"assault rifle" for home defense = legal issues?

6

6fthook

Joined
Dec 1, 2009
Messages
20
Likes
3
Location
CT
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
To start, I'm not asking what is better for home defense, just wondering about the legal issues.

With so many anti gun and sue happy people and lawyers these days I've been thinking; which would be easier to defend in court and not go to jail:


1. Someone breaks into your house and you fear for your family's lives. You kill the person with a shotgun.

2. Someone breaks into your house and you fear for your family's lives. You kill the person with an "assault rifle" like an ar-15, ak47 type, etc.

3. Someone breaks into your house and you fear for your family's lives. You kill the person with a handgun.


Keep in mind, each situation is exactly the same..just different firearm.


In my mind if you use number 2, the opposing lawyer could show a picture of the weapon to the jury and argue that the weapon you used is and "assault weapon" way too overboard for home defense, etc. And since there are so many people who are ignorant to firearms, the jury may see his/her point.

Any opinions and criticisms are welcome!



EDIT: By saying "assault rifle" I mean what the general public who know nothing about firearms sees as an "assault rifle", not the actual definition of one.
 
Last edited:
MassMark said:
Here comes someone with the "proper definition" of assault rifle...Wait for it...3, 2, 1....
Click to expand...

Well I know what the law defines as an assault rifle, but what I'm talking about is what the general public who don't know firearms considers an assault rifle by what they see. They see a weapon that looks "scary" like military rifles which are used to kill
 
ar will create a lot of holes on your wall. stay with the pistol lol. and Use the ar when he is outside lol !!! it is just a joke. :D all you need is a weapon + good aim. good weapon but bad shot is useless.
 
Timber said:
in MA you better kill them with your safe keys / combination, or you're going up the river for having violated safe storage laws. everything else is moot.
Click to expand...

I suspect the appropriate term is "irrelevant;" not moot.

I also suspect the observation is in utter derogation of the two statutes regarding home defense.
 
Oh and to answer the OP - I would try to discuss where the burlgar's life-path had taken a turn for the worse and see if perhaps with a little support and companionship they could turn things around...

Guns are evil and their only purpose is to kill people...
 
cekim said:
She has plenty of minions to handle the gritty details of filing nuisance and generally abusing her office...
Click to expand...

marine-slap.gif
 
I would say you have even bigger issues if you need to think about it. I think a good rule of thumb is if you are truly in fear of your life, the last thing you will be thinking of is what the jury will think. So at that time I would use whatever I can most effectively and not give two sh*ts about the jury. I'll worry about the legal aspect once the threat is eliminated and my family is safe.
 
6fthook said:
In my mind if you use number 2, the opposing lawyer could show a picture of the weapon to the jury and argue that the weapon you used is and "assault weapon" way too overboard for home defense, etc. And since there are so many people who are ignorant to firearms, the jury may see his/her point.

Any opinions and criticisms are welcome!
Click to expand...

A good shoot is a good shoot and a bad shoot is a bad shoot, at least from a criminal law point of view. You are either justified in your use of deadly
force or you are not.

Everything else is Ayoobism/fumes, and conjecture. An anti gun DA will still try to paint you as a "murderer" even if you kill the BG with an O/U shotgun that has ducks engraved on the side of it, so IMO it doesn't matter much.

Let's put it this way- you won't catch me basing the choice of a defensive firearm on some hypothetical BS on how it might be "perceived" in court. There are bigger things you should worry about, like how secure your house is, etc.

-Mike
 
Please, please, please stop this crap. You're being a tool and a troll. What exactly makes you think that you'd be subject to criminal prosecution for doing something legal like defending yourself in your home. (Or is CT different from MA????) We have many, many examples of people suffering NO criminal jeopardy from doing what you're talking about. And we have NO examples of people being subject to criminal prosecution for the straight forward defense of their homes and families.

Please stop feeding this erroneous belief that people are routinely prosecuted for simply defending themselves. You're reading too much Ayoob.

Disclaimer: if you're talking about civil litigation all bets are off. You can get sued for wrongful death if a home invader trips on your cheap throw rug and impales himself on one of those tacky candle stick holders you got at the Pottery Barn.
 
Knuckle Dragger said:
Please, please, please stop this crap. You're being a tool and a troll.
Click to expand...

FWIW I think you're being a little bit harsh on the guy here. A "Troll" implies malicious intent to disrupt something, and I certainly don't think that's the case here.

It's very easy for someone to think what he expressed, especially if all he's ever dealt with is whatever the gun rags have prattled on about, or even some of the "less informed" gun boards on the internet. With all of the garbage info on this topic floating around, it's easy to come to the wrong conclusions if one does not scrutinize the information they are seeing.

-Mike
 
6fthook said:
To start, I'm not asking what is better for home defense, just wondering about the legal issues.

With so many anti gun and sue happy people and lawyers these days I've been thinking; which would be easier to defend in court and not go to jail:


1. Someone breaks into your house and you fear for your family's lives. You kill the person with a shotgun.

2. Someone breaks into your house and you fear for your family's lives. You kill the person with an "assault rifle" like an ar-15, ak47 type, etc.

3. Someone breaks into your house and you fear for your family's lives. You kill the person with a handgun.


Keep in mind, each situation is exactly the same..just different firearm.


In my mind if you use number 2, the opposing lawyer could show a picture of the weapon to the jury and argue that the weapon you used is and "assault weapon" way too overboard for home defense, etc. And since there are so many people who are ignorant to firearms, the jury may see his/her point.

Any opinions and criticisms are welcome!



EDIT: By saying "assault rifle" I mean what the general public who know nothing about firearms sees as an "assault rifle", not the actual definition of one.
Click to expand...

Ok, Im guessin' #3 (Handgun)
Try to avoid "Space Age" plastic guns,this can make a jury uneasy.
When blasting the intruder stick with an all metal pistol,a REVOLVER would be great!
Yes a wheel gun is best for droppin' the bad guy in your home.
Get a .357 snubbie (Ruger or S&W),practice with .38sp.,
keep it loaded with.38+P in your nightstand "On the Ready".
You also have the .357 option for bear or say if SHTF.
..just my .02,hope it helps
 
wow I didn't realize that I'd be bashed by asking for opinions regarding a subject that I know little about. Thanks for the help anyways.
 
6fthook said:
wow I didn't realize that I'd be bashed by asking for opinions regarding a subject that I know little about. Thanks for the help anyways.
Click to expand...
You are welcome... [laugh]

You may soon come to recognize that you stepped in a pile of doo-doo aka "what would you do?".

Hypothetical "shoot-no-shoot" situations discussed on the web which:

a. Descend rapidly into madness
b. Involve statements of intent in a legally messy situations which should never be made in a public venue which can and will be used against you in a court of law
c. Generally demonstrate the absurdity of the human condition and legal system specifically...

So, don't take it personally - just wash your shoe off and continue on a little wiser... [laugh]
 
cekim said:
You are welcome... [laugh]

You may soon come to recognize that you stepped in a pile of doo-doo aka "what would you do?".

Hypothetical "shoot-no-shoot" situations discussed on the web which:

a. Descend rapidly into madness
b. Involve statements of intent in a legally messy situations which should never be made in a public venue which can and will be used against you in a court of law
c. Generally demonstrate the absurdity of the human condition and legal system specifically...

So, don't take it personally - just wash your shoe off and continue on a little wiser... [laugh]
Click to expand...

haha yeah I realized I just opened a can of worms here by asking a question like this. Live and learn I guess
 

Similar threads

Finally. Someone with intelligence.
Replies
4
Views
525
LT5
L
Red Raven Defense
Replies
19
Views
504
RPLHVAC
R
Californians Arming Up for Self-Defense as Illegals Flood into Cities
Replies
23
Views
460
mothybee
mothybee
CO Democrats’ ‘Assault Weapons’ Legislation Bans 9mm Pistols With Threaded Barrels
Replies
0
Views
117
Reptile
Reptile
Smith and wesson website issues
Replies
23
Views
379
M1911
M1911
Back
Top Bottom