Massad Ayoob ...

[Tubby45]

It was the Daniel Bias case, and it involved his girlfriend committing suicide.

Yes, that was the one I was thinking of. This seems to be the only handload case Ayoob speaks of, one of his own writings, and doesn't involve self defense.

The big sticking point in the case was the prosecution not being able to replicate the ballistic performance and powder residues to back up Mr. Bias' story. From my understanding, mas did what he could for Mr. Bias, but he ended up doing some jail time. The reason Mas is so adamant about using factory or LEO ammunition is for both civil and criminal reasons. The civil part being the defense that the ammunition you used was recommended by a police officer, or was the regular duty issue ammunition issued by the local police. The criminal part is simple in that if you use a factory load that is easily traceable by investigators, ballistic performance and powder residues can be easily verified, along with your story of how things went down......

Factory ammo isn't always replicated either. But they don't mention that.

(Oh, and that last little unnecessary jibe of yours is utterly at odds with the fact that Ayoob's own spoken and printed words never blur the line between cop and armed citizen; he knows the difference and expects his students to, as well.) What he does state is that one should always, if at all possible, use reliable expanding ammunition for a defensive handgun.

The law regarding use of force and justified force is the SAME FOR POLICE OFFICER AND CIVILIAN ALIKE.

If you did not use factory loaded ammo for which exemplar testing ammo is available from the manufacturer, then you could be unable to introduce a potentially vital piece of evidence in your own defense (i.e., the GPR pattern that shows the badguy was six feet away with the knife, as opposed to thirty feet away like the prosecutor claims).

Keep samples of your loading batch and records. There is no reason why this should be an issue. The factory will have samples from each lot. So can you.

No, he did not provide case references.

You say it's a myth that prosecutors will play the reload card. You're wrong, I've seen it happen.

If we are wrong and he has seen it, then it should be no trouble to look into his notes of court cases he has testified in or witnessed to prove it. He hasn't done this in the 5 years I've been cruising gun forums.

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[Final Option]

Having sit in a courtroom during the trial of one of my brother officers in which Mas was the expert witness...I'll stick by him. He knows his stuff and few if any others out there can bring what he does to the witness stand. He made an entire prosecutors team look incompetent. Granted, in this case it wasn't that hard. The case involved an officer shooting a knife weilding attacker who was advancing on another officer from about 15 feet. I'm not going to go into any more specifics but that officer and many others (including civilians) that were involved in justifiable shootings owe their freedom and lives to the man. He is top notch in my book.

[blackhawkbill]

Ayoob has been around since i was a little boy [ 40 years ] you don't get old being stupid or incompetent ....

[kazzaerexys]

The law regarding use of force and justified force is the SAME FOR POLICE OFFICER AND CIVILIAN ALIKE.

Nope, sorry. Police are authorized to use necessary force, non-police are only allowed equal force. Police may, under certain circumstances, have a duty to employ lethal force, non-police never have a duty to do so. To suggest that Ayoob has taught his students to "want to be cops or something" is to imply that he elides these differences. He does not.

If we are wrong and he has seen it, then it should be no trouble to look into his notes of court cases he has testified in or witnessed to prove it. He hasn't done this in the 5 years I've been cruising gun forums.

Other than the Bias case. Whether or not it was self defense, the fact seems to be that Bias could not use admissible evidence to demonstrate that his wife, not he, pulled the trigger, which I presume comes down to establishing the distance from which the shot was fired---something that would be very relevant in an SD shooting.

[cwblanco]

Nope, sorry. Police are authorized to use necessary force, non-police are only allowed equal force. Police may, under certain circumstances, have a duty to employ lethal force, non-police never have a duty to do so. To suggest that Ayoob has taught his students to "want to be cops or something" is to imply that he elides these differences. He does not.

Having tried several shooting cases in the criminal and civil rights arena, I think that upon proper research of this question you will find that the conduct of both police and civilians must be reasonable, and that the "equal force" statement is not a correct statement of law.

Ayoob is a good authority on the topic. However, you must remember that most of his appearances are as a hired expert witness, and in that context he is an advocate, although most experts will contend that they are not an advocate and are completely objective. That is why we have "cross-examination." Still though, that does not negate Ayoob's knowledge. If I were accused of an unlawful shooting as a civilian or as a LEO, I would certainly like to have him on my team.

[MitchellCT]

Nope, sorry. Police are authorized to use necessary force, non-police are only allowed equal force. Police may, under certain circumstances, have a duty to employ lethal force, non-police never have a duty to do so. To suggest that Ayoob has taught his students to "want to be cops or something" is to imply that he elides these differences. He does not.



Other than the Bias case. Whether or not it was self defense, the fact seems to be that Bias could not use admissible evidence to demonstrate that his wife, not he, pulled the trigger, which I presume comes down to establishing the distance from which the shot was fired---something that would be very relevant in an SD shooting.

Actually, the standard for law enforcement and everyone else is "force which is subjectively and objectively reasonable".

Was your force reasonable to you, at that moment, knowing what you knew, seeing what you saw and feeling what you felt...

And in reviewing it afterwards, the trier of fact evaluates if your decision at that moment was reasonable.

And speaking as to the tests for GSR, from my own experience in dealing with a criminal matter for a client, GSR requires the same gun and the same ammo used in the crime for the test to have any meaning.

I wanted to have a GSR test to determine distance of the shooter to the victim; however, among other issues we had from this gem of a case, we didn't have any exemplar ammo on hand.

The case plead out (this was NOT a case involving a guy with a carry permit who was a member of the PTA on his way home from visiting the elderly in the hospital who was set upon by MS-13 thugs who were shooting up a shopping mall...in fact the words "Felon with firearm" & "Federal Time" were going to start being uttered...) before it got any further, but the State's Attorney was not going to be happy with accepting ammo for testing that didn't come from the crime scene.

Hand loads, even documented hand loads, would be a certified nightmare for a court case.

That is why, from my own experience, I am so against them.

But then again, what the hell do I know? I'm only a lawyer.

Ayoob may not be cutting edge, but he has something many other instructors don't have: Authority.

He has been involved in training LE and the rest of us for so long "his word is law".

Not many people have that, and you want that on your side.

[edr9x23super]

I will repeat what I said in a previous post regarding Mas: WHY DON'T YOU ASK HIM TO PROVIDE SOME MORE INFO, AND I AM SURE HE WILL ACCOMODATE YOU.....

In fact, I think i am going to do just that......

[Musketeer]

Nobody is 100% so I went with 80%.

If you had included "Mas is the Man! +95%" I would have voted that way.

[Thumper]

I too went with the 80%.

Mas knows one hell of a lot more than I do but there are a couple of his techniques I just don't agree with. Not that his are wrong, just not right for me.

[Tubby45]

Nope, sorry. Police are authorized to use necessary force, non-police are only allowed equal force. Police may, under certain circumstances, have a duty to employ lethal force, non-police never have a duty to do so.

The laws regarding the use of force apply to both civilian and police alike. Civilians and police officers are justified in using reasonable force to stop a life threatening action.

When an officer uses deadly force, the investigation is treated as a homicide and the pending question was "was the officer justifed in using deadly force to stop the threat?" When a civilian uses deadly force, the investigation is treated as a homicide and the pending question was "was the civilian justifed in using deadly force to stop the threat?"

While in cop school I have had this crap drilled into my head. When I get to the academy it will be drilling in my head again. When I hit the streets, it won't change.

I will repeat what I said in a previous post regarding Mas: WHY DON'T YOU ASK HIM TO PROVIDE SOME MORE INFO, AND I AM SURE HE WILL ACCOMODATE YOU.....

In fact, I think i am going to do just that......

And I'll repeat what I said that he has never all the times me and others have asked him. Never.

[QKShooter]

OK the "yelling" in all CAPS is adding nothing beneficial to this thread so please end that. Thanks.

[Bumper]

My recommendation would be those of you that believe his experience means nothing, find someone else to testify as an expert witness when the SHTF and those that do have confidence in him will do their best to have him on their side. I know I will if it ever happened.

If this thread is to remain open, the rhetoric needs to be toned down a bit....

[sheepdog]

I'm probably closer to 95 than a hundred percent. But after reading his "stuff" for more years than I can recall and talking to him a couple of times on the phone, I know this-he is number one on the "call list" for expert witnesses in a shooting for me. I think he was researching and writing about the dynamics of the fight and what happens afterward before anyone was, at least in the general media. His book, In Gravest Extreme, should be mandatory reading for anyone that wants to carry a gun, even though the hardware part is now dated. He has been quite direct, insightful and easy to talk with the times I asked for his assistance.

[snowdoctor]

only one person was correct 100% of the time...so I picked two...80% is still very high...

[Airborne Falcon]

only one person was correct 100% of the time.....

Snowdoctor ... how do you know my first wife? She's a nurse - did you and her work together at a hospital or something?