Radically Invasive Projectile rounds

>imagine fucking up a shooting so badly you end up in court
In any defensive shooting, there's always a chance some overzealous, bleeding-heart prosecutor is gonna go out of his way to convict you of murder.
Remember, they're not there to figure out what happened. They want a conviction so they can get elected.

they suck, theyre a meme to sell to people who dont do their research.
The petals dont penetrate near enough to reach vitals and the core barely does.

>it COULD happen
Yeah, but hasnt.

It does frequently you tosser

while this seems to pretty much be internet consensus, i've been doing some small game hunting with segmented .22 rounds and it's surprisingly effective. animals that would run for a minute or two from a solid .22 drop instantly from a segmented one. this applies to rip rounds because they have been declared equivalent to one solid .22 and two segmented shots. that sounds pretty destructive based on seeing what actual fragments to do tissue and i've been reconsidering picking up a few boxes.
youtube.com/watch?v=psGFPRpWZ3w

>equivalent to one solid .22 and two segmented shots
>that sounds pretty destructive
.22 also doesn't have adequate penetration to be considered an effective round for self-defense. While it can reach vitals and go through skulls, it won't do so reliably.

based on testing criteria, but in the real world .22 kill stuff pretty good.

anecdotally, i knew the guy who semi-legally sold Maitz the gun and ammo, it was a .22 with segmented hollow points. he only shot the bear once or twice.
nbcconnecticut.com/news/local/Bear-Shot-in-Burlington-Officials-151535035.html

Attached: Fatalities-900x654.jpg (900x654, 65K)

This graph is meaningless. Doesn’t account for number of shots impacting, or make any distinction between eventually lethal and immediate incapacitation.

here, more charts. the only place it fails is failure to incapacitate, and i'm positive that number would be lower if they were segmented .22 rounds.
thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/06/foghorn/ask-foghorn-22l-for-self-defense/

Attached: RoundsToIncap.jpg (911x662, 81K)

>sticking around after you shoot them

top zozzle

Failure to incapacitate is the biggest reason not to use .22 for self defense.
Everything else is irrelevant.

Just whip out your badge and custom "you're fucked" engraved upper, no charges filed.

Do these rounds offer significant advantages over your run of the mill hollow points? And if so, is the extra cost worth it?

The only round that are demonstrably superior to your standard JHP are the Liberty rounds which can pen soft armor. Otherwise, you're not getting anything noticeably extra, and they're certainly not 4x as effective despite being 4x the price.

>based on testing criteria
No. I didn't say anything about testing, I said .22 cannot reach vitals and penetrate skulls reliably.

>but in the real world .22 kill stuff pretty good
No, it's not. Your graph has nothing to do with whether .22 can reliably penetrate or not and is completly devoid of any context.

Can .22 kill? Yes. Can it do so reliably? No. Not something you want to bet your life on.

This chart is also meaningless. People don't magically stop shooting the moment attacker is in fact incapacitated, they shoot until they personally think it's enough. Not to mention factors such as gun used (you are way more likely to shoot more rounds with a 9mm handgun than you are with a .22 bolt action), context of the shooting, etc.

i'm interested in seeing your quantitative data

Attached: rip-round2.png (494x305, 185K)

If you think 22 can't reliably kill someone that you just shot 5+ times in the chest/neck/face then... idk. Maybe you're dumb.

Why would you use a 22 bolt action in a gun fight?
Why would you use a 22 bolt action at all honestly.

>”Who is this Zimmerman guy I keep hearing about?”

You must be underage. The only explanation that makes sense is that you were too young to understand when poor skittles boy was all over the news.

>Ranger Ts

just use FMJ and don't think about anything else

>running from the scene in this day in age where cameras are everywhere

see you in prison

this

That's gay af. And that's cumming from someone who edc hardcast boolets.

>broad stroke lawful good
simpleton

He was in my house.
He broke in.
He had a hammer.
He threatened me.
He got shot until he was no longer a threat.

it could be inferred that because you have killer meme rounds you wanted to shoot the intruder regardless of their intent to harm you. also by the fact that you didnt call 911 first.

depens on what state.
in my state you would be cleared right away with stand your ground laws.

from what he said if you could read, it's implied the intruder saw him, and you can't predict the future to see if he would actually follow up and attack or fuck off out of your house. It would be very hard to call 911 and wait for the police to arrive in that situation. You can say all he had to do was hold him at gunpoint, but you can't predict what a cornered man with a weapon would do out of desperation so it's better to not take a chance and potentially get yourself killed

They dont feed well in anything, and have poor balistics and terminal effectiveness.

It happens often. Idiot.

Incapacitation is about punching holes in major blood vessels and vital organs, not nasty looking, yet non life threatening flesh wounds. Blowing up hams looks cool on YouTube, but I'd rather have a traditional bonded or solid copper hollow point in a real shootout.

>punching holes in major blood vessels and vital organs
doesn't multiple wound channels increase the chance of that over a single 18" deep hole? how deep do you think the average person's heart is inside their body?

No it doesn't.

No one has ever been convicted because "omg he used a certain bullet and regardless of any other facts this means ur a murderer"

Not really. There is no state that says stupid shit like that.

Not what we're talking about. We're talking about
>"OMG he used a gun on a good boi who dindu nuffin! He's a murdering white supremacist!"
OP here, just took a CC class. Instructor and a cop there both said the courts will treat you as guilty until proven innocent, even if you were obviously in the right.

Cops aren't lawyers and neither is the instructor. Taking advice from a cop is like saying you'll let a cop search your trunk because you have nothing to hide.

My cc instructor handed out pamphlets about NY self defense law that were wrong across the board like "you can only defend yourself within 21 feet" which is nonsense it doesn't appear in any law in NY.

Self defense despite what people tell you is cut and dry in NY. Did you or did you not hold a reasonable belief that you were in danger. That's really it, and the law reads specifically that the litmus test is up to you not what the prosecutor says. The prosecutor literally has to prove that you somehow were not in danger AND that you couldn't possibly have felt in danger.

Why the fuck would you be on the stand?

>"you can only defend yourself within 21 feet"
I think that was more about how far an attacker needs to be to close in on you in a split second.

You would be 6 feet under not in court because you tried to defend yourself from tyrone on crack with metal toothpicks.

Yea but in the pamphlet it reads "you can bit use a gun in self defense or defense of another without being within 21 feet" I'll take a Pic of it when I get home

The amount of bulkshit I had to go through to get my ccw especially with dumb literature like this I have no reason to believe that a cop would tell me the truth

Don't forget Black Talon

Well what about somebody who just uses Hollow points over FMJ rounds.

You can also justify protecting yourself over being able to call 911. Saying that calling 911 makes too much noise. Your phone was in the other room.

Being in your own house yeah you may have the opportunity but you might not want to. Especially since all you need to do is claim your phone was dead/in another room. Everyone uses cells now.

You're not obligated to call the police FYI.

No state has any law saying if you defend yourself you have to call the cops beforehand. It's a farce. Stop making self defense more complicated than it has to be.

Real world targets are not often oriented like they are at the shooting range. Quite often bullets need to go through hands, arms, and shoulders before they get to the chest cavity. That's why the FBI wants a minimum of 12 inches of penetration. See also the Miami Dade shootout.

Yeah personally I feel if somebody is willing to break the law (robbery, armed or not) they are basically risking their life.
If you are in somebody's home and you're not invited or an official with a warrant or under duress of emergency, that you are willing to accept that the owner might shoot you for trespassing.
I don't share the same sentiment for places of business but I support the right of say a shop owner to defend themselves.

Call them after and say
>Someone has been shot in self-defense
>I need an officer and an ambulance
>I am willing to cooperate
>but first, I need to speak to an attorney
Then hang up. Do not give the police a statement until you have spoken to an attorney.

OH please the Miami Dade shootout is so overrated its surprising how much documentation there was on it at the same time how much bullshit was invented because of it.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=iv8cByaVyNQ

I wouldn't even say all that I would just say "help I need an officer at (place) he broke into my house and I shot him in defense" no need for "I'm willing to cooperate" or "I'm getting a lawyer" because you do that all in hindsight. Don't talk to the cops when they come, etc.

Some people are so broke they can't afford a hipoint.

>no need for "I'm willing to cooperate" or "I'm getting a lawyer" because you do that all in hindsight.
Telling them those things, over the phone or on the scene, shows your side while preventing you from running your mouth and saying anything that could sink you in court.

Or how about just say nothing?

This.

the last thing you want to do is look like that bitch to a court. google "Byron David Smith".
also, paul harrell provides some insight. considering he's been in court for self defense TWICE, it's worth something.
youtube.com/watch?v=ayd4sxW_RUA

but those contain arteries as well and you still have the penetration of the base chunk of bullet

Because you will be panicking after you just greased someone. And the cops are going to be asking you questions, so you'll be running your mouth to explain yourself. The moment you get Saul Goodman on the line is the moment your attorney-client privilege starts, and he can help you not say or do anything stupid.

If someone has been shot, they are not just going to take your word that it was in self-defense. They're going to open an investigation. May not be the trial of the century, but you won't be let off the hook right then and there.

Maybe if you're in some tyrannical shithole state that deserves to be ejected from the Union.

this. the legal mechanism how it works:
shooting someone is a crime, and if they have probable cause to believe you shooted the invader, they can arrest you.
things like castle doctrine, stand your ground, etc are LEGAL DEFENSES, not exceptions to the law. if the evidence is overwhelming the prosecution (either DA or the AG) decides whether or not to dismiss charges. if they believe there is sufficient evidence to prove you were not acting in self defense, they press charges

>imagine having to explain a round initialed "RIP" to a jury of 50 year old female MSNBC viewers and 30 year old purple haired #nevertrump cool wine aunts and 120lb vegan numales with NPR saved on every preset of their Prius radio

yep just use whatever the local police use

>imagine fucking up a shooting so badly you end up in court
if you live in a cuck state or city you better believe you will be in court even if you shot the guy as he was chainsawing your legs off while raping your 2 year old child and holding an ISIS flag

Attached: 1552615948075.png (414x419, 286K)

its good against small pests like squirrels

>imagine believing your ammo choice could get you convicted
>believing it can't

Do you know who Harold Fish is? He was sentenced to 10 years in prison for defending himself from some nutjob who attacked him while hiking, and one of the primary arguments used against him by the prosecution was that his choice of a 10mm demonstrated that he had a desire to shoot and kill people. This is of course a stupid argument, but it's a stupid argument that was able to convince the jury to find him guilty of second degree murder. Fortunately, the sentence got overturned on appeal. Educate yourself: law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=4266

Underwood extreme defenders are also substantially better than hollowpoints, 2-4x bigger permanent wound cavity. They are also highly reliable in their terminal performance and penetrate well. This all from that FBI study people have been linking.

>80 year old grandma being beaten in the face by 19 year old Tronquavius Washington
>Granny uses pistol loaded with R.I.P. (Racists Ideal Projectile) to MURDER the offender

"Despite the apparent use of force in self defense, We the jury find the defendant guilty of murder due to her use of a cruel racist bullet as evidence of premeditated intent to murder young Tronquavius

>hewasagoodboy.jgp
>helovedschool.jpg

>Fortunately, the sentence got overturned on appeal.
Sooo your ammo choice cant get you convicted legally gotcha.

What if it was hd?

I'm sure Mr. Fish enjoyed spending 3 years of his life in prison because of his choice of caliber before his sentence got overturned.

That's pretty fucked.

.22 can bounce off the bone and hit extra shit inside the body before coming to a stop

Yes, and that's why you're better off just using standard ammunition in a standard caliber rather than meme shit like RIP or 10mm.

so you're saying there is precedent of court decisions involving ammunition usage getting thrown out? good to know.

Attached: 13621371_10153608307111960_2098744008_o.jpg (1600x1200, 463K)

>And one of the primary arguments used against him by the prosecution was that his choice of a 10mm demonstrated that he had a desire to shoot and kill people.
Besides that being objectively wrong Fish was a grade A fucking idiot. The prosecution used the evidence of the size of the hand gun and the ammunition choice for (1) to tie the wounds to the guns (2) to show that Fish knew or did not care that by shooting the victim Fish would kill him. This also leaves out that is was a bad shoot, Fish was a liar, Fish could have but didn't get the testimony about his gun collection and knowledge excluded, that he waived his chances to exclude this testimony in the presence of attorney. This is all covered in paragraphs 29-30 and 39-42 of the appellate case.

This only happened because the judge refused to hear the defense at all. The lawyer didn't challenge it and only after another lawyer DID challenge it did the entire thing get thrown out on appeal.

He didn't get convicted because of his ammo choice, this is fringe bullshit people like you quote and you don't look at exactly what happened which had nothing to do with it in the first place.

this is bullshit, one instance out of millions of DGU makes this a hardcore strawman that you misrepresent from the get go

There is no precedent and never has been. No one has cited this case in other lawsuits let alone citing it AND getting something out of it.,

Thick cloth and American levels of bodyfat cant defeat that round.

But holyshit would it be painful

If you lurk more you will see an unfortunate amount of stories of just this situation.
The state will fuck you if you let it.

Not only that but you cannot cite the appellate case where they discuss the gun detail but for some weird procedural rules.

HURTIN' BURGER BUSCADERO TICONDAS

Attached: 1531689492981.jpg (228x221, 7K)

>Prosecutors get elected in Burgerclapistanislavisrael
Your system is so goddamn stupid. Instead of having the best people with actual qualifications who are there to apply the law, you get popularity contests and inevitable pandering
Yes everyone has biases but they're just exacerbated with this model

Attached: Rage_face.png (409x258, 8K)

More often than not, prosecutors run unopposed because literally no one cares.

Nobody in America participates in municipal politics, that's one of the major reasons why our schools, law enforcement, and urban planning are so bad.

>Glassers
Anything that comes in clamshell wraps of 4 rounds, probably isn't good enough to carry.

Prosecutors get elected in certain counties and states and depends on the state's constitution or city bylaws.

Its not a universal thing. Some prosecutors are appointed by the AG, some AG's are elected and some are appointed.

This pretty much sums it up

youtube.com/watch?v=ayd4sxW_RUA&t=14s

RangersLeadTheWay
For now...

its not the DAs office you need to be worried about. its pedro or jamals family in the very likely civil suit cuz he wuz a good boy he dindu nuffin.

Black Talons were unironically good tho
The lib media frenzy they stirred up was the problem.
They live on today as the Ranger T-Series.

a .22 bolt action costs more than a C9 friend

Holy fuck this dumb meme again.

I've never heard of someone being found not-guilty in a defensive shooting and yet somehow loses a civil suit against the family of the criminal in question.