Asking for trouble?

[DoubleTap45]

If you have what LOOKS like a LEO or Mil-type 1911 are you automatically in for a rough ride in court? What about Tritium sights, custom grips or guns with "odd or menacing names" like the Trojan, Desert Warrior or SIS? CAN a DA really screw with you over than and get away with it and do you need to have Mas come and take him to school?

-Ray

[d90king]

I believe if you use your firearm in a lawful manner none of the described issues listed will cause you any problems in court.

[DoubleTap45]

Hope you're right. Politically motivated DA weasels are abundant. Just look at the Duke lacrosse case. At least HE got was was coming. :appld:

-Ray

[d90king]

That is where the "lawful" part comes in. If it is questionable then the DA will use anything he can to show that you went "looking" for trouble.

[miketyson986]

I believe if you use your firearm in a lawful manner none of the described issues listed will cause you any problems in court.

yes its true.

[Rick McC.]

I don't believe that's an issue.

If it were; all the Glock owners would be in big trouble! :eb:

Take care,

Rick

[Rich-D]

A District Attorney/Prosecutor can bring up anything they desire about a weapon and how it was used. It's a matter of, will the jury be swayed by the argument.

[DoubleTap45]

In most areas outside NY, CA, NJ, MA, MD, D.C. or big cities like Philly you're right. The jury may well contain a gun owner or two and it would be almost impossible to remove them during voir dire without cause. You only get in my state 4 disqualifications before you have to SHOW cause and the defense will do everything to KEEP the other shooters ON the panel. All it will take is one guy who won't move off his "Not Guilty" vote to hang a jury..

I served 22 years ago on a murder trial in the Bronx. I and the only other white guy on the panel fought with the other ten for two hours till we cut the kid loose from a case built on supposition on top of supposition and opposed by science and testimony. Even the victim's brother said he was innocent.

Ray

[Rich-D]

Ray, I am glad that you stuck with it, some folks will give in and convict, just to go home sooner. I put thousands of felons in prison, however proving suspects were innocent who were behind bars was more personally satisfying!

[DoubleTap45]

The State's case was bogus. The first witness, the ME blew away the contention that the accused put the gun to the victim's head and shot him. There were NO powder burns or stipling. The minimum distance to avoid that is a meter. You can get stipling from as far as 6-10 feet but if there are no burns the distance is at least one meter.

Then after one witness shot her mouth off (dressed like a street walker) two more came up to say that she'd be bragging all over the project that she was getting a lot of money as soon as Sabu was convicted. Then the victim's own brother testified that he was there and heard the shot but that Sabu was too far away in a packed crowd to have shot his brother.

This nonsense went on for 3 weeks.

Ray