I make the TFB Youtube Big Time

[Glenn E. Meyer]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gUcF5KhtQM

James goes over my study! How about that!

[Flamingo]

You should maybe talk to James for a follow on video.

[Totem Polar]

^^^Yes. #wouldclick

[Guerrero]

Wow. Surprised at those results.

Reminded of something DB once said, "A 'jury of your peers' isn't a jury of your peers, it's second-grade teachers and bus drivers who have been educated [on guns and shooting] from television."

[Shawn Dodson]

On August 25, 2020, Kyle Rittenhouse shot 3 people with an AR15, two of them fatally, during a night of civil unrest in Kenosha, WI. All of the shootings were captured on video.

Despite all the negative media, all the negative political fallout, all the prosecutorial pressure, etc., he was totally acquitted because his legal defense team skillfully presented not only the facts of each shooting to the jury, but also fully explained his reasonable perceptions that led to each decision to shoot.

[Patrick Taylor]

Location , location , location.....if he had shot them in another county/state he might be in prison now.

[JCN]

I didn’t realize James Reeve was a lawyer!

My first home defense long gun was a Tavor because it wasn’t a scary AR for that reason.

I only own one AR really and it has a 22LR CMMG barrel in it.

Of course an MCX is functionally equivalent but hey, the gun is grey instead of black so not as scary!

[Paul Blackburn]

What's the consensus on US Law Shield, CCW Safe, and similar offerings?

[Hambo]

On August 25, 2020, Kyle Rittenhouse shot 3 people with an AR15, two of them fatally, during a night of civil unrest in Kenosha, WI. All of the shootings were captured on video.

Despite all the negative media, all the negative political fallout, all the prosecutorial pressure, etc., he was totally acquitted because his legal defense team skillfully presented not only the facts of each shooting to the jury, but also fully explained his reasonable perceptions that led to each decision to shoot.

He had a lot of money available for his defense. The average person here has one attorney and no one else. Voir dire lasts for at most a couple of hours. I saw one case in which two sets of attorneys had to use the same jury pool. Case #1 picked first, and Case #2 got to pick from the leftovers. If you're charged and go to trial, the loss rate for defense attorneys (PDs or private) is >90% regardless of the criminal charges. If you live where you're going to be charged criminally for legitimate self-defense in your home, you're already fucked.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Shawn, unfortunately you post only a surface appreciation of the issue and the study.

1. You and and many others make the mistake of thinking the factor is an absolute. You will get convicted if you use an AR - OMG!

2. That is not the case. If you read the study as presented in TJE, it states: On the verdict side, the percent of guilty judgments was approximately 65% for the AR-15 vs. 45% for the Ruger.

Thus, a large proportion of the mock jurors found the defendant not guilty, so the issue was the comparative rate and not an absolute. Many just don't get this.

3. Kyle's case is arguing from one anecdote that is quite different. He had clear video of being attacked. Unlike ours. He had video of a guy who admits having a gun - not like ours. Our scenario was much more ambiguous and based on legal discussions of SD and other research. It is not comparable and Kyle doesn't count unless you fall into the OMG - it's an absolute principle.

So to push this - the DC Sniper used an AR. The prosecution at opening made a big show of putting the gun together. OMG - if only the snipe used an Mini or maybe Grandpa's 30-30, he would have walked. No - that was not the case.

4. The models of jury processing suggest a summation of factors with those presented at opening, perhaps setting a cognitive agenda that focuses selective information processing for the rest of the presentations.

Some folks don't get the idea of a factor and want it to be an absolute process they can deny in a subconscious RKBA denial defense mechanism. Nope - it's a factor.

We just have to go back to Goetz in the subway. He used a revolver but with HP rounds and a tactical holster. He beat the shooting charge based on a brilliant defense but was convicted on the gun charge. IIRC, the lawyers chose not to fight that on RKBA grounds against the NYC ban. The jurors said they did consider the ammo and holster as motivational evidence of 'blood lust' (plus his big mouth) but discarded that as relevant after the SD case was strong. It was a factor of discussion. However, they did consider it as motivational in the carry charge and went for guilty. The judge considered it in determining sentence.

It is frustrating to read what are more emotional responses to the study - I had some fat fuck at our local gun club, where the president asked me to present it , go off on me being a gun banner and the ChiComs and UN will be coming down the road for his gun - despite me blazing away with an AR at matches.

Hope this clears up misconceptions. If apperance doesn't count - I recall a case where an officer was tried for shooting an intellectually challenged guy - details ambiguous. In his official picture - white sidewalls and a fearsome glare. On the stand, nicely grown out and styled hair, three piece suit and put on half granny glasses to read reports. WILL MY HAIRCUT SEND ME TO PRISON?