Do you think the color of your carry gun matters?

Do you think the color of your carry gun matters?

  • Yes, I could see it playing a role.

    Votes: 33 25.4%

  • No, it would not have any impact.

    Votes: 84 64.6%

  • I'm not sure if it would or not.

    Votes: 13 10.0%
  • Total voters
    130
  • Poll closed .
S

Sequins

New member
Do you think the color of your carry gun matters?

If a potential shooting scenario was 100% justified I'm sure we would all prefer if that wasn't the case, but let's imagine the decision to use lethal force wasn't on it's face "100% clean". Charges are filed and now you're in court.

Do you think that within those court proceedings the color of your gun would ever conceivably be mentioned? I think a pink grip panel or rainbow wash Glock 21 will have more favourable legal outcomes than an FDE Glock 21 or even a plain black Glock 21 would.

What say you?

(You know in retrospect this could cover any gun you carry, not just an autoloader, I just carry an autoloader so my 'training' took over and I put a carry thread in the forum for the kind of gun I carry)
 
Last edited:
This kind of logic is 100% urban myth. There is zero legal basis that I am aware of.

Buy whatever you like, or whatever is on sale. Hopefully both.
 
I once had a guest admire a double barreled side by side shotgun of mine with a color case hardened finish. It was an old Ithaca and it was a beauty, it now belongs to my good friend. The same guest then recoiled in horror and told me how much guns are bad when I showed them my parkerized GI 1911. Literally the same woman went from thinking my side by side was kinda cool to saying "I'm uncomfortable and I want you to put those away" when I brought out the 1911. That woman is a registered voter and a member of the jury pool in Washington.

I think it might depend geographically where you are. I haven't traveled a lot throughout these many states but I imagine in Utah it would not matter whereas where I live in Seattle, WA it might matter tremendously. Keep in mind for the purpose of this poll your intentions when shooting are already being questioned in a court of law. You're up against an unscrupulous ADA looking to run for the DA spot next season and he wants to make a big political show about how hard he is on guns and gun criminals to a sympathetic gun grabbing electorate. 70% of your "peers" vote for the preferred party agenda without even checking the name of the candidate (my aunt does that I kid you not, just down her party line, I assume the other voters in king county are equally informed and considerate).

If I was that ADA I'd make hay with the gun colour, no question. I'd say this looks like the kind of gun a trained killer would use. I'd ask questions about how often you go to the range and I'd cast aspersions on whether or not you are in fact the kind of trained killer that I imagine would carry such a gun. I'd check on facebook to see if you ever shared any 2A posts and I'd characterize you as the kind of right-wing nut who constantly went on about his guns and was looking for a reason to kill... Basically I'd cast all the good things in your life in a negative light to 12 strangers who already trust me more than you because, well, you're a trained killer and I'm from the government and I'm here to help.

That is based on nothing but my personal bias of course which is why I started the poll. I think the caliber probably matters the most as a heavy duty "hunting" round might imply you were hunting for your fellow citizens. Legally I feel the bigger caliber = more guilty line of reasoning is proven by the harold fish case, and furthermore I think that semi-automatic is definitely a "more guilty" type of hand gun than a revolver. I think impressions matter a heckuva a lot and in my area I would expect my jury pool to be 12 people who have never fired a gun before.
 
Last edited:
If it was a purposeful defense shooting, colors and modifications won't matter and should be easily swept away by any competent defense lawyer. I know M.A. posts here and people take his word as law, but an AD/ND is different than a purposeful SD shooting.


Disclaimer:I'm not a lawyer so don't take anything I say as advice or fact.
 
These trials are often jury trials, so in that way it matters always. Those who say it doesn't matter legally are right too,but it is about folks looking at your gun and letting that define your personality in their eyes.
 
I prefer black guns for concealment. Other than that it doesn't matter. Why a color in court would be relevant to a shooting is beyond me. It's like saying the color of my shoes had some impact or correlation to the outcome.
 
IMO the only thing that comes into play when talking about concealed firearm finishes is how durable they are. I think rust on a handgun would be a greater cause for concern than the color of its' frame.
 
I think it could but I'm not going to worry about it. Slogans or pictures could be a negative too. If you have a grim reaper on your revolver or "kill em all let God sort em out" etched on your rainbow wash Glock 21 (wait, I can GET that? :p ), you can bet you will get slammed for that.
 
In two high profile shooting cases, the Dunn and Zimmerman shootings, the finish of the gun was never brought up. Trigger pull and magazine capacity is what the prosecution seemed to focus on. Dunn used a stainless gun while Zimmerman used a blues Kel-tec.
 
As in so many things in life, its often the luck of the draw. The teacher you get, the detective you hope you get to solve a loved one's murder, etc. Same with prosecutors. There is a case I am now following in which an intruder broke through a rear patio door. When confronted by the homeowner, armed with a .45 Kimber with laser, the intruder backed out but at the last minute picked up a near by barbeque skewer and threw it at the homeowner. The homeowner shot once hitting the man in the right shoulder at the joint. The bullet completely separated the shoulder by tearing ligaments, etc. The man is unable to work now because he has a permanent disability. (Of course, he hasn't worked in 10 years.) The family is suing the homeowner. But what's better is the prosecutor is making much of the laser attachment. He is earnestly attempting to prove premeditation by virtue of the fact that the laser - in the prosecutor's mind - says the homeowner wants to kill, therefore he has enhanced that eventuality by having a laser to more efficiently dispatch his enemies. I'll let you know how this one works out. Scary. Does that mean range time and training to perfect our skills will be used against us because we will be seen as preparing to kill?
 
I have heard the opposite of your argument... In that bright colors like pink (and other non traditional gun associated colors) can work against you.

That the gun looked like a toy, and lured in the person you shot who did not feel threatened. That you disguised the nature of your weapon in order to make the person unafraid of attacking, so you could have reason to shoot.


If you want to minimize such potential risk, then sticking with factory supplied traditional finishes are best, stainless, blued (black) and even FDE to some extent now. Being factory supplied, means you didn't do anything extra, can't be said to have purposely altered anything for nefarious reasons... Your weapon choice is another matter though.


But, that is really all irrelevant...

The factor that is going to matter most... Is the political leanings of the DA, and that of the majority constituency where you live.

Meaning, that any DA that has reason to want to push the issue and force a court case... Is going to find any angle they can to win over a jury.

No matter what color the firearm is... If they think they can spin it to there argument, they will.
 
In the above mentioned case about the laser...

If they are being sued, then it isn't a prosecutor making the argument, but a lawyer representing the family doing the suing.
 
Yes. The prosecutor is attempting to "sell" the case to his division chief using his theory of the laser against the homeowner. The lawyer suing on behalf of the family is, on behalf of the family, pushing for a prosecution. If successful, the civil suit is a fait accompli thanks to the gov't. A civil lawyer's dream, have the DA do your legwork and make the case that you can just copy on the civil side.
 
Well, if its the dreaded "black rifle" I'd say you're ownership in same will tend to bias the jury against you. IMHO.
 
That's one of the reasons I quit carrying my nickel plated Smith and Wesson Model 37 with pearl grips.
Thought it might prejudice the jury, carrying something that flashy.
 
Sometimes color will draw the female to her first firearm for design qualities. Females are detailed, concentrated in their actions and can out shoot most of the time of males at her first shot!

Since we're talking about "does it matter", I would say the only part of a firearm that the assailant sees is its muzzle . Therefore, I would get a firearm that would first meet my requirements for a conceal carry. The size of the firearm should have the greatest impact of the ammo it carries at close range (5-10 yrds.) Mini firearms of any color with the right ammo will do the task.

A laser dot on the perpetrator's chest or brow is very visible and might deter the charge. But a pink frame on a conceal carry only states it's from a female carrier for her wardrobe safety. if the attacker is taking on a female (most often a male attacker)... It's the muzzle opening that protect the victim, not the color of the firearm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top