Author Topic: question in light of recent emailing...  (Read 2820 times)


  • Guest
question in light of recent emailing...
« on: April 17, 2015, 04:05:03 PM »
I understand the whole perspective of not using "we don't call 911" etc.  It makes sense, though I do not believe that it is right that we must hold-back our first amendment rights.  However, this is NOT about that.  What this is about is a paradigmatic one.  I use G2 RIP ammo.  I realize there are good and bad things to be said about it's use.  I did not choose them based on marketing, or the "hype".

However, I was told that if I actually am forced to use it, I might be in a similar situation (as the recent newsletter mentions about bumper stickers), since their marketing is all about "the last round you'll ever need".  (In fact, it is no where near the last round I will ever need!  :lol:  )  So that is my question; am I forced to choose a less aggressively marketed ammo because of the same legal paradigm?

If so, then what about ANY self/personal defense ammo - isn't it all marketed to "stop the criminal"?  perhaps I am just thinking too many steps ahead.  any advice would be appreciated.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest »


  • Administrator
  • Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 996
    • View Profile
Re: question in light of recent emailing...
« Reply #1 on: April 20, 2015, 01:02:07 PM »

Great question, this is certainly something to keep in mind when you purchase ammunition. Thereís no legal difference in using the RIP rounds. But like the bumper stickers and signs, a prosecutor can try to turn your choice of ammo against you in front of the jury. Obviously, this is more of a calculated risk than putting a bumper sticker on your car, and is also easier to defend against if it were to come up in court. We generally recommend that you buy whichever ammo you believe will keep you safest and be most effective (except for armor piercing, of course), and let us sort out any issue that arises in court. Good defense attorneys can put the kabash on a prosecutorís ammo argument very effectively.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest »