I too see what you are saying. However, couldn't that extend to just about any ammo that is not your basic ball type bullet? Couldn't an attorney ask, " Why did you carry Hollow Points, why jacketed bullets, why Ballistc Tips, why + P's, why a heavier grain than the lightest availble, why a .45 instead of a .22, why a handgun instead of just a knife, why any weapon at all?
What I'm trying to get at is that if we are that paranoid about what we carry then why carry at all? I've no illusoins that if we have to shoot someone all will go smoothly in court but just as we can expect an attorney to give us grief so too should we expect our own attorney to both point out common sense and, I hate to have to say it, but more importantly the law as to what is legal. Instead of fearing laws that do more to protect the criminal than the victom, instead of being so afraid that we tie our hands and carrying becomes more a token than a real defense, how about we do more to educate the public as to the realities of having to defend one's self? How about fighting to strengthen laws to protect victoms rather than criminals?
How about instead of carrying legaly, yet too afraid to actualy use our weapon to defend ourselve's and thus defeating the purpose of carrying in the first place, we admit to both ourselve's and everyone else that we go armed for a very important reason. That being that if it comes to the choice of a violent attacker living, or ourself or a loved one living, we choose ourself or the loved ones! We need to point out that there is a big differance between " PLANNING" to shoot someone and being "PREPARED" in case we actualy have to. If a jury can't understand that then the problem doesn't lie with what we carry it lies with our judicial systom and peoples perceptions of us. That being so, rather than change what we LEGALY carry, we need to change the systom and peoples perceptions!