Would you use this for home defense?

[wired]

Ive got a couple 9MM AR-15's. Ones a "pistol" and the others a SBR. Both shoot wonderfully well and both look really menacing. Maybe too menacing to use as home defense guns. What do you think? Is this something you'd rather not have shown to a jury if it comes to a trial and would a lever action be more humbling ?

Read More

 

[No_Regerts]

Any and all means necessary to stop the threat.

 

[edslhead]

Thats thinkn too far ahead

 

[IronMonster]

I don't think the choice of gun is an issue, however I would just as soon it not have that skull on the receiver. The attorneys are going to be showing the firearm to the jury and I personally would not what any kind of extra "evil" marked on my home or self defense gun.

There was a cop not long ago who had something like "You're Fu@K@d" on the dust cover of his personal AR that he used for protection. They made an awful big stink about that in the media.

It may not ever be an issue, but if I had my druthers I would want a plain jane production looking firearm for self defense.

If its what you got and its the only thing you got... Well then I certainly would not not use it

 

[IronMonster]

A NFA item might cause you extra grief as well. A jury in Idaho would probably not think much of you using a suppressed firearm for self protection. A jury in Portland or Seattle would likely be another story altogether.

The thing is in a court hearing what matters is that the jury likes you and thinks you are the good guy. Your attorney has to prove you are the victim and you only wanted to protect your family. In Portland just the fact that you own an super evil suppressed gun with a skull on it will make you the bad guy in the eyes of 80% of prospective jurors. I would suspect Yakima is a far sight more sane.

 

[Oathkeeper1775]

99% chance of a wrongful death lawsuit regardless; according to the former 2a lawyer and author who provided a training event I attended some time ago.

Dealing with the threat; round 1
Dealing with/the jurisdiction; 2
Dealing with/civil suit; round 3
and
Getting on with your life; 4

Better than you or your family being harmed...

 

[41mag]

I was introduced to a bullpup 9mm by a guy at the range. Over the course of several bowling pin matches he changed my preconceptions about both bullpup designs as well as 9mm. Of course I never came across on I could afford, but it certainly wouldn't have a deaths head on it in any case.

 

[No_Regerts]

At least in WA, if youre cleared criminally and its a justified homicide, you cant be ran through the ringer in civil court.

 

[wired]

I had never really considered the skull bit a problem. Maybe I'll do some parts swapping to one of my more generic SBR lowers.

 

[MilitantBEEMER]

I have HD guns and I also have "themed" guns. The two do not mix.
My themed guns have nothing vulgar or overtly offensive. Perception is key and how one will most likely be judged if using in a SD/HD situation

 

[Kruel J]

I prefer to use the most reliable, and most affordable option that I won't mind if I ever get it back. I'd never use an SBR, suppressed or any other NFA item for home defense. Why draw more attention or make another example the media can pile on?

My choice for HD is a G34 with a TLR-3. But to be honest, I'm sure I'd just grab my 9mm Shield as its the only one not locked up in the safe when I sleep.

 

[Kruel J]

More I think about this, I say EVERYONE here gets a good old fashioned wood wearing shotgun. Put that on display for the court. I'd be surprised if it even raises an eyebrow.

 

[11Charlie]

I agree with a lot of assessments here. One thing I would say is my family comes first any means necessary!

 

[MilitantBEEMER]

More I think about this, I say EVERYONE here gets a good old fashioned wood wearing shotgun. Put that on display for the court. I'd be surprised if it even raises an eyebrow.

Great point. I prefer 12g for HD and a nice old warn wood stocked shotgun would unlikely be an issue.

 

[Kruel J]

I agree with a lot of assessments here. One thing I would say is my family comes first any means necessary!

Of course, goes without saying. But taking an SBR wearing a can that required stamps and LOTS of time to acquire AND "looks" like an evil "military assault weapon" won't do well in court or for all of us law abiding citizens. Let's not give them ANYTHING to make an example out of.

 

[wired]

I prefer to use the most reliable, and most affordable option that I won't mind if I ever get it back. I'd never use an SBR, suppressed or any other NFA item for home defense. Why draw more attention or make another example the media can pile on?

My choice for HD is a G34 with a TLR-3. But to be honest, I'm sure I'd just grab my 9mm Shield as its the only one not locked up in the safe when I sleep.

I feel completely differently about NFA. I'm a upstanding member of the community who has had extreme federal vetting and background checks, a veteran and I look good in a suit. While it is assumed by some that using NFA stuff in home defense is a no no I see it maybe more help than not. Even a bad lawyer could spin that 8 month background check thing to effect. Iv'e never seen a case where using NFA was a liability. This is Yakima. We dont have "Overzealous Prosecutors" looking to make a name for their liberal constituency. Its Yakima.

 

[Kruel J]

Great point. I prefer 12g for HD and a nice old warn wood stocked shotgun would unlikely be an issue.

Exactly. Why have another "assault weapon" make the news?

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

If you are in your home and shoot an aggressive intruder, I wouldn't worry about it. As soon as the Hearing Protection Act passes, a non-NFA suppressor is going on my home defense gun.

 

[11Charlie]

Of course, goes without saying. But taking an SBR wearing a can that required stamps and LOTS of time to acquire AND "looks" like an evil "military assault weapon" won't do well in court or for all of us law abiding citizens. Let's not give them ANYTHING to make an example out of.

If I'm sitting in my chair cleaning it when they bust through the door its getting used!

 

[Kruel J]

If you are in your home and shoot an aggressive intruder, I wouldn't worry about it. As soon as the Hearing Protection Act passes, a non-NFA suppressor is going on my home defense gun.

It's the principal, and another reason for gun grabbers to target lawful citizens and their right to own "evil black rifles". I agree, IF the HPA gets passed, I'll have a family of cans and won't be afraid to use them. But I'm talking today, right now. Can you imagine if tomorrow there is a front page article of a homeowner using a suppressed firearm to shoot an intruder? I can already hear the outcries from gun grabbers about how it wasn't "fair" to the intruder. Let alone lawsuits from the intruders family that he was killed "silently" by an evil gun owner. Think about it.