Quote Originally Posted by stroguy View Post
I agree that factory loads are more reliable but I do not agree with the premise of a prosecutor swaying a jury with that comment. First a grand jury would have to see merit in a self-defense case needing to come before a jury. Then, a gun is already a deadly weapon and when used as I was taught in the military and taught now in my continued training, when I shoot, I shoot to kill. The best way to stop a threat is to kill it dead, it don't get stopped much better than that. If I decide to not carry a gun for protection but instead a knife which is legal size under state law am I not allowed to sharpen the knife? Could a prosecutor tell a jury that I sharpened the knife to be a more deadly weapon? No, just more effective at the intended purpose.

I completely agree with your reasoning, I didn't say that it was correct, I said that the prosecutor will try to use it against you. You have to remember who is in the jury, it is NOT a jury of our peers as they tell you, it is not a jury of people that carry guns for protection. I grant you that mostly depends on where you live, but even most gun owners are not truly knowledgable. I know lots of gun owners that are against "assault weapons," mostly because they are clueless. The percentage of gun owners that actually do any training is tiny.

Your arguments are correct, but to a non gun person they can make a lot of sense. A prosecutor's job is to make you look like a vicious killer and anything that puts a crack in your defense in the eyes of the jury helps him convict you. The less guilty you are, the more the prosecutor will lie and use dirty tricks. Enough cracks in your defense and you become guilty. Same reason that I won't carry a knife that says "Annihilator" on it. The knife is no more deadly with that name, its how the prosecutor will paint you with it. I know some experts that carry a pink knife because it will look less deadly to ignorant jury members. Remember, AR15s are vilified because of their color. The same rifle in a wood stock looks pretty instead of scary to the ignorant.

It's is not about what is correct or not, its how a prosecutor can vilify you in the eyes of a clueless jury. Here's a good example of a dirty trick: A prosecutor will say something to the jury or ask a leading and illegal question to a witness even though he knows that it will be objected to and stricken from the record. The jury will to be told to disregard it, but its too late, it will never be forgotten.

If we are forced into a situation where lethal force needs to be applied, we should do so in a manner which gives as little “ammunition” as possible to the prosecutor to use against us. Sure, we can bring in experts to counter the lies of the prosecutor, but regardless of the strength our counter arguments, the truth is no guarantee that we will change the minds of the jury. Not a lot of point of winning the gunfight only to be hung by the jury.

Remember the old saying that “a grand jury could indict a ham sandwich?” That’s because a grand jury is a one-way street. The prosecutor presents his lies and there is no defense allowed. Indictments are all but guaranteed.