Frank will probably chime in but with no offense the post is too simplistic.
Using legally possessed weapon or mod won't automatically convict you.
That is a throw-away statement by folks who don't understand jury dynamics.
It goes like this:
1. You are charged because your action is not seen as righteous by the authorities - grand jury, DA.
2. You go to trial.
3. The DA will establish a story of why you should be convicted. The use of some esoteric weapon (which we the choir think is fine - but not all, Zumbo and research studies and look at the current Recoil mag thread) may cast doubt on the validity of your claim. It implies you are less than truthful or were perhaps overly aggressive and too quick on the trigger.
This flow as been documented in several cases and in jury research.
Some folks deny it because - well, that's their problem.
Saying a suppressor makes you a mass murderer is just, no offense, a rant and misinterpreting the subtle nature of the issue. It is the influence of appearance to the jury based on conflicting stories. That has been studied into the ground. Deny it if it makes you feel good.
Your lawyer will have to construct a tale that is convincing using emotion and logic.
Remember if someone says it's a good shoot, blah, blah - that's nice but when you are on trial (which is the point we are discussing) it is not a good shoot or why are you wearing the pretty orange suit and shackles?
Think Zimmerman (not to the discuss his case in detail) would have a stronger position if he had a suppressed Glock or a SW 500? Appearances count.
Last edited by Glenn E. Meyer; September 14, 2012 at 02:49 PM.