civil liability with hollow point ammo

[silverado427 10,677]

When asked "why" you use hollow points, NEVER mention stopping power. 

I use HP ammo for safety reasons.  I believe there is less of a risk to my family from over penetration and going through walls.  I believe that is the same reason why law enforcement uses hollow point. 

+1 

[Joeyd6 0]

For 9 mm if you can find it, the Winchester Ranger Q4364 or RA9B.....the 9 mm 147 grain bonded JHP is my choice.  And at $250 a case its only .50 a round.

[Duppie 73]

I've had excellent results with the 117 grain HP's by Aguila that I get infrequently from AIM..... $15.95/50 but shipping tends to be a little expensive.

[vladtepes 1,060]

When deadly force is justified, the method used is NOT an issue.  Not in NJ, NY or any other state.  You can drown them hit with a  frying pan, use a pen, a Swiss Army Knife, run them over with a car, rock to the head, etc....  The method used has no bearing on a civil suit.  

 

Albeit a civil case has a much lower burden of proof for a judgment, it is still about the death, not tool used. 

 

 

THIS...

 

I really really really hate misinformation... 

If there is not LAW to support the statement.. then it is just a bunch of BS.. 

[vladtepes 1,060]

When asked "why" you use hollow points, NEVER mention stopping power. 

I use HP ammo for safety reasons.  I believe there is less of a risk to my family from over penetration and going through walls.  I believe that is the same reason why law enforcement uses hollow point. 

 

why would someone ask you why you used a certain ammo..  that is not relevant to the situation at all.. 

[TheDon 3]

This has always been my reasoning too. It is astonishing to me that for some reason HPs are regarded as more evil. I know living in an apartment I would hope all the neighbors used them!

 

Won't a ballistic vest theoretically work better against an HP too?

 

I the eyes of a civil attorney, hollow points are "designed to kill," FMJ are "military bullets."  If you shoot with anything other than lead wad-cutters, you are going to be challenged on why you chose the ammunition you chose.  And the family of the criminal you shoot will always argue that if you had chosen to use another type of ammo, their punk-a$$ed kid would still be alive. 

[Se9 0]

The criminal also had a choice

I don't really think the DA is going to bring charges if the shooting is justified

The distances inside the home if u shoot the intruder in the chest with HP or FMJ more then not he will get the same result

All bulletts are designed to kill some faster then others

[boo 6]

I just took the Low Light course today at GFH and was advised that if you're ever involved in a HD shoot at home, tell the police you feared for your life and responded with deadly force, but absolutely not to provide ANY details about the incident without first talking to a  lawyer.

[vladtepes 1,060]

Does anyone have any links to any instances where the type of bullet was an issue.... This all just sounds like more fear based urban legend fear mongering to me..

 

Oh better use a simple shotgun.... Using a modern military style gun will get you sued...

Oh better use this ammo or that ammo....

[Joeyd6 0]

I just took the Low Light course today at GFH and was advised that if you're ever involved in a HD shoot at home, tell the police you feared for your life and responded with deadly force, but absolutely not to provide ANY details about the incident without first talking to a  lawyer.

 

And another bunch of mis-information.  I love how these guys are all trained and taught on what to say themselves, and then they screw they average gun owner in education.  YOU SAY NOTHING.  YOU REQUEST AN AMBULANCE AND GO TO THE HOSPITAL FOR SHOCK/TRAUMA AND RINGING IN YOUR EARS!   And if you are dumb enough not to, you saw one word, "LAWYER."  No need to say anything else, including you feared for you life.  They get 72 hours to recover and speak with their attorney without saying a word.  So should you!

[vladtepes 1,060]

And another bunch of mis-information.  I love how these guys are all trained and taught on what to say themselves, and then they screw they average gun owner in education.  YOU SAY NOTHING.  YOU REQUEST AN AMBULANCE AND GO TO THE HOSPITAL FOR SHOCK/TRAUMA AND RINGING IN YOUR EARS!   And if you are dumb enough not to, you saw one word, "LAWYER."  No need to say anything else, including you feared for you life.  They get 72 hours to recover and speak with their attorney without saying a word.  So should you!

Granted it is a totally different state... But just last week...

 

An armed civilian got involved in an armed robbery...

He stopped two criminals coming out of a store.... Struggle occurred and shot them both dead...

Cooperated with the police...

 

The outcome....

"This man is a hero... No charges will be filed"

[Joeyd6 0]

If you shoot with anything other than lead wad-cutters, you are going to be challenged on why you chose the ammunition you chose.  And the family of the criminal you shoot will always argue that if you had chosen to use another type of ammo, their punk-a$$ed kid would still be alive.

 

No you are not.

 

And you or whoever is filling your head doesn't understand the civil court system. If you get used by the heirs in civil court, they are suing you for a financial recovery the value of the perps life had he lived to hide normal life expectancy. Their lawyer will not argue the method of use of force used, especially if no criminal charges were filed or you were found not guilty. The matter at hand is if you wrongfully killed them and caused them a loss......to which you argue the perps negligence and your right to self defense.

 

Using your logic, every pedestrian could get more money because they were hit by somebody driving a pick-up instead of a subcompact car since it can do more damage. They don't! See how ridiculous? There is nothing in any of the case law databases, including Westlaw, on any cases where in NJ this was ever mentioned or argued. By the way, I graduated law school and have some idea what I am talking about.

[vjf915 456]

The criminal also had a choice

I don't really think the DA is going to bring charges if the shooting is justified

The distances inside the home if u shoot the intruder in the chest with HP or FMJ more then not he will get the same result

All bulletts are designed to kill some faster then others

Being charged by the DA isn't what's being discussed right now, that's a criminal case.  I've been out of the game for a little while since I moved out of NJ, but from what I remember NJ has protection from criminal prosecution in the event of a legal self defense shooting, but no protection against civil.  As stated before, the burden of proof for a civil case is lower than it is for a criminal case.  Also, if I remember correctly (Joeyd6, please correct me if I'm wrong) a criminal case requires a unanimous decision by the jury, whereas a civil case only requires a majority decision.

[DaveR 42]

IMHO, use whatever you local or state police use.

 

Makes it harder to prove any nefarious intent.

 

No need to state reason for use as stopping power, safety, whatever....

 

If its good enough for them, its good enough for me, thats why I used it.

[mipafox 438]

When deadly force is justified, the method used is NOT an issue.  Not in NJ, NY or any other state.  You can drown them hit with a  frying pan, use a pen, a Swiss Army Knife, run them over with a car, rock to the head, etc....  The method used has no bearing on a civil suit.

 

Albeit a civil case has a much lower burden of proof for a judgment, it is still about the death, not tool used.

When deadly force is justified, the JURY is the issue if you are required to face them. And I am no expert on the matter, but the people that are say it is commonly accepted that if you kill with a knife in self defense your chances with a jury (if it gets that far) are much worse than if you kill with a firearm.

 

 

 

Does anyone have any links to any instances where the type of bullet was an issue.... This all just sounds like more fear based urban legend fear mongering to me..

 

http://www.haroldfishdefense.org/

[vladtepes 1,060]

 

http://www.haroldfishdefense.org/

 

 

I am not sure where it talks about the type of ammo being an issue? I read briefly and searched a little but dont see it?

[mipafox 438]

 

I am not sure where it talks about the type of ammo being an issue? I read briefly and searched a little but dont see it?

 

 

He was roasted by the prosecution for carrying a powerful 10mm with "hollowpoint bullets" since it met he was obviously looking to shoot somebody dead. Out in the wilderness. And that was the straw that broke the camel's back for the jury.

[vladtepes 1,060]

   

 

He was roasted by the prosecution for carrying a powerful 10mm with "hollowpoint bullets" since it met he was obviously looking to shoot somebody dead. Out in the wilderness. And that was the straw that broke the camel's back for the jury.

 

ah I didn't read that part at all.. it seemed like more of an issue of the guy he killed being unarmed and all that.. 

[Bob2222 316]

Since 2006, after the conviction of retired school teacher Harold Fish in Arizona for second degree murder during a self-defense shooting, some CCW holders in the United States^[who?] have elected to switch from carrying hollow-point bullets, and especially 10mm Auto caliber weapons with perceived higher one-shot stopping power, to carrying smaller caliber weapons^{[citation needed]}. Fish's conviction for killing a homeless man with a history of dangerous violent behavior and mental instability who attacked Fish while hiking on a remote trail, was obtained through a jury trial by stressing that Fish overreacted, through choosing to use the increased stopping power of 10 mm hollow point bullets. State law in Arizona has subsequently been changed, such that the state now has the burden to prove that a self-defense shooting was not in self-defense, whereas the burden previously, before the Fish incident, was that the shooter on trial had to prove that the shooting was in fact, done in self-defense. The conviction has since been thrown out by the Arizona Court of Appeals. CCW training classes often advise the use of bullets that are identical to those used by local police, in type (FMJ or hollow point) and caliber, to prevent an overreaction prosecution.^[11][12]

 

 

Fort Dix drywall penetration test of .223 ammunition conducted by the New Jersey Division of Criminal Justice in 2003:

 

http://www.state.nj.us/lps/dcj/njpdresources/pdfs/wallboard_test.pdf

 

They tested 55gr Federal FMJ, 69gr Federal OTM, 60gr Hornady TAP, and 55gr Remington SP. Each was tested out of a 19" barrel and a 14.5" barrel.

 

Like everything, "it all depends" -- but yes, loaded with the correct ammunition, a .223 AR carbine could be a very good choice for home defense.

 

Loaded with the appropriate ammunition, an AR carbine has favorable drywall penetration characteristics similar to a 12-gauge shotgun loaded with 00 buckshot, compared to most handgun rounds. IMO, the AR has less recoil, is easier for a smaller female to shoot accurately and is the more ergonomic of the two choices.

 

....so as a double whammy -- a very good choice of firearm and ammunition for home defense would be the combination that would would look worst to a jury.

[Mikeythumbs 1]

for 9mm, Are you guys running the critical defense of the critical duty (which is +P)?

 

They actually make Duty in regular and +P I have the +P in my glock I use defense in my 1911 because they relaesed the duty in 45 but i have yet to be able to find any. The new one I need to try is Federal Guard Dog. It looks like FMJ RN but it has a polymer built into the slug that lets it expand like a HP. I have one box in .45 I will run it through just in case but being the same profile as FMJ it should heve no feeding issues. They say thet make it in 9 and 40 also but hell if i have been able to find it. I just found the .45 but only bought one box till i can test it

[GRIZ 3,369]

 

 

He was roasted by the prosecution for carrying a powerful 10mm with "hollowpoint bullets" since it met he was obviously looking to shoot somebody dead. Out in the wilderness. And that was the straw that broke the camel's back for the jury.

  

ah I didn't read that part at all.. it seemed like more of an issue of the guy he killed being unarmed and all that..

 

IMO you both are correct. The guy Fish shot was unarmed and shot with hollowpoints.

 

However, this case proves my point. If the prosecutor ever gets to the point he's bringing up what kind of ammo you used, you are already in much more serious trobule than your choice of ammo. The plantiff in a civil case will most assuredly bring up your ammo selection to bring the preponderance of evidence to the 50.001% in their favor. The big issue in a civil case, as has been noted, is did you "justifiably" kill the other guy.

 

Even being found not guilty in a criminal trial has some bearing on a civil trial. Remember OJ? Not being indicted and not standing trial at all is to your benefit in a civil case.