Documented Overpenetration?

[bubbajoe45]

Some good comments here. Certainly, I (and anyone else carrying) should take every reasonable and prudent precaution; Typically, I carry hollowpoints in an unmodified gun, and practice. Hitting the target is fundamental to discharging the firearm to begin with. But, sometimes I am carrying a .44 mag with flat nose bear ammo (not ball) and I stop in town to pick something up. Am I being reckless? Some might argue that having 2 guns would appear more reckless/aggressive/etc.?

My point was more toward the fact that there are more important considerations, as Watchman duly noted. Whether you are justified to begin with; whether you do everything right beforehand, hit the target, and still get shot and killed - will you be concerned about litigation from an injured 3rd party? Yes, they'll sue your family, but you still did what you could. I'm not saying it's not a concern - just down the list a ways; a lot of other stars have to align first.

 

[NE450No2]

If I am on a hunting trip with my 44Mag, I always make sure I have a few "Urban" HP loads with me if I go to town.

If I am traveling in a vehicle to the hunt, and the 44 is my main carry gun then I have "Urban" loads and hunting loads.

As others have stated you are responsible for any shots your fire.

In the case where one "buddy" sued his friend that saved him from a bad beating... It is a good idea to tell your "buddies" to be prepared to save themselves.

I bet the "buddy" had to pay his own legal fees as well.

 

[cp1969]

Worry about the 'ultimate' in overpenetration first--the outright misses. They didn't even get slowed down any. Now you've got ultra-deadly JHPs flying downrange at full power, and whoever they collide with is going to be less amused than if you hit them with a round nose.

 

[cmort666]

Worry about the 'ultimate' in overpenetration first--the outright misses. They didn't even get slowed down any. Now you've got ultra-deadly JHPs flying downrange at full power, and whoever they collide with is going to be less amused than if you hit them with a round nose.

I'm sure that plaintiff's lawyer will be equally amused, regardless of with what you shoot his client.

 

[Kanewpadle]

Yup, might as well get out your checkbook. And that's after you've given up your guns and your right to carry.

And maybe a little jail time to boot.

 

[NE450No2]

Many, many years ago, even before high capacity semi autos were the main gun carried by the police, it was a studied fact that 85% of the rounds fired by the Police were misses.

So why worry about the over penetration of the 15% that actually hit???


However IF, you pick "Urban" ammo, that is carried by some local PD, or some big city PD in your state, or one of the big Fed Agencies, or some ammo that the manufacture claims as their pick for Personal Protection, then when on the stand IF asked, you can simly state, "I picked my ammo baised upon.... They are experts, I am not"...

 

[Massad Ayoob]

Thanks to the lawyers for chipping in their hard-earned real world experience on the issue.

Attempting to marginalize over-penetration concerns by invoking the dangers of missed shots is really an apples and oranges thing.

When we fire in self-defense, a missed shot that strikes an unseen bystander can be honestly and persuasively argued as the perpetrator's fault, not ours. We have made our best, good-faith effort to hit what we were aiming at. However, the violent perpetrator's actions have caused us to fire, perhaps at a bobbing, weaving man while moving desperately ourselves to avoid his gunfire. It is quite likely that it will be ruled that the lawless actions of the perpetrator who forced us to shoot at him, and not our best-effort, good-faith attempt to stop him, was actually the proximate cause of our miss that caused the bystander's injury.

However, if we have knowingly ignored the danger of over-penetration, deliver a perfect shot, and the bullet PREDICTABLY exits and strikes down an innocent bystander whom we knew or should have known might have been behind him and out of our view, it's much more likely to be seen as our fault.

Anyone not familiar with the term "deliberate indifference" is respectfully requested to look it up before continuing the discussion.

A defense of "I ignored the danger of over-penetration because I was more worried about the danger of misses" is likely to be spun by opposing counsel -- and interpreted by a lay jury -- as you saying, "I didn't worry about THIS life-threatening danger I presented to the innocent, because I was planning to present a much GREATER danger to the lives of the innocent." I wouldn't expect that argument to last long in court.

 

[writerinmo]

My personal experience with any legal action is to say as little as possible...

 

[cp1969]

So you expect a jury to buy the argument that spraying ammo down the street is an acceptable, non-prosecutable risk but a round that goes thru a bad guy isn't? If that logic holds, then the person you hit with one of your stray rounds has no case against you but the the person who got hit with a round that went through the bad guy does.

I don't know who on a jury might buy that argument but I would not one of them. That is utterly contrary to any logical conclusion I can reach.

Also, could you elaborate on "predictably" exiting? I have yet to see the bullet that could be 100% reliably predicted as to what it will do when it hits a target. For one thing, targets vary considerably. A 400 lb man is a lot more apt to stop a bullet than a 100 lb one. For which one do I prepare when arming myself?

 

[38-44HD45]

Until you have conducted, been the subject of, or at least witnessed a skilled cross-examination, some of what Mas has said may not click right away. I don't think he was talking about "spraying bullets," but rather an understandable miss during a dynamic shooting event.

"Predictability" is a moving target. In the case I mentioned above, the young man I was hired to assist had almost no handgun shooting experience before the incident and was not a CHL holder. The shooting occurred in his home. The ball ammo he used was given to him when he bought the pistol, which he'd not even taken to the range yet. My report said, and my testimony would have been, that he would have had no reason to predict that overpenetration would take place.

What if Mas or I, or a CHL-holder who had received some training had been the shooter? Different scenario. We should know that 9mm ball is an overpenetrating SOB. Actually, in my case, even with the extensive background I have, I was surprised that every single round overpenetrated. Won't be a surprise if there is a next time.

 

[bitstream]

I found this article (Best Choices for Self Defense Ammo) while doing some research into ammo choices. It includes some good information on over penetration and has some interesting data from tests. Pretty interesting stuff.

I am now carrying Federal 180gr HST in .40s&w and was happy to see how it faired in the tests.

 

[watchmanjimg]

I just took a look and found the comments regarding the use of .357 in J-frames particularly interesting.

I'm curious to hear what others think. Is there truly no point to carrying a J-frame .357 unless it's loaded with .38s?

 

[cshoff]

So you expect a jury to buy the argument that spraying ammo down the street is an acceptable, non-prosecutable risk but a round that goes thru a bad guy isn't? If that logic holds, then the person you hit with one of your stray rounds has no case against you but the the person who got hit with a round that went through the bad guy does.

I don't know who on a jury might buy that argument but I would not one of them. That is utterly contrary to any logical conclusion I can reach.

Also, could you elaborate on "predictably" exiting? I have yet to see the bullet that could be 100% reliably predicted as to what it will do when it hits a target. For one thing, targets vary considerably. A 400 lb man is a lot more apt to stop a bullet than a 100 lb one. For which one do I prepare when arming myself?

The difference is that one of the situations (a clean miss) can be demonstrably shown as a bona fide accident, where as the other situation (over-penetration due to poor ammunition selection) can be "convincingly" shown as negligence. Numerous States have laws that exempt you from liability in the case of a bona fide accident. Negligence, on the other hand, not so much.

Don't ever make an assumption as to the level of critical thinking skills a "jury of your peers" may possess based on your own critical thinking skills. A skilled prosecutor who desires a conviction can and will make some very convincing arguments against you, regardless of whether you were "in the right" or not. Supposed "impartial" juries cave in to emotion and their own sense of morality all the time.

 

[cmort666]

The difference is that one of the situations (a clean miss) can be demonstrably shown as a bona fide accident, where as the other situation (over-penetration due to poor ammunition selection) can be "convincingly" shown as negligence. Numerous States have laws that exempt you from liability in the case of a bona fide accident. Negligence, on the other hand, not so much.

I wouldn't expect a successful CRIMINAL prosecution for a miss that hits an innocent in an otherwise good shoot. On the other hand, I'd expect a bloodbath in civil court.

Ohio makes people who participate in good shoots immune from suit from their attackers. There's no such protection from innocent third parties.

1. Hit at whom you aim.
2. Use appropriate ammunition.

Prudence in the latter could be the difference between compensatory and punitive damages in a civil suit if you do get sued. It's evidence of "due diligence".

 

[38-44HD45]

I just took a look and found the comments regarding the use of .357 in J-frames particularly interesting.

I'm curious to hear what others think. Is there truly no point to carrying a J-frame .357 unless it's loaded with .38s?

The problem with their comments, like a lot of the comments from that site, is that they paint with too broad a brush. For instance, in my 2 1/4" SP-101, Federal 125gr. JHP .357 gets 1230 fps. and has a lot of flash and blast. Is that enough improvement over +P 135gr. Speer snubby loads to justify the downside? Maybe, maybe not. In the same gun, Cor-Bon 125gr. JHP runs at 1420 fps., with almost no flash. Is that enough to matter? I think it is.

Also, they ignore (or pre-date) the existence of loads like Speer Short Barrel .357s and Golden Saber 125gr. loads. Both those have little more recoil than .38+P, and both get substantially better ballistics from a snubby than can be had with .38+P.

In short, my snubby .357s stay loaded with .357s.

 

[cshoff]

I wouldn't expect a successful CRIMINAL prosecution for a miss that hits an innocent in an otherwise good shoot. On the other hand, I'd expect a bloodbath in civil court.

Ohio makes people who participate in good shoots immune from suit from their attackers. There's no such protection from innocent third parties.

1. Hit at whom you aim.
2. Use appropriate ammunition.

Prudence in the latter could be the difference between compensatory and punitive damages in a civil suit if you do get sued. It's evidence of "due diligence".

And that may very well be the same thing you'll find in other states as well (that is how Missouri law works). A "miss" that was ruled "accidental" may subject you to civil liability, but not criminal liability.

Negligence, on the other hand, is almost certain to be considered a criminal act in most states. In the case of negligence, you would then be subject to criminal AND civil liability.

 

[oldman45]

I feel that negligence will be more in a civil case. Intentional acts are more of a criminal matter.

Maybe an accidental injury to a third party could be considered negligence but I have never had a case where that was an issue.

In any case, a gunshot wound is going to be costly to the shooter if it involves a third party.

 

[sheriffoconee]

Again I ask....
Where are the citations, jury awards, transcripts, etc of all these gloom and doom "negligence for using ball ammo, or some-other-ammo-that-may-or-may-not-overpenetrate" cases????
There are court records, real ones, filed in court clerk offices that document these events. I would love to read them for myself, instead of relying on a series of conclusions based on what may or may not be based on actual proceedings held in courthouses across these United States.
Anyone???

 

[Massad Ayoob]

Check with NYPD, Sheriff. They should have lots of paperwork on file, given the number of problems they experienced with overpenetration before they went to JHP. Google search should turn up the NY Times article with the stats.

best,
Mas

 

[sheriffoconee]

I recognize cases from NYPD. Someone, somewhere must be teaching these concepts Mas, and if so, I would assume that there is a resource library of case references. I teach within our agency, at the Northeast Georgia Regional Police Academy, the Georgia Public Safety Training Center, the University of Georgia, the Georgia Sheriff's Association, and of course at our local public schools on occasion.
I teach from a lesson plan, that references cases on any number of issues, including liability, search and seizure, criminal procedure, on and on.
Certainly there is a reference library with case citations, transcripts, etc, that can be researched???
I am not talking about a case or two out of NYC, in which municipal and county governments will sometimes settle or agree to out of court settlements to "cut their potential losses".
Where are the cases of regular folks, using a handgun or rifle to defend themselves in a justified deadly force encounter, where a bullet passing through a target into an innocent bystander resulted in a jury verdict award that was upheld on appeal???
Thanks, and as always, I appreciate your concern over these issues Mas.