Transcription
That he articulated his self-defense well, even though that was literally his job for the last 12 years. And they wouldn't be drawing your attention to that if they thought there was a chance in hell they could win their case without smoking mirrors. You just need a good defense attorney.
>> Yeah, >> we are the arms attorneys. Today we have another question and answer episode for you. Stick around. We're going to talk about over penetrating rounds. We're going to talk about when you're a coldblooded murderer and are veterans at a disadvantage when it comes to self-defense situations. But before we get started, share your support for the Second Amendment by hitting the like button. And Richard, >> yeah, >> I'm so happy to be back for a questions episode. It feels like it's been forever.
>> Yes, it is. And we have some great questions. If you would like a question answered in a future episode, type it out in the comment section down below. Type out question. Really helps us find these things. our favorite segment. All the good stuff. Uh I'll do this first one to you, Emily. It says this is uh Red McKver 7645E. Emily said, uh state proved murder, but it was self-defense. I thought it is only a murder if the killing is not justified, i.e. killing of the N. I said, can you explain more on that one?
Yeah, we've gotten a lot of questions on this one. >> Yes. So, this was I was on a couple weeks ago after um Leslie and I's murder trial that we won and I said the state can in fact prove murder, but you be found not guilty. That is exactly what an affirmative defense does. In fact, the state has to first prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you committed the murder for the jury to then consider self-defense. Because in Texas, murder just means you intentionally or knowingly caused the death of another individual by in this case they will allege shooting them with a deadly weapon to it a firearm which the state always very confidently proves. Why do they competently prove that? Well, because you get up there and you say, "I did it. I shot him. I did it on purpose. It was me." Boom. Beyond a reasonable doubt, they proved a murder. But you will not be guilty of murder. You will be found not guilty of the charge of murder and therefore not a murderer if you are a self-defender and the state cannot disprove your self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt. So yes, in fact, you are charged with murder. It is a murder case, a murder trial, a murder charge. They will prove a murder, but then you will be found not guilty of said murder. If that makes any sense.
>> Yeah, it does. And the one scenario where where I would say, hey, maybe that might not be the case. Because I have seen this in a couple maybe one state's law where they'll say the unjustified intentional killing of another person, you know, if they if they put it into their statute that it's unjustified.
>> Yeah. Then that would not be a murder.
>> Then that's not a murder cuz they they proved it was justified, so they haven't proved it. But the way that we set ours up is it's a a justification excluding criminal responsibility. So it's a little bit different.
>> Yep. You have to prove the murder, then prove it's justified. So maybe that's an odd part of Texas law. I don't know.
>> Let's go do a survey. Tell us your state's law on that one.
>> Sure enough.
>> Yeah.
>> All right, we've got daver26600. Could you take some time to discuss people like me, elderly, disabled, with multiple coorbidities and polyfarm pharmacy? How do the factors of disperate force affect the case? How do the disease processes and pharmarmacology of prescribed medications affect the case? Do the courts treat elders different than a far younger individual? People in wheelchairs are using walkers have unique self-defense adaptation situations as well. Thank you.
>> Yeah. So, all right, got a lot here. We'll kind of break it into a couple of things. First, for coorbidities, this is just unfortunate, but here's what it is. Um, a lot of these, you know, disabilities aren't physically manifested such that a normal person can tell, hey, look, this person is suffering from this condition or that condition. And so when we have those kinds of issues, we call that, you know, specialized in knowledge when it you're, you know, kind of calculating your subjective reasonleness that you had to act right then without delay in response to this unlawful threat. And so for these kind of comorbidities that don't physically manifest themselves, they're tough. Um, and I don't know what it is, but it almost seems like it puts disabled folks at a disadvantage. Now, I'll, you know, separate those a little bit from >> if these are truly physical manifestations. Let's say missing a limb, in a wheelchair, uh, aged, you're clearly weak. Those types of things, those are a little bit easier for juries to wrap their heads around because we're not having to jump into the mind of the person and say, "Oh, from your perspective, what did you see?" So, I'll kind of break those two things out, but generally, and we talked about this in a previous video and got a lot of flack for it, um these disabled defense cases, elderly defense cases, they really generally don't go well for our disabled people. If if anything, it might be held more against them.
>> Yeah, I I wish I understood why. I wish I did, but I mean, even I mean, this last case that Leslie and I tried, he had some physical disability. um you know just he had been in a bunch of motorcycle accidents which I guess as I understand motorcycle people get in a lot of accidents just generally speaking um and he had like a lot of like back issues, neck issues, things like that. Um but he still could run around and shoot somebody with an M1 Grand and so we we didn't even address it at trial because I think if it's not very very evident a jury tends to think, "Oh, they're making some weird excuses now. I don't see anything about this guy that looks disabled, that looks weak, that looks infirm. And then we have the issue that you brought up of potential pharmaceuticals, which is its own double-edged sword because you could say, "Oh man, look at this guy. He's got so many issues. He takes these meds. This med does this, this med does that. All of that makes him more vulnerable or less able to defend himself." But the flip side of that coin is, well, did it impair his judgment? Does it make him less reasonable? And then back to our last issue is the defense just throwing a whole bunch of spaghetti at the wall to see what sticks because this really wasn't very good self-defense. And it's it sucks. It shouldn't be this way. But juries tend to not be super sympathetic.
>> Yeah. And the medication issue. Yeah. Goes goes to just that. Um why is that relevant? Well, is it impacting your action reaction time? Are you trying to excuse criminal responsibility saying, "Hey, guess what? Um I wouldn't have done this if I wasn't maybe intoxicated, right?" Um, you know, for for those folks I say, hey, they they talk about, hey, take medication, whatever. Um, my general rule, hey, if you wouldn't drive a car, you know, maybe you shouldn't be carrying because these are these kind of issues do come up and then people say, oh, Richard, I guess you just want these disabled people to get attacked and murdered. No, that's that's not what I'm saying. I'm just saying obviously use caution. Now, the last issue that he raised was um, and it comes up a little bit differently. You you use the example of a wheelchair.
Mhm.
>> It kind of goes back to our physical manifestation of disabilities, you know, juries are very forgiving when there's no reasonable safe alternative. And so for these, especially with mobility issues that are very manifest,
>> I'll say for the most part, I've seen those go well.
>> Yeah. No, I agree. When you really I mean, there's not a oh, there's this issue and it's a disability issue that is either more minor or less visible. Yes. If it's a big visible disability issue, that's going to go pretty well.
>> All right, next one to you, Emily. This is for for Sam Hayne. Where does the law stand on firearms made before 1964 and weren't required to apply for serial numbers on firearms? Are those classified as ghost guns the same as personally firearms?
>> Well, bear in mind, ghost gun is a madeup stupid term that means nothing. Um, so classified would be a stretch. But if you are worried about what rules that have been applied to personally made firearms might be applied to your pre68 and therefore pre serialized firearm. Um if it goes to have a sleepover at an FFL, it's going to have to come back serialized. Um but otherwise you should not need to worry about anything changing. Now that is on the federal level. Your state's law may vary um depending if you live in a very free state like Texas or a less free state.
All right, we've got at Ken R3471. Have you ever had to defend a case where ammo over penetrated and hit a bystander? And if so, what caliber?
>> No. U no over penetration. Uh I've seen cases like that. And you know, in our jurisdiction where that has happened. Uh we had a high-profile case, got convicted of murder. And I'll just say here's the note on over penetration. I think that caliber that was a handgun ammunition.
Um
>> I think that was a 45 caliber. Uh, does that sound right?
>> You know what? I don't remember. I feel like I would have remembered if it was 45. I want to say maybe it was 40. Uh,
>> anyway,
>> but all that kind of aside, what makes overpenetration very tough, again, I can't say that it happens, it doesn't happen very frequently, and when it does happen, it doesn't go well. Uh, because it's tough. You know, you're on trial for murder of this innocent person or manslaughter of this innocent person. and the way that our self-defense laws, this is just Texas, maybe it's better in other states to fit these justification claims into those cases. It is so clunky and it just doesn't seem to go very well.
>> Yeah, you have to have not been reckless. Um, which is a tough bill when it's all happening in public, unfortunately. Um, I mean, I will say I have never personally had an over penetration case. Um I handgun rounds stop in bodies way more often than you might imagine. Um and you know really I mean other than that one that we just tried that's my first I mean that was that was an six and that you know I mean even that didn't leave his body. Even that didn't leave his body that round. So I don't know. I mean, I know it happens, but boy, I can tell you personally, we're just seeing a lot of body stop and bullets.
>> Yep. All right. This one to you, Emily. So, this is it's sudden question. If any of these states pass machine gun bills and start selling machine guns, would they be able to sell to residents of other states that don't have state bans?
>> Yeah. All right. Roll credits. Well,
>> you don't get to sell them interstate.
>> Yeah. The FFLs won't be able to transfer it because the federal government's not going to allow that. That's going to jeopardize their license. And then private sale that would be prohibited because we have the
>> uh interstate transfer of farms between residents of different states. It's not going to go well.
>> No. No, it is not. So live in a live in a free state. Did you tell them? Did you tell them last episode you just wrote that bill for Texas bill for Texas?
>> Yeah, we had that qu we had that on the last question and answer. It was
>> Come on, y'all.
>> It was a guy I met Rick, I believe. We met at Aegis Arms in Houston and he said, "What about West Virginia? Texas needs to get on it. We got on it.
>> See,
>> buckle up, Texas 2027.
>> That's right.
>> All right, we've got Kingrich09 question. I have always wondered, God forbid you ever have to use your firearm in self-defense, what do you do with the firearm or any others in your possession at the time while waiting for the cops to arrive? Also, what about any other firearms in my house or my vehicle?
So, the short answer is assuming the scene is safe. Um, it's perfectly acceptable to reholster on your person. Um, keep the firearms within arms reach on a kitchen table, you know, maybe a counter if you're out in public, the front driver's seat of your car. Um, but again, reholstering probably the best option on these. Now, the tough part is you've summon helped or 911's on the way, right? Um, police and law enforcement are on their way. At that point when you start manipulating evidence and things like that, it typically doesn't go well. You know, most states criminalize concealing things or tampering with things. And so for these other firearms, hopefully you're not you don't have your whole stash on you at the time. Um but I wouldn't go run around locking stuff up and hiding things. I mean, if it wasn't and and this is again, I'm going off Texas's tampering statute. If it wasn't used in the offense and you are not destroying it or hiding what could be evidence, I think legally in Texas you could move the firearms that were not used without running a foul of the tampering statute. Now, is that what I want you to be doing? Like there's people testifying like other family members like, "Oh, yeah. He called his lawyer and he ran around hiding guns. Like, no. If there is if there is anybody to talk about what you did, don't do that. Like, do things like say prayers um and inquire about the person on the ground or your family, their well-being. Um so, I just because maybe you wouldn't be prosecuted for tampering doesn't mean it's a good idea. Now, unfortunately, anything that is in plain view will probably be taken into evidence by the police. Like, if you're in your vehicle, you have six guns in your car, and you use one to shoot somebody, guess what? You're losing all six in evidence, and they are not going to give them back to you until the case is done with its prosecution.
>> They're in your home. I don't know. Sometimes I see people not confiscate all of them.
>> Yeah. Especially, let's say you have some in a safe and clearly, yeah, when
>> they shouldn't get your safeguards.
>> Whenever when all the physical evidence lines up with, hey, this particular firearm was used in a self-defense incident. Um, for the most part, we don't see cops seizing entire gun collections when there's any question or if the cops are being a little cheeky and they just say, "Hey, we want to rule everything out, right? Um, we don't want us to show up to trial with this gun and actually be something else." You know, I I'm not going to pretend like I haven't seen that happen because it has.
>> Yeah. No, fair enough. O don't keep them laying out all over your house,
>> right?
>> Keep them available but concealed.
>> Yep. All right. Next one. You to you, Emily. This is from Steven Green 3566. I have a question below that I think bears repeating. Combat veterans will have a different much more controlled response to surviving a self-defense scenario compared to the average Joe. How can they best protect themselves against the prosecutor saying, "Are they cold-blooded killers?"
>> Yeah. Hire a good lawyer. Um I mean, really, because they are going to say, in fact, we had that happen. You remember we had our we had our veteran on veteran
>> Yep.
>> crime murder. Um Yes. He was extraordinarily I mean, the way he laid it out for police afterwards,
>> from the 911 call to the police interview, he was calm. He was meticulous. He laid everything out. He answered questions reasonably. He did not break a sweat. I mean, it was uh it was very cool. But at trial, they tried to twist it as though he was just a, you know, exactly a cold-blooded murderer. He wasn't scared. He wasn't upset. He just killed his brother-in-law. He didn't care one bit. It's like, well, I mean, he was in the Marines for a lot of years. He was trained to stay calm. I mean, he was a radio operator. He was trained to stay calm under intense amounts of pressure. He was overseas. I mean, it just you just need a good defense attorney who's like going to dismiss that in the exact right way in front of the jury. Like, look at the look at the red herring the state threw at you. The state couldn't show you that this wasn't self-defense. So, they tried to distract you with the fact that he articulated his self-defense well, even though that was literally his job for the last 12 years. And they wouldn't be drawing your attention to that if they thought there was a chance in hell they could win their case without smoke and mirrors. You just need a good defense attorney.
>> Yeah. No. And you see this, it doesn't matter how you respond to this
>> because you can have somebody who's completely emotionally uncontrollable. And you see prosecutors point to that of look how unreasonable this person is. Look how how they couldn't control their emotions. It boiled over and that's why we're here today. So again, these are one of those things where it's not going to transform a good self-defense case into a bad one or bad one into a good one. Um, the facts are going to be what the facts are. Good attorney, as Emily says, that's the way to approach this.
>> I'd rather have the calm veteran than I would the screaming lunatic. I'll tell you that right.
>> Yeah, me as well. But we hope you enjoyed this discussion. If you did, consider subscribing, hitting that like button, and help us fight the anti-2A algorithm by sharing this video.
>> And as always, please question and comment for us below. Leave your questions for next week's episode here. And until next time for the arms turns.