r.i.p. ammo

C

coyotewsm

New member
I just saw this ammo online lastnight while browsing for a good home defense round. Does anyone have any experience with this ammo? From the pictures it looks like an incredibly nasty round. I'm also wondering with it being made the way it is in sections and not solid smooth bullet would it not foul up the barrel of your firearm?
 
Hmmm... you have much to learn young Padawan. :D

In short, avoid the RIP ammo line. This ammunition does not penetrate deeply enough in order to reach vital organs like the heart and spine, and to top it off it's also extremely expensive.

With a defensive handgun bullet, you want the thing to get deep enough to destroy these organs but don't want it to over penetrate and leave the body of the attacker, lest it hit an innocent bystander.

These RIP rounds make a shallow, nasty wound but like I said they simply don't poke a deep enough hole. Get some Speer Gold Dot or Federal HST ammo for your gun, police departments use these two brands and they both are extremely good loads that expand to make a big hole yet still get deep enough.

The RIP ammo is all marketing, and frankly they have a formula... and part of that formula is to prey on the misinformed and/or ignorant. I'm sure others will chime in to help you OP, please keep reading and do more research on wound ballistics. It is very eye-opening and will help you to see past these advertisements in order to get good ammo that will actually do a great job of protecting your life!
 
I'm avoiding it for just about every reason out there. Frangible ammunition is nothing new and nothing special, the rounds are not proving to be anything particularly noteworthy, and the marketing is ridiculous. The last thing I need is to have to use a firearm to defend myself or my family and then face a jury while my ammo choice called "R.I.P." is brought into question. No thank you.
 
Model12 I see what your talking about, now that I read read the thread that John posted the link to. Thanks for the info, and yes I am a young padawan with much to learn just bought my first handgun less than a week ago.
 
Imightbewrong. I'm sure this is a stupid question but I've seen more than one person talk about this. What does the name of the ammo have anything to do with going to court?
 
It has to do with what evidence is brought up by the prosecution. It may or may not be brought up, but the argument could always be made that by choosing an ammunition type like "R.I.P." indicates that the user was "looking for trouble". If we look at history, the Winchester Black Talon round was banned from sale because after it was used in a violent shooting incident it became vilified and considered some kind of "killer's round". I'm no legal expert, I can't say for sure how relevant the round would actually be in court, but I wouldn't want to make the risk either way.
 
The idea is that your use of ammo with a name like that would potentially be a fact that a prosecutor or trial attorney could depict as evidence suggesting that you weren't simply a victim of an attack who was left with no choice but to use deadly force, but that you were looking for trouble/confrontation and a chance to use your pistol, etc.

It could certainly be harmful in a criminal trial, but it would be most likely to do a defendant damage in a civil trial, where the standard of proof is much lower.

As for the ammo itself, whoever is making it is a charlatan.
 
Coyote,

If you have to actually use a firearm in self defense, you WILL find yourself in court. First the shooting may go to a grand jury, probably made up of non gun folks or anti gun folks.

Even if it doesn't go to a criminal court, you will probably be sued civilly for wrongful death. In either case, the attorney will do his or her best to make you seem like a murderous, gun toting vigilante who's main goal is to find someone to off.

In that light, everything about your firearm, your ammo, and everything you say will be twisted to try and prove that point.

Your "hand canon" is called "The Judge," your ammo is called "RIP." It is obvious to any thinking person that you believe yourself to be judge and jury, with a desire to see how bad your ammo can hurt a poor, misguided young man whom you misunderstood the intentions of.

And then you said that "No, I don't always carry my concealed weapon with me, only when I am going to an unsafe part of town." This will be translated as you went looking for trouble. "And I shot to kill him since he had a knife," instead of trying to stop the threat.

You can see where this is going. None of this is exaggeration, it is every day.

Go find out what ammo your police department or sheriff's department uses and consider that. Mine uses Speer Gold Dot, so my carrying that gives them one less thing to poke holes in, and it is great ammo.

Be well,
Tony
 
As I mentioned, I'm not a lawyer, but I think it's always a good idea to "CYA", especially if you can do so preemptively. If something could potentially bite you in the rear, don't do it. That's a general rule of thumb for me.
 
How is the type of ammo you use to stop an assailant any more damning than the fact you're a firearms enthusiast with multiple firearms you own and shoot?
 
I try to think about the other side of the story, the side that's going to be made against you.

It's going to be hard enough to get through all the court crap even with a clean, clear, evidence filled defense on your side. The family coming against you just lost their loved one in a gun fight, and families in that situation have quite the knack of painting stories of a "pure, innocent child who wouldn't hurt a fly!" The attorney coming against you probably specializes in anti-gun; that's probably his/her largest source for cases! Then, to add salt on the wound, they were gunned down by a Judge or a Governer or a Peacemaker, "loaded with evil intent with a round named after death"...

It's just not worth the overinflated price
 
The whole object is for you to survive the gunfight. I use my own reloads to increase my odds of survival doing less is rediculous.
 
I try to think about the other side of the story, the side that's going to be made against you.
Click to expand...

The anti-gunners count on people to feel that way. In fact, maybe you should just give that right to bear arms, as it would make everyone feel all better.

Honestly, it isn't the name of the ammo or the gun that will be on trial; it will be you and whether you used good judgement in the face of a threat.
 
To be fair... This is more a problem for those living in states with a history of anti-gun law making, or with a large population who oppose guns.

So you can take that into account. If you feel your area is gun friendly enough to prevent the frivolous from rearing it's head.


"might as well give up your 2nd" is a bit hyperbole... While the overall sentiment is good, the fact that too many very good HP rounds are available (like HST, critical defense, etc) to warrant loading up some questionably effective "death-o-matic 9000 ++P+++" rounds, that just the name of, can be used to paint you as looking to kill not defend.
 
stagdpanther said:
How is the type of ammo you use to stop an assailant any more damning than the fact you're a firearms enthusiast with multiple firearms you own and shoot?
Click to expand...

Discussion of type of ammo from a lawyer here:

http://blog.cheaperthandirt.com/law-shield-ammo-choice-matter-court/

Evans: If you have been forced into the court system after you have used your gun and are relying on a justification defense, such as self-defense, a prosecuting attorney may attempt to argue that, because you used a certain ammunition, that you were looking for trouble. However, a competent defense attorney should be able to explain that a gun is just a tool, and you simply used the best tool to defend yourself.
Click to expand...

I don't like having to depend on words like "should" in a courtroom. Since the type of ammo you carry is actually very irrelevant to your effectiveness with your weapon, I carry the same ammo as the local sheriff's department.
 
Before we get too far off track, the name isn't the worst thing about this ammo. There have been a number of similar rounds (Glaser and MagSafe come to mind). The main drawbacks to this type of ammunition are lack of penetration and cost. I remember stories of early Glaser Safety Slugs being defeated by a heavy leather jacket. Remember, there is no such thing as a magic bullet. Count me among those who consider the stuff to be nothing more than an overpriced novelty.
 
Before we get too far off track, the name isn't the worst thing about this ammo. There have been a number of similar rounds (Glaser and MagSafe come to mind). The main drawbacks to this type of ammunition are lack of penetration and cost. I remember stories of early Glaser Safety Slugs being defeated by a heavy leather jacket. Remember, there is no such thing as a magic bullet. Count me among those who consider the stuff to be nothing more than an overpriced novelty.
__________________
Good judgment comes from experience, but most of my experience comes from bad judgment.
Click to expand...
I agree with this--and I also agree that it is likely that if you have to shoot somebody the potential is great that you will end up in court being attacked from every angle possible--though it really depends on the area you live in--I suspect a shoot in an area that advocates "stand your ground" it would be a lot harder to prosecute in a fairly obvious life-threatening self-defense case--especially if it's a home invasion. The pursuit of a bullet that "doesn't kill but incapacitates" is a tough thing when it meets up with the realities of ballistics and the complexities of barrier variables and target's mental/physical state I would think. Sometimes the weapon you may need to use is whatever is at hand with whatever cartridge is in the well. Since everything we say here and anywhere on the net is databased in perpetuity--I would also clearly state that I sincerely hope I never have to draw a weapon on a human being ever, and would only do so in a situation in which I believe the threat of serious bodily injury or death is imminent.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top