less-lethal ammo

[Ron-Solo]

i kinda want some for bears while camping

Make sure you remove the front sights from your gun before using his on a bear. After you hit him with one of these, Yogi is going to take that shotgun and shove it where the sun don't shine. Removing the sights will reduce injury to your sphincter muscles.

[Riksk]

Regarding getting sued after a legal shoot. (or possibly facing criminal charges)

It does make sence to me that being the only witness can only be a good thing. I realize that investigators will be able to make some reasonable assumptions based on evidence on hand (example: kicked in bedroom door). However in a situation where there isn't obvious evidence if my life was in danger it would seem that a wounded intruder calling shenanigans could impart some doubt as to the legality of my shot. The old my word against yours.

Seems like some of you have some crime scene experience that may be able to shed light on that theory.

Thanks!

[bernieb90]

Not contesting your rules, laws or anything else about your state.

Read the comment and think about it. IF YOU ARE JUSTIFIED TO USE DEADLY FORCE THEN YOU ARE JUSTIFIED TO USE ANYTHING UP TO DEADLY FORCE. If you are justified to blow a hole in a mans chest that you can almost put your fist in then you would have also been justified to have done less then that.

My post is not about whether to use specialty impact munitions it is about the ridiculous statement that you are going to be sued for that instead of killing the person.

If the munition is legal in your state then how can you be sued for using it instead of lead? What a nonsensical bunch of mess this is when people (not you dog) spread this stuff as a fact, yet can not give a single, not one, not one case of a persons being sued for using less then deadly force when the facts justified the use of deadly force.

People don't even stop and think about the mess they post. They just repeat some mess they read some where or heard from some Delta Farce Tactical Ninja Instructor in some fool course they took.

I agree 100%. However we have a greater issue here, and that is the use of Specialty Impact Munitions against a lethal threat. The only time a civilian can fire their weapon (regardless of ammunition) at another person is when there is a threat of grave bodily harm usualy from a person with a weapon. No LE agency teaches the use of less lethal impact munitions as a method of self defense against a suspect with a lethal weapon. Therefore there is never a good reason for a civilian to have his weapon loaded with these for SD.

As far as shooting people in the legs goes that is just as much lethal force as shooting a guy in the head or chest (remember Cpl. Jamie Smith in Blackhawk Down).

I think the problem people can run into with Specialty Impact Munitions is in assuming since they are less lethal they can be used as a deterent in a situation that does NOT warrant lethal force. Guy looks threatening shoot him with rubber bullets...Wrong!! you are looking at assault with a deadly weapon, unlawful discharge of firearm etc.