Thanks for that... I'll definitely be doing a little research on that one.

I think there has got to be more to the original conviction than just the simple fact he chose a 10mm. The question to the jury would have been, at least partially, did the death result from a criminal act of the defendant? If they cant answer that question in the afirmative then they cant find the defendant guilty on that charge. So, there must have been something there for the first jury beyond his choice of caliber. There must have been some thought on the part of the prosecution or the grand jury that some crime(s) had been committed or they would have never indicted the guy... you cant file charges just based on gun choice or caliber if both were legal for possession and use where the shooting happened. That choice is not, in itself, indicative of a crime.

Certainly arguements like caliber / ammo type could come up, and thats why you have to have a knowledgable attorney who can redivert the attention of the jury away from a non-issue back to the substantial facts of the case. The jury is made up of people, and those people can make flawed decisions. So anything is possible. But I would submit that the overwhelming majority of self-defesnse shootings that happen in this country (and there has been a few ) happen by actors who used guns and ammunition far different than what their local (or any) cops carry... and these types of fluke convictions are just not rampant in the system.

Just two nights ago on the Denver news here in Colorado was a story about a guy who shot and killed a teenager who was one of 2-3 kids who broke into his house in the middle of the night. He fired two shots -- the second struck the teen in the head and killed him on the spot. Gun - Taurus Judge, loaded with .410 buckshot. You just about cant get a situation that is more ripe for "evil" gun and/or ammo choice arguements... but it never happened. The self-defense was clear cut and the man was never charged.

I think, from my perspective, the whole point to what I've said is that "IF" it does happen it would be an incredibly unusual circumstance -- especially when you compare the purported cases to the total number of self defense shootings. And beyond that, since each of us is liable for every bullet we send downrange, we need to be prepared for finding ourselves in court regardless of our gun/ammo choice. Part of that preparation is having a lucid and reasonable arguement for the choices you made, whether you get to articulate those yourself to the jury or whether you have an attorney do the talking for you.

If you get on the stand and say, "I chose a 10mm (which happens to actually be what I carry) becuase I knew it would kill better than anything else" -- well, then you've probably hot a HUGE problem on your hands.

Again, thanks for the cite.