Self Defense Lawsuits

Weathermaker · Mar 2, 2009

I've been reading through a post on another forum about issues regarding using a revolver in single action vs. double action. Specifically, arguments that may be used against you in court if you shoot someone in self defense with a revolver in single action mode.

While opinions in the referenced post vary...there evidently have been cases where this issue has been brought up by prosecutors in the past.

This post is not to further the discussion on using a revolver in single action in a self defense shooting. Rather, it is to bring up another thought I've had.

In either a criminal or civil suit, I can just imagine the prosecutor/attorney saying in their closing arguements to the jury, "...and in conclusion, please remember, as you deliberate the facts of this case...the defendant is obviously a paranoid sociopath with an obvious gun fetish. Why else would he (the defendant) have 8 rifles, 9 handguns, 3 bayonets and 7,000 rounds of ammunition in his home."

Now, I know this may sound far fetched. But, it seems to me, that your best bet is to only have an old revolver that Uncle Pete left you with one partial box of ammo.

Oh well...............

fingolfen · Mar 2, 2009

... and your lawyer should close with...

"Remember the defendant has a long record of promoting firearms safety and is a recognized collector of fine historical firearms..."

Opposing lawyers always sling mud - its their job - you just need to make sure that your lawyer teflon coats you...

Trlsmn · Mar 2, 2009

I don't believe any defensive shoot has been criminally prosecuted here in Oregon in regards to a CHL.

wichaka · Mar 3, 2009

I would like to see the transcripts of the court on any case where the hammer was back on a revolver. And for sake of conversation, who would know?

Courts look at intent....if you intended to shoot the person, then the gun goes out the window and they look at your incident to how lawful it fits.

There's a lot of scare going around on many forums about the aftermath of a shooting. There are far more shootings where nothing happens after, than civil suits that are brought.

Defense attorneys can bring up most anything they want, that's the way it goes. How is anyone going to know how many guns or ammo you have, unless they have a search warrant to look for those things?

Anoobie Knewberton 47 · Mar 3, 2009

I've thought about this about enough to realize that if anyone in my family were to go to court after stopping a home invasion, I'd rather not have the prosecutor/attorney waving an AR/AK in front of the jury (not to mention that 223 isn't my first choice for HD). Any gun waved in front of a jury of non gun owners is going to be scary to them. An AK... no way, but SA/DA the jury won't know the difference unless they're shooters/gun owners, and in that case it won't matter.

korntera · Mar 3, 2009

So what does a shotgun look like to a jury?

I still have yet to own a revolver, to many tacticool items i need first.

spengo · Mar 3, 2009

korntera said:
So what does a shotgun look like to a jury?

I still have yet to own a revolver, to many tacticool items i need first.

It depends on if the shotgun is nice and wooden or looks like a benelli m4.

Anoobie Knewberton 47 · Mar 4, 2009

korntera said:
So what does a shotgun look like to a jury?

My 20GA 870 w/ youth wood stock is as cute as they come, compact, and takes corners well.

A pink cricket may look cuter to a jury, but I'd rather have a little stopping power. :s0114:

It'd also be a lot less heart breaking/cost effective to have an 870 sitting in an evidence room than a benelli m4.

Trlsmn · Mar 4, 2009

Anoobie Knewberton 47 said:
A pink cricket may look cuter to a jury, but I'd rather have a little stopping power.:laugh

Yes but if the bad guy was ghey would it be considered a hate crime?

Doc In UPlace · Mar 4, 2009

I believe the summation needs to be limited to facts admitted in the course of the trial, and the issue of whatever other equipment the defendant may have at home would had to have been found material to the case, in the first place. Even a person's arrest record and prior convictions are not admissible in the trial phase if I remember correctly.

I have thought about this other idea of having pre-cocked a gun before firing it being detrimental to a self-defense case because it could tend to prove premeditation (I guess?). A notion that hasn't made sense to me yet.

The time it takes to cock while bringing a weapon to bear would only be a fraction of a second, and if the condition of the weapon just prior to firing was somehow made part of the record, seems to me the defense could be made that the procedure would tend to make the shot more accurate, therefore more effective at scoring a hit (and stopping the attack) as well as safer to the public because of the accuracy gained by shooting single-action...

Weathermaker · Mar 10, 2009

The crux of the original post was not about precocked or not. It was about your inventory of firearms and ammo that you have on hand.

wichaka · Mar 11, 2009

Haven't seen a case where that was brought up.

PhysicsGuy · Mar 11, 2009

If you start thinking about how this will be spun in court, then when you are actually in a defensive situation, it may make you think twice about action, then before you know it you know you are 6 feet under.

I've learned to never judge anything by the court system, since people can get paid out for millions for coffee that is too hot ( I know that's not criminal court). But the outcome is probably more affected by the skill of your lawyer than how "evil" your defensive weapon looks.

wichaka · Mar 11, 2009

How many people have died or became seriously injured because of the scare tactics of civil court, and didn't act when they should have?

Folks don't let this get under your skin, protect your family first, worry about the other garb when you cross that bridge.

But as I've said before....for the price of a case of ammo, sit down with an attorney that is well versed in the issues of deadly force, and discuss the issues....best money you'll ever spend.

Better than sitting around worrying about it.

Trlsmn · Mar 11, 2009

wichaka said:
How many people have died or became seriously injured because of the scare tactics of civil court, and didn't act when they should have?

Folks don't let this get under your skin, protect your family first, worry about the other garb when you cross that bridge.

But as I've said before....for the price of a case of ammo, sit down with an attorney that is well versed in the issues of deadly force, and discuss the issues....best money you'll ever spend.

Better than sitting around worrying about it.

Buy <cough torrent cough> the DVD "Cute Lawyer Tricks" -Mas Ayoob It is a must watch for any criminal defense.