From an old research interest of mine on appearance. I've read a case (not Fish) and confidential where in an ambiguous shoot, the jury clearly discussed the use of hollow point bullets by the defendant. Initial discussions by the jury (as later related) were that the choice of ammo must indicate intention to kill and thus guilt. Later the SD aspects finally won the day against the most serious charge but the lesser charge actual sentence given by the judge was influenced by the use of HP rounds (judge said so).
Thus, I see this ad, which type I've mentioned before for this company: https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/...wilson-combat/
Deadliest Bullet on the Planet!
Contrast to :
I know the standard argument is to pick something used by the law in your area. A counter is: SO - you think you are police officer!Critical Defense®
Personal Protection / Concealed Carry
Critical Defense® handgun ammunition was developed to provide the best performance for DEFENSIVE or PERSONAL PROTECTION SITUATIONS
However, my question is do you consider the more 'out there' rhetoric in ammo choices. Not to pick on the company or their business model. With the lawsuits over advertising (Remington), it's a thought.