…turkey didn’t stand a chance. 
2 Likes
Sarcasm is in every text and should be assumed! The bug is in being someone who doesn’t take offense. I’m fond of saying that if someone is always looking to take offense, they’ll always find a way to be offended. Life is too short! 
5 Likes
Guns you wouldn’t buy for self defense: probably not an AR-10 pistol- a little loud and maybe penetration issues
2 Likes
I don’t agree. Following your link, I think it is relatively subdued related to military assertions. Maybe any mention of military or terms like operator in firearm marketing might have a negative connotation to some, but I don’t think it was excessive… especially considering it’s my understanding that the APX was specifically developed (or thrown together) to compete in the last military trials.
I’m not a big Glock fan, but they even use bold font for their “law enforcement” description on some pages of their website. From: GLOCK Inc. | GLOCK Pistols | Buy Guns Online
" Utilizing the design and engineering GLOCK developed for its military pistol (G19X), combined with operator and worldwide Law Enforcement specifications."
Video from same page:
1 Like
See @ScottH I was thinking the other end of the timeline…and besides, it’s more of offense than self-defense… 
3 Likes
Legal concerns are real, and while they may be overridden by other factors they should never be ignored.
2 Likes
Does a Colt Officers ACP count as a micro in your book?
1 Like
I don’t quite get it. What does it have to marketing?
Legal concerns are the same for every handgun bought in USA.
2 Likes
A prosecutors decision on if they should charge you with a crime for defending yourself, the way they sell the jury on your intent, the way this is done in civil court as well, is very much influenced by the image of the gun and ammo used. Using a firearm marketed solely to “operators” runs a higher likeliness of you being portrayed as a Rambo-wannabe who was looking for an excuse to shoot someone. It brings greater scrutiny and greater likeliness that even the slightest flaw in your handling the situation will result in legal action against you. And then the prosecutor just has to hand out copies of the marketing materials to prove their point.
3 Likes
I had to google the pistol you mentioned. I wouldn’t consider that a micro- I was talking like DB9 sized pocket pistols! I’m not hating on Diamondback as a company, it was just the 1st pistol I thought about in that category! 
2 Likes
OK… I’m lost now…
Are we talking about Rambo - Jumbo guns or self-defense firearms, like any handguns, fe APX which doesn’t advertise itself correctly?
If you buy anything legally what logically seems to be self-defense firearm (and you keep it factory equipped) - there is no way that anyone can charge you differently based on size or color or model…
1 Like
I like that. It is great to have as long as you had a bus load of ammo. Hope you can fine some extra.
1 Like
While I don’t necessarily agree that you are more likely to lose a court case based on marketing, there is a possibility of getting demonized because of other variables. Ammunition or caliber perhaps… referring to the Harold Fish case. IMO something like that might be more likely.
Disclaimer: I wasn’t there, so I don’t have full knowledge of the series of events or circumstances. I am in no way a lawyer, haven’t played one on TV, and haven’t been to a Holiday Inn Express recently. I also have nothing against the 10mm cartridge.
1 Like
That’s why I wrote:
If you buy anything legally what logically seems to be self-defense firearm
We are discussing firearms that may be used for self-defense these days. Any handgun with 9, 10 mm, 0.22, 0.25, 0.38, 0.40, 0.45 is considered self-defense one.
2 Likes
I think some of us are discussing firearms that were not asked about in initial post.
I stick to the question form the post:
So are there guns that are obviously intended for/seem good for self-defense that you would never consider buying for that purpose?
I don’t worry about the DA. I am more concerned about the JURY.
1 Like
I imagine the marketing is to show the weapons reliability and quality. The message to me is that if the pistol is good enough to be trusted by the military and/or police, then it could be trusted by the consumer.
To me, it is simply another way they are telling a buyer that they can count on this being a high-quality sidearm. I also think that a firearms smart defense attorney could make that case to a jury.
What are we supposed to do? Buy one that is not good enough for the pros? No thank you. I am a retired Soldier though and may be a tad biased.
2 Likes
In the not to distant past I wouldn’t have even considered marketing to play a factor in legal issues. In 2020, my mind has changed about more than a few things.
With that being said I still intend to purchase what I want. Just ordered a Hellcat for example, could really see a lawyer having fun with that name and possibly even playing it up into the automobile version and how both are designed to be more than what a “reasonable person” needs in a gun or car.
But I refuse to live in fear of outcomes that may or may not happen based on scenario. So if I like it I’ll carry the hellcat. If I could ever afford one I’d drive a hellcat!
5 Likes
Sccy is definitely not one i would buy
4 Likes