front door during periods of some particularly nasty riots in the '60s. He was living in a second floor apartment in a particularly bad neighborhood. His goal was to "...clear an entire flight of stairs packed with bad guys in just one shot... " He doesn't live there anymore.

I can't say that a 5 3/4 pound .458 Win. Mag. would be my first choice in defensive weapons... Though they seem to be the standard for dangerous game rifles.
Link Posted: 8/19/2004 11:56:29 AM EDT
not my primary concern, but using a gun the local jbts issue is certainly not a negative.
Link Posted: 8/19/2004 5:25:48 PM EDT
Get rid of the hand loads and get some commercial<sp> ammo.

Link Posted: 8/25/2004 12:56:58 PM EDT
I wouldn't worry about criminal charges if it is a "good" shoot. It is the civil trial you should be worried about. The rules are much looser here.
Top Top