• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Legality of Hollow points

tito887

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2008
Messages
146
Location
, ,
imported post

I'm only 23 and over the last year began catching up with our gun rights and the struggle all of you have fought for over the years. What's up with some police interactions involve the police officers stating that hollow points are illegal. Was there a point when the anti gun crowd was trying to make them illegal. A recent story mentioned that the judge asked if it was teflon coated.

What's the deal with that?
 

DreQo

State Researcher
Joined
Jan 8, 2007
Messages
2,350
Location
Minnesota
imported post

There are some areas and even States I believe where hollow-points are restricted and/or illegal. Interestingly enough, it's illegal for the military to use hollow-points against the enemy. They're considered "inhumane". :?
 

KodiakISGOOD

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2007
Messages
353
Location
Springfield, Va, , USA
imported post

the whole teflon deal had to do with bullets that were made from tungsten rather than copper. the teflon was designed to protect the barrel. bullets made from tungsten claim to have been able to defeat certain body armor.

happy carrying,


jason
 

LEO 229

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
7,606
Location
USA
imported post

Actually... it was a magistrate that advised hollow points are not illegal.

I have no idea why the officer thought hollow points were illegal.
 

tattedupboy

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2006
Messages
518
Location
Gary, Indiana, USA
imported post

Felid ' Maximus almost got it correct. Hollow points are not illegal to possess per se; they're just illegal to use. If, for instance, you purchase hollow point ammo out of state, you can bring it into Jersey, but you can't use it. About the only other place I know of where it is illegal is D.C.; even though hollow points aren't specifically mentioned as being illegal there, unregistered ammo is, and since handguns are illegal there (pending the outcome of the D.C. v. Heller case before the Supreme Court), so too is hollow point ammo.
 

eyesopened

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2007
Messages
731
Location
NOVA, Virginia, USA
imported post

tattedupboy wrote:
Felid ' Maximus almost got it correct. Hollow points are not illegal to possess per se; they're just illegal to use. If, for instance, you purchase hollow point ammo out of state, you can bring it into Jersey, but you can't use it. About the only other place I know of where it is illegal is D.C.; even though hollow points aren't specifically mentioned as being illegal there, unregistered ammo is, and since handguns are illegal there (pending the outcome of the D.C. v. Heller case before the Supreme Court), so too is hollow point ammo.

Oh you can use Hollow Points in NJ. You just can't have them in your carry pistol away from home, but you can transport them to the range separately and practice with them there. Also no provision saying you cannot use Hollow Points in your home for SD.

http://www.state.nj.us/njsp/about/fire_hollow.html
 

LEO 229

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
7,606
Location
USA
imported post

I suspect that the officer in the referenced event must have come froma state that banned them.

He should have known in either case to look up the charge and get the code section as this is needed when you go before the magistrate. But then.... in Virginia you shall release on a summons for misdemeanor charges.
 

ufcfanvt

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2007
Messages
431
Location
NoVA, Virginia, USA
imported post

LEO 229 wrote:
....But then.... in Virginia you shall release on a summons for misdemeanor charges.
Nope. Remember the recent Supreme Court Case originating in Portsmouth, VA?
True, they are supposed to release, but if they don't and they find a crack pipe on you, you still go up the river for the crack pipe. That's a MAJOR reason a cop might want to arrest someone without just cause for a misdemeanor, esp if he knew his CO would back him up.
I know of nothing in place (history of cops losing their jobs, wage garnishments, etc) that would prevent an officer from arresting a person arbitrarily for a non-continuing misdemeanor. Perhaps you can fill me in...
 

Sheriff

Regular Member
Joined
May 19, 2008
Messages
1,968
Location
Virginia, USA
imported post

§46.2-936 says an officer shall release on a summons in the case of a misdemeanor. But if the arresting officer has reason to believe a person will not honor and abide by a summons,they can take the personinto a magistrate's office according to §46.2-940. This isn't exactly what was meant when the code section below was adopted, but it is the way many officers interpret it. And we both know arresting officers would never misuse the authority this section supposedly provides them, don't we?

-----------------------------------------------------

§ 46.2-940. When arresting officer shall take person before issuing authority.

If any person is: (i) believed by the arresting officer to have committed a felony; (ii) believed by the arresting officer to be likely to disregard a summons issued under § 46.2-936; or (iii) refuses to give a written promise to appear under the provisions of § 46.2-936 or § 46.2-945, the arresting officer shall promptly take him before a magistrate or other issuing authority having jurisdiction and proceed in accordance with the provisions of § 19.2-82. The magistrate or other authority may issue either a summons or warrant as he shall determine proper.

(Code 1950, § 46-194; 1958, c. 541, § 46.1-179; 1966, c. 639; 1972, c. 474; 1981, c. 382; 1989, c. 727; 2006, c. 276.)
 

murphy2

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2008
Messages
143
Location
, ,
imported post

Sheriff wrote:
§46.2-936 says an officer shall release on a summons in the case of a misdemeanor. But if the arresting officer has reason to believe a person will not honor and abide by a summons,they can take the personinto a magistrate's office according to §46.2-940. This isn't exactly what was meant when the code section below was adopted, but it is the way many officers interpret it. And we both know arresting officers would never misuse the authority this section supposedly provides them, don't we?

-----------------------------------------------------

§ 46.2-940. When arresting officer shall take person before issuing authority.

If any person is: (i) believed by the arresting officer to have committed a felony; (ii) believed by the arresting officer to be likely to disregard a summons issued under § 46.2-936; or (iii) refuses to give a written promise to appear under the provisions of § 46.2-936 or § 46.2-945, the arresting officer shall promptly take him before a magistrate or other issuing authority having jurisdiction and proceed in accordance with the provisions of § 19.2-82. The magistrate or other authority may issue either a summons or warrant as he shall determine proper.

(Code 1950, § 46-194; 1958, c. 541, § 46.1-179; 1966, c. 639; 1972, c. 474; 1981, c. 382; 1989, c. 727; 2006, c. 276.)
Yeah! No cop would ever go beyond there authority. Or common sence.
 

Hammer

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2008
Messages
448
Location
Skagit Valley, Washington
imported post

tito887 wrote:
I'm only 23 and over the last year began catching up with our gun rights and the struggle all of you have fought for over the years. What's up with some police interactions involve the police officers stating that hollow points are illegal. Was there a point when the anti gun crowd was trying to make them illegal. A recent story mentioned that the judge asked if it was teflon coated.

What's the deal with that?
You'll hear almost anything. Don't go by hearsay. There aren't many regs against ammo, but there are a few. So-called armor-piercing ammo (tungsten w/teflon coat) is illegal in many places. Incindiery ammo is illegal in many places. There's a lot of info in this thread already about some of the ammos and reasons. You'd do well to know your local laws.
My father was career Navy in the Medical Corps. He told me the reason the military uses FMJ. Yes, there is the Geneva convention that says in general that HPs are inhumane. Is war humane? I'm getting off-topic.
The reason to use FMJ is this: If you punch a small hole in an enemy, he is wounded and requires 2 more to carry him away, and medical care, and often is permanently disabled, sapping enemy resources.
If you hydro-shock an enemy and kill him, no such after-care is required. In fact, depending on circumstances, the winner has to clean up.
 

LEO 229

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
7,606
Location
USA
imported post

mvpel wrote:
I found out what my town's PD carries, and carry the same - Winchester Silvertip JHP.
Silver tip? You have ware-wolves there??
 
Top