Legal Issues Related to Ammo

W

wildbillbugman

Inactive
Hello to everybody,
I am brand new to this Forum and brand new to guns, period ! My reason for buying a pistol is for home defense and target "fun".
My choice of guns was a Glock 20 My choice of ammo in the home was Doubletap Equalizer. My choice of ammo for practice is whatever is cheapest.
I purchased this type of gun and ammo because, in the event of home invasion, I might only get one chance. One round. I keep the gun, with loaded magazine separate from the gun, in a drawer next to my bed.
The reason for this post is that I saw in old posts on this forum that there was concern about legal troubles if one actually shot someone with an Equalizer(2 ball) load.
My question is: Why would a 2-lead bullet be more of a legal problem than a shotgun, with many more "loads"?
I am in California, with the harshest gun laws in the nation
Regards to all,
Bill
 
Welcome to TFL, wildbillbugman!

I'm totally unfamiliar with the ammo you've selected, but if you can point us to the posts to which you refer, maybe we can help you sort out some of the legal theories at play.

Oh, and I renamed and moved your thread for you.
 
Welcome wildbillbugman!

Here's a link to the ammo you mentioned:
http://www.doubletapammo.com/php/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=42
As a first time gun owner, you certainly went for the "bad boy" on the block with the 10mm Auto. (My personal favorite)
I would be looking to purchase practice ammo with about the same bullet weight. You're gonna have some recoil with that one.
Double Tap sells 230 grain hard cast loaded ammo. http://www.doubletapammo.com/php/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=158
As a California ex-patriot, I'd be thinking a free consult (if you can find one) from a local attorney that knows the firearms laws would be in order. Obviously, you were able to purchase the ammo so that hurdle should be cleared. As to use of it? Best to ask an expert.
 
Why do you keep the magazine out of the gun? Is this a CA law? You will find it hard to insert the mag and rack the slide while under the stress of a home invasion.
 
Thanks for the replies,
I chose this gun after consultation with a retired Police office/ Sheriff. Also I read volumes about it and other calibers. I do have advise that, in California, one is in a better legal position if he kills the home intruder, rather than just wound him. There is the possibility of civil Suits from a wounded intruder. It has happened here and the intruder won.
I found the old topic of the Equalizer round being possible a legal issue by searching Yahoo for "Doubletap Equalizer". I will search for it again.
With regard to keeping the magazine separate from the gun- That was advise given to a class I took on basic pistol use and safety. In California, a loaded magazine, without the gun, is considered a weapon if being transported. So if I take my gun to the range, the magazine is unloaded. The ammo is kept separate from the gun in my car. bullets in glove compartment, gun in trunk.
Bill
 
Your legal theories are a bit flawed, my friend.

1)Whether the intruder is dead or alive, you're likely to get sued. By them if they survive or their family if they do not.

2)Regardless of suits by the attacker or their family, which would be in civil court, you are very likely to end up in criminal court, should any part of your actions or circumstance fail to convince the DA that you were 100% justified beyond any doubt.

3)Defensive shooting has one singular goal, that is to stop the attacker. Whether they live or die is irrelevant, at that moment. While it is obvious and we fully realize that the actions that we take with a firearm are very likely to result in the death of the intruder, that should not be the goal. The goal is to make them stop their actions that are threatening our lives or well-being.
 
If you wound an intruder, he can sue you. If you kill him, his estate can sue you.

Shoot to stop the threat. Nothing more, nothing less.
 
At a minimum, take a class. That will answer several basic questions, and will show you where you need more research.
 
So, it is a loose-loose situation. If I do not shoot, I could be killed, with a knife or even a brick. If I do shoot, and the intruder has a knife only, I am likely to go to jail. That might or might not be better than being killed.
I knew a lady who had her throat slit by a home invader. If a stronger man has only a knife, I am screwed or dead.
 
If you are in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm, you do what needs to be done. The details can be complex, such as duty to retreat, castle doctrine laws, etc, but every state recognizes the basic right to self defense. The key is to know the laws ahead of time and not be guessing when it's time for action.
 
wildbillbugman said:
So, it is a loose-loose situation. If I do not shoot, I could be killed, with a knife or even a brick. If I do shoot, and the intruder has a knife only, I am likely to go to jail. That might or might not be better than being killed. I knew a lady who had her throat slit by a home invader. If a stronger man has only a knife, I am screwed or dead.
Click to expand...
It's not necessarily lose-lose, but you need to realize that if matters have gotten to the point that killing another human is your only viable option, they're already pretty far off the rails.

With that said, you need to take some time to learn and study the laws surrounding armed self-defense in your jurisdiction. Get some training. Have some plans so that you're not flying by the seat of your pants at a critical moment.
 
According to the book "Self Defense Laws of all 50 States", CA goes by case law more than written law, which makes it harder to understand what's right to do. Find a place that teaches various self defense courses and get some training. See if there's a range that has regular practice sessions of shooting targets while you move rather than just standing still shooting at a bulls eye. I have been doing this twice a week for two years now. Read some of the books by Massad Ayoob. Assess your home layout and situation so that you don't accidentally shoot an innocent; IOW, how do you know when there's really an intruder?

It's a good idea to protect yourself. It's much better if you understand the laws and have some training. You have made some assumptions about when it is OK to shoot in self defense that lead me to believe that you need to learn more. The generally accepted thinking is that you may defend yourself with deadly force when you believe your life or the life of your family is in imminent danger of death or grave bodily harm. The criteria that is usually taught for knowing when it is OK to use a gun to defend are:

Ability means that the other person has the power to kill or to cripple you.
Opportunity means that the circumstances are such that the other person would be able to use his ability against you.
Jeopardy means that the other person’s actions or words provide you with a reasonably-perceived belief that he intends to kill you or cripple you.

So a person with knife can kill or cause grave bodily harm, but if he's far enough away or there's a fence between you, you probably can't shoot him.

You also cannot be the instigator of the argument or action that results in shooting someone and claim self defense.

There's a lot to know and you need to know your local laws. You may find Calguns to be a good resource: http://www.calguns.net/

But please find out if it's legal to load the gun in your house. I know that the ruling for CA for concealed carry on the street is that you have to have a loaded magazine separate from the gun because a (stupid) judge decided that when a person is confronted with such a situation he has time to draw his gun, insert the magazine, rack the slide, and then hope the bad guy has politely waited for you to do all that:mad: I hope it's not the same within your home.
 
All good advice, so far, the decision to keep a gun for personal defense is an important one, and one that should be taken fully aware of all of the laws that apply to you.

Which is not really what you asked.

If the ammunition you bought is legal for private citizens to own in your state, then then should be no legal prohibition against its use in self defense.

States regulate what ammunition one may hunt with, but that is a game law. Some states regulate what ammunition you may possess in certain locations (I understand that NJ allows hollowpoints at home, or at the range, but does not allow their carry on the street - no I don't see the sense in that, but that's another matter).

The one point where I can see you might have a problem with that 2ball load in a defensive shooting aftermath is pretty obvious. Your "word" and the immediate physical evidence will differ.

In every defensive shooting, the responding officers are going to look at the situation, and listen to what you say. Their opinions are going to be influential when determination is made to see if you are charged with anything.

If, for instance, say you shot your attacker once, and they see two bullet holes, your creditability is instantly suspect. And so is the rest of you.

Sure, there is an explantion, and when the word gets around about the 2 ball load, your word will be proven honest. But, people are people and doubt, once it is there, rarely goes away completely. It just might be enough to make the difference in the decision to bring charges, or not. Not saying it would, only that it could.

And because of that slim chance that happening, using an uncommon load for self defense is generally considered a poor choice.

The other string on that bow is that if you do wind up in court, expect the other side to use every thing they can to make you look irresponsible, at the least. Expect them to make fantastic claims about you, and your choice of ammo, in order to convince the jury that you were in the wrong to shoot. That's their job. Using uncommon ammo (including handloads) is seen to be something that could make their job easier.

Not everyone believes this is a creditable risk. Cases where the ammo used was a significant factor in conviction are rare, and I have not yet heard of any where the ammo alone was the deciding factor.

I recommend you get professional advice on your local laws and your rights and responsibilities under them. Also might not be a bad idea to learn a bit about your local prosecutor's office, and their attitudes.

If your DA has history of prosecuting every defensive shooting, then the potential downside to your choice of ammo becomes a moot point. Or so it would seem to me.

Not a lawyer, not pretending to be one. My advice is worth what you paid for it, or perhaps, less.
 
I think the consideration on ammo is, if the DA decides to go after you, he/she will try to paint you as a foaming-at-the-mouth nutcase. If you use "standard" ammo, that should be defensible with an appropriate "expert" witness on your side. For example, trainers around here advise NOT to use hand loads - that will look like you went beyond the minimum necessary. I also wouldn't use +p+ ammo. Basic JHP is easily defensible, your expert will just testify that's what Cops carry.

Whoever told you to keep the magazine separate from the gun is an idiot, and you should ignore everything they say. When transporting, in CA, the gun has to be empty and out of reach of the occupants in a locked container (trunk qualifies), and the magazine with ammo has to be separate. In your house, the magazine should be in the gun.

Shoot to "kill" or "wound" is the wrong thought process. You do not have the right to kill anyone. You do have a right to use deadly force to stop someone from inflicting grievous bodily harm or death on you or the people you are defending. You shoot to stop the threat. When the threat's over, you stop shooting.

Other fools will tell you to make sure you drag the body inside your house - forensics will show you did that, and it will convince the authorities to charge you with murder.

Overall, there's a lot of bad advice out there. Find some qualified instructors to give you the real scoop.
 
handgunlaw.us is a good resource with a great summary article on California gun laws. There is even a section in there on ammo if you scroll down (pg 10). http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/california.pdf

10mm is a great caliber that has ammo in a wide selection of power. IMO for self defense I would make certain that whatever ammo you chose is reliable in the gun. Probably not a problem with a Glock or Doubletapp, but it is the first priority. Also, again just my opinion, but for home self defense in a 10mm I would consider a lower pressure hollowpoint load, recoil is less and the end result is the same. Much of the higher pressure 10mm loads are designed for hunting and thus less optimal for self defense.
Lastly, I dont think your gaining a stopping power advantage with that "equalizer" load and since your new to shooting seeing two holes on a paper target isnt going to make it easier becoming a good shot.
 
So, it is a loose-loose situation. If I do not shoot, I could be killed, with a knife or even a brick. If I do shoot, and the intruder has a knife only, I am likely to go to jail. That might or might not be better than being killed.
I knew a lady who had her throat slit by a home invader. If a stronger man has only a knife, I am screwed or dead.
Click to expand...
its not really about if you should or shouldn't shoot, its about if you have no choice. A knife is a very deadly weapon, look up the Teuller Drill.
Its not all doom and gloom and like they say, better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6. If you had no choice then you did what any reasonable man would do....
 
If it were me, I would find a good 10mm round that doesn't offer any gimmicks or something that could be perceived by a non gun person as something that is far more deadly than everything else available. Ideally in a perfect world you'd have the same rounds in your gun as what LE in your area might use. Should the issue about what ammo you used come up it will definitely make your attorney's job a lot easier if you are using something that is widely and commonly used. Unfortunately with 10mm there isn't much out there compared to calibers like 9mm, .40, and .45. I'm kind of in the same boat as I carry a G29 with Winchester Silvertips and my primary house gun is a G20 with Hornady XTP's. Takes a minute to get your head around the fact that these aren't the most powerful 10mm rounds out there, but they are a step up from .40...should you ever need to use them they are more than enough to do what you need them to. People have stopped attackers with lesser calibers, others have been shot with calibers greater than 10mm and laughed it off, its really about shot placement. Just my .02.

If in doubt, seek legal advice from an attorney in your state.
 
Thank you for all of the concerned responses! Believe me, I am aware of my ignorance in the area of gun laws in my area, and my general ignorance about guns. I have decided to change my ammo load to a more conventional load. It was already my intention to take a course in "Defensive Handgun" this month. I have already taken a "General Handgun" course.
The printed advise to keep the gun and the loaded magazine separate actually came with the Glock. After this I will ignore that advise. Just FYI, a local district attorney has come "under fire", politically, for recommending that every household should have a gun. Despite heavy criticism, he has not retracted his advise. He said what he said because of the reduction in police presence and the increase in crime, specifically home invasion. My area has really changed in the 30+years I have been here.

Thanks,
Bill
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top