SBR as evidence question [Archive] - M4Carbine.net Forums

NCPatrolAR

03-23-08, 13:38

It is not an issue... If it is a weapon that you are using on duty, and after an OIS your Agency wants to examine it for administrative purposes, there is no transfer...

If you are really concerned, you can ask your agency issue you a weapon receipt for it, but it is not necessary...

Just my .02

Buck

If it is personal property being used on duty then the agency should issue you a property sheet detailing what was taken to include the serial number/caliber/etc. Should you encounter this, you could always ask the ATF agent that works your area or call up to WV and speak with one of the people up there if you felt there was a need.

jlunn

03-23-08, 13:49

Sorry, guess I don't get it.

I'm specifically looking to keep this in my patrol car. Why can't I use it?

My bad . I assumed you were a civilian and we all know about assumptions. Regards,

Neeglik

03-23-08, 13:58

Thanks guys. Precisely what I needed to know.

Ed L.

03-23-08, 15:43

What about civilian use of SBRs for home defense?

Are you guys saying that there is a legal issue--i.e. having the police confiscate it in the wake of a shooting, or are you saying it is a issue of it looking bad (which I imagine depends on your locale)?

NCPatrolAR

03-23-08, 16:19

Neeglik

03-23-08, 17:05

I guess I'm still confused here. It's illegal to use an SBR for defense as a civilian?

SuicideHz

03-23-08, 17:32

No, neither is it illegal to use a machinegun or suppressor as long as they are legally possessed by you.

If the shooting is good, the shooting is good.

Neeglik

03-23-08, 17:47

Ok... I think I get it. I was just misreading the response. That's what I get for being all hopped up on candy from my easter basket.

SuicideHz

03-23-08, 17:48

Good. Now share some of your candy! I didn't get SQUAT!!

bigsarg99

03-24-08, 09:54

Good. Now share some of your candy! I didn't get SQUAT!!

Sorry to hear that, I thought everyone else would have recieved some Blackhills or Lake City in their baskets too!! :D

markm

03-24-08, 10:05

I guess I'm still confused here. It's illegal to use an SBR for defense as a civilian?

My home defense gun is one of my SBRs. :cool:

Ed L.

03-24-08, 13:13

So if I understand it correctly there is a legal issue with using an NFA firearm for home defense--that legal issue is that the police would take possession of it after a shooting, which is a type of transferance that is technically in violation of the NFA. It would be the same thing as loaning the NFA firearm to someone who is not listed as an owner or whatever.

Is this correct?

thanks

ST911

03-24-08, 13:33

It's not an issue. Citizen or LE.

Get an evidence receipt, as is SOP in any competent LE agency.

You'll have bigger things to worry about.

SuicideHz

03-24-08, 13:36

No.

Legit gun + legit shoot = good times for all. Shouldn't be a problem unless you get a very uninformed individual.

AFAIK I can legally carry my beretta all day with my suppressor attached.

decodeddiesel

03-26-08, 16:20

No.

Legit gun + legit shoot = good times for all. Shouldn't be a problem unless you get a very uninformed individual.

AFAIK I can legally carry my beretta all day with my suppressor attached.

Very true, however one can't help but think of the documented incidents when someone used an NFA firearm for self-defense, such as in the case of Gary Fadden and Harry Beckwith. Every time seemed to result in a lengthy court battle where in every case the defendant was absolved of all wrong doing, yet they ALL stated basically stated it would have been a lot less painful if they had used a run of the mill shotgun or pistol instead. Allbeit they both used machine guns, however I am sure a SBR like a Krink or a Mk18 would probably look equally as evil to an uninformed jury. Just some food for thought, but personally as a civilian I think I would rather reach for my non-NFA weapon given the opportunity first rather than face a long unnecessary court battle.

http://www.afn.org/~guns/ayoob.html

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BTT/is_168_28/ai_112685749/pg_1

markm

03-26-08, 16:30

...yet they ALL stated basically stated it would have been a lot less painful if they had used a run of the mill shotgun or pistol instead.

That is still no guarantee of anything. Again, take the Harold Fisch case. He didn't use an NFA weapon, but the prosecution still demonized the 10mm pistol he did use as "more powerful than what the police carry".

Any weapon can be made to seem evil... even a stupid bird gun. The important thing is the legitimacy of the use of force. The cleaner the shoot, the less important the type of weapon generally speaking. That said, I'm grabbing the best tool for the job. In most cases that is going to be the carbine.

SuicideHz

03-26-08, 16:35

Wes-

You are 100% correct.

You always have to worry about civil court. That's never cut and dry.

I have a simple 92fs next to my bed, suppressed. It's a basic gun, issued to tons of police, shoots a little 9mm bullet and they are hold dots which are recommended by a lot of police. Nothing too fancy. No lasers or anthing. The suppressor, well that's just to save my hearing indoors.

;)

decodeddiesel

03-26-08, 16:37

That is still no guarantee of anything. Again, take the Harold Fisch case. He didn't use an NFA weapon, but the prosecution still demonized the 10mm pistol he did use as "more powerful than what the police carry".

Any weapon can be made to seem evil... even a stupid bird gun. The important thing is the legitimacy of the use of force. The cleaner the shoot, the less important the type of weapon generally speaking. That said, I'm grabbing the best tool for the job. In most cases that is going to be the carbine.

Good point. I wish I could find the case where they were bent around the axle about the weapon in question having a "hair trigger" as if that had any bearing on the incident.

jlunn

03-26-08, 16:37

Very true, however one can't help but think of the documented incidents when someone used an NFA firearm for self-defense, such as in the case of Gary Fadden and Harry Beckwith. Every time seemed to result in a lengthy court battle where in every case the defendant was absolved of all wrong doing, yet they ALL stated basically stated it would have been a lot less painful if they had used a run of the mill shotgun or pistol instead. Allbeit they both used machine guns, however I am sure a SBR like a Krink or a Mk18 would probably look equally as evil to an uninformed jury. Just some food for thought, but personally as a civilian I think I would rather reach for my non-NFA weapon given the opportunity first rather than face a long unnecessary court battle.

http://www.afn.org/~guns/ayoob.html

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BTT/is_168_28/ai_112685749/pg_1
My feelings exactly. Legal is one thing,smart is something else. I have a subgun in my house......is that what I should use ? Better yet a subgun with a suppressor.All of us know that it is no more deadly than a good double tap with a S&W revolver of sufficient caliber,but the do gooders,the gun grabbers, and by far most of the jury(criminal or civil) will not know that. Most of the ffl/sot guys I know will advise the same. Keep your nfa stuff locked up and do your defending with a weapon that is just as effective but needs no explanation or justification. Regards,

decodeddiesel

03-26-08, 16:39

The suppressor, well that's just to save my hearing indoors.

;)

Heh, sounds good to me Joe! (no pun)

CarlosDJackal

03-28-08, 10:13

I guess I'm still confused here. It's illegal to use an SBR for defense as a civilian?

The first thing I would recommend is to determine if your agency has a policy in place that addresses the use of personal firearms on duty. Then I would determine if there is anything in that policy that addresses registered (NFA) items.

As far as I understand it, all the ATF cares about is knowing where the NFA item is located if it is no longer in the possession of the registered owner. Maybe a call to the NFA Branch in WV to ask this very question would save you any headaches later on. FWIW, I am planning on calling them myself to inquire about where I can keep my NFA items (SBR & Suppressor) should I get mobilized for active duty (I'm in the Reserves).

Also, my SBR & Suppressor is my "trunk gun" which will be used in extreme situations only (we don't yet have a Patrol Rifle program although I have been pushing for one the past couple of years).

Good luck!!

SuicideHz

03-28-08, 10:25

You will have to lock it up in a safe at a friend or relative's house but they cannot know the combination or have a key to the safe.

Or you could go the trust route and name a person who will remain in the states as a trustee. They will have the same rights as you as far as the item is concerned.

Neeglik

03-28-08, 22:05

Carlos, I'm gtg with my dept. There are already guys totin' SBRs, and I've been carrying my personal rifle for better part of a year.

I got a little confused by a few of the comments here and thought maybe I was missing something, but I see what folks were trying to say now.

Having said that, the responses here have answered my questions and I have my course of action planned for this particular scenario.

JLM

03-29-08, 00:50

My local DA remarked to me once "If you HAVE to shoot them, I don't care what you do it with".

I'm with markm.

Civil lawsuit in the aftermath? Not anymore here with the new Castle Doctrine bill that was just signed by the Governor. :D

CarlosDJackal

03-29-08, 21:23

...Civil lawsuit in the aftermath? Not anymore here with the new Castle Doctrine bill that was just signed by the Governor. :D

I wish this was true for LEOs. While a civil suit is the least of my worries when SHTF, I would be lying to myself if I said that it couldn's happen should I have to pull the trigger in the line of duty.

SuicideHz

03-29-08, 21:34

You can always be sued in a civil court and you WILL have to pay to defend yourself.

K.L. Davis

03-29-08, 22:40

Very true, however one can't help but think of the documented incidents when someone used an NFA firearm for self-defense, such as in the case of Gary Fadden and Harry Beckwith. Every time seemed to result in a lengthy court battle where in every case the defendant was absolved of all wrong doing, yet they ALL stated basically stated it would have been a lot less painful if they had used a run of the mill shotgun or pistol instead. Allbeit they both used machine guns, however I am sure a SBR like a Krink or a Mk18 would probably look equally as evil to an uninformed jury. Just some food for thought, but personally as a civilian I think I would rather reach for my non-NFA weapon given the opportunity first rather than face a long unnecessary court battle.

http://www.afn.org/~guns/ayoob.html

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BTT/is_168_28/ai_112685749/pg_1

Something along this line... a few folks have brought this up and I talked with a couple of liawyers about it -- there is a mandatory sentencing enhancement for a criminal conviction involving an NFA weapon. So... if something goes sideways and it is not a legal use of force... well, like the liawyers say "I wouldn't want to be the test case".

JLM

03-30-08, 02:52

Something along this line... a few folks have brought this up and I talked with a couple of liawyers about it -- there is a mandatory sentencing enhancement for a criminal conviction involving an NFA weapon. So... if something goes sideways and it is not a legal use of force... well, like the liawyers say "I wouldn't want to be the test case".

I remember that case now, the guy with the AC556, but didn't remember the details.

Certainly something to consider.

Is a semi SBR something that is going to be more closely scrutinized than a 16" AR thou? That's the part I'm wondering about, sentencing enhancements aside?

Personally I don't plan on getting involved in a bad shoot, but there is allways Murphy to contend with.

Our new "Castle Doctrine" statute:

6-2-602. Use of force in self defense.
15
16 (a) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable
17 fear of imminent peril of death or serious bodily injury to
18 himself or another when using defensive force that is
19 intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily injury
20 to another if:
21
22 (i) The person against whom the defensive force
23 was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully
24 entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, an

1 occupied structure, or if that person had removed or was
2 attempting to remove another against his will from the
3 occupied structure; and
4
5 (ii) The person who uses defensive force knew or
6 had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry
7 or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.

If you stipulate above, its hard to imagine a 'bad shoot' inside one's home here.

SuicideHz

03-30-08, 13:15

THAT is a castle doctrine? I thought severe castle doctrines involved the entire property and not just the structure.

Ben Lenett

03-30-08, 14:24

Having been involved in Deadly Physical Force situations and investigations, as well as having testified in court on a regular basis, I can say that the average citizen would be unwise to use a NFA weapon to defend yourself with.

If you are a LEO and are using it as an authorized duty weapon then you are good to go and can justify to the jury why that weapon was needed. A private citizen trying to explain to a jury of their "peers" about why they shot poor little John with a 10.5" 5.56mm SBR is going to be screwed.

You would be much better served using a 16" gun. All of that being said...you would be even better served to utilize a handgun or shotgun.

People can say whatever they want about "a good shooting being a good shooting", but take it from someone who has been on both sides....it does not always turn out that way.

Especially if you get a detective that is anti-gun. The first appearance during an investigation is a large portion of how the arriving investigator will work the case. If he sees a man who just shot someone with a weapon he himself has never fired, and only knows that his SWAT team uses something similar....you are up the creek without a paddle.

And this is coming from from someone who lives/works in one of the most accepting states regarding firearms ownership.

CSI isn't real, but the uncomfortable bracelets are.....don't risk getting put in them over a few inches of barrel. That is stupid. The jury of your "peers" is not truly your equal....and that is who decides whether you walk home or go out the back entrance to the jail. This group of "peers" is trained by watching CSI, The Unit, and Law & Order.

SuicideHz

03-30-08, 14:37

I'm actually the one who said "a good shooting is a good shooting" but you must have stopped reading after that. I continued to say that's not to suggest that you can't still catch all hell.

Don't quote me and NOT quote me at the same time please.

Thanks. :)

Ben Lenett

03-30-08, 15:11

Sorry to let you down, but that comment was not directed at you. Rather the large majority of individuals that seem to believe that same concept.

I would hate to see someone go to prison over their weapon selection.

JLM

03-30-08, 15:30

Ben, thanks for the insight.

If he sees a man who just shot someone with a weapon he himself has never fired, and only knows that his SWAT team uses something similar

Wouldn't that be equally true for a 16" gun thou?

Ben Lenett

03-30-08, 15:37

JLM:

I think it is true of any AR/AK/HK/ETC system you use. The private citizen is much better served by using a handgun or shotgun. If you are going to choose a carbine though, having it all "dressed up" with optics, rails, etc is a bad idea. Having a SBR is an even worse idea.

While I agree that it is the best system one could choose, you are opening a door that doesn't need to be opened.

A good 18" 870 with a SF Forend will do everything you need, and it is much more socially acceptable.

JLM

03-30-08, 15:49

Okay, given the known overpenetration risks articulated by SSA Boone, what would you recommend for 12ga ammo, in an apartment complex?

That was my whole thought process in going to the carbine in the first place, not slinging lead thru the walls at potential innocent bystanders. Am I overthinking this?

Not trying to be flippant here, but a Remington 700 in 30-06 might be a lot more 'socially acceptable' until you launch one thru the wall and it kills granny next door.

Some politically motivated DA or investigator might look at something like a 30-06 (the standard issue deer hunting rifle in my AO) and be taken aback and your use of a 'high powered rifle'.

Thoughts?

Ben Lenett

03-30-08, 16:03

I think using any type of rifle is a bad idea. It has a negative appearance and rifle wounds are extremely bloody by nature. That adds to the initial first impression by the investigator, or worse the city/county attorney looking at the pics and wanting to make a name for himself.

The type of round used will always be an issue inside an apt unfortunately, but the same can be said inside a home where multiple people reside.

I would take a look at the Federal Low Recoil OO Buck LE offering. It is an excellent round.

JLM

03-30-08, 16:44

Ben, I understand where you are coming from but...

If Joe the local Meth Tweaker is in my home at 3AM, armed, and intends to do me harm, what does the nastiness of the wound have to do with the price of tea in China? Joe has a large name file in Spillman, a long history of criminal activity, and I do not. He's got no right to be there, and furthermore is threatening me with immediate, otherwise unavoidable threat of death or serious bodily injury. Otherwise I wouldn't be shooting him, even with a cap gun.

Joe could have avoided that nasty wound if he wanted to. He could have got a job as a Wal-Mart greeter. :D

I've heard good things about the 12ga round that you have mentioned, but it seems to me that if I popped an armed intruder in the head with that round that's going to leave a pretty nasty looking wound too.

What about the use of "LE" rounds like Ranger and the Federal load you mentioned? Isn't that going to create a potential 'perception' problem as well?

I think its good that we have discussions like this, so people can make informed decisions and I appreciate your input.

ETA: is this the Federal offering you are talking about? http://www.le.atk.com/general/federalproducts/shotshell/tacticalbuckshot.aspx The 8 pellet?

Ben Lenett

03-30-08, 17:09

JLM:

In a perfect world, I would agree with EVERYTHING you just said 100%. But the sad reality is that most people have no concept of what the reality of a armed confrontation is.

I do not direct that comment at you but rather the investigator, prosecutor, judge, and jury. If anyone of those four major pieces to the puzzle is flawed, you will be in for a difficult ride.

As an example to the above, whenever I teach carbine classes I bring a picture book with me. This picture book contains actual photos of armed confrontations involving rifle rounds. Three of the pictures are from an Officer Involved Shooting I was involved in, where I shot a man six times at 10 yards with a 5.56mm M4 carbine. These pictures are exceptionally bloody. I say that because this course is filled with people who are somewhat "switched on", and they are usually quite horrifed at the graphic nature of the photos. That even goes for the cops in these courses. A good portion of LEOs will never see a rifle wound, but will see hundreds of handgun and shotgun wounds.

Now take the above example and put that into a courtroom where the totality of the circumstances are brought together. Crime Scene photos tell over 50% of the story that the jury will absorb, whether your defense attorney wants that to be the case or not.

This also plays into the next thing some people have....do you have an 'I love me" wall inside your home. That is a generic question and not directed at you. This is important because that cool picture of you posing with all of your kit on and your SBR at the last class will be brought into court to show how you are a trained killer just itching to kill someone.

Now take all of the above and throw a suppressor on the weapon you used....now you are really screwed. If I remember correctly...didn't Bruce Willis use a suppressed weapon in Tears of the Sun to quietly kill someone. While you and I know the answer to that and the realities...the jury and prosecutor will not. They will think you are playing James Bond rather than trying to preserve your hearing during the armed confrontation.

Most people don't understand that the investigators in the case don't always have the final say on who gets charged with what. That defaults to the city/county prosecutor who will look at the report, pics, etc and then decide if they are going to charge you based on the supporting information. Maybe you get lucky with a switched on cop, but you get screwed with a stupid prosecutor who wants to run for mayor next term by being "tough on crime" and your use of an "assault weapon".

Please do not take the above as my being argumentative on teh topic at all, rather I just hate to see people get jammed up by the system when they could have avoided it.

JLM

03-30-08, 17:14

I get where you are coming from, believe me. Like anything in life there are a lot of variables involved. Its wise to consider them all.

I appreciate your responses, thanks :D

SuicideHz

03-30-08, 18:59

Ben- sorry but those were my exact words so you were actually quoting me. I felt the need to reply.

:)

As with any legal matter, it's a moot point because a jury is always going to be made up of human beings who may or may not judge appropriately.

I'm sure you've told people that going 60 in a 55 is ok and technically that's more illegal than shooting someone in my own home with my SBR or silencer attached to a gun.

There's no point in coming in the thread to reiterate what we've already said- to carefully think about whether or not you want the trouble associated with using an NFA item even though it's legal. You definitely seemed to be going one step further than what we've already discussed by telling us or trying to tell us it's still not ok just because there's a chance you can still get in trouble.

Ben Lenett

03-30-08, 19:09

SuicideHz:

For starters I have never told anyone that going 60 in a 55 is ok....that is an urban legend and doesn't hold up for squat in court.

Second...I am trying to give someone factual detailed information on what happens when you press the trigger in a situation as previously mentioned. If you don't want to read it then don't.

Do me a favor though...before you start pontificating about the realities of these situations, go to law school and practice criminal defense or go to the police academy and work the criminal justice system for a few years. Until you do, you will have no concept of what I described. Reading about it doesn't count and neither does your friend who is a cop and told you all about it.

Your profile advises you are a Draftsman/Land Surveyor. If you are or have been a cop/criminal attorney then I will gladly apologize to you publicly on the forum. Until then...suck it up and deal or get some experience.

Blitzking

03-30-08, 20:31

Make damn sure you have a suppressor on it, especailly indoors if not you'll be bleeding from the ears..

SuicideHz

03-30-08, 21:26

Ben-

You are not understanding my point. I was simply saying that if you were going to jump in late and repeat everything we've stated, please don't quote me and leave half of what I said out, potentially making it look like I've got no clue.

You quoted me word for word:

If the shooting is good, the shooting is good.

But not all of it:

You always have to worry about civil court. That's never cut and dry.

Your area of expertise doesn't give you any more right to holding my opinion than mine does. We've expressed the SAME thoughts in here. You just chose to quote HALF of what I said and then say the other half in your own words to suggest that I and others have only been giving out HALF of the required or correct advice.

I am not the one making "pontifications" as I've never claimed to be an expert.

You didn't need to go in my profile to see I wasn't anywhere near as qualified as you. If I were qualified to have my opinion then you would see "manufacturer" under my name, would you not?

Why do I need to be a "cop/criminal attorney" to say the same thing as you but before you? I do think you need to apologize for being so condescending. There is no reason for the attitude you've had towards me.

ETA: If reading about "it" doesn't count then you are wasting your breath in here. Quit trying so hard to make me look like some dumb schmuck.

Ben Lenett

03-30-08, 21:45

Civil Court is the least of my concerns....going to prison is what I would be most concerned with.

When you get advice about chest pain...do you talk to your doctor or to your landscaper? I am assuming you would talk to your doctor.

Same situation here...you can talk to unknown people on a forum...or you can get some advice from someone that is openly identifying himself and the reasons for what he has said. I was giving first hand information based on having been in and investigated these types of situations. I am not an expert in anything. Just a guy that has been extremely unfortunate when it comes to being at the wrong place at the wrong time.

You don't need to have a fancy title to have first hand knowledge of these types of situations. I am sure there are plenty of salty cops on this forum....I know of several myself and they don't have any fancy title.

You are the one that keeps responding to my posts...I haven't quoted you or identified you once in a post that wasn't in direct response to you. You seem to think yet again that my original statement of "a good shoot is a good shoot" was directed at you. IT WASN'T. I hear people say that same thing all the time, and it bothers me to no end because they are giving themselves a false sense of security.

Last time I checked, this is an open forum of which we are all members. So are we not allowed to post on a thread if someone has already said the same thing? Because if that is the case there wouldn't be this much activity here.