Alphecca

I am not aware of many prosecutions for self-defense shootings in NJ. However, there's no question that NJ prosecutors and LEOs have too much leeway and not enough accountability when it comes to defining and enforcing gun laws.

Having said that, I've recently begun to wonder about the actual frequency of self-defense situations (excluding LEOs). Obviously, such events do occur. Furthermore, some locations and situations will be higher risk than others. However, it seems to me that the shooting community has embraced a worldview that overstates the actual danger. Maybe this is a reaction to the half-truths of gun critics, but I wonder if we place too much emphasis on this theme.

Even assuming the risk assessment is reasonable, how many gun owners are properly trained for self-defense situations? I'm fairly new to the sport, but when I go to a gun store or firing range and see some of the people with guns it scares the hell out of me. Frankly, I'm more concerned about getting shot by a bozo than a criminal.

I don't know the answers. I'm just tossing out the questions. The floor is open for rebuttal.

NJ Gun Owner

Sure 15 states have recently passed this legislation, but they should include the states that have had such laws for a long time, just like my own Washington State. Here, if you are charged with a crime such as murder, manslaughter, assault etc, and then found to have acted in justifiable self defense, the state MUST pay you compensation for legal fees and so forth by law. The only state that does this, IIRC. From http://ofarmsandthelaw

"When a person charged with a crime listed in subsection (1) of this section is found not guilty by reason of self-defense, the state of Washington shall reimburse the defendant for all reasonable costs, including loss of time, legal fees incurred, and other expenses involved in his or her defense..."

Considering how "liberal" NJ politicians can be in protecting the rights of criminals (their natural constituency), I fear it will not pass muster. Although I would take as a trade-off an explict authorization for homeowners to defend themselves with hollowpoints, which is what the Police here carry. Right now, it's prudent for the homeowner to NOT load hollowpoints for fear of the automatic extra 5-years for using them in the commission of a crine...namely; defending yourself, even if retreating.
The general concensus at the ammo counter is that the only "legal" ammo is FMJ, lead wadcutters and lead roundnose; none of which are nearly as effective as the myriad hollowpoint designs out-there. Even the Glazers and Corbon Powr-points are questionable since the are still marketed as hollowpoints with a polymer filler.
At-minimum, we shoud be allowed to carry whatever the standard-load used by our local Police or State Police is.

Jeff, I particulary like how you call the Brady group "pro-crime" in relation to their stance on issues like this. That really tells it like it is.

Cops can shoot unarmed people all day and not face prosecution, a homeowner can shoot an armed intruder and be charged with a crime. Have we returned to a system where our governors are supposed to be direct descendants of God? Our servants are now our masters? Our prosecutors are our persecutors? These are not rhetorical questions.