Question for you NFA/ClassIII guys

[esrice]

I'm not very familiar with the NFA and ClassIII rules and regulations, or even the proper use of the 'lingo', but I do have a question.

What effect, if any, is there if you were to use a regulated item in a self-defense or home-defense situation?

Say you have a LEGALLY-OWNED suppressor on your pistol or a short-barreled shotgun that you use to stop an attack by an intruder in your home. Is there any law saying you can't? How would this look in a trial?

Just curious.

 

[Don]

Short barreled shotguns are illegal in indiana, You would not be looked at any different because thats all you had time to grab. We have no laws saying you must remove a suppressor to save your life.

 

[esrice]

Short-barreled shotguns are illegal? I thought someone on this board recently purchased one of those Super-Shorty shotguns like this --->

 

[Don]

Thats a a.o.w. Any Other Weapon. There is no buttstock on that to make it a SBS. NFA stuff has real fine lines on them things.

 

[esrice]

Gotcha! Now it makes sense.

Don, you have ever heard of anyone using any type of restricted item in self-defense?

 

[Don]

I never heard of anyone using one in a shooting type deal, however my SBR is the first thing I'm grabbing if someone is coming in my house.

 

[Lars]

I think that AOW shotgun is best suited as an anti-carjacking rig.

 

[bigcraig]

Don has pretty much answered the question, but I would just like to add, a good shoot is a good shoot it doesn't matter what tool you use. However, if you use a title II item you can expect some some interesting comments by the responding LEO's, just be prepared to explain that it is a legal item and have your appropriate form 1 or 4 to prove it, but leave the questions about the actual shooting incident for your attorney.

 

[Scutter01]

just be prepared to explain that it is a legal item and have your appropriate form 1 or 4 to prove it, but leave the questions about the actual shooting incident for your attorney.

I would suggest rather "I want to comply fully with your investigation, but I would like to speak to my attorney first." Let the attorney explain that it's a legal item and let the attorney produce the form 1 or form 4.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Don, you have ever heard of anyone using any type of restricted item in self-defense?

Yes, several incidents are detailed by Massad Ayoob writings. Prominent ones are the Ruger employee with the AC556 and a Florida dealer with a SW76.

The shooting in Indy by the gun store employee was not that MAC11 Title II? That did not turn out so well, no?

 

[bigcraig]

Yes, several incidents are detailed by Massad Ayoob writings. Prominent ones are the Ruger employee with the AC556 and a Florida dealer with a SW76.

The shooting in Indy by the gun store employee was not that MAC11 Title II? That did not turn out so well, no?

Kirk I am familar with the Ruger employee story as well as the Florida gunshop owner, but I am not aware of the Indy MAC11 story, you have any more info on this?

edit: DOH....Nick is right, it wasn't a Ruger emplyee, it was a H&K rep that had the AC556 in his personal vehicle for demo and T&E purposes.

 

[VUPDblue]

Kirk, if my memory serves, the industry employee who used the AC556 was an HK rep. That was a very bad deal for him. The shop owner who used the '76 was more like dirty harry. It worked out in his favor, but it is an incredible story! And, just for the record, my HD rig is a plain ol' .357. I don't want any of my expensive toys locked up for too long should something happen, not to mention how a jury would see me if I dumped a full mag into a bad guy with the M16...
I will warn you, Esrice, that BRD has nothing on NFAD!!!!

 

[Kirk Freeman]

HK rep? I remember Ruger employee, but will check tonight. I've muddled details before and do not have it in front of me.

I'll check the net.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

I stand corrected. It was an HK employee, Gary Fadden.

Detailed here: davehayes.org » Blog Archive » The Gary Fadden Incident

 

[VUPDblue]

This kind of post would go great in an INGO NFA forum

 

[Ridgeway]

though one is within their rights to use a sbr hk94 or real mp5, suppressed or non it would seem pertinant to think about possible consequences

while a good shoot is a good shoot, if your in a country with a da who brings all shootings (including self defense) to a grand jury, i would imagine your choice of weapon could be used essentially to demonize you
kinda of the "black talon" effect- while you can use 'em it may not be wise (despite being an antiquated round)
what would you rather a average jury who knows nothing about guns see as the weapon used? a plebian s&w revolver would top my list, or a standard autoloader, or even a traditional non sbr ar15...the sbr issue could paint you in a bad light

read the h&k guys account, it's a long but very worthwhile read
i believe his conclusion was that he was @ least in part prosecuted and had such a difficult ordeal because of his usage of a machinegun

my sbr(s) sit in the safe. unless the zombies are battering down my door, i think it would be my last choice for self defense (despite being well suited for such a task)

 

[SavageEagle]

Lots of good info in this and other NFA threads. I'd still like to know more about the Mac11 shooting here in Indy. I can't seem to find any info on it... Maybe I'm looking for the wrong things...

 

[Rafficarian]

0

 

[VUPDblue]

The guy with the AC556 worked for H&K and he won criminal but lost civil. The guy in Indy was reported to have used an MP5 and he got in a world of hurts over that shooting! Both criminal and civil if memory serves.

Garry Fadden was never sued in civil court over this incident....

 

[Rafficarian]

you're right, it was H&K asking for repayment for lawyer fees that ran him in the ground financially, my bad...