Which cartridge does the Nashville PD carry?

[Guest sling]

A buddy of mine just came back from his carry permit class and he was sharing his experience with us at break. He said that one of his instructed stated that its sometimes a good idea when choosing self defense ammunition to find out what your local PD carries in their handguns. That way, in the case of a defensive shooting, one could use the arguement when the jury states that it was an "evil bullet" that its the same cartridge that our local police offers use. Any information about this topic will be helpful. Many thanks.

[molonlabetn]

THP carries .357sig Glock 31s... I'm not sure if Metro has followed suit, or if they are still carrying Glock 22s. I have been told before that THP uses Speer Gold-Dots.

To be quite honest though... I've never heard of a justified shooting being judged unjustified because of the ammunition used. It's either a clean shoot or it isn't. The manufacturer's stamp on the empty cases found at the scene would the least of my worries.

Edited February 20, 2008 by molonlabetn

[Ruprect]

Winchester Ranger SXT in .40

The city dosen't DO ANYTHING because its the best, they do it because it's the cheapest.

[molonlabetn]

Aye, Ranger is pretty much the cheapest 'premium' JHP ammo you can get in bulk... But, it works fine for it's intended use.

[Ruprect]

THP carries .357sig Glock 31s... I'm not sure if Metro has followed suit, or if they are still carrying Glock 22s. I have been told before that THP uses Speer Gold-Dots.

They are trying to get the 3rd gen G22s by trading in the 2nd gens

[molonlabetn]

On of the last times I was in Nashville, I distinctly remember the officer who was directing traffic for the Titan's game I was attending had a 3rd gen glock on his hip (finger-grooves unmistakable)... Does NPD permit the use of personally owned sidearms, if they don't want to carry the old 2nd Gen guns?

[DBTN]

.40 with 165 grain Ranger. Some units have 3rd gen. Glocks. Patrol is issued 2nd gen. Glocks. Personally owned weapons used to be allowed but that is no longer an option.

[Guest sling]

In regards to the bullet not really mattering...I understand the arguement. Nevertheless, the possibility of a jury saying that "the bullet that was used was designed to cause as much damage as possible" is still out there. I believe i recall hearing about such an instance a long time ago... however i'm not 100%. Upon hearing that it was the same cartridge that the local PD used it "changed opinions." Though i suppose it does depend on the jury that day. :-\ Sad world.

[ZZRguy]

THP carries .357sig Glock 31s... I'm not sure if Metro has followed suit, or if they are still carrying Glock 22s. I have been told before that THP uses Speer Gold-Dots.

To be quite honest though... I've never heard of a justified shooting being judged unjustified because of the ammunition used. It's either a clean shoot or it isn't. The manufacturer's stamp on the empty cases found at the scene would the least of my worries.

Have you ever heard of the Black Talon? I read Combat Handguns and Massad Ayoob has a article called Self Defense & The Law and he has discussed this topic several times, most recently being in the Feb. 2008 issue, there has been some prosecutors that has tried to convict law abiding citizens in justifiable shootings because the citizens used a hollow point bullet in self defense. The prosecution said that the citizens used the hollow point bullet to create more injury to the criminal. I do not think anybody has been convicted, but had to go through the expense of a trial. I read this in Ayoob's articles and thought I would relay this to you, I never would have thought bullets used in self defense would be an issue but it can be for anti-gun people in power.

[molonlabetn]

Have you ever heard of the Black Talon? I read Combat Handguns and Massad Ayoob has a article called Self Defense & The Law and he has discussed this topic several times, most recently being in the Feb. 2008 issue, there has been some prosecutors that has tried to convict law abiding citizens in justifiable shootings because the citizens used a hollow point bullet in self defense. The prosecution said that the citizens used the hollow point bullet to create more injury to the criminal. I do not think anybody has been convicted, but had to go through the expense of a trial. I read this in Ayoob's articles and thought I would relay this to you, I never would have thought bullets used in self defense would be an issue but it can be for anti-gun people in power.

Of course some prosecutors would try anything... but even remembering that, the issue of ammunition choice was not sufficient to unjustify the need for self-defense (lethal-force is lethal-force) in 99.99% of cases. And even if there is one or two cases in which the judge was so biased, or the jury to emotionally manipulated, that the balance of judgment for self-defense was swayed by the cartridge used... I've never heard of them, and they certainly haven't been considered policy-making cases which would concern a shooter whose case is plainly justified. I consider the rumors of ammunition prosecution to be pretty un-founded, and I've looked for evidence which says otherwise.

You're correct though... it has certainly been tried (unsuccessfully), but I think those examples say more about the individual prosecutors and local agenda than they do about any legitimate legal standpoint on types of ammunition.

[Guest db99wj]

Have you ever heard of the Black Talon? I read Combat Handguns and Massad Ayoob has a article called Self Defense & The Law and he has discussed this topic several times, most recently being in the Feb. 2008 issue, there has been some prosecutors that has tried to convict law abiding citizens in justifiable shootings because the citizens used a hollow point bullet in self defense. The prosecution said that the citizens used the hollow point bullet to create more injury to the criminal. I do not think anybody has been convicted, but had to go through the expense of a trial. I read this in Ayoob's articles and thought I would relay this to you, I never would have thought bullets used in self defense would be an issue but it can be for anti-gun people in power.

I believe, and I could be wrong, but the Winchester Ranger SXT is what the Black Talon was renamed.

Oh and remember, a lawyer can make issue with anything, you did, have done, thought about doing, wishing you did....etc.

[dunndw]

Some people make the same argument for NOT carrying reloads. The other side will start out with the "how many rounds were you carrying, why so many? How many people were you looking to shoot that day" argument.

I'm not going to let the fear of some half backed prosecutor accusing me of looking for a war because I carry two spare mags stop me from doing what I feel is right, and I'm not going to worry about what bullets I'm using in them.

If my "law enforcement only" HSTs and TAPs aren't "politically correct ammo" to carry, then I'll deal with it if and when the time comes.

[Guest dwrd]

I am actually sling's coworker who posed the question. It was not referring to whether or not the shooting was justified, but rather that chance of a civil suit being filed against you after the fact if you have to fire in self defense. I agree that I am not going to base my ammo choice based of what a lawyer might say, but I just found the topic interesting.

[Guest ETS_Inc]

Here's my stand on carry ammo:

It's highly unlikely that any prosecutor or jury in TN is going to take issue with your ammo choice. But, unfortunately, there are no guarantees about anything in life, except death and taxes.

If some hard-charging, liberal-minded ADA wanted to take issue with your ammo choice, there is some validity to the argument that you are carrying the very same ammo as his cops.

Another good reason for choosing the same ammo as the local cops is that most new shooters are pretty overwhelmed by the myriad of choices available. Many of them are comfortable with the idea that the local cops have done at least some research into ammo choices, and if the choice was good enough for the cops, it must be at least marginally effective. It often makes a difficult decision easier for a new shooter.

Personally, I am not a fan of reloads as carry ammo. Not because I'm worried about being prosecuted for it, but because I know how poorly I do at reloading. It's not the type of bullet I'd be concerned with, it'd be the consistency of the reloading. If you're a skilled reloader, and have confidence in your skills and ability to consistantly load a good round, go for it.

This past Sunday, we had an incident at ASP in Joelton that reinforces my opinion on reloads. A long-time shooter and reloader was there, firing his fairly new Sig GSR. He had a squib load that got stuck in the end of the barrel, and the next round was a bit hot. Apparently, he didn't realize that the squib was in the end of the barrel because the round had enough power to cycle the action and feed the next round. When he pulled the trigger, the extractor and the slide pretty much exploded, as did the magazine. The floorplate, spring and ammo blew right out the bottom of the mag well, and the mag body stayed in place. Shrapnel cut his forearm and embedded in his stomach. He ended up in the hospital, in critical condition, because of the shrapnel in his stomach, which cut an artery.

Personally, I'm comfortable with the idea that Federal, Winchester, and Remington have been loading metallic cartridges for 140+ years. They've got Quality Control people who ensure fairly consistent loads. I have confidence that the ammo is going to be the same from round to round. That's why I prefer factory-loaded ammo, as opposed to reloads (because my reloading skills suck).

[towerclimber37]

Have you ever heard of the Black Talon? I read Combat Handguns and Massad Ayoob has a article called Self Defense & The Law and he has discussed this topic several times, most recently being in the Feb. 2008 issue, there has been some prosecutors that has tried to convict law abiding citizens in justifiable shootings because the citizens used a hollow point bullet in self defense. The prosecution said that the citizens used the hollow point bullet to create more injury to the criminal. I do not think anybody has been convicted, but had to go through the expense of a trial. I read this in Ayoob's articles and thought I would relay this to you, I never would have thought bullets used in self defense would be an issue but it can be for anti-gun people in power.

heh. any lawyer worth his salt would rebut "of course he was trying to kill the criminal you knobhead, the guy was doing the same to him"! would you rather he be dead and the criminal free to victimize another person?

well..I would say that..a lawyer would say "the defendant used and carried the optimum round to stop the threat. As we can attest here today, that round DID stop the threat."

meh

DWRD, the law in Tn states that if you're absolved of criminal responsibility, you can NOT be sued in civil court. go TN!

Edited February 21, 2008 by towerclimber37

[Guest dwrd]

I wasn't aware of that towerclimber. That pretty much puts my question to rest if that is the case.

[Marswolf]

I believe, and I could be wrong, but the Winchester Ranger SXT is what the Black Talon was renamed.

Basically correct. Winchester got rid of the black coating and did some minor rework on the talon design. Then they renamed it Ranger.

That whole Black Talon "cop-killer" thing was so idiotic. Just shows that the public will fall for about any lie if presented creatively.

[Marswolf]

DWRD, the law in Tn states that if you're absolved of criminal responsibility, you can NOT be sued in civil court. go TN!

Not quite correct. You can not be involved in a criminal act (like packing in a place that serves alcohol?) and you can still be sued. You just get to recover your legal costs from the guy who sues you. Good luck with that.

[Guest canynracer]

Have you ever heard of the Black Talon? I read Combat Handguns and Massad Ayoob has a article called Self Defense & The Law and he has discussed this topic several times, most recently being in the Feb. 2008 issue, there has been some prosecutors that has tried to convict law abiding citizens in justifiable shootings because the citizens used a hollow point bullet in self defense. The prosecution said that the citizens used the hollow point bullet to create more injury to the criminal. I do not think anybody has been convicted, but had to go through the expense of a trial. I read this in Ayoob's articles and thought I would relay this to you, I never would have thought bullets used in self defense would be an issue but it can be for anti-gun people in power.

Shelby County Sheriffs used to use Black Talons...they now use Rangers

course, now I read Mars's post and I guess they are the same thing without the black sharpie coloring

Edited February 21, 2008 by canynracer

[dunndw]

Frank was that someone in your class????

[Guest ETS_Inc]

Frank was that someone in your class????

I don't know, brother.

[Fallguy]

DWRD, the law in Tn states that if you're absolved of criminal responsibility, you can NOT be sued in civil court. go TN!

T.C.A. 39-11-622 Justification for use of force — Exceptions — Immunity from civil liability.

(a) (1) A person who uses force as permitted in §§ 39-11-611 — 39-11-614 or § 29-34-201, is justified in using such force and is immune from civil liability for the use of such force, unless:

(A)

The person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in § 39-11-106 who:

(i)

Was acting in the performance of the officer's official duties; and

(ii)

Identified the officer in accordance with any applicable law; or

(iii)

The person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer; or

(

The force used by the person resulted in property damage to or the death or injury of an innocent bystander or other person against whom the force used was not justified.

( The court shall award reasonable attorney's fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by a person in defense of any civil action brought against the person based upon the person's use of force, if the court finds that the defendant was justified in using such force pursuant to §§ 39-11-611 — 39-11-614 or § 29-34-201.

[Acts 2007, ch. 210, § 3.]