"Less Lethal" ammunition

[Aloha_Shooter]

So after watching all the crap Zimmerman had to go through and the way the media jumps on anyone who uses a gun for self-defense these days, I got to thinking about using "less lethal" ammunition for home or self defense. A quick search found 12 GA shotgun ammunition for about $5-6 per shot and pistol ammunition for about $3 per shot (although they say the pistol ammunition will not cycle the action on semi-automatics). At that cost, I can't see doing much practice with the ammunition and I prefer the idea of practicing as you're going to fight but ... the prospect of avoiding the kind of crap Zimmerman went through might be worth 5 or 6 rounds a quarter or even month ...

Not putting the assailant down permanently is possibly an obvious disadvantage -- but legally might be an advantage. I think most of us agree the very act of self-defense is often enough to dissuade many attacks, especially the kind of mall or school assaults we've seen recently.

Any other advantages or disadvantages beyond cost, legal repercussions, or possible follow-up attacks? Is there a potential burgeoning market here for home- and self-defense?

[spqrzilla]

What happens when you kill someone with "less lethal" ammunition? At your trial for murder, the prosecutor points out that you "obviously" were not in fear for your life because you used "less lethal" ammunition, so you have no self defense claim ... Likewise when the family of the 'victim' sues you.

For that matter, when you use the "less lethal" ammunition and the other guy survives, a prosecution for aggravated assault ensues.

And lastly, you must be very careful that you don't mix up, and shoot someone with lethal rounds thinking you had loaded "less lethal".

Over all, I'm not interested.

[BREATHER]

I've been saying this all over and here several times. Hard working, law abiding, tax paying America citizens DO NOT WANT TO KILL anyone, we just want to stop a piece of shit from hurting or killing our family members or ourselves when the said POS is committing a crime.. The Libtard media and all the criminal politicians that want to disarm us don't get it. or they get it but don't want to say it... But they do know it regardless of what diahria comes out of their mouths..

[merl]

The only case where you can use the less lethal stuff you'd also be justified using the lethal stuff. I don't see any advantage other than not killing someone (reliably) and the disadvantage is potentially not stopping the threat immediately (as you pointed out)

Dont think I'd fault you if you wanted to load a beanbag round as the first shot and buck after that but I wouldn't expect it to gain much sympathy from the justice system.

[rbeau30]

I agree with spqrzilla, they are going to say (whether you being charged with murder or afterwards during your civil trial) if you have enough time to choose or utilize less than lethal rounds, you were not in imminent fear for your life.

EDIT to add: Just like when you use a "tactically-modified" firearm for self defense, that will also open up all kinds of cans of worms during the trials afterwards. Then they have a way of painting a picture of you obsessed with evil guns and killing.

[newracer]

Using less lethal ammunition is not going to reduce the amount of crap you will have to go through if you shoot someone in self defense. Especially if it is not in your home.

[MED]

If you have to pull your firearm on an attacker, it will change your life...period. I say buy one of the top 3 self defence loads for your caliber and hope you never need to use them. If you do, have a good attorney; and be damn sure you are justified when using lethal force. Awareness and avoidance are always the best tools as a civilian just going about your business. I put more stock in these skills than what kind of ammunition I use. A controlled pair of whatever I put in my firearm at close range in the thoracic cavity will likely be lethal...lethal or less lethal...doesn't matter; you are discharging your firearm on another human being, and there will be legal, liability, and emotional consequences for all involved.

[speedysst]

Yep and dead bad guys don't testify.

Using less lethal ammunition is not going to reduce the amount of crap you will have to go through if you shoot someone in self defense. Especially if it is not in your home.

[kidicarus13]

Have you ever witnessed less-than-lethal not work as designed on someone? Now what? If you don't have option #2 now what? Shoot until you're empty and then die? Premium hollow-points for me. I'll protect me and mine to the best of my ability and then worry about the rest later.

[cmailliard]

Have you ever witnessed less-than-lethal not work as designed on someone? Now what? If you don't have option #2 now what? Shoot until you're empty and then die? Premium hollow-points for me. I'll protect me and mine to the best of my ability and then worry about the rest later.

This - this is why LE are not supposed to deploy Less Lethal unless they have lethal cover. You always hear "why did they not use a taser" more often than not it is because there is only one officer on scene, if he/she deploys less lethal and it does not work (quite often) then they are in a world of hurt. The same can be applied to a non-LEO situation.

There was a video out not to long ago where a LEO was in a house with a guy and a knife I think. You hear him ask almost pleading for more officers to arrive and get in here. If I had to guess he did not want to shoot this guy and was hoping a second Officer could arrive and deploy less lethal, but because he was by himself he had his handgun out. If a second Officer were to arrive he/she could have deployed a taser and given them more options. As it stood the guy closed in on the Officer and he shot him.