close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Welcome to Glock Talk

Why should YOU join our Glock forum?

  • Converse with other Glock Enthusiasts
  • Learn about the latest hunting products
  • Becoming a member is FREE and EASY

If you consider yourself a beginner or an avid shooter, the Glock Talk community is your place to discuss self defense, concealed carry, reloading, target shooting, and all things Glock.

Ranger T's for Self-Defense and a Prosecutors Viewpoint

Discussion in 'Caliber Corner' started by Glockman454, Sep 1, 2009.

  1. Glockman454

    Glockman454

    376
    0
    Nov 21, 2004
    Indiana
    I have been wondering on the "what if's" scenario of using Winchester Ranger-T ammo for self defense and a prosecutors viewpoint. Recently I personally watched a week-long trial of attempted murder. It was not gun related, but I had the opportunity to see how over zealous and vindictive a prosecutor can be.

    So, since Ranger T's are not illegal, but Winchester restricts it from the general public, I could see a prosecutor attempting to use that against someone. At least I would not put it past the local prosecutor I watched in court recently. She went after any and every shadow of impropriety.

    I know every self defense shooting does not go to court, but for sake of argument let's say John Doe shoots a perp in self defense and for whatever reason it goes to court. I wonder what the real chances of a prosecutor using the type bullet to make any possible charges even worse than they are. Even though they are not illegal, I could see the prosecutor making a statement that they are restricted to LE only and then trying to cast a bad light upon the shooter to look bad to a jury.

    I am aware of the history of the original Talon and a coroner making a statement in defense of the police that they were unremarkable and did not do any damage that most any other hollow point would do. See below.

    "The forensic pathologist who performed the autopsies of the fatal shooting victims gave a detailed presentation about his findings at the 1994 IWBA Wound Ballistics Conference in Sacramento: "The 101 California Shooting: The Black Talon Bullet," Boyd Stevens, M.D., Medical Examiner, San Francisco, CA. He stated that the wound trauma produced by Black Talon was unremarkable, meaning the wounds were no different nor any more severe than wounds produced by typical JHP handgun bullets. Each of the victims incurred fatal injury because a bullet passed through a vital structure."

    For anyone wanting to read the whole article here is the link.

    http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs2.htm#Black-Talon

    But back to the point of it being restricted by Winchester. Does anyone know of any history of a blood thirsty prosecutor making a big deal about the present day Ranger T's?

    And secondly, any type ammo?
     
  2. thats a "rule" not a "law" that winchester, and others, have to not sell their ammo to us lowly, un-worthy civilians......

    it it legal for you and me to own it and use it....
     


  3. JBP55

    JBP55

    9,639
    249
    Mar 4, 2007
    Louisiana
    I use the ammunition and gun I like and I am not concerned with a BS prosecutor. Regardless of gun or ammunition I feel that: A good shoot is a good shoot and a bad shoot is a bad shoot.
     
  4. Glockman454

    Glockman454

    376
    0
    Nov 21, 2004
    Indiana
    I do appreciate the reply - but I did mention that I already knew that it is not illegal. And yes, I see the sales lines on most website saying it is a Winchester rule, not a law and it is legal for us to own, on and on and so on.

    That is not my point. That means nothing to a blood thirsty prosecutor. I would like to know if anyone knows of a case where someone did use it in self defense. And if they did, was it brought up by the prosecutor that Winchester restricts it to LE.

    Until I recently watched an attempted murder case in which the accused did not attempt a murder, and the prosecution could not show any proof/evidence of attempted murder, that did not stop the prosecutor from pushing the charge. The accused was not convicted, but it took $50,000 to defend himself. See my point? Until I watched that trial I never knew such a thing could be allowed to even start let alone go for a week long trial...

    That being said, I could see a anti-gun prosecutor making a big deal out of the LE restriction trying to make the defendant look like a ravenous psycho using extreme measures.

    So again, my question is, does anyone have any knowledge of ANY court case where the defendant was pursued by the prosecution for using any certain type ammo? i.e. unreasonable force etc.
     
  5. SIGShooter

    SIGShooter Hucklebucks

    4,208
    0
    Jan 25, 2005
    I had an instrutor tell me once..."If you are worried about being prosecuted for defending yourself with a gun, don't carry one."

    I liked his no BS point he made. A lot of people get wrapped around the axle about this and that ammunition to use for SD.

    Let me ask you this...

    What amuniton on the current market ISN'T used by LEOs? Whether it says LE AMMO only or not?

    What's the difference?

    What seperates a SD shooting with Gold Dot Personal Protection ammunition from a SD shooting with Gold Dot LE ammunition?

    They are both from the same manufacturer right? They use the same cases? They use the same primers? They use the same powder? They use the same BULLET!

    So what is the difference?

    I have not found any cases related to your question.

    I couldn't even imagine there being one. How messed up would that be...John Doe shoots an intruder who had a knife to his wife's neck and is now sitting in prison for life because he used Ranger LE ammo. But John Doe cop shot a man who had a knife to someones wife's neck and he is hailed as a hero and is cleared in the shoot.

    Again, what's the difference?
     
  6. kensteele

    kensteele

    5,379
    0
    Aug 3, 2003
    Leawood, KS
    You might not want to wear those baggy pants, just in case you have to shoot someone while wearing them. After all, a blood thirsty prosecutor might make you look bad by showing that gang members who have no remourse often wear the same type of baggy pants. If you're in court from a shooting, the ammo you used is the least of your worries. It won't be the piece that sinks you.

    Think about it. If a prosecutor brings up your ammo, you can effectively counter that defense in half a dozen ways with a good defense lawyer. It will make the prosecutor look bad, not you.

    If you end up looking bad because of the ammo you used, it really wasn't the ammo that made you look bad...you know what I mean? ;)
     
  7. Glockman454

    Glockman454

    376
    0
    Nov 21, 2004
    Indiana
    I think you are getting out of context. First off I am not worried (overall) about prosecution God forbid I had to defend myself with a gun. You are preaching to the choir her as I have been shooting since I was four - thats 45 years of shooting.

    To answer your question about any difference between civy and LE loads. There are no difference except LE loads are usually inspected one by one and possibly other quality checks. Other than that MOST ammo whether Civy or LE, there is no difference.

    BUT, Ranger T has no civy counterpart. So we can't use the above concept to nullify the idea I mentioned. Sure they have another sxt, but even though the Ranger T is built on the basics of the SXT, they are not the same as one would compare a regular gold dot to a LE gold dot.

    Here's the deal. Before watching the attempted murder trial I would have not given the Ranger T concern much thought. You were not at the trial and I was. If you would have seen and heard the utter BS that prosecutor was using and adding her own spice to it, it was totally amazing it was allowed to go on. I have zero, absolutely zero doubt if the above mentioned prosecutor was handing a case like I mentioned and she found out it is restricted to Leo's I guarantee she would attempt to make a mountain out of it.

    Would it stick? Maybe not. But because if this over zealous prosecutor she caused a defendant to spend 50K versus, if he were charged with the battery he did git charged with he would have saved about 45K

    So, please do not take my post out of context and read into too much.

    It is simple. There are prosecutors out there that will lie, twist and use every bit, no matter how trivial. They try to persuade a jury with lies. The prosecutor told the jury this guy used to be a bouncer and it is in his blood to hurt people. That was 30 years ago. You get my point? And he has a totally clean criminal background. Or I should say did, until she got a hold of him.

    So, if a woman prosecutor went after that, I would think it safe to say that this woman would use the bullet concern against someone and try to paint a picture in the jury's mind that John Doe is vicous and uses bullets only for law enforcement. After she got done with the jury and even though they are legal, she would have brainwashed the jury.

    Being a bouncer is not illegal either, but she tried to use that against the guy.
    If you would have been there and seen how this person twisted everything you too would make sure you were bullet proof (no pun intended).

    People like her should not be allowed to hold such an office. Some of you say it is no big deal. Let's see how you feel IF a situation like this caused a unnecessary trial that cost 50K. I am basically covering my butt.

    I hope that it does turn out someone can tell me with authority that it is a non-issue because I have a bunch of RA45T.

    Again, if you could have saw the Bitc# in action your jaw would have been in your lap. If she were against you in a shooting and she learned the are "restricted to Leo" oh buy! hold on, were going for a ride.

    In the end you may get off fine. But that extra detail could mean tens of thousand of dollars difference in fees.

    I sincerely hoe it is not a concern as I think I would prefer them over my Gold dots. But that woman freaked us out.
     
  8. Glockman454

    Glockman454

    376
    0
    Nov 21, 2004
    Indiana
    Hey, how did you know I were baggy pants? :rofl:
     
  9. Police Marksman

    Police Marksman

    395
    17
    May 28, 2006
    Texas
    Glock454

    I understand what your are saying!

    Sometime shoots aren't black and white. Specially to a Jury!

    If you don't feel comfortable with Law Enforcement only ammo you might try the excellent Speer Gold Dot. Speer makes their law enforcement ammo available to citizens.
     
  10. Glockman454

    Glockman454

    376
    0
    Nov 21, 2004
    Indiana
    You say you understand what I am saying but I don't think you totally read my last post. You are recommending Gold Dots.

    If you had read my post completely you would have read the last line which read.
    Quote "I sincerely hope it is not a concern as I think I would prefer them over my Gold dots. But that woman freaked us out."

    Key point - "over my Gold Dots". That implies I have Gold Dots.

    I am not per se afraid of "law enforcement ammo". I have a truckload of it and carry it. I have LE Gold Dots and I am not afraid to carry it. Because the only diff between it and what you buy at Sportmen's warehouse is the LE has better quality control and checks. This is not a issue of LE rounds as a whole. It is about a round that has no civilian counter part and is restricted by the manufacturer.

    Even though Speer and other offer LE rounds, they are not restricted and Speer does not have a hangup about civilians buying it. Winchester is the only one who frowns on civies owning their LE loads.

    I am trying to keep this post on the context and scope of the concern. Although I appreciate replies, I am not looking for recommendations, suggestions etc. I am fishing for someone who may have heard directly or indirectly about any legal issues from using any type ammo in a self defense situation and nothing else.
     
  11. bogey3737

    bogey3737 diablo azul

    550
    0
    Nov 15, 2005
    The Swamp!
    Simple and truthful explanation...I've received instruction from LE officers who train others at their respective academies. I took this training because I felt that if I was going to carry a firearm, I had the obligation to learn to use it safely and effectively so as to limit the chances of injuring innocent bystanders in the unfortunate event that I was forced to use it. These LEOs told me the type of ammunition they use and why - it is effective at stopping a threat and is less likely to over-penetrate, reducing the risk to innocents. They recommended that I carry the same type of ammunition for the defense of myself and my family.
     
  12. mongo356

    mongo356

    878
    1
    Aug 18, 2004
    IL
    Glockman454- I understand what you are saying....I'm LEO but NOT an attorney. I've seen some lawyers that will try to sell anything if they think the jury will buy it. The limits of what some attorneys (not all) will do is anyone's guess, as I'm sure you saw in your experience.

    Just ask 5 Cops,Lawyers,Doctors,Judges, Auto Mechanics a question in their respective field be it law,medicine, or cars and you will likely get 5 different answers but they will all be for sure they have the correct answer.

    FWIW-Ranger BONDED and PDX1 are suppose to be the same bullet & specs in different packaging.
     
  13. Merkavaboy

    Merkavaboy Code-7A KUZ769

    Glockman454, it seems that you had a very educating experience watching an actual trial in progress and witnessing first hand what Prosecutors can and will do to try to win a case. What you witnessed is EXACTLY what Massad Ayoob has been teaching his students and has been writing/publishing articles about for several decades now.

    And yet if you look at many of the responses in this thread, you'll realize that many people are in denial about what actually takes place at court trials and the type of tactics a proscutor may stoop to to try and get a conviction.

    "If it's a good shoot, there's nothing to worry about". "The type of gun and/or ammo you use is a non-issue". "if you're worried about going to court then don't carry a gun".
    Such statements are based upon ignorance; don't listen to people who spew such crap.

    If you have or carry a firearm for SD, and you are willing and committed to using that firearm to protect yourself, a loved one or an innocent stranger, there may come the time that you may have to use it, and you had best be prepared to defend your actions in court, no matter what someone else tells you. Know how to defend your actions and your choice of equipment.

    Anyone who doubts that the type of gun and/or ammo won't make a difference in court had best review the Harold Fish case out of Arizona and find a copy of the TV News program in which Fish's jury members were interviewed and pubically said that the fact that Fish used a "powerful 10mm" pistol and "hollow point" bullets had made a big impression upon them.

    As Mas tells his students and anyone who cares to educate themselves: "Know thy gun and know thy ammo".
     
  14. glocksterr

    glocksterr DirtyGlockHippy

    1,298
    0
    Aug 10, 2008
    NC,USA
    if the prosecutor is doing his job it shouldnt matter if you use a T, a toothpick, a golf club or a butter knife.

    self defence is self defence no matter how you slice it.
     
  15. isp2605

    isp2605

    1,532
    36
    Oct 2, 2002
    IL
    Fish had a lot more problems with that shooting case than using 10mm ammo. Fish was not on trial because he used a 10mm. The justification for the shooting was legally lacking. The prosecutor introduced a whole mirade of facts. So what. If you sit in any trial you'd hear the same type of statements in any case, shooting or not. In legal parlance it's called "throwing it against the wall and seeing what will stick."
    I've investigated numerous shooting cases in my LE career. I've testified in both criminal and civil cases and presented cases in a lot more cases that never made it to either. Here's what was the concern in EVERY shooting case we investigated - "Was the shooting justified?"
    Don't worry about what ammo the local PD carries. PDs change ammo for a variety of reasons. It may be due to unavailability of ammo. They may carry a certain rd because they can get a better price than another. They may have officers carrying different makes at the same time.
    Now look at the LEAs in your area. How many PD, sheriff depts, state police, other LEAs are within 30 miles of where you currently live? There's a very good chance that each agency is carrying something different from the others. So which PD's ammo are you going to carry? Simple fact is it doesn't matter.
    If you want to carry your worries even more, are you carrying it to the same extreme in selecting caliber? Are you carrying a 9mm or .40? Those are the most common LE issued calibers. But what about .45? Even the 10mm can be found authorized by many agencies. By using your worries then you could also have a problem if you grabbed the 12 ga instead of the .22.
    The simple fact remains is when we investigate a shooting what is used is not an issue in determining whether the shooting was legit or not. A good shooting will not turn to a bad shooting simply because you used a .45 or 12 ga. On the other side, a bad shooting will not turn into a good shooting because you used the same ammo that your local PD uses. That kind of stuff is from TV and cheap dime novels. In real life it simply doesn't happen. Sure, you've sat in one trial and heard one case. The fact remains that in the case you heard, and in Fish, they did not end up there because they used a bullet or caliber that was not currently being used by the local PD. Again, that's cheap TV movie stuff. The caliber and bullet might be discussed during the trial but the person being charged isn't there because of such caliber or bullet.
    You worry about things that aren't based on fact.
     
    Last edited: Sep 2, 2009
  16. Merkavaboy

    Merkavaboy Code-7A KUZ769

    Morning isp2605. :wavey:

    You are correct that there is more to the Fish incident, but the fact that his use of a 10mm and HP ammo was not lost on the jurors. It was not insignificant evidence that was discarded by the jurors. It had enough impact upon the jurors that they were quite vocal about those two items of evidence that they brought it up during their TV program/interview.
     
  17. isp2605

    isp2605

    1,532
    36
    Oct 2, 2002
    IL
    Good morning!
    It's a good thing Fish didn't use a 12 ga loaded with slugs. Just think of the field day the prosecutor could have had with that. Or used a .22 which 'everyone' knows is a hitman's weapon used by both the mafia and the Israeli intelligence. Or used a Beretta M-9 with FMJ ammo which would mean Fish thought he was a military killer. Or if Fish had used what the local police uses then he could have been painted as some kind of cop-wannabee vigilante. No matter what was used it could have been turned against him. In Fish's case it just happened to be a 10mm.
    Fish had a lot of problems in justifying the use of deadly force. The 10mm wasn't the real issue.
     
  18. imho you answered your own question. it is legal to own so therefore the prosecutor would have to come up with another type of excuse to prosecute. the answer to the question of type of ammo is that it's the best sd round available, it's within my rights to own and use, and anyone would want the best equipment possible (legal wise) when your life is on the line. certainly any jury in the world would understand that. a good shoot is a good shoot.
     
  19. tripl_b

    tripl_b

    209
    0
    Aug 26, 2009
    why would they only sell the rounds to LEOs anyway? If they're not different what's the point?
     
  20. BadAndy

    BadAndy

    1,321
    0
    Oct 2, 2004
    Irmo, SC
    I ran into a little bit of trouble when I was younger and I had 9mm Black Talons loaded in my gun. I was very surprised that the prosecutor didn't call them "cop killer bullets". Interesting experience...