Response to Rat Shot
I have read with great concern these posts. If you are not willing and ABLE to kill someone then by all means do NOT carry a concealed side arm. Even though most altercations happen within 2-3'if you carry and if you decide to present your weapon then you must be willing to discharge your weapon until the threat is removed. Two to the center of mass and one to the head will be enough in most cases. At this point several additional things need to happen. 1. follow the threat to the ground until you are absolutely sure the threat is naturalized. 2. While covering the threat pull out your cell phone and make sure YOU are the one on the phone to 911. Make no cometary, state the facts and no more. Do NOT re-holster you weapon until the men in blue show up. At this point your life will change forever. Even if it is a clear case of self defense you will be thrown to the ground, cuffed and put in the back of the car. You will be sued by every relative the threat ever had. With all this you and your family should still be alive. Make no mistake you will be changed by the experience. IF YOU ARE NOT WILLING TO DO THE ABOVE THEN DON'T CARRY. The above is just a small part of what you must resolve before hand. Kyle
The term should be 'neutralized' I think...
The term should be 'neutralized' I think...
0
-
kylew,
I can attest to this as I seemed to be caught between a rock and a hard spot about 13 years ago. A mexican drug gang came and took a small time dealer who reneged on a $1500 payment. Seems the local constabulary took his dope, valued at $1500, and then turned him back on the streets so that he could inform on them. Well, the 'heavies' were sent to round him up to 'have a talk' to the boss. Somewhere along the line the #1 heavy decides to make a name for himself and kill the kid. It just so happens that when they took the kid, I ran into them face to face. That made me a witness. So, naturally, the A-holes came around looking to threaten me. I wasn't going to have any of it. But, I will tell you that slick, greasy city prosecuter didn't give a damn about my hide. If I'd have slipped up he would have put me in the pen as fast as any of them. Truth be damned. All he wanted was a bigger number for faster promotion. He DID NOT CARE ONE IOTA FOR THE TRUTH.
Meaning: you better be damn righteous if you are ever going to get away with defending yourself. If you slip up in any way, I can almost guarantee you, that you will have to deal with that same, very exact problem, in prison. Rotting away your freedom if you even so much as step half-way out of the lines of legality.0 -
I would still rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6. 0 -
So if a person with a Taurus Judge uses it with a .410 shell then a .45 to stop an armed attacker he or she can be put in prison because putting out the would be killers lights before he was shot is wrong? 0 -
quote:"I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6."
This bit of street wisdom is reasonable, but those aren't necessarily the only two options!
Personally speaking, I'd rather not be judged by 12 **OR** carried by 6 if I can help it.
If I can do something to reduce my chances of ending up court facing criminal or civil charges that could impoverish me *even if I beat the charges*, ruin my reputation, land me in jail or in the poorhouse, I think I'll try to do that.
quote:Originally posted by quickmajik
So if a person with a Taurus Judge uses it with a .410 shell then a .45 to stop an armed attacker he or she can be put in prison because putting out the would be killers lights before he was shot is wrong?
Yes, in fact that is possible, particularly if the shooting is otherwise not "clean". Its not necessarily all that likely, but the liability involved would depend on the situation.
Rather than speculate about "what ifs" lets just say that if you deliberately use a non-traditional weapon for defense that has a pronounced tendency to wound or mutilate an attacker, you are just asking to be criminally charged for recklessness or civilly sued if in fact you do mutilate someone.
Note that a Judge in your home might be a little bit different scenario than the "rat shot" question, where the question was about loading the first three rounds of your carry .22 ("carry .22" itself not a good idea) with .22 rat shot in a deliberate attempt to blind your attacker.
The LEGAL LIABILITY [edit] problem with rat shot could well be worse if you blinded your attacker rather than blinding him then killing him.
Now you have a living assailant who is permanently disabled, and in a particularly horrible way. Wait until this guy shows up in court with his baby-Momma and four brats then takes off his dark glasses to show the jury what his face looks like after you blew out both his eyes with rat shot. That's not a position you want to be in as a CIVIL defendant.
Note that in many jurisdictions a CIVIL jury doesn't have to decide cases in a unanimous way, and in fact, they don't have to decide bases "beyond a reasonable doubt", but rather just based on the "preponderance of the evidence". In other words, the bar to losing a civil case is quite a bit lower than a criminal one. Even if the jury sincerely believes that you were within your rights to shoot this guy, they're STILL likely to be outraged by the fact that you chose in advance to blind him for life. Plus of course, the jury may sympathize with the defendant for social or other reasons.
As a CRIMINAL defendant, you'd probably not be all that much better off.
If you blind someone, the prosecutor is going to depict you as a total nutjob not really any different than the guy you shot. Why on earth would you shoot someone in the eyes with the DELIBERATE intent of permanently blinding them? There is no other reasonable explanation for having rat-shot in your carry pistol on the street, and its simply cruel.
The prosecutor will ask the jury why you didn't simply use readily available and legal pepper spray, like everyone else. What's your defense here? There isn't one. You're boned.
And this is just the LEGAL aspect of why using .22 ratshot is a bad idea.
As I explained in detail in the other posts on this, there are several good tactical reasons why .22 ratshot is just a poor choice for defense, not the least of which are that the shot itself is only effective under a very narrow range of circumstances (ie close range and only if you get a clear shot to the front of the face), and it has a tendency to jam semi-automatic .22 guns.
Edit:
quote:Sandwarrior
Meaning: you better be damn righteous if you are ever going to get away with defending yourself. If you slip up in any way, I can almost guarantee you, that you will have to deal with that same, very exact problem, in prison. Rotting away your freedom if you even so much as step half-way out of the lines of legality.
Agreeing with this entirely, let me add the following. A lot of how you are treated after an incident like this will have to do with the jurisdiction where it happens. In some places (eg rural South) you may get quite a bit more benefit of the doubt in the aftermath of a shooting incident.
I can say with near certainty that if you simply fire a gun in defense (regardless of whether you hit anyone, wound them, or kill them) anywhere in New England, you WILL BE CRIMINALLY CHARGED. That's just standard operating procedure there. If you even DRAW a gun (not even firing it) you will be criminally charged with "brandishing" should the authorities be notified about your action. Note that the latter is basically an unbeatable charge. . .if you REALLY believed you were in a life or death situation, why didn't you fire your gun?
Now *if* you have ALL your ducks in a row (ie you're a respected member of the community, its an unequivocal case of life-or-death self-defense, you are permitted to possess the gun in question in the location you shot it, AND you kill your attacker cleanly with ONE shot) THEN you will likely beat the charges, and only be out six months of aggravation and a few to several tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees.
But if you fire a shot and hit something you shouldn't, wound someone, have any aggravating factors (ie you had a drink earlier that night, are of a different race than your assailant, etc) then good luck. . .you'll need it. The jury you face will likely be anti-gun, and they may impute racial motivations where there really weren't any.
Shoot someone with rat-shot? Forget it, no matter how justified the shooting, you WILL go to jail, PERIOD.
0 -
I need to choose better when I use spell check. I also need to proof read better. I just wanted to make one additional comment on this subject. Carrying a concealed weapon is not and should not be considered a hobby. This is serious stuff with real consequences. It's not a joke, it's not funny, If you do this you must have some advanced training. In most states the CFP class is, you must remember, just the beginning and just the bare minimum required. You must practice and shoot thousands of rounds per year. I personally feel that everyone that is able should get a permit and carry, however we all should be trained. I am and I can tell that most of you are also but not all. I have been fortunate enough to have never had to present my weapon and hope never to do so. Lastly this process has changed me I am a better driver because of it. I will NOT be drawn into a road rage incident. I no longer speed at all. I stay away from places that are a potential problem. I always sit in a restaurant with my back to the wall and a clear view of the exits. I practice profiling everywhere I go. Who are the potential threats? When I'm out with my family I have one overriding goal. Keep them safe. I am much more observant where ever I go. Some may say "I don't want to live like that". I can respect that view but I chose to live, period. Kyle 0 -
Oh yeah, on jurisdiction, one other thing.
The MA-State license to carry specifies that carry of a concealed weapon is legal "for all lawful purposes".
Since you aren't allowed to shoot rats on the streets of Boston (or anywhere else in MA for that matter), there is no "lawful purpose" for carrying rat shot in a pistol concealed on your person in public.
If you are ever detained by police for **ANY** reason AT ALL (ie speeding ticket, jaywalking, etc), they'll take your gun, and as part of routine procedure unload it. Then they'll see the ratshot in it.
Now you're hosed. Any cop with half a brain (and in MA, most of them have at least that amount) will see the ratshot and may ask you what you're doing with it. If they don't like your answer (and I'd assume that many would not), then you're potentially looking at permanent loss of your LTC and possibly criminal charges.0 -
The .22 "birdshot" has not advertized nor referred to as "rat shot" by anyone that I am aware of, before this series of postings. The use of that term here on GB by this individual is in referrence to someone that he wishes or wants to maim, blind and then place a follow-up Coup d' Gras round in him, "to put him out of his misery".
It was also clear that he was referring to neutralizing the individual, when that individual was incapable of defanding himslef!
To cooly step over and put a follow-up Coup d' Gras round in him to put him out of his misery. ~Of course the range is short.~
Bamavol
quote:"I would load it 3 rounds with shot. If your problem gets as close as 6 feet just point at the face and shoot. It would be sure to blind. That is as good as a one shot stopper.
Is this a good plan?"
1. I naver suggested that shot would kill anything, not a rat not a man."
2. I only suggest that if you shoot some one in the face at about 6 feet it is almost certain to cause blindness."
A blind person is not much of a threat."
3. At this point you could put the bad guy wiout of his misery with a follow up solid bullet."
4. Of course your range is short."
The above clearly indicates "the presence of forethought". 2nd degree might well be considered very lenient!
(I would suggest that this subject matter could well have been addressed in the General Discussion Forum rather in the Expert Forum. Plus there is the notion that this was not a search for expert or reasonable answers to a reasonable question.)0 -
I don't seem to be able to leave this alone. I wanted to give you something to think about.
You are in a store/ gas station, bank or someplace that some guy come in and holds the place up. He holds a weapon at the clerk and demands money. He's a 20 something that looks drug-ed out. Most of us would feel that we could engage him and end the situation. I ask the following questions.
What if he was clean cut and polite?
What if it was a woman?
What if it was a woman with kids in tow?
What if it was a 16 year old pretty girl?
What if it was a 14 year old pretty pregnant girl?
What if it was a 9 year old shaking handed little boy?
These are questions you must ask yourself and resolve long before the day comes. I offer no answers. You must all answer. Kyle0 -
it's been called "Rat Shot" around here all my life. 0 -
Okay guys, three Rat Shot threads is more than enough to have sorted out the subject. If someone feels the need for Rat Shot IV it should go over in General Discussion. 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
10 comments