Does anyone carry one of their builds?

[Alpa Chino]

<<<On December 7, 2017, after a six-week trial, a jury acquitted Brailsford of all charges.[8]>>>

Shooting of Daniel Shaver - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

“In 2021, Shaver's parents settled with the city for $1.5 million. Shaver's common-law widow, Laney Sweet, was seeking $75 million in a wrongful death lawsuit, and refused to settle at that time. In November 2022, Sweet agreed to settle her lawsuit against the city for $8 million.”

 

[Racer88]

I think it was Ayoob (again) who recommended choosing the same ammo as your local law enforcement uses.
So when a prosecutor tries to spear you for your choice to carry hollow points your lawyer has something to argue.
Just me and my opinion but carrying stuff like this is stupid in my opinion

I agree 100%. Never minding that such gimmicky ammo is unproven and possibly not as "effective." I stick with Federal HST for the most part. Used by many LEAs and a long-standing record in the field.

 

[Racer88]

“In 2021, Shaver's parents settled with the city for $1.5 million. Shaver's common-law widow, Laney Sweet, was seeking $75 million in a wrongful death lawsuit, and refused to settle at that time. In November 2022, Sweet agreed to settle her lawsuit against the city for $8 million.”

Yep. But the officer was acquitted. Mind you... his life was pretty fucked up after that. But he didn't go to prison for it. He was acquitted despite the "nasty inscription" on his rifle.

 

[Alpa Chino]

Yep. But the officer was acquitted. Mind you... his life was pretty fucked up after that. But he didn't go to prison for it. He was acquitted despite the "nasty inscription" on his rifle.

The fact that it was brought up should be enough warning.

Shoot them all, let God sort them out.

Let’s put that on a receiver.

 

[Racer88]

The fact that it was brought up should be enough warning.

Shoot them all, let God sort them out.

Let’s put that on a receiver.

Those trite expressions of bravado are simply not my style anyway.

I do like putting American flag icons or quotes from the Constitution or references to American history on my builds, though.

 

[JCinPA]

Wow! Sisyphean! I'm impressed! Love it.

Yeah, we're all over the place on this one, and understandably so. I always say you cannot judge what another person feels is being cautious. Some are more cautious than others.

 

[Racer88]

Wow! Sisyphean! I'm impressed! Love it.

Yeah, we're all over the place on this one, and understandably so. I always say you cannot judge what another person feels is being cautious. Some are more cautious than others.

Absolutely agree. And I've been equally cautious as you, like I said. But the "academic" in me ponders these questions.

 

[Alpa Chino]

Its an interesting scenario.
Let’s go a different route for a minute.
Let’s say you had to defend yourself and you used a screwdriver and the other person received fatal injuries.
Mmmm ok what’s the story?
Were you at home fixing something when you became the victim of a home invasion?
Or were you walking the street or in a place of nuisance and you were carrying the screw driver concealed?
Same improvised weapon, same outcome.

Context.
Jurisprudence deals with similar cases not exactly the same cases.
So that a (former) LEO gets acquitted from a manslaughter charge with an (aesthetically) modified duty weapon doesn’t mean that it won’t be a problem for YOU.
As a matter of fact it might be the last nail in your legal coffin.
Former cop case, jury didn’t feel it was manslaughter not because of the gun but because of loads of other evidence such as body cam footage.

Well he got off so I’ll get off

Thats a very tricky line of thinking.
Stick to the well worn beaten path and pray ( if you’re so inclined ) that you’ll have a jury with a couple people that have at least some rudimentary knowledge of firearms.

Remember the prosecutor in the Rittenhouse case?
He went on and on about how the kid used Full Metal Jacket ammo, like the Military uses to kill people.
I may be paraphrasing what he said but he went on for probably 10 minutes about the supposed extra lethality of “military grade” ammo.
Completely ignoring that the military (mostly) uses FMJ because the Convention of Geneva forbids certain types of ammo.

 

[Racer88]

So that a (former) LEO gets acquitted from a manslaughter charge with an (aesthetically) modified duty weapon doesn’t mean that it won’t be a problem for YOU.

Well he got off so I’ll get off

I never even implied the above. The case was quoted as an example of "offensive embellishments" being used against a defendant. So, I simply pointed out that it ended up not being a factor in the outcome of the trial.

Remember the prosecutor in the Rittenhouse case?
He went on and on about how the kid used Full Metal Jacket ammo, like the Military uses to kill people.
I may be paraphrasing what he said but he went on for probably 10 minutes about the supposed extra lethality of “military grade” ammo.

And once again... This guy was acquitted. It was used "against" him, but to no effect in the end. It was unsuccessful for the prosecution. He was portrayed as a "traveling vigilante," with an "assault weapon," too. That fell flat in the final outcome.

If he had used hollow points, they would have been presented as "cop killer bullets." Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

If he had a laser... bad. If he used a scope... bad. If he had NO sights... bad.

If he frequented a gun forum... bad.

If he had no firearms training... bad. If he DID get training... ALSO bad. So, do you get training, or not? Worried about how that might look?

Of course every case is different... every prosecutor is different... every jury is different... as is the judge.

We can try to navigate their constantly moving goalposts, in a futile attempt to gain some delusional "favor" from the prosecution should we be in such an unfortunate position after defending ourselves. We'll never win that contest. Ultimately it comes down to whether the use of force was legally justified.

That doesn't mean we should be careless and flippant about how we present ourselves. But I also don't think we should agonize over looking like boy scouts. I'm sure they'd find some "fault" with that, too!

 

[Bobster]

I am fortunate to live in a state (FL) that honors SYG and CG (Stand Your Ground, Castle Doctrine). The short of it is you do NOT have a "duty to retreat" if attacked at home or out and about. Someone attacks you at the gas station while you are filling up and it is shoot first, ask questions later... BUT, if the attacker backs off after you have shot him, you can NOT keep shooting him because the threat is now over.

I haven't been pulled over in quite some time probably because I drive smoothly, skillfully and lawfully. I have never volunteered my carry status because I have never been asked nor do I have to. Sheriffs, state and local police know EVERYONE is carrying so why risk an accidental discharge or other gun-related issue? I'm sure if it was a felony stop there WOULD be a need for determination of if the perp was armed with ANY weapon.

As for a "built" gun, I don't think that would matter all that much here as there are no laws prohibiting them. You can't use flechettes, Dragon's Breath or other interesting loads--I don't know about the chainsaw bullets though...

 

[Bongo Lewi]

<<<On December 7, 2017, after a six-week trial, a jury acquitted Brailsford of all charges.[8]>>>

Shooting of Daniel Shaver - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I did not know what the outcome was. Good to know and I'm glad it turned out that way. But.... the deputy probably had the legal support of his Dept or Union. If this were civilians like you or I, in similar circumstances we would be facing an incredibly expensive legal defense. Unless you were insured for that and said insurer held up their end of the agreement.

I have experimented with that type of G2 ammo @Alpa Chino posted and others like it. In many calibers and types. Including shotgun shells like dragons breath, flechette, fragmenting slugs, bolo, etc. I now carry solid, non expanding copper rounds from Underwood, ARX, or Norma in my EDC. For shotguns, mainly for home defense, I have a few of those exotic loads I mentioned but consider them last resort. I would have to load that ammo before using it, which would require that time was on my side and that the threat was so great that I needed to not only send some 00 buck to his torso but also light him on fire.

A few years ago I bought some blocks of clear ballistic gelatin and shot different ammo into it just as a learning exercise. Doing so is really not necessary or practical since you can watch experts do this online and learn just as much for free. But I did. Mainly solid copper bullets and a few of those more radical types like the G2 in the previous post. They all work as advertised.

I believe it may be an unnecessary legal risk to use defensive ammo that can be perceived as overly harsh. Our rights end with stopping a threat to defend ourselves, not shredding the guts and almost certainly killing a perpetrator.

 

[Bongo Lewi]

How you want to be perceived in court

 

[Racer88]

How you want to be perceived in court

View attachment 11611

How you will be perceived anyway:

 

[Bongo Lewi]

A little off-topic but I should have mentioned that a 16 inch block of clear ballistic gelatin will run you about $100-125. Sometimes a little cheaper. Way more fun than watching videos.

 

[JCinPA]

@Racer88 said it best. This is absolutely true.

If he had used hollow points, they would have been presented as "cop killer bullets." Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

If he had a laser... bad. If he used a scope... bad. If he had NO sights... bad.

If he frequented a gun forum... bad.

If he had no firearms training... bad. If he DID get training... ALSO bad. So, do you get training, or not? Worried about how that might look?

Of course every case is different... every prosecutor is different... every jury is different... as is the judge.

We can try to navigate their constantly moving goalposts, in a futile attempt to gain some delusional "favor" from the prosecution should we be in such an unfortunate position after defending ourselves. We'll never win that contest. Ultimately it comes down to whether the use of force was legally justified.

That doesn't mean we should be careless and flippant about how we present ourselves. But I also don't think we should agonize over looking like boy scouts. I'm sure they'd find some "fault" with that, too!

I'm wavering on carrying my subcompact build now. It's def plain vanilla. Glock complete upper, no Punisher lasered into the frame no Don't Tread on Me slide cover plate, nothing. This is it, along with the Knightfall Customs holster for it.

It should not make a difference in a legally justified lawsuit, but it may be a real problem in a civil lawsuit which are often filed even if you are not charged and prosecuted. We are knowledgeable and proud of our builds, but a jury? Whether it should matter or not it probably can.

I think I'll carry my G26 most of the time, and continue to carry this when I feel I need something smaller, but I may use my next GSSF coupon for a Glock 43 so as to eliminate a PMF as a factor at all. Like Racer said, they'll use anything against you. I just can't decide if it's advisable using this or not, I keep flipping on it in my mind.

 

[JCinPA]

Most of the jury thinks this about AR-15s. What the heck will they think about PMFs? lol

 

[Racer88]

It should not make a difference in a legally justified lawsuit, but it may be a real problem in a civil lawsuit which are often filed even if you are not charged and prosecuted.

If the use of force in self-defense is legally clear-cut... it shouldn't matter which weapon you used (as long as it's a legal weapon).

I'm wavering on carrying my subcompact build now. It's def plain vanilla. Glock complete upper,

So, it's basically a stock Glock, except the frame.

Like Racer said, they'll use anything against you. I just can't decide if it's advisable using this or not, I keep flipping on it in my mind.

It's all a matter of hedging your bets and weighing your priorities. No right or wrong answer. Personal decision, really.

 

[JCinPA]

Yeah, ultimately, it is a very personal decision, and I never question anyone else's judgment about what is cautious enough. On my carry .45 which started as a Kimber Compact CDP II before extensive modification, I removed the Swarz FP safety. Mas would think I'm nuts, but Colt still sells Series 70 no FP safety guns (I believe) and Springfield Armory doesn't use one, either. I'm comfortable with it and a drop safety is totally a non-issue when you intentionally point the gun at someone and pull the trigger.

My build should be fine. My new G26 will limit how much I carry this subcompact. I'll decide on getting a G43 later if it really bothers me.

 

[Racer88]

Yeah, ultimately, it is a very personal decision, and I never question anyone else's judgment about what is cautious enough.

If you can carry it comfortably / effectively, and you can shoot it competently... that's what matters, eh?

On my carry .45 which started as a Kimber Compact CDP II before extensive modification, I removed the Swarz FP safety.

See... I would think removing a safety would be a legal red flag. Though, I have no idea what a "Swarz FP safety" is.

 

[JCinPA]

A few decades ago everyone got very worried about "drop safeties". In the glock, the firing pin safety in the frame is familiar to all of us. The striker cannot go forward unless the trigger is pulled. Some guns can go off if they have an inertial firing pin like the 1911 if they are dropped on their muzzle.

However, in the 1911, if you don't futz with the firing pin and firing pin spring, I've never heard of or read about a 1911 going off if dropped. One guy even went to a lot of trouble dropping an assembled slide with a case with primer but no powder loaded and I think he had to get to like a drop of 20 feet to make the primer fire. The untold millions of service 1911's never had a firing pin safety. As I mentioned, Springfield Armory still doesn't use them, and I think Colt you have a choice of with or without. So, at least in the case of the 1911, the FP safety was a solution in search of a non-existant problem.

Now, I'm not sure one could not fiddle with the 1911 enough, changing firing pins and springs to make it not drop safe, but the original design is. So the FP safety was added to many 1911's in the craze in the 80's and 90's. Back then people actually wanted the Series 70 guns - no drop safety.

So, while back then, Mas would tell me I was nuts for removing the Swartz safety (that's just the name of the inventor, it was supposed to be a better approach to the FP safety at the time) if I used the gun defensively. That just never made any sense to me. "I did not drop the gun and it went off and killed our deceased choir boy, I was in fear for my life so I pointed a loaded gun at him, and intentionally pulled the trigger, putting two in the HVAC and one in the CPU, your honor." Anyone making an issue out of the firing pin safety when the 1911 never needed one, did not have one for 80 years, and many don't have them today would end up looking a little foolish if they brought it up, I reasoned.

Again, it's a matter of degree. Use one of those scary bullets posted above, that's prolly not smart, putting a Punisher slide cover plate on your gun or engraving, "Kill them all, let God sort them out" are prolly also not smart. I'm convinced my removing the FP safety is a non-issue, but others will disagree. I just cannot figure out if using a PMF would cause enough of a problem to be meaningful. It is a media created problem, but the media is great at scaring the shit out of a lot of people.

I'm twisting in the wind over this one.