Another Self Defense Question

[cabezaverde]

The many debates on this board (and others) regarding the use of handloads for SD got me thinking about how a jury or prosecutor would treat the use of laser grips or a laser attached to a hand gun.

Any opinions or actual knowledge on any cases like this?

Just wondering if an attorney would try to paint one as a Robocop type of guy when a witness testifes that there was a red dot on the poor assailants chest right before they heard the boom?

Please - no ammuntion discussions, assume you are using what you are comfortable with.

[Finster101]

I have a laser on my Kel-Tec. My thought on it is that if I ever have to use that little pocket pistol, bringing it up and getting a good sight picture is probably out of the question. With the red dot, what you see is what you get. I practice firing in different hold positions using only the laser where I can't even see the pistol. It works pretty well with a little practice.

[flounderman]

not what you asked but I was advised to use factory loads because a lawyer would try to make something out of you using something you loaded yourself, and that is probably good advice. question the lawyer would ask with a lazer, would be why did you shoot the person where you did, when using a lazer sight you could have put the dot where you wanted the bullet to go? iron sights, fear for your life, heat of the moment, it wasn't where you intended to hit, actually you were so frightened you were lucky to hit anything. that said, if I had my druthers, I wouldsooner have the lazer and the sight of that dot on their chest might be all that is needed to defuse the situation.

[44fanatic]

How many LE service weapons have laser "aids" on them? A good lawyer will bring that up.

If it comes down to it, I would rather be deadly accurate with a deadly round defending myself than having to worry about a criminal sueing me.

[pat g]

Would iron sights make a difference, if they bright orange or night sights.
The sights do not kill or wound.
Laser sights are SIGHTS.

I spent 33 years as a Detective on the Chicago Police Dept.
Never once did the sights on the gun used in a crime or self defense come into the equation.

Pat

[gray wolf]

If you are absolutely sure that you are in fear of your life, and that deadly force
Is/was the only option you have/had. shoot the bad guy, enough of this nonsense.

[BulletFactory]

^ what he said. If you are legal for a SD shooting, you are legal. It makes no difference if you use a .22pistol, a .50 rifle, a bat, whatever. If you shoot SD, say your name, given ID, claim self defense, and SHUT UP. Let the lawyers handle the rest.

What to the cops say to you, Anything you say can and will be used (for the benefit of your defense) in a court of law." ? Or "Anything you say can and will be used (AGAINST) you in a court of law".?

Words have meanings, and the cops are not there to help you. They just told you that in the 3rd grade to make their lives easier when you grow up, and it works.

[Bret4207]

I have never heard of any cases where laser type aiming devices were a component in a wrongful conviction. You aim center mass in any case. No one shoots to wound.

I won't even dignify the continued support for the non-existent "handloads" issue beyond saying it's nonsense at this time.

BF- the cops ARE there to help you, it just depends on what situation you're in. They have a job to do and it's not to protect a "good guy gun owner" who made a poor decision.

[Echo]

I was chatting with a couple of women who were taking an SD CCW course, and they asked me if I would shoot to kill. I answered 'No, I would shoot to STOP. If the perp died in the process, so be it.'

[BulletFactory]

If anything, the device would be a benefit to your defense. Your chance of missing and hitting some innocent bystander is reduced.

[stubshaft]

I don't think that the method of aiming would be of any consequence. Most gunfights are at 3yds. and if you are planning to look for the red dot on the perps torso he will have gotten off 2 or more shots already. That being said, the only thing that I would be looking for would be a glimpse of the front sight to indicate where the muzzle was pointing. In a darkened environment you wouldn't be able to see the dot after the first shot whether you fired or the intruder did.

As fas a shooting to "stop", I don't agree with that mindset. You would shoot to IMMEDIATELY INCAPACITATE your target, which usually results in their demise. The split second you take to decide if you should kill or wound them may result in their being able to hit you. Remember the basic rule "They don't care if they kill YOU".

[Gohon]

While the FBI states most gun fights are 7 yards and under, sometimes they aren't. So what do you do, just start blasting away in the general direction? I don't think so. Personally I'd much rather get a fast glimpse of that red dot and know exactly where my shot was going than just a quick glimpse of the front sight and only know the general direction of the bullet. Can't think of a better way to miss all shots when under extreme stress, even at 3-4 yards. As for muzzle flash blinding you, well you don't go blind. Just a momentary loss of night vision and that is only if shooting in total darkness in which case no sight is any good. Seems that would make that first shot even more critical now wouldn't it.

[Skipper488]

The purpose of any sighting aid is to hit what you're aiming at and not hit what you're not aiming at. I think the arguement could and should be put forth that it's primary purpose is to avoid hitting innocent bystanders.

[HammerMTB]

Do any LE use Lasers? If they do (and I know some do) then your response in a court is "I am just an ignorant gun owner. I looked at LE and imitated what they do. Evidently what they do is legal."
A good lawyer will try to twist anything into what serves his client best. It's very doubtful you'd run into trouble with a criminal trial. In a civil trial, all bets are off. Best to make sure there is not some injured party to testify against you. If a Laser makes that happen, use it.
BTW, I have a Laser on my home defense pistol.

[waksupi]

I would point out that you may have your lazer sighted in on a target at whatever distance. But as the distance changes from that point, it gets off further and further.

[mpmarty]

two to the body, one to the head, do it again until they are dead. If the situation warrants shooting a perp you don't want him to go to court and lie later.

[biker_trash_1340]

I'm sure everyone seen this but if not here it is...
don't talk to the cops.... (part1 &2)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08fZQWjDVKE&feature=related

[XWrench3]

i know a l.e.o. personally. and the bottom line is if it is a good shoot, you dont have a lot to worry about. at least here in michigan. if it is not a good shoot, or if it seems unsure, then, i think a laser sight would be the least of your problems. it was explained to me this way. if the officer(s) can tell that it was a do or die situation, there isnt going to be much of a problem. it is when stories conflict, or evidence gets tampered with, or it simply was not a situation where you were trying to save yourself, or another from great bodily harm, death, or rape. that is when they get busy trying to find out the real truth. and if the real truth says you were not acting in self defense, "you are going to be in a heap of trouble, son." laser sights, hand loads, or shooting them with an elephant gun does not matter if it is a good shoot.

[blaster]

I worked on a self defense shooting a while back. Took the jury 3 minutes to deliberate and find not guilty. In this case the majority of the prosecutions case centered on the police's inability to find a shell casing or to lift prints off the "victims" knife which his buddy had run over as they headed toward the hospital and how the scene must have been staged. Never mind the fact that the "victim" had thrown a brick through my guys window earlier and was drunk, calling and threatening my guy and his daughter ("victims" ex-girlfriend) hours and minutes before he showed up drunk in my guys yard brandishing a knife.

Bottom line if the prosecution wants to make something an issue they can. Should it matter? NO. According to law here you can shoot someone with a bazooka if a reasonable person in you position would believe their life was in danger.

If you think it would help in a self defense situation, use it. A good defense lawyer can negate it. Don't associate with scum bags and it will probably never come up.

[thunderthud]

like it or not, most laws at least here in Ohio favor the criminal. Sd is your last choice, in our state you have the duty to retreat if your able. What the hell does that mean? I got a bad back, a bum knee, and cant run anymore (very fast)Yes, this is even in the face of serious bodily harm. That said I usually use factory loads cuz I don't want to have an expensive box of jacketed boolits sitting around with nothing to do after I load a dozen for my sd pistol. I like most say here, If you got a good shoot you should be ok. Praise the Lord & pass the ammo!

[Char-Gar]

I don't know why this kind of stuff keeps on cropping up. The type of weapon, sight, load or attached gizmo will have zero bearing on the outcome of the trial.

In the case of a criminal trial, the issue will be if the shooting was sanctioned (righteous) by the law or prohibited (criminal) by the law. That it..that is all!

In the case of a civil trial the issued will be if the shooter was negligent or not in his actions. Did the shooter do what a reasonable prudent person would do under the same or similar circumstances. That is it..that is all!

All of the rest of this stuff is just a distraction from the real issues. Fun for the gun board and profitable for the gun writer, but of little or no substance nor value.

[Bret4207]

like it or not, most laws at least here in Ohio favor the criminal.

I would modify that slightly to "laws tend to favor the victim". The part that gets us screwed up is that even if you are the original "victim" or aggrieved party, you can alter the situation and become the aggressor. If your neighbor comes over to your house to kick your butt, he's in the wrong. If you get a bat and chase him back into his yard and beat him while he's on the ground then you altered the situation and, even though he " started it" and "deserved it", you became a criminal TOO.

[Char-Gar]

I strongly disagree that the laws favor the criminal. The right to defend your self and your property has been strengthen with the advent of the "Castle Laws". In Texas and most other jurisdictions, you are even immune from civil liability if your actions were justified under the Castle Law. The mantra.."laws favor the criminal"..makes good gunboard palaver but is not reality.

Bret is 100% right! If you (generic) are attacked you have the right of self defense. It the attacker breaks off the attack and retreats and you continue the conflict, you then become the attacker and the criminal. The right of self defense stops when the attacker breaks off the attack and retreats.

This is Texas law and probably most other jurisdictions. This has been the law of the land since the mind of man rememberth not.

[BulletFactory]

I don't think Ohio has castle doctrine. Im pretty sure that is what upset him. Castle doctrine laws exist because the laws had favored the criminal.

[Char-Gar]

Why would anybody want to live in Ohio anyway. We still have room in Texas for immigrants coming South as well as immigrants going North.

Be that as it may, Ohio does have a Castle Law. It was SB 184 signed into law August 10, 2008 by Gov. Strickland. Google is your friend!

[HammerMTB]

in our state you have the duty to retreat if your able. What the hell does that mean? I got a bad back, a bum knee, and cant run anymore (very fast)

Sounds like it means you back away at your own pace, all the while lighting up your target with your laser, and pressing smoothly on the trigger until the threat is no longer threatening.