Do you consider ammo company PR in choices?

[Ed L]

Ed, while I don't recall seeing that particular question, I am guessing that you jumped in on someone else's thread. You're talking about the GATE (Go Ask The Experts) section, which was set up years ago by GlockTalk founder Eric as a "one-stop express lane" for viewers who simply wanted a question answered. The concept was two-person dialogue, limited to the original poster and the dedicated responder, which in that section of GATE was me. So, other folks jumping into the conversation were deleted. I was the primary moderator there, and will usually delete with an explanation to the person who jumped in. However, supermoderators enforcing the same rule occasionally get there ahead of me and delete.

If you had sent the question as an OP, I would of course have approved it and answered, "Putting Alec Baldwin grips on your pistol would flunk the cost/benefit analysis. You would get no benefit from it, and would look like some smartass who didn't take the responsibility of deadly force seriously."

Hi, Mas,

I did post it as a thread in the GATE section and it was deleted. To be clear, I meant it as humor. I have no desires to put the name or likeness of Alec Baldwin as anything but memes. Shortly after the whole thing with Alec Baldwin happened, I came up with this one that relates to this topic. Even though Jay Leno has long been retired from the Tonight Show, I could see Jay coming up with this joke and delivering it exactly this way:

[Ed L]

jd950, no problem quoting me; you probably want Ed L's permission to use his quote too, for context. If you do, please be sure to mention that he was almost certainly writing tongue in cheek. I had to answer it seriously because on the Internet, there's always someone who doesn't have their sarcasm meter turned on.

@jd950, Yes, you can certainly use that. As I said in my previous post, it was meant as humor, as I thought was obvious, so please mention that if you are going to repeat it.

I know it is not the subject of the thread, but Alec Baldwin has led me to develop numerous memes related to firearm safety and other things.

[OlongJohnson]

Not a lawyer but I read a legal thriller and in the courtroom there was a scene where at the closing statements, the prosecution added something as fact that was [assuming you mean to include "not" here] presented during the trial. The crusading defense attorney protested that this was not allowed as it couldn't be rebutted. Wanted a mistrial, IIRC but the judge just told the jury to disregard.

So is that a real thing for lawyers here?

IANAL, but I have heard of a plaintiff attorney introducing a whole new defect theory in the closing arguments of a product liability case.

I really enjoy conversing about firearms, as well as getting information. So I would still take part in forums. But I would use a more obscure user name, a different cutoff email address, and be more restrained in what I posted, and be careful about posting any info that could give away my identity. As it is, whenever I post anything about use of force I make sure to be judicious (the same way in real life). I am also restrained with politics and would be more so if I lived in NY.

Assume that none of that matters. If you are sued civilly in the aftermath of a shooting, any plaintiff attorney worth his briefs will include all aspects of your social media activities in interrogatories and it will all come out. No hiding behind special-purpose email addresses or anything else like that.

[Ed L]

Assume that none of that matters. If you are sued civilly in the aftermath of a shooting, any plaintiff attorney worth his briefs will include all aspects of your social media activities in interrogatories and it will all come out. No hiding behind special-purpose email addresses or anything else like that.

So given risk, why is anyone posting on Pistol-Form?

[DDTSGM]

So given risk, why is anyone posting on Pistol-Form?

There is some degree of risk in everything we do. Additionally, some folks kind of compulsively find things to worry about.

My thought is, if you mind your P's and Q's while posting there probably won't be a problem.

Not wanting to give the moderators a big head, but this place is kept pretty clean.

Here's kind of a litmus test: would someone using the recent post feature to look over your posts find anything you couldn't stand behind?

[jd950]

jd950, no problem quoting me; you probably want Ed L's permission to use his quote too, for context. If you do, please be sure to mention that he was almost certainly writing tongue in cheek. I had to answer it seriously because on the Internet, there's always someone who doesn't have their sarcasm meter turned on.

Right. Thanks. Many of the folks I deal with carry ammo provided or approved by some governmental entity, and is invariably Hornady, Winchester, Federal or Speer. But I do sometimes have these "will doing _____ hurt me in court?" discussions with others. It is useful to have other ways of making certain points when talking with people who feel putting cute slogans and logos on their ARs or pistol mags or slide plate covers or grips.

[OlongJohnson]

The only markings I have on my ARs beyond those legally required and functional (on/off safe) and manufacturer logos are cartridge designations on the dust covers. Because safety.

[LockedBreech]

So given risk, why is anyone posting on Pistol-Form?

Personally, I assume anything (and I mean anything) I put on any social media may one day be used as an exhibit and I do my best to conduct myself accordingly.

I'm not ashamed of being a gun owner and shooter, I'm proud of my right as an American to shoot recreationally and to have the option of self-defense as a last resort. I'd be happy to back up anything I've posted in my 8 years here, and it's never a bad reminder not to say anything online that you wouldn't say to a person's face. That's my approach anyway.

[BBMW]

If you carry a gun, you just have to price in that you'll likely be sued if you shoot someone, even if it's legitimate self defense. The type of ammo you use will be a minor issue (if an issue at all) compared to the fact that you actually shot someone. You're VASTLY overstating this issue. And I wouldn't carry crap ammo just to reduce my exposure to this likely non-issue.

The lawsuits don't have to be successful to be expensive. In the Soto v Bushmaster case, the court directly cited numerous ads that led the court to conclude that there was a potential violation of Connecticut's Unfair Trade Practices Act. That's why the PLCAA's litigation bar didn't apply. While I disagree with the court's conclusion, it's hard to argue that wasn't a successful use of advertising against a manufacturer.