Less than lethal round as the first shot?

This is a discussion on Less than lethal round as the first shot? within the General Firearm Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Opinions on this please; This is 40 S&W Less Than Lethal Rubber Projectile Ammo. This ammo is manufactured by A.L.S. Technologies, the leader in Less ...

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 40

Thread: Less than lethal round as the first shot?

  1. #1
    VIP Member Array Sticks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    3,407

    Less than lethal round as the first shot?

    Opinions on this please;

    This is 40 S&W Less Than Lethal Rubber Projectile Ammo. This ammo is manufactured by A.L.S. Technologies, the leader in Less Than Lethal Ammunition. Alot of people ask, Why Carry Less Than Lethal Pistol Ammunition? The answer is simple, When a less Than lethal shell is used as the FIRST round, knowledgeable courts of law and boards recognize this type of round as a legitimate attempt to defend without the intent of causing lethal injury, therefore reducing your risk of a lawsuit. That means that if you attempt to defend yourself with A Less Than Lethal Round as the first shot and then Kill the perpetrator with a real round, you have a defense in court. Unfortunatly we have to not only defend our selves from the criminals, but there family as well in civil court. A.L.S Technologies, Inc is pleased and excited to announce a new line of Less Than Lethal Pistol Ammunition for Home/Self Defense and Animal Control. These munitions are often referred to as extended range impact munitions and serve a similar role as a baton, as they are used to control a subjects behavior through pain compliance and the normal strike areas for a baton are often used as target zones. There have been hundreds of uses across the country where these munitions have been used to disarm people armed with knives and clubs, Use this ammo to temporarily disable combative subjects and reduce the risk of unruly death and lawsuits. This ammo is packed in 6 Round Packs. This ammo will not cycle semi-auto weapons.
    Granted if the first shot does the job, you are going to get sued anyway for trauma.
    Sticks

    Grasseater // Grass~eat~er noun, often attributive \ˈgras-ē-tər\
    A person who is incapable of independent thought; a person who is herd animal-like in behavior; one who cannot distinguish between right and wrong; a foolish person.
    See also Sheep

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    Member Array KSJustice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Armpit of the World
    Posts
    29
    My first non-lethal round will be verbal commands or striking weapons. If I have to draw down on someone that means I have expended other options and that first shot needs to count. That's my 2c.

  4. #3
    VIP Member Array goldshellback's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan; by way of St. Mayberry, GA
    Posts
    4,749
    If deadly force has to be employed, then put real bullets in your real gun.

    That's just me talking before my coffee's done.
    "Just getting a concealed carry permit means you haven't commited a crime yet. CCP holders commit crimes." Daniel Vice, senior attorney for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, quoted on Fox & Friends, 8 Jul, 2008

    (Sometimes) "a fight avioded is a fight won." ... claude clay

  5. #4
    Moderator
    Array Bark'n's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    West Central Missouri
    Posts
    9,916
    Ok, right off the top of my head... I do not know of any .40 cal revolvers being made at this time. Since the manufacturer states this round does not cycle semi-automatic weapons, you now have a one shot gun followed by having to perform an immediate action drill, under stress with people who may not be as proficient at performing an immediate action drill.

    So... If we fire one round and get killed holding a weapon not in battery or without a live round in the chamber, do our families get to sue the manufacturer into oblivion?

    Ok, now in all seriousness. These rounds are not designed nor are they intended to be used in situations where sudden, unavoidable and immediate threat of death or crippling injury occurs in close quarters. Which by the way, is the type of encounters where civilians are going to encounter.

    Police departments are all about reducing liability any way they can... If less lethal rounds worked for situations such as that, every LEO across the nation would be carrying a less lethal round as the first one out in their duty weapons.

    Less lethal rounds are used primarily in riots and crowd control, or during times where there is an armed person at stand off distance basically having a stand off. When an officer deploys less lethal munitions they almost always have a covering officer ready to use lethal force instantly because the officer using the less lethal munitions is in a very vulnerable position.

    Also officers usually by department policy utilize weapons dedicated to less lethal rounds and often times are marked in a distinguishing way. So they do not get confused as to which weapon they are using under stress.

    As far as I'm concerned... Less Lethal Rounds = Bad for Civilian Use.

    JMHO... YMMV
    -Bark'n
    Semper Fi


    "The gun is the great equalizer... For it is the gun, that allows the meek to repel the monsters; Whom are bigger, stronger and without conscience, prey on those who without one, would surely perish."

  6. #5
    VIP Member Array Paco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    McKinney, TX
    Posts
    3,493
    Um, I'm sorry but if I have to pull the gun out my intentions are going to be lethal. I think a jury would just say that you were messin' with the BG before you shoot him for real if you use a rubber bullet.
    "Don't hit a man if you can possibly avoid it; but if you do hit him, put him to sleep." - Theodore Roosevelt

    If you are not willing to stand behind our Troops, feel free to stand in front of them!

    -Paco

  7. #6
    VIP Member Array JonInNY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Mid-Hudson Valley New York State
    Posts
    4,207
    Quote Originally Posted by Paco View Post
    Um, I'm sorry but if I have to pull the gun out my intentions are going to be lethal.
    +1

    If you are at the point where you need to use your weapon, then I assume you have exhausted all other reasonable options, and are no in a life or death situation. To annoy an angry BG with a less-than-lethal round, I feel would invite greater wrath and hostility. My 2
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch; Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."
    -- Benjamin Franklin

  8. #7
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    24,185
    I think we can all agree that stopping a violent threat is the whole point of the exercise.

    Who's to say that a less-than-lethal round that subsequently jams your gun will stop anything, and not simply anger the aggressor? Particularly in an age of drugs that desensitizes and disconnects a person from pain signals, simple disruption of a body can be difficult.

    Are you prepared to bet your life on that "pain compliance" working, first shot? Remember, you've now got a jammed up .40cal sitting in your hands, and you're standing in front of a seriously angry aggressor who previously wanted to violently attack you. He still does, more than ever.

    My thoughts: If my life is threatened, I will stop the threat as expeditiously and effectively as I am able, without a leisurely walk up the force continuum that might or might not achieve the goal of stopping the threat, let alone screwing around with a one-shot prayer that had better not fail. I'm all for the BG surviving his stupidity and arrogance, if he's able. But, not at the cost of my life; much less, at the cost of the lives of my loved ones.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  9. #8
    Distinguished Member Array Paymeister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    1,540
    Sounds an awful lot like "shoot to wound", and that's been pretty well covered here and in the courts.

    I also HIGHLY agree with the concerns shown by others about the "instant guaranteed jam" these would cause.

  10. #9
    Member Array Double Naught Spy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    453
    Less lethal round as first shot?

    Sure if you want to incur the same legal liabilities as firing a more lethal round and if you are willing to put yourself at greater risk for failing to subdue your threat as quickly.
    Considering yourself to be defenseless is the first administrative step to becoming a victim.

  11. #10
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    24,185
    The answer is simple, When a less Than lethal shell is used as the FIRST round, knowledgeable courts of law and boards recognize this type of round as a legitimate attempt to defend without the intent of causing lethal injury, therefore reducing your risk of a lawsuit.
    The thing is, in the U.S. at least, courts don't prosecute citizens. Individual prosecutors and attorneys do. The prosecutor and attorney(s) against you are not your friends. And juries are notoriously fickle and unlearned in the law.

    Remember, the jurors you'd be facing would be the ones who can get by on ~$35 day and a validated parking pass. Remember, these are the same sort who saw a 10mm bullet being used defensively by Harold Fish as turning him into Attila the Hun because of caliber, whereas (presumably) a 9mm or other bullet would have been perfectly acceptable.

    It's a subtle point, trying to turn a known lethal weapon into a less-than-lethal instrument. I cannot see the average juror as being able to easily distinguish between a lethal weapon that has normal bullets and a lethal weapon that has a few rounds of newfangled bullets. It's still the same basic thing: a gun, which delivers death, which is known by everyone as a lethal weapon. Can't change that in a day in court, particularly when "knowledgeable courts" are not the threat.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  12. #11
    VIP Member
    Array archer51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    20,461
    LTLA.....hmmmmmm......sounds like a idea developed by the same guy that came up with the idea for CCW Badges. I can see the mall ninja's carrying them, but not someone who is serious about defending their and their familys lives.
    Freedom doesn't come free. It is bought and paid for by the lives and blood of our men and women in uniform.

    USAF Retired
    NRA Life Member

  13. #12
    VIP Member Array Sticks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    3,407
    I am right in line with you on the use of these. It just struck me that the advertisement for them were playing on the fear factor of a shooting aftermath.

    I just thought I would bring it up with the frequency of the comments of members here on the use of sprays and other items before the use of a firearm.

    Quote Originally Posted by archer51 View Post
    ...I can see the mall ninja's carrying them...
    I swear to the gods that if Gecko45 show up here, I am canceling my membership!
    Sticks

    Grasseater // Grass~eat~er noun, often attributive \ˈgras-ē-tər\
    A person who is incapable of independent thought; a person who is herd animal-like in behavior; one who cannot distinguish between right and wrong; a foolish person.
    See also Sheep

  14. #13
    Administrator
    Array SIXTO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    19,378
    Silly idea. Stick with what works.
    "Just blame Sixto"

  15. #14
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    24,185
    Quote Originally Posted by Sticks View Post
    I just thought I would bring it up with the frequency of the comments of members here on the use of sprays and other items before the use of a firearm.
    I'm all for using a different tool, in appropriate situations. But, frankly, when a firearm is called for in a LETHAL FORCE situation, the last thing I want to do is have my gun full of one-time-use "anger accelerators" instead of bullets. That bet's too "rich" for me.

    Remember this, as well. Police have a completely different task to perform as compared to citizens who are threatened. The job of police is to stop and arrest the aggressor to ensure he/they face charges, if at all possible. The job of a threatened citizen is strictly to stop the threat. Attempts to "haul in" a person are all well and good, but it should not cloud the issue: surviving the situation, no matter the cost to the BG.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  16. #15
    VIP Member Array rottkeeper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    3,194
    Isn't less than lethal like dragging your foot to stop your car from hitting a brick wall? using real ammo=using your brakes
    For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the son of man be. Mathew 24:27

    NRA Member

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Thoughts Regarding the Lapse Between Lethal and Non-Lethal Force
    By littlejon126 in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: October 9th, 2009, 05:34 AM
  2. Shot Heard Round The World
    By Scot Van in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: February 23rd, 2008, 09:18 AM
  3. Less Than Lethal Attack
    By Geo2020 in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: September 6th, 2007, 06:10 AM
  4. Today in history: "The shot heard round the world.
    By p8riot in forum Bob & Terry's Place
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: April 19th, 2007, 08:13 PM
  5. Does PA law allow ANY Less than Lethal?
    By djturnz in forum Related Gear & Equipment
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: March 26th, 2007, 10:04 AM

Search tags for this page

.40 rubber bullets

,

.40 s&w rubber bullets

,
40 s&w less than lethal
,

40 s&w rubber bullets

,
40 s&w rubber projectile ammo
,
9mm less than lethal
,

9mm less than lethal ammo

,

less than lethal 40 s&w

,

less than lethal 9mm ammo

,

less than lethal ammo 9mm

,
non lethal 9mm ammo
,

rubber bullets 40 s&w

Click on a term to search for related topics.