Punisher Skull on a Self Defense Firearm

[Joe in PNG]

This thread should be a sticky, so far as I'm concerned. Too much awesome information.

For the sake of discussion, let's flip the question: is there anything you could do to a firearm that would be beneficial under the scrutiny of a self-defense shooting?

Heavier trigger? FMJ rounds? 'My Little Pony' stickers?

To make the question more specific, let's make it a "standard" PF owned Gen 4 Glock 19 that will likely have a SCD, nights sights, and a NY-1/ "-" trigger combo.

[Sero Sed Serio]

This thread should be a sticky, so far as I'm concerned. Too much awesome information.

For the sake of discussion, let's flip the question: is there anything you could do to a firearm that would be beneficial under the scrutiny of a self-defense shooting?

Heavier trigger? FMJ rounds? 'My Little Pony' stickers?

Can't think of anything modifications-wise. The use of hollow point ammo was a big deal in the Fish case in Coconino County AZ (retired teacher shoots crazy transient who charges him as he's ending a long hike), but my suggestion be for ammo is find out if a local LE agency carries that's on Dr. GKR's list. Kind of takes the wind out of the "evil man killer bullets" case theme if you ask the case agent to pop their mag out on cross examination and show the nice jury the boolits. This is also reason # 764 why I would never carry RIP ammo or some other flashy "it kills their soul or your money back" snake oil brand.

[Mitchell, Esq.]

This thread should be a sticky, so far as I'm concerned. Too much awesome information.

For the sake of discussion, let's flip the question: is there anything you could do to a firearm that would be beneficial under the scrutiny of a self-defense shooting?

Heavier trigger? FMJ rounds? 'My Little Pony' stickers?

You can set things up so that you are able to present the best picture of yourself possible.

As to training –Self Defense is based on the idea that you made the reasonable decision. What is a reasonable decision in this case? One that is subjectively & objectively reasonable. Assuming the decision you made is based on rational & honestly held beliefs use of force was needed, subjective is covered.

Objective reasonability…you need to be able to convince other people your decision was rational & prudent; therefore, training needs to be as contextually appropriate & non-controversial as possible with the best pedigree you can get. It is hard to argue with excellence. It is hard to say your decision is not reasonable when you acted in conformity with “The Textbook(s)” as taught by “The Expert(s)”.

If your decision process & actions are in conformity with those who are respected on the issue it becomes a very easy sell.

We expect people in dangerous situations to act with reasonable care (that is a buzz word for lawyers). If you act with reasonable care – as evidenced by your decisions & actions conforming to “The Textbook(s)” as taught by “The Expert(s)” it makes the decision by a police officer/prosecutor to say to his boss that the incident is kosher – notwithstanding the awesome gruesomeness of how well you did in packing the morgue – that much easier.

After all, if your actions were in conformity with the law, everyone who matters has the ass covered – right?

Because this is all about ass covering.

You think a prosecutor in a staff meeting will say “Boss, I think it’s questionable…but I’m inclined to let it go because…reasons & things…plus, I’m a gun guy! NRA 4 Life, yo!”
Nope. He’s going to need to cover his ass.
You need to make it easy for him.

You need to make his case to his boss for him.

You need to be able to let him tell his boss, “Based on the forgoing, the shooter acted in conformity with the applicable law as well as best practices. Accordingly, I recommend this case not proceed as no criminal action is present…” and have him able to defend his choice.

Pedigree…what is that?
Well, who’s respected? For what?
Shooting is only part of it.
Force on force & phycology for decision making.
Martial arts – who’s teaching realistic things so that you can say “Yes, I know how bad being on the ground can be. I train in…and it still sucks because I know the disadvantages of being hit/knocked down/otherwise disadvantaged…”

Who is non-controversial? I’m not naming names (Please – don’t go there…) but there are people in the industry who, while they may be good on the field, I just don’t want as an expert because…baggage.

Equipment – Got a reason for that modification? Does it help sell your case? What does it do for you?

Does it make you shoot faster…or increase your visual feedback allowing you more information & time to process it so you can make a better decision?
Does anything you do to your gun make top people in the field look at you as if to say, “Huh…wut?”

Reasonable people can disagree.
Reasonable people WILL disagree on a lot of things, but if a consensus of experts would look at something, then say, “I wouldn’t do that shit if I was you…”

Well.

Who decides what is reasonable?
Ultimately, the po-po & the prosecutor.
Who do they consult?

Experts. If experts look at something you did to that gun saying “Nah, dawg! You roll that way…I’m gonna not go with you…” (Backing away SLOWLY from the nutball…) you probably shouldn’t do it.

Again, reasonable people disagree. If Tom Givens is saying you don’t need tritium because in his student’s experience in 50+ incidents he says they aren’t needed, but (I’m reaching for a name…Craig? We’ll use him…but you can use Ayooob...or, well...Clint Smith...someone...) says that they are a necessity because in his incidents & all the police shootings he’s investigated show that guns demands tritium…you have a reasonable disagreement based on data.

Generally speaking (I hate that term…) if you have to sell something hard, it is shit.

I don’t need to hard sell a guy with training within the past 2 years from a reputable shooting school run by a non-controversial instructor who is using equipment that is not illegal to carry in good working order which is modified within the scope of normal modifications (Glock stock trigger changed to NY-1/3.5#, M&P with an Apex Duty/Carry kit/1911 with carry package from Colt or a reputable shop) who didn’t set up/provoke a situation, attempted to avoid trouble but then defended himself.

Steak & Red wine. Sells itself.
You just put that shit out there and people eat it.

If you need to do mental contortions or take people down a twisted path of “Because…well…” to explain why something was done…
Roast cat.
You can package that as “Authentic Chinese Food!” all you want.
I’m not paying for it. If given it, I won’t eat it. Sell it – yeah, not on commission.

If you do things that alienate others, expect a reaction.

I once argued with a client over the idea “But it wasn’t illegal!” – My response was, “In family court it doesn’t matter. It only matters if the Judge likes you…or, more simply, if you didn’t alienate him.”

Act like a freak, get treated like one.

Freaks don’t get to slam the prom queen. Freaks are socially isolated because nobody wants to be friends with them.

You want to slam the prom queen.
(Or, for the females, the prom king. Unless it is the prom queen you are after…or for men who want the prom king…forget it…you know what I mean...)

You want to be a freak who shot someone?

OK...

Then you get a prosecutor who is convinced he needs to work on that case because he's taking his job to protect the public seriously...

Looking at you as a threat.

He has resources he's going to throw at the case. Police officers who have went to "The Top Schools for Guns" as well as attended State & Federal training on "How to be a good witness" & "Connecting with the jury - a LE Seminar for testimony."

[Hambo]

Then you get a prosecutor who is convinced he needs to work on that case because he's taking his job to protect the public seriously...

Or is running against his boss for the top job...or is running for judge and wants a high profile win...or...well, you get it.

Again, thanks for the free consultation.

[Mitchell, Esq.]

Or is running against his boss for the top job...or is running for judge and wants a high profile win...or...well, you get it.

Again, thanks for the free consultation.

Ah.

Prosecutors in my area aren't elected so I didn't think of that, but yeah.

That too...

[BehindBlueI's]

I had a case years back where I went to bat for the shooter, who's actions were actually illegal.

A female passenger on the back of a motorcycle was OC. A male teen attempted a surprise gun grab, but did not defeat the retention of the holster. The male teen (along with two additional male teens) then beat feet. There was no assault, no threat, no weapon displayed. Essentially, a purse grab from behind but going for a gun instead of a purse.

The passenger dismounts and fires several rounds at the teens. She hits no one. Her back drop was a 3 story apartment building, which was not damaged.

Her actions were not legal. There was no imminent threat, she did not act reasonably, etc. The prosecutor wanted her charged for criminal recklessness. I pushed back and got it no-filed because she acted foolishly but not with malice. She cooperated with the investigation, she didn't realize what she did was illegal, and she simply presented herself as someone who was...foolish but not mean. She simply acted without thinking. She acted criminally, mind you, but without thinking.

If she'd have hit someone, she was bought and paid for. If she'd damaged something, she was probably bought and paid for. But, she only shot dirt. I was able to go to bat and argue it was not in the best interest of justice to prosecute the victim, we had no witnesses we could make testify as the teens had not stuck around to make a report and the person with her was her husband, and that I had been able to educate her that what she did was both stupid and had great potential consequence, thus her risk to the public safety was minimal.

I would not have went to bat for someone who presented themselves as a vigilante or an asshole. There is no public record of the reasoning that this case was not filed. There is no "case law", etc. However I am telling you the ONLY REASON this person was not charged is they presented themselves in such a way the detective (me) viewed them favorably enough to push for a no-file. This is the way shit really works.

**Edit**
If you looked at the official reason this was a "no file", it is "evidentiary issues". That's sort-of-kind-of true if you squint. We had a confession, shell casings, and a gun that would match those shell casings...even the slow kids on the jury would piece that together. There's literally no way, other than me or the screening prosecutors telling the story, that you could know the "real reason" this wasn't filed.

[Mitchell, Esq.]

There is also the issue of cases which are not prosecuted being subject to erasure in some jurisdictions.

In Connecticut, a police report which does not result in prosecution is destroyed after a certain period of time. Literally there would be no record of the incident so even if somebody was looking for incidents which did not result in prosecution they would have to limit their search to those files which are still available at that time.

[VolGrad]

I don't feel like reading this whole thread but here's my general take - If you ask a question like this it generally means you already know the answer.

[Jeep]

For the sake of discussion, let's flip the question: is there anything you could do to a firearm that would be beneficial under the scrutiny of a self-defense shooting?

'My Little Pony' stickers?

You mean everyone here doesn't already have My Little Pony stickers on their carry pistols?

Might go better with the jury than a Punisher sticker, though you might get a few odd looks.

[Peally]

I don't feel like reading this whole thread but here's my general take - If you ask a question like this it generally means you already know the answer.

I'm amazed threads like these go past 2 pages.