You know, brings up an interesting question. I would say typically handguns are regarded as self defense weapon inside & outside the house, shotguns inside the house, but you never really hear too much about rifles in self-defense situations (AR-15's, etc.). Not to say they aren't used, nor should there be a difference; however, bearing in mind this happened right in front of this guy's house, had a such a weapon been available and used in defense, would courts treat use of a handgun/shotgun differently than a rifle (especially in a residential area)?
Lawyers, LEO's any insight? Looking for direct experience/precedent in a court of law, investigation, not just what the code says.
I think it was GUY from TFT that I heard this from or perhaps tha Abyoo (??sp??) files. In any case short summary there was a study that found the juries were more likely to find someone guility as follows:
man/women who uses revolver less guility than...
man/women who uses handgun (semi-auto) less guilty than...
man who uses shotgun less guilty than...
man who uses rifle
women who uses rifle or shotgun were see as the same but still at the bottom of the list along with man using shotgun/rifle.
I think it was GUY from TFT that I heard this from or perhaps tha Abyoo (??sp??) files. In any case short summary there was a study that found the juries were more likely to find someone guility as follows:
man/women who uses revolver less guility than...
man/women who uses handgun (semi-auto) less guilty than...
man who uses shotgun less guilty than...
man who uses rifle
women who uses rifle or shotgun were see as the same but still at the bottom of the list along with man using shotgun/rifle.