You have a beautiful carry gun but what happens to it if you have to use it?

You have a beautiful carry gun but what happens to it if you have to use it?

I don't have any beautiful guns, and no desire to own one. I do though have a number of very nice handguns, most of which get carried from time to time. If I ever had to use one for real, I'd be REALLY HAPPY that I was alive to worry about getting it back.
 
My then-finace-now-wife bought me a Colt Lawman .357 snub as a BUG/ODG for our engagement in 1979. Her comment was she was investing in getting me back at end of watch. She did. It later became my nightstand gun. About 10 years ago I had this same thought - knowing what I know about how guns in evidence are treated, would I want my "engagement ring" to be MIA for an extended period?

I retired it to the safe. The difference is that in 1979 the Colt was replacing an utterly unreliable Browning .32 war trophy, which was what I could afford. Now I have plenty of options, at least the equal of what I retired, for self defense.

So, ironically, what was for almost 30 years a daily tool is a keepsake that doesn't fulfill its intended function.
 
You should carry something you shoot well in CQC simulation, and is powerful enough to stop the attacker.

Having charges dismissed is not sufficient to assure your firearm is returned. You need a court order to retrieve it from the police. They know it, and will give you a run-around indefinitely until you get the order, keeping you in the dark.

If it's a justified shooting why would there be charges to be dismissed? Depending on where you live a court order isn't always needed, yeah we give every person who legally defends themselves the "run-around" indefinitely all the while keeping them in the dark until they get the nearly impossible to obtain court order.

Yep...as a Detective I always try to defend the guy killed while trying to do an assault, home invasion or robbery rather than the legally armed VICTIM who defends themselves while following state law and exercising their second amendment rights.....

Are you one of those "Sea Lawyers" they talked about while I was in the Marines?
 
I was really surprised......

I was really surprised at the shape Lee H Oswald's revolver was in when it was returned to his brother. Many people had scratched info right into the finish all kinds of numbers, names and notes.:(:(:(
 
I think people way over-think this. The vast majority of justifiable self defense shootings are pretty cut and dried. The authorities aren't going to confiscate your hand gun if you're clearly in the right.

This comment is 100% wrong. Even LEO guns used in shootings are taken as evidence. The police will take your gun... maybe not forever and if returned with an only an evidence tag attached, consider yourself lucky. If you gun is sent to a forensic lab it will receive additional engraving by way of a case number.
 
You owned a gun. You loved your gun, you named it Brad, and for four years, you believe that nothing could ever replace Brad if it were used in self defense and taken by the state. But, your local gun store offers an awesome "Election 2016 Super Sale!" So you break into your happy dance!
 
Last edited:
This is why I carry a Glock "GASP,"( yea, I hear you) as I do not care/need to lose anything of value to include my life. Glocks work, and I can always get another one. Kyle
 
This is why I love my used and well worn matte finish Colt M1991A1 with the old roll mark. While she might not be a high end Wilson 1911, I get perfect reliability with all .45 ACP ammo, and good combat accuracy with those high Series 80 sights. Basically ugly on the outside but Colt quality inside. There is not much a man can ask for in a 1911 for defense to be honest. I would be too scared to use $3000 1911 for defense carry use!
 
That's why I carry a Glock. They can keep it as long as they wish. I can get another one just like it in less than an hour.

I agree with your statement in the present tense. Unfortunately there is election in the near future and I am concerned our gun rights are in serious jeopardy! It might not be a bad idea to pick up that extra Glock now!
 
Here in California most handguns are no longer on the roster, so a gun might quite literally be irreplaceable. Also if you use a gun in justified self defense, it will be destroyed. You are never getting it back.

My carry gun is a Shield 9mm. Reasonably priced, accurate, reliable, and easy to replace.

Next spring we are moving to Free America, and I am still sticking with the Shield.
 
Folks, I have followed this thread with keen interest. Honestly, I am of the belief that I would rather be alive to fret on the fate of my sidearm used in self defense that having the eternal view of roots!

That being said, is it typically the case where a person that uses a firearm for self defense is not only stripped of the arm used in self defense, but also any and all arms owned by the person that defended themselves? If this is the case, is it also likely that the successful defender would be flagged and prevented from purchasing replacement firearms?

I noted that Second Call Defense lists in their above base policies, that they will either retrieve or replace the firearm used in a self defense shooting. Is this advertising bait? I would think in today's world, anyone that has to use lethal force in self defense would need the assurance afforded by a firearm, considering the retribution and friends that their attackers may have.

What really is the S.O.P. concerning the retention of Second Amendment rights when a person HAS to use lethal force in defense of themselves and their loved ones? It sounds like the trend is punish a person for successfully defending themselves in a justifiable shooting, if someone takes the content of this thread to heart.

The bottom line of this thread seems to suggest that justice sides with the wolves, not the sheep and the sheepdogs!
 
That being said, is it typically the case where a person that uses a firearm for self defense is not only stripped of the arm used in self defense, but also any and all arms owned by the person that defended themselves? If this is the case, is it also likely that the successful defender would be flagged and prevented from purchasing replacement firearms?
Can you name a single case where this actually happened?


Most on here are delusional. You're so worried about losing your gun, you've forgotten to protect yourselves. If the main reason you pick a gun to carry is that you're not afraid to lose it, then you have the wrong reasoning.

If you're carrying a gun just to say that you're carrying a gun, then fine, carry one based on the thought you'll lose it. However, if you're carrying one to save your life one day, don't you want one that you can save your life with? Shouldn't being able to use it effectively be the top priority?

Sure, if you can use the el-cheapo gun effectively, carry that one. Just don't base your carry gun simply based on price.
 
Agreed, Rastoff. But there is more to it to me. It's like jewelry. If you are going to wear a gun almost all the time, then wear something nice! Don't go thru life with an ugly gun.
 
Two pages of postings and still no correct answer.

If you don't want your special carry gun confiscated after using it to successfully defend your life, just don't use it while being attacked. Your heirs will have a nice gun to remember you by.

There's a solution for every problem... just got to think it through!
 
Back
Top