Caliber choice and your defense in court…..

[Gary in Pennsylvania]

OK.

I’ve read in many places (magazines, books, internet) that, for the purpose of defending yourself in court if need be, you’re better off not carrying an overkill firearm for self defense.

In other words….a S&W 29 .44mag……or a 10mm……480 Ruger or the like is gonna make more work for your defense attorney that if you were carrying the 9mm/.40/.45

Basically….If you’re carrying what the cops carry, you’re not gonna compromise your defense with that choice of caliber. Even more so…if you carry the firearms that the cops carry (G17, P226, M9, yadda), you’re in even BETTER shape (I can dig up two magazine articles that state this)

I’d like to know your opinion of the above claim. Whaddaya think?

[knight0334]

OK.

I’ve read in many places (magazines, books, internet) that, for the purpose of defending yourself in court if need be, you’re better off not carrying an overkill firearm for self defense.

In other words….a S&W 29 .44mag……or a 10mm……480 Ruger or the like is gonna make more work for your defense attorney that if you were carrying the 9mm/.40/.45

Basically….If you’re carrying what the cops carry, you’re not gonna compromise your defense with that choice of caliber. Even more so…if you carry the firearms that the cops carry (G17, P226, M9, yadda), you’re in even BETTER shape (I can dig up two magazine articles that state this)

I’d like to know your opinion of the above claim. Whaddaya think?

Its not what you killed them with, its if you were justified to use deadly force.

If you were justified to use a handgun, you were also justified to use a 105mm tank cannon provided you didn't endanger "innocents".

Only in civil cases does that overkill thing take place. But as far as I can remember its all urban legend with maybe only one or two cases that can be found to substantiate the myth.

[LittleRedToyota]

caliber should not matter at all. and i think it generally does not...especially if you have a good lawyer.

however, it definitely has factored into at least one criminal case...that being the case of that Fish guy (forget his firstname) in Arizona.

the prosecution made a big deal out of the fact that he carried a 10mm...saying that carrying such a "powerful" gun showed that fish was bloodthirsty and just wanted to kill someone.

interviews with jurors afterward confirmed that the fact that he was carrying a 10mm did indeed factor into their decision to find him guilty.

ignorant jurors can be lead down the wrong path by overzealous DAs. though i do have to wonder about the competence of Fish's legal counsel given that they were not able to make caliber choice a non-issue.

[rwilson452]

In my opinion it will only count in civil court and if your lawyer can't put that to rest you have the wrong lawyer.

OK.

I’ve read in many places (magazines, books, internet) that, for the purpose of defending yourself in court if need be, you’re better off not carrying an overkill firearm for self defense.

In other words….a S&W 29 .44mag……or a 10mm……480 Ruger or the like is gonna make more work for your defense attorney that if you were carrying the 9mm/.40/.45

Basically….If you’re carrying what the cops carry, you’re not gonna compromise your defense with that choice of caliber. Even more so…if you carry the firearms that the cops carry (G17, P226, M9, yadda), you’re in even BETTER shape (I can dig up two magazine articles that state this)

I’d like to know your opinion of the above claim. Whaddaya think?

[ChamberedRound]

IMHO caliber choice shouldn't matter as far as a defense is concerned if the shooting is justified, but in the real world it could matter. I'd be curious to see if any of our resident lawyers have an unofficial opinion, or knowledge of any case(s) which might indicate one way or the other.

[Pa. Patriot]

Don't believe everything you read in the gun rags

[whoshisface]

If a guy busts into your house and starts shooting. You then take out a hand grenade grab his gun and shove it where the sun doesn't shine, no jury is going to care because most probably no DA is going to prosecute you for murder. If he does, most juries still wont care. Maybe you'll get prosecuted for having a hand grenade but not murder ..

[Hokkmike]

I’ve read in many places (magazines, books, internet) that, for the purpose of defending yourself in court if need be, you’re better off not carrying an overkill firearm for self defense.

I've not come across this. A .22 to the leg or a 12 guage to the head are all the same if you are trying to defend your life. (I guess I consider those to be the two extremes)

[4XLT]

i dont know why size of caliber would count for anything, why carry a pistol in a caliber that is not going to stop the BG ?

as far as a 10mm i thought a 10mm was the same size as a .40 cal? 9mm .38 and so on... but either way carry the biggest caliber your comfortable with to get the job done.

[LittleRedToyota]

or knowledge of any case(s) which might indicate one way or the other.

IANAL, of course, but the choice of caliber did factor into the Fish case. (Arizona v. Harold Fish)

From: http://armedandsafe.blogspot.com/200...-for-whom.html

the prosecution claimed that Mr. Fish's choice of caliber (10mm) and ammunition type (hollow point) indicates a desire on Fish's part to kill.

from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stopping_power

Some CCW holders in the United States have elected since 2006 to switch from carrying hollow-point bullets and especially 10 mm caliber weapons with perceived higher one-shot stopping power to instead favor carrying smaller caliber weapons after the conviction of retired school teacher Harold Fish in Arizona for second degree murder during a self-defense shooting. His conviction for killing a homeless man with a history of mental instability who attacked him while hiking on a remote trail was obtained through a jury trial by stressing Fish overreacted through choosing to use the increased stopping power of 10 mm hollow point bullets. State law in Arizona has subsequently been changed, such that the state now has the burden to prove that a self defense shooting was not in self defense, whereas the burden previously before the Fish incident was that the shooter on trial had to prove that the shooting was in fact done in self defense. Meanwhile, many CCW holders have elected to switch to carrying handguns loaded with FMJ bullets in calibers smaller than 10 mm. A choice often advocated for selecting the correct stopping power in CCW training classes is to select to use the exact same type of bullets (FMJ or hollow point), in the exact same caliber that are used by the local police, to avoid being accused of overreacting during any self defense post-incident trial

i cannot find any citations for the juror quotes in the media after the trial that confirm that his choice of 10mm did factor into their decision, but, at the time, i did read such quotes from 2 different jurors. they both indicated that his choice of 10mm made them think he was looking for the opportunity to kill someone.