SBR as evidence question

[SuicideHz]

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]

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]

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/m...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]

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

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

[CarlosDJackal]

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]

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]

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]

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.

[CarlosDJackal]

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

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]

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