f one owns RIP, Civil Defense, Civic Defense and other ammo that fragments upon entry; are law-abiding citizens, have trained and qualified to acquire ones legal right to own and carry a firearm openly or concealed; ones should not have a legal problem, however, If one does, one has horrible legal representation. Here is why…
The ballistics data supporting RIP ammo grossly outweigh popular ammo that over penetrates using the same testing medium. Brass Fetcher, as well as other ballistic test, proved it. I advise gun owners and 2nd Amendment lawyers to download such data if they have not already.
An attorney with this critical data would have no issues focusing the jury’s attention on how RIP performs, contrary to the name and or its appearance. This same attorney would compare RIP, to the standard ball and hollow-point type ammo that sometimes fails to mushroom upon impact, performing like ball ammo where incidents of hollow points and ball ammo have over-penetrated an intended target, unfortunately striking an innocent bystander, severely injuring or killing them.
The dogma that cloaks popular hollow-point brands while comparing them to RIP IMO would justify the use of RIP. We all have watched the videos and the commentary stating that RIP does not penetrate deep enough to kill a bad guy. Instead, some gun owners would prefer to walk around with Lehigh Extreme Penetrators, Hornady Critical Defense, both advertised to penetrate barriers such as steel. Not to mention, they both as well as Critical Duty and Federal HST all exceeded 20 inches of penetration in 10% ballistic gel test (FBI standard) with a barrier such as denim is in front of the intended target (10% ballistic gel). However, the RIP round performed as it should 10% Ballistic gel, bare and with a barrier such as denim is in front of the intended target (13 to 14 inches of penetration). When in doubt think like a prosecutor!
Should one not use AR-10 or 15 rifles to defend one’s home or property, because of the “AR” is perceived by the unlearned to mean Automatic Rifle? Should this cause one use a shotgun or bolt-action rifle instead, to keep it simple?
The most significant problem IMO with a jury is not the ammo; it is the 2nd Amendment style t-shirts worn by many on their social media platforms, at the range, family reunions, grocery stores, or outside to walk the dog. That would put one in a jury jam, not the legal use of ammo created for performance and safety regardless of its name.
Scrap the t-shirts keep the ammo.