Pre-Ban Hi-Cap mags for Self-Defense

[Axel Yup]

Some gun writers, such as Massad Ayoob, write about the liabilities in court of using certain guns, modifications, and equipment for self-defense.

Examples of legal liabilities often mentioned include: modified triggers with light actions, handloaded ammo (factory ammo wasn't deadly enough, he had to make his own), disabled safeties (i.e. disabling magazine disconnect safety), and certain "bad" image guns (Tec 9).

Will using a pre-ban hi-capacity magazine in a self-defense situation be considered a legal liability? I have ordered a Kel-Tec P11 which will come with 10 round mags. If I buy a pre-ban S&W 59 series 15 round mag which will fit the P11, am I leaving myself vulnerable legally. I can imagine a DA using the argument "Congress has mandated that 10 round magazines are now the legal limit, but the defendant felt that his gun did not have enough killing power. So he went out and bought a magazine with 50% more lethality."

I would also like to get a Glock M31 (.357 SIG) and use pre-ban hi-cap M22 mags for self-defense. Is this a good idea legally?

Axel

 

[Jeff Thomas]

Axel, I seriously doubt anyone here will attempt to tell you what a DA or jury will do. Yes, a DA or plaintiff's attorney could make such an argument. They can make any argument they choose. But, I think this clearly falls under the 'rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6' rule. Our first choice is to avoid a fight. Our second choice is to live to see any subsequent trial. With even well-trained shooters only hitting somewhere around 20% to 30% of their shots, and considering the high, high stress of a deadly force encounter, I'll choose to carry the amount of ammunition the firearm can efficiently handle. IMHO.

[This message has been edited by Jeff Thomas (edited April 28, 1999).]

 

[thaddeus]

Chuck Taylor made a good argument. He said that all the hype about what the DA is going to do to you is not based on truth.
He said that no criminal case have ever had mention such things as how your gun was modified or any somesuch nonsense. He says that in a criminal case, you will be tried for whether you had to use deadly force to defend yourself and if you acted properly, period. That is all a criminal case is about is whether you made the right decision or killed someone because you were mad or whatever.

He said that in a CIVIL case, there may be another matter where some creepy lawyer will smatter the court with "evidence" that you are civilly liable for using a super-gun.
So, you may get sued (that is a big "maybe", and probably the last of your worries), but it will not be an issue in a criminal trial.

That's what he said anyway....and as of yet, I agree. I carry what I like and what works best just short of keeping an "assault rifle" in the trunk of my car. Let the chips fall where they may. What I DO concentrate on is understanding the law very well when it comes to using deadly force. That will keep you out of troulbe in most cases. Know when it is right to use it, and when to stand down.

thaddeus

 

[Destructo6]

Simply, you never know what will happen.

I think it was two years ago in the great city (read cesspool) of LA (my home) that a fellow, illegally carrying a concealed pistol, shot two gangbangers (tagging at the time), who were armed with screwdrivers. He killed one and wounded the other. The DA, even under pressure from gun control idiots and minority groups (shooter = light skinned: shot = dark skinned), it took him quite a while to finally charge the shooter with misdemeanor illegal concealed carry.

Again, near my home, in west Orange County a truck driver who was sleeping in his loaded rig (as required by his insurance company because a previous rig, with load, was stolen) awoke to two bozos breaking a window and attempting to climb inside. He grabbed his loaded carbine (a Marlin camp, if memory serves) and proceeded to shoot the both of them, while running across Beach Blvd in his underwear. Neither was killed, unfortunately. Popular support, for the shooter, resulted in no charge whatsoever. I'm sure some of this had to do with both parties being Hispanic, so no race card was available.

 

[Covert Mission]

Good posts by Thaddeus and Jeff. On one of the GlockTalk threads, an attorney said that he had done a broad computer search of appellate law decisions, using the criteria of "modifications" etc, to find cases where allegations had been made of illegal/improper modifications to a firearm. He found none. This doesn't mean they don't exist, but I like the "tried by 12" theory, even with our flawed jury system. If the magazines are legal, pack 'em.

[This message has been edited by Covert Mission (edited April 29, 1999).]