PDA

View Full Version : I'm sure it's "here we go again time"...handloads and self defense


opos
05-28-2012, 12:19 PM
I've tried the search in several of the threads and can't find something but I'd bet there has been plenty of discussion...Please excuse and indulge one more request if there have been prior threads on this issue.

I'm looking for one specific thing...is there any specific published court case history where handloads were all or a part of the case when handloads were used in a self defense situation...vs factory loads?

I don't want to start another opinion poll or speculation as there has been a lifetime of chat about this and I have to admit I've been on the bandwagon from time to time...I'm aware of Ayoob's writings and all the speculation about what a court or jury might or might not do , etc, etc.

I'm only searching for specific case citings that talk directly to the issue where handloaded ammunition being a direct or partial cause for someone defending themselves being charged with a crime. This is sort of like the flying saucers...if it's been so much of an issue...where is one actual piece of evidence or legitimate finding that it's for real?

I don't load hadloads in a s/d weapon...that's my choice but for the life of me I can't "prove" the claims that lead me to use factory ammo...

Thanks and I'll duck now for raising this issue again..

bigdawg86
05-28-2012, 12:27 PM
I have wondered the same thing... nobody has every specifically stated why handloads would be a liability.

mtsul
05-28-2012, 12:35 PM
Interested

scarville
05-28-2012, 1:01 PM
I can imagine a case where the lack of an exemplar might make a difference but I've never heard of a self-defense case where it actually has. The case Ayoob usually refers to was not remotely self defense.

tagged...

BoonieGhost
05-28-2012, 1:06 PM
if handloads arent legal to use here in CA for defense, its only because this state looks for any reason possible to punish people for trying to defend themselves... protectionist bastards!!!

scarville
05-28-2012, 1:24 PM
I found this article which does mention a case where reloaded ammunition was an issue.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BQY/is_4_51/ai_n11840291/

In one case I was consulted on back in the '70s, the shooter had used a CCI Speer 200-grain JHP he'd handloaded to equal CCI's ballistics in a factory loaded .45 ACP cartridge. The state police who investigated, and the prosecutor who brought him to trial for aggravated assault, kept asking why regular bullets weren't deadly enough for this man. On my recommendation, the defense brought Jim Cirillo in as an expert. He calmly explained the whole thing, including the fact the defendant's .45 ACP handloads were less powerful than the factory amino [sic] issued to the investigating troopers for their .357 Magnums, and the jury acquitted the shooter. Still, it was an attack that could have been prevented if the defendant had simply loaded with CCI's own factory cartridges, and used his identical handloads for training and practice.

BKinzey
05-28-2012, 1:45 PM
I point out that the cases of this happening seem to be very rare and IIRC only one or two (I really can't remember enough about them) possibly gave some creedence to the fear, excuse me FUD, surrounding ammo.

There is a lot of Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt about what the DA can and will do. I am of the opinion that any DA who will make an issue around 10mm Black Talon reloads is going to go after any training, affiliations, and memberships you have that are firearm related and will claim you are a wanna-be ninja who was just itching to kill somebody anyway. You have more than 100 posts on CalGuns you are sunk.:rolleyes:

I'm going to pick a firearm and ammo based on what I think will stop the threat best. I'm not going with second best because maybe the DA might do something.

BKinzey
05-28-2012, 1:55 PM
I found this article which does mention a case where reloaded ammunition was an issue.

Massad Ayoub thinks it is. I like to see references and case numbers so others can analyze the case(s). I'll also point out one of his 2 cases he points out it was an "issue" but didn't affect the outcome of the case. He says so.

SilverTauron
05-28-2012, 2:09 PM
May, 1990. I hang up the telephone and lean back in the chair in my office and utter the words, "Damn it!"

John Lanza, the attorney defending a young man against a charge of Murder, has just told me, "The state will contend that a different load with a different powder charge was used than what we determined from the defendant's reloading notes was likely to have been in the gun at the time the fatal shot was fired."\

It's important. It's very important. The difference is whether it's Murder as charged, or a man trying to pull the gun out of the hand of a woman he loves as she tries to commit suicide ... and tragically, failing to stop her.

The bullet that tore through Lise Bias' brain and killed her almost instantly had been fired from a Smith & Wesson Model 686, a heavy-duty stainless steel target-grade service revolver which, in this case, had a 6" barrel. The rifling marks conclusively showed the death bullet had been fired from this particular firearm, serial number AFH3446. Both prosecution and defense would stipulate this was the death weapon.

The problem was that the prosecution thought it was a murder weapon.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BTT/is_181_30/ai_n26806104/-
In reference to the Case of Daniel Bias. Brass tacks summary, the police acquired a warrant and seized everything firearm related in the plaintiffs home during the investigation, including his reloads.The Grand Jury sought a murder charge because the handloads in the death weapon didn't leave gunshot residue for the crime lab to detect, which contradicted Bias' statement that his wife killed herself with his gun.

More records, posted by Mas Ayoob himself when asked the same question directly that the OP poses here.
Link :http://www.gunatics.com/forums/general-gun-talk/5514-cases-where-handloads-caused-problems-court-mas-ayoob.html



NH v. Kennedy

James Kennedy, a sergeant on the Hampton, NH police force, pursued a drunk driver whose reckless operation of the vehicle had forced other motorists off the road. The suspect ended up in a ditch, stalled and trying to get underway again. Advised by radio that responding backup officers were still a distance away, and fearing that the man would get back on the road and kill himself and others, Kennedy approached the vehicle. At the driver’s door, the suspect grabbed Kennedy’s Colt .45 auto and pulled it towards himself. It discharged in his face, causing massive injury.

The reload in the gun was a 200 grain Speer JHP, loaded to duplicate the 1000 fps from a 5” barrel then advertised by Speer for the same bullet in loaded cartridge configuration.

This was the first case where I saw the argument, “Why wasn’t regular ammunition deadly enough for you,” used by opposing counsel. They charged Kennedy with aggravated assault. They made a large issue out of his use of handloads, suggesting that they were indicative of a reckless man obsessed with causing maximum damage.

Defense counsel hired the expert I suggested, Jim Cirillo, who did a splendid job of demolishing that argument and other bogus arguments against Kennedy at trial, and Kennedy was acquitted.

This case dates back to the late 1970s. The local courts tell me that the case documentation will be on file at Rockingham County Superior Court, PO Box 1258, Kingston, NH 03843. File search time is billed at $25 per hour for cases such as this that date back prior to 1988.



TN v. Barnes

The decedent attacked Robert Barnes and his young daughter with a large knife and was shot to death by the defendant with SJHP .38 Special reloads from a Smith & Wesson Model 36. The distance between the two at the time of the shooting became a key element in the trial, and a misunderstanding of that distance was a primary reason he was charged with Murder. The evidence was messed up in a number of ways in this case, and I do not believe the reloaded ammo (which the prosecution did not recognize to be such until during the trial) was the key problem, but it definitely was part of a problem in reconstructing the case. We were able to do that without GSR evidence, and Mr. Barnes won an acquittal. In this case, I believe the use of factory ammo, combined with proper handling and preserving of the evidence by the initial investigators, would have made the defense much easier and might well have prevented the case from ever being lodged against him.

The records of TN v. Barnes are archived under case number 87297015 at:

Criminal Justice Center
201 Poplar
Suite 401
Memphis, TN 38103

Iowa v. Cpl. Randy Willems

A man attempted to disarm and murder Corporal Randy Willems of the Davenport, IA Police Department, screaming “Give me your (expletive deleted) gun, I’ll blow your (expletive deleted) brains out.” Willems shot him during the third disarming attempt, dropping him instantly with one hit to the abdomen from a department issue factory round, Fiocchi 9mm 115 grain JHP +P+. The subject survived and stated that the officer had shot him for nothing from a substantial distance away. GSR testing showed conclusively that the subject’s torso was approximately 18” from the muzzle of the issue Beretta 92 when it discharged. Randy was acquitted of criminal charges in the shooting at trial in 1990. Two years later, Randy and his department won the civil suit filed against them by the man who was shot.

I use this case when discussing handloads because it is a classic example of how the replicability of factory ammunition, in the forensic evidence sense, can annihilate false allegations by the “bad guy” against the “good guy” who shot him. The records of State of Iowa v. Corporal Randy Willems are archived in the Iowa District Court in Scott County, Davenport, Iowa. Those from the civil suit, Karwoski v. Willems and the City of Davenport, should be at the Iowa Civil Court of Scott County, also located in Davenport, Iowa.

A final word: I did not research the above and place it here to placate lightweight net ninjas. I did it because three recent Internet threads led me to believe that a number of decent people had honest questions about the real-world concerns about using handloads for self-defense, and were possibly putting themselves in jeopardy by doing so. For well over a decade, certain people have been creating an urban myth that says, “No one has ever gotten in trouble in court because they used handloads.”

This is now absolutely, and I hope finally, refuted.

Respectfully submitted,
Massad Ayoob

http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=2129976&postcount=140

Paul S
05-28-2012, 2:42 PM
if handloads arent legal to use here in CA for defense, its only because this state looks for any reason possible to punish people for trying to defend themselves... protectionist bastards!!!

Hand loads are perfectly legal in California. There is no legal prohibition against using hand loads in a self defense situation.
However, many caution that using anything other than regularly manufactured ammunition gives an opening to the D.A. and/or the family of the deceased.
"He was a good boy and getting his life turned around and now you've killed him." Can you see where the issue would arise from the ambulance chasing attorney?

A D.A. is highly unlikely to care what kind of ammunition was used to kill someone. If the case is justifiable homicide end of story. If the case is manslaughter or higher you've got a lot more to worry about than whether the ammo was a hand load.

Fjold
05-28-2012, 3:06 PM
"In reference to the Case of Daniel Bias. Brass tacks summary, the police acquired a warrant and seized everything firearm related in the plaintiffs home during the investigation, including his reloads.The Grand Jury sought a murder charge because the handloads in the death weapon didn't leave gunshot residue for the crime lab to detect, which contradicted Bias' statement that his wife killed herself with his gun."

What kind of gunpowder doesn't leave residue?

Meplat
05-28-2012, 4:19 PM
At least with hand loads the validity of duplication of results is known to be considered to be nonexistent. On the other hand, the confidence level of valid replication of results, with factory ammo, is extremely high. The performance of factory ammunition is not always consistent, even if ammo from the same lot # is used. It would be a real tragedy to be convicted on the bases of what everyone assumes is valid reliable results; that are anything but.

I don’t know about you but I don’t have to shoot my carry gun very often. Time and temperature are the enemies of ammo, especially powder and primers. If the ammo in your gun has been around for say a couple decades it is not going to perform exactly like other ammo from the same lot unless the storage conditions have been exactly the same.

I make it a point to shoot up and replace my carry ammo at least once a year. It is replaced with ammo from the same lot, bought at the same time. However, the carry ammo has been carried around all summer and winter in the outdoors under widely varying condition of heat, humidity, barometric pressure and the like. Add maybe being locked in a car trunk that may get to 140 to 160 degrees in summer and below freezing in winter, a few times. I am not going to expect that ammo to perform identically, in a scientifically measurable way, as ammo from the box it came in that has been stored in a cabinet or safe in my home at 72*F for the same period of time.

bussda
05-28-2012, 5:27 PM
The primary problem with handloads is the difficulty in determining what the specific load of the round(s) fired. Factory ammo can be traced back to factory records. Home loaded ammo records can be considered manufactured evidence, and thus not considered. So other things get mixed in, which makes the accused seem to be lying.

An example: A person who witnessed a murder states person standing outside shot the victim from outside a closed window. Problem: All the window glass is outside. Every one knows when a bullet goes though a window, the glass travels in the same direction as the bullet. Thus window broken to add truth to the story, so the witness is accused of murder. BUT: When the local agency recreated the event, it verified the witness's story.

Any point not backed by an external factor becomes a point of argument.

BKinzey
05-28-2012, 6:09 PM
...John Lanza, ....


NH v. Kennedy

... Jim Cirillo, who did a splendid job of demolishing that argument and other bogus arguments against Kennedy at trial, and Kennedy was acquitted.


TN v. Barnes

... We were able to do that without GSR evidence, and Mr. Barnes won an acquittal. In this case, I believe the use of factory ammo, combined with proper handling and preserving of the evidence by the initial investigators,

As for John Lanza here is an interesting part of his case:

"He proceeded downstairs and laid on the couch and watched TV. She came down with the .357 magnum in both hands. She stated that she had just got done watching a movie on TV and that 'it was so easy to shoot you any time I wanted.' He told her to 'stop fxxxxx' around,' and to put the gun away. She went upstairs to apparently put the gun upstairs, and approximately two minutes later he followed to ascertain if she did. When he walked in the master bedroom, he observed her standing in front of the mirror with the gun in her left hand pointing it at her head. He thought she was joking because of the fact she is right-handed and had the gun in her left hand. When she didn't acknowledge that he was standing there, he made a 'rash decision to grab it before she hurt herself.' He grabbed her left hand with his left hand and pulled the gun back. At that instant the gun fired and she slid off the dresser falling on a portable heater."

I would guess Mr. Lanza also had Gun Shot Residue on his hand.

There are actual cases where the bad person finds the HD gun first or manages to take it away from you. Some people use those cases to convince others not to have firearms for self defense at all.

SilverTauron
05-28-2012, 6:31 PM
I believe the OP's question has been answered. Put simply using hand loads for self defense introduces a variable in court. When it comes to our legal system variables are not good.

Remember that this is just the case summary from one experienced expert court witness. These sorts of problems can take place all over the country, and without dilligent and expensive case searches we'll never concretely know how often hand loads play in convicting someone of a civil or criminal penalty.

cdtx2001
05-28-2012, 6:40 PM
"In reference to the Case of Daniel Bias. Brass tacks summary, the police acquired a warrant and seized everything firearm related in the plaintiffs home during the investigation, including his reloads.The Grand Jury sought a murder charge because the handloads in the death weapon didn't leave gunshot residue for the crime lab to detect, which contradicted Bias' statement that his wife killed herself with his gun."

What kind of gunpowder doesn't leave residue?

The kind of gunpowder used in heat seeking bullets when fired from the rifle with the shoulder thing that goes up.

greg36f
05-28-2012, 7:34 PM
When it comes right down to it, why would you intentionally complicate a situation that is complicated already? Yeah, a good shoot is a good shoot no matter what gun or ammo you use, but you would be an idiot to throw anything into the mix that you do not have to.

Using hand loads in a personal defense weapon is foolish. There is ABSOLUTELY NO REASON to use hand loads with all the good quality factory stuff out there.

I mean, I can see you just coming back from the range and heck goes down; you have no choice but to use what you got.

But why would you choose to do such a thing?

ubet
05-28-2012, 7:53 PM
Coming from a different aspect of this, handloads can have problems. Whoever has loaded pistol ammo has not fully crimped some before. So, you put this one uncrimped round into your magazine and go about your day. You are forced to draw and shoot, when that un crimped bullet goes to feed and it jams. I have never and pray to god I am never in a gunfight, but I think the last thing you want in a gunfight, is for your GUN TO JAM.

Not saying all factory loads are 100% perfect, but the fact of accidently missing something like that, and having it affect me in a life or death situation, is the reason I carry ranger ts in my carry gun.

Bhobbs
05-28-2012, 8:05 PM
When it comes right down to it, why would you intentionally complicate a situation that is complicated already? Yeah, a good shoot is a good shoot no matter what gun or ammo you use, but you would be an idiot to throw anything into the mix that you do not have to.

Using hand loads in a personal defense weapon is foolish. There is ABSOLUTELY NO REASON to use hand loads with all the good quality factory stuff out there.

I mean, I can see you just coming back from the range and heck goes down; you have no choice but to use what you got.

But why would you choose to do such a thing?

I reload most of the ammo I shoot. Why? Because I enjoy it and it is cheaper in many cases. That is the reason I would reload my self defense ammo.

ojisan
05-28-2012, 8:56 PM
Coming from a different aspect of this, handloads can have problems. Whoever has loaded pistol ammo has not fully crimped some before. So, you put this one uncrimped round into your magazine and go about your day. You are forced to draw and shoot, when that un crimped bullet goes to feed and it jams. I have never and pray to god I am never in a gunfight, but I think the last thing you want in a gunfight, is for your GUN TO JAM.

Not saying all factory loads are 100% perfect, but the fact of accidently missing something like that, and having it affect me in a life or death situation, is the reason I carry ranger ts in my carry gun.

Any ammo, factory or handload, that I would carry for self defense is inspected and chamber checked for fit before use.
As you say, defects can be found everywhere.
That said, for $20 you can get a box of factory SD ammo and avoid the possible legal headaches completely.

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure...
:oji:

opos
05-29-2012, 5:30 AM
Well, it all comes back to Ayoob's court testimony and his "opinion" on things. I'm not an Ayoob fan as I said before and with the years and years of "don't use handloads in SD or carry weapons" I still have to see one documented case other than Ayoob's famous "this proves it" citings.

I don't use handloads in my SD weapons because I do believe it can introduce a variable that could be damaging to a person involved in a self defense shooting (especially in California)...I've "spread the word" for years about don't used handloads so I'm not critical of anyone that does that...I just got called out by someone about what my post is about...and only that....other than Ayoob's citings...come up with one case out of the multitudes of self defense shooting cases (not suicides, etc) where home brew ammo was actually, directly cited as part of the reason a "defender" got charged with a crime....and frankly I can't find anything and nothing posted here goes beyond Ayoob's paper.

Ayoob, in my opinion, is like the Forensic Pathologist Baden. He makes his living testifying in court for money and spends much of his time as a special guest on this or that news program. It's all about the public image. When Ayoob cites a case where the situation is powder burns at a specific distance and that it was not handloads but factory ammo involved, and they were able to test the same ammo...and says that proves that factory ammo is repeatable, therefore handloads are bad....is way too much of a stretch for me to be convinced that that proves anything...he wants us to believe that because factory loads are repeatable that everything else is not...and frankly I just don't buy that logic.

My whole question was citing specific cases where handloads were the cited culprit in a self defense situation...not powder burns, not suicide examination and not a theory that if factory loads are repeatable that all other loads are not.

X231
05-29-2012, 6:33 AM
If a jury would send someone up the river for the type of ammo they used it doesn't say much for our justice system does it?

SilverTauron
05-29-2012, 8:53 AM
........ our justice system does it?

There is a significant distinction between a "justice system" and the current "legal system" in place today.

Mulay El Raisuli
05-29-2012, 9:00 AM
I believe the OP's question has been answered. Put simply using hand loads for self defense introduces a variable in court. When it comes to our legal system variables are not good.

Remember that this is just the case summary from one experienced expert court witness. These sorts of problems can take place all over the country, and without dilligent and expensive case searches we'll never concretely know how often hand loads play in convicting someone of a civil or criminal penalty.


I also believe the OP's question has been answered. There's ONE 'maybe' from 30 years ago (with other factors thrown in) & that hardly constitutes evidence that use of a handload will cause a problem.

IMHO, the fact that there are no citations (despite "diligent" searching) showing conclusively that handloads are a problem tells me that I won't have a problem if I should find myself having to explain to the cops how that felon got that fatal bullet wound.


The Raisuli

YubaRiver
05-29-2012, 9:10 AM
Many handload BECAUSE they can do a better job than the factory loads, in their gun.
Handloads can be tailored to each firearm for best feeding and
accuracy. The old saying, if you want it done right, do it yourself. (Not talking
about self dentistry or brain surgery here).

Then you can practice with the same ammunition you carry.

How do you prove your cartridge was factory ammo anyway?

Attorneys will throw everything on the back porch to see if the cat licks it up.
They could easily make up nonsense about factory rounds being something
special too.

YubaRiver
05-29-2012, 9:22 AM
Would you let someone else pack your 'chute?

I could show you the velocities of my handloads, with written records, over time,
that have lower standard deviation, by far, than factory loads. They also match
load data recipes for velocity in the loading manuals. This is
something anyone with a little time to test can do, not than I am any kind
of superior being when it comes to pouring powder into a piece of brass. I just
have the gun to work with which the ammo factory does not.

When your life depends on something, why go with an inferior product if you
can do a better job yourself?

scarville
05-29-2012, 9:29 AM
This conversation raises a new question: What exactly is "factory ammo"?

Are the loads from someplace like Buffalo Bore considered "factory"? How about the reloads from someone with a type 6 FFL?

rugershooter
05-29-2012, 10:11 AM
I'm going to throw in a different twist to this discussion. Which is more harmful to a legal defense, using JHPs vs. fmj, or handloads? I've hear more rhetoric and BS about hollowpoints being the magic death ray bullets than about handloads.

SilverTauron
05-29-2012, 10:31 AM
??????


You guys act as if we don't live in The Age of Moronic Litigation.

McDonalds lost a lawsuit for serving HOT COFFEE. Do you guys really think that in a day and age where "moral relativism" is socially acceptable, that you WON'T face adverse legal consequences after a 'good shoot'?

Personally ,I believe we should prepare for court as much as we prepare for a gunfight. Both are stressful tests of one's survival, and losing either fight can have drastic consequences for one's future. Its a textbook Pyrrhic victory to win the gunfight and to lose in court, with the attendant consequences of spending decades behind bars -or suffering the enduring disgrace of writing a civil damages check to the family of the dead scumbag.

Stuff happens. That's why we carry weapons to begin with. If something goes bad on the street, you could end up dead. If something goes bad in court, you can end up in prison or impoverished. To avoid these outcomes certain measures are wise. On the street, you carry a reliable gun that can be shot accurately under stress. In the courtroom, you don't give the opposing counsel reasons to hang you.

YubaRiver
05-29-2012, 11:05 AM
??????


You guys act as if we don't live in The Age of Moronic Litigation.

McDonalds lost a lawsuit for serving HOT COFFEE.

Lame example. The lady got 3rd degree burns. After countless others
received same and McD's was warned. Real injurys. Not made up stuff.
Don't rely on Rush for your legal advice.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Restaurants

You are spreading FUD.
Where are your real examples of handloads being a problem? Why wouldn't factory loads
cause similar concern. "Military grade, Police quality, etc."

BoxesOfLiberty
05-29-2012, 11:06 AM
I'm going to throw in a different twist to this discussion. Which is more harmful to a legal defense, using JHPs vs. fmj, or handloads? I've hear more rhetoric and BS about hollowpoints being the magic death ray bullets than about handloads.

I don't think anyone would recommend using FMJ for SD purposes these days.

That said, I can remember hearing on a number of occasions back in the nineteen-eighties from a number of presumed reliable sources (including one who was an expert witness on firearms matters and another who was an police range instructor), that no civilian should never use hollow-points especially Hydra Shoks and the like in a defensive weapon, because any DA worth his salt could quickly convince a jury that loading anything but ball ammo (plenty lethal for the military, after all) was conclusive evidence of premeditation, and murderous intent.

rugershooter
05-29-2012, 11:07 AM
If that's the case, what makes you think you won't be sued or somehow face adverse legal consequences even if you are absolutely spotless and it was a 100% good shoot? That ties in with my question about jhp vs. fmj and factory vs. handloads. We gunners know that expanding ammunition is better for defensive purposes than non expanding ammunition. But even so, you may face adverse legal consequences by using expanding ammunition, if the DA wants to persecute you in some way. I've never heard of any actual cases of the happening, but then again I haven't researched it.

ETA: The above was my response to SilverTauron.

Maestro Pistolero
05-29-2012, 11:30 AM
I see no reason to introduce the slightest doubt into a self defense case, as the cost of carrying quality factory ammo is so minimal in the long run.

Once I'm confident in a factory load for carry, I carry it for 2-3 years then replace. I am diligent to avoid contaminating primers with solvents and lubricants, and I regularly check for set-back on rounds that may have been chambered multiple times.

Also, when I chamber my carry ammo, I make an exception to the rule of not riding the slide forward, because dropping the slide full-force, multiple times on the same round can cause bullet setback that can lead to dangerous pressures.

I am careful to choose rounds that have a crimp or are otherwise manufactured to prevent bullet set-back.

I have fired old rounds that were carried for a few years (old hydra-shoks and others) from the late eighties and early nineties that still functioned as new.

longhairchris
05-29-2012, 12:56 PM
Prosecutors can say anything they want. Who's to say that they wouldn't grill you for using the same ammo as the local PD (as is often recommended here)? They could just as easily paint you as a "cop-wannabe vigilante" for using police style ammunition. Just use what you want, it should be irrelevant when it comes to a good shoot.

Lawyers would argue your choice of boxers vs briefs if they thought it would help their case.

SilverTauron
05-29-2012, 1:32 PM
The game isn't based on what the opposing counsel says,but how easy it is to refute their statements.
In one of Ayoob's many books,a guy with a 1911 and two magazines was portrayed in court as a 'vigilante' because he carried 25 rounds of 'especially deadly' .45ACP.Ayoob was able to refute the bogus claim by citing the courts own bailiffs as examples of responsible people carrying spare mags.

Remember,a 'jury of your peers' will not be 12 guys from the local gun club.If you were unlucky enough to end up shooting someone you'll likey end up with 12 people who think a barrel shroud is 'the thingy that goes up'.Good luck refuting the 'madman creating cop killer bullets in his basement lair' meme to 12 Brady Brainwashed sheeple who get their gun info from Terminator sequels.

CBruce
05-29-2012, 1:55 PM
??????


You guys act as if we don't live in The Age of Moronic Litigation.

McDonalds lost a lawsuit for serving HOT COFFEE.

Here are 3rd degree burns that Stella Liebeck suffered from the 'hot cofee' in question that prompted the infamous 'hot cofee' lawsuit. VERY GRAPHIC AND NSFW (http://travis.pflanz.me/assets/stella_liebeck_burned_by_mcdonalds_coffee.jpg).

...[she] suffered third-degree burns on six percent of her skin and lesser burns over sixteen percent.[13] She remained in the hospital for eight days while she underwent skin grafting. During this period, Liebeck lost 20 pounds (9 kg, nearly 20% of her body weight), reducing her down to 83 pounds (38 kg).[14] Two years of medical treatment followed.

She wanted a mere $20k to cover her actual and expected medical expenses. McDonald's refused to offer more than $800. She was forced to hire an attorney and the jury awarded her $160k + $2.7mil in punitive damages to McDonalds (1-2 days worth of revenues from McDonald's coffee sales at that time).

All of those amounts were reduced by 20%, and they eventually settled out of court before an appeal for an undisclosed amount, but it's still heralded as the poster-child for uncessary litigation and tort reform.

dantodd
05-29-2012, 1:55 PM
The kind of gunpowder used in heat seeking bullets when fired from the rifle with the shoulder thing that goes up.

The kind of gunpowder that is shot from across the room. Remember it was the defense atty. that claimed the gunpowder used didn't leave powder residue.

dantodd
05-29-2012, 1:59 PM
The chances of having any legal issue in a clearly legal shoot because of using reloads is very small. The chance of having it brought up in a civil case following a shooting (where the requirement for evidence is lower) would seem much greater.

It's really cheap insurance for 25 rounds/year.

Scottie15
05-29-2012, 3:32 PM
It's really cheap insurance for 25 rounds/year.

The cheapest part of any shoot (be it a tournament, hunt or self defense) is the ammo. Why not splurge and buy some factory defensive loads?

YubaRiver
05-29-2012, 4:26 PM
"The cheapest part of any shoot (be it a tournament, hunt or self defense) is the ammo. Why not splurge and buy some factory defensive loads?"

Why not splurge and take the time to make something more accurate?

Maestro Pistolero
05-29-2012, 4:43 PM
Why not splurge and take the time to make something more accurate?
How accurate do you need a round to be that's going to be fired at under 25 yards, or even more likely, under 25 feet? If you are in a "defensive" shooting at more than 75 feet, I suspect you'll have some 'splainin to do.

YubaRiver
05-29-2012, 6:11 PM
Okay, you have convinced me. Only factory ammo all the way.

http://www.gunsandammo.com/files/2011/10/316319_10150349685928369_80176223368_8118710_19398 86866_n.jpg

Meplat
05-29-2012, 11:05 PM
If that's the case, what makes you think you won't be sued or somehow face adverse legal consequences even if you are absolutely spotless and it was a 100% good shoot? That ties in with my question about jhp vs. fmj and factory vs. handloads. We gunners know that expanding ammunition is better for defensive purposes than non expanding ammunition. But even so, you may face adverse legal consequences by using expanding ammunition, if the DA wants to persecute you in some way. I've never heard of any actual cases of the happening, but then again I haven't researched it.

ETA: The above was my response to SilverTauron.

If a DA wants to persecute you he will do it regardless. Hollow points are murderous and malicious, FMJ’s are cop killers. They will find a way to vilify a nerf ball.

NotEnufGarage
05-30-2012, 4:13 AM
How accurate do you need a round to be that's going to be fired at under 25 yards, or even more likely, under 25 feet? If you are in a "defensive" shooting at more than 75 feet, I suspect you'll have some 'splainin to do.

Most self-defense shootings are probably at less than 20 feet.

SanPedroShooter
05-30-2012, 5:31 AM
Massad Ayoub thinks it is. I like to see references and case numbers so others can analyze the case(s). I'll also point out one of his 2 cases he points out it was an "issue" but didn't affect the outcome of the case. He says so.

I understand its because the ballistic evidence is or can be, or will be thought to be, unduplicatable or inconsistent. Theoretically, if handloads are more accurate than factory because of their consistency, the effects and result should be more predictiable than factory...

But, the factory keeps detailed records (so do I), the factory makes and sells millions of rounds a year, you are just an 'amatuer' (I'll put my handloads up against any factory loads) in the end, its one factor that you can dismiss if you shoot someone with FBI or the local police approved ammo as opposed to super deadly poison bullets you made yourself in your basement....

I think its more a perception issue than any reality.

By the way, I found a deal on 9mm gold dot projectiles, I thought about buying a few hundred so I can practice more frequently with the same rounds I carry.

Does Ayoob have any cases that arent from the dark days of uber gun control histeria?

ubet
05-30-2012, 5:36 AM
Most self-defense shootings are probably at less than 20 feet.

I am going to guess and say that most shot fired in self defense are in <2'.

NotEnufGarage
05-30-2012, 5:46 AM
I understand its because the ballistic evidence is or can be, or will be thought to be, unduplicatable or inconsistent. Theoretically, if handloads are more accurate than factory because of their consistency, the effects and result should be more predictiable than factory...

But, the factory keeps detailed records (so do I), the factory makes and sells millions of rounds a year, you are just an 'amatuer' (I'll put my handloads up against any factory loads) in the end, its one factor that you can dismiss if you shoot someone with FBI or the local police approved ammo as opposed to super deadly poison bullets you made yourself in your basement....

I think its more a perception issue than any reality.

The reality is that by using handloads you're giving the prosecution or plaintiff one more issue to bring up in court that will potentially make it look like your were itching to kill someone. That's never a good thing when either your freedom or treasure is at risk and definitely not worth the few dollars you'd have saved by not buying premium grade factory loaded HD ammo to keep in your HD weapon.

Buy some premium HD ammo, chronograph it, buy some similar components and work up a load that is identical to use for regular practice, but keep the factory stuff in the gun when you carry or when it's sitting in your nightstand. Problem solved.

I don't understand this line of thinking. By loading your own HD ammo you might save a few quarters on the one or two rounds you end up discharging into whatever threat someday might present itself. Is that $.50 worth losing your house or your freedom over? Why would any thinking person want to handload for HD/SD knowing the legal shenanigans that DA's and plaintiffs attorneys pull every day to try to turn otherwise completely legal and innocent people into criminals or notorius killers of children who were "getting their life turned around"?

Does the $1 million McDonalds coffee award mean anything to you?

OP - What is your compelling reason for wanting to carry handloaded rounds in your HD weapon? Are you under the impression that factory ammo just isn't powerful or accurate enough? Trust me, it's what the police use, so it's been tested and shown to work just fine. Is factory ammo too loud and has excessive kick for you to handle in a stressful situation? If that's the case, the gun you're using is too much for you and you should take a step down in caliber. Is it some ego thing? I just don't understand why anyone, knowing the potential downside, would even pursue this.

SanPedroShooter
05-30-2012, 6:06 AM
I agree, but I still say that is perception over reality. In the end, it only matters what a jury perceives to be true. If they think that you are making your own ammo on the pretext to kill someone, you are SOL.

I just buy factory loads to carry. Why even go there.

YubaRiver
05-30-2012, 8:46 AM
The reality is that by using handloads you're giving the prosecution or plaintiff one more issue to bring up in court that will potentially make it look like your were itching to kill someone. That's never a good thing when either your freedom or treasure is at risk and definitely not worth the few dollars you'd have saved by not buying premium grade factory loaded HD ammo to keep in your HD weapon.

Buy some premium HD ammo, chronograph it, buy some similar components and work up a load that is identical to use for regular practice, but keep the factory stuff in the gun when you carry or when it's sitting in your nightstand. Problem solved.

I don't understand this line of thinking. By loading your own HD ammo you might save a few quarters on the one or two rounds you end up discharging into whatever threat someday might present itself. Is that $.50 worth losing your house or your freedom over? Why would any thinking person want to handload for HD/SD knowing the legal shenanigans that DA's and plaintiffs attorneys pull every day to try to turn otherwise completely legal and innocent people into criminals or notorius killers of children who were "getting their life turned around"?

Does the $1 million McDonalds coffee award mean anything to you?

OP - What is your compelling reason for wanting to carry handloaded rounds in your HD weapon? Are you under the impression that factory ammo just isn't powerful or accurate enough? Trust me, it's what the police use, so it's been tested and shown to work just fine. Is factory ammo too loud and has excessive kick for you to handle in a stressful situation? If that's the case, the gun you're using is too much for you and you should take a step down in caliber. Is it some ego thing? I just don't understand why anyone, knowing the potential downside, would even pursue this.

Guess you didn't bother to read the other replies.

Hornady doesn't seem bothered by the liability of selling Zombie killing ammo, which it would seem would be something that could be used in court to show the mental processes of the defendant or manufacturer.

Other companies factory defense rounds boast of how well they can penetrate, expand, get through clothing etc. Looks like there is a similar downside potential for using "premium HD ammo".

YubaRiver
05-30-2012, 8:51 AM
How accurate do you need a round to be that's going to be fired at under 25 yards, or even more likely, under 25 feet? If you are in a "defensive" shooting at more than 75 feet, I suspect you'll have some 'splainin to do.

If you know, how accurate do you need to be at 25 yards? How accurate is
your gun at that range? If you could halve the MOA would it make a difference
in outcome?

SilverTauron
05-30-2012, 9:11 AM
Guess you didn't bother to read the other replies.

Hornady doesn't seem bothered by the liability of selling Zombie killing ammo, which it would seem would be something that could be used in court to show the mental processes of the defendant or manufacturer.

Other companies factory defense rounds boast of how well they can penetrate, expand, get through clothing etc. Looks like there is a similar downside potential for using "premium HD ammo".

"You honor and ladies and gentlemen of the Jury, YubaRiver used a brand of ammunition which is made by Winchester with a 165 grain .40 Caliber round. Hollow point bullets are especially DEADLY rounds as proven by these gelatin tests here"

"My client, YubaRiver, used a brand and type of ammunition as issued by the FBI and many other Law Enforcement agencies. If the round is certified by one of the largest law enforcement agencies in America to be good enough for their agents, its good and safe enough for one man to use in the course of defending himself from lethal assault."


As stated above, the issue is not that opposing counsel will accuse you unjustly. They won't have a case if they don't, after all. The debate is won and lost on the ability of the armed citizen & counsel to refute and expose the bogus claims for what they are.

YubaRiver
05-30-2012, 9:12 AM
Are you under the impression that factory ammo just isn't powerful or accurate enough? Trust me, it's what the police use, so it's been tested and shown to work just fine.

Links as to what police use? Could you show that me any policy/protocol?
Their reasoning?

I suppose it depends on what their budget allows.

I know some LEOs that roll their own for their backup guns and long arms.

Glock22Fan
05-30-2012, 9:32 AM
I really don't see any need for all this mental masturbation.

Commercial ammunition, which is available in high qualities, is perfectly adequate for self defense. Otherwise police departments, the FBI and any other government agency you can mention would not use it. When the FBI thinks that generally loads are inadequate (and they have been in the past) they cooperate with the manufacturers until the "defects" are corrected.

Using factory ammo will never get you into more trouble than using handloads. The converse may also be true, but there is more uncertainty about it.

Frankly, if I was on the jury and you were accused of using handloads, I'd wonder why you felt the need. Especially as my experience is that many handloaders do indeed want to get "more bang for the buck" than they get out of commercial ammo (and I do handload myself, but for economy, not for increased power).

Do the max/min analysis:
1) Using factory ammo will not get you into more trouble.
2) Using handloads will not get you into less trouble.

Now do the math.

YubaRiver
05-30-2012, 9:48 AM
"
"My client, YubaRiver, used a brand and type of ammunition as issued by the FBI and many other Law Enforcement agencies. If the round is certified by one of the largest law enforcement agencies in America to be good enough for their agents, its good and safe enough for one man to use in the course of defending himself from lethal assault."[/I]




Here is one such case. The jury believed he was a carrying a 10mm gun
(as issued then by the FBI) and he was convicted. " prosecutor to argue that one of the two combatants had a powerful 10 mm gun loaded with hollow point bullets while the other had nothing."

Fish appealed and the decision was reversed. Cost him a bunch of money.

http://www.haroldfishdefense.org/

Can you show me where using handloads have caused a similar or worse problem?

YubaRiver
05-30-2012, 9:57 AM
Do the max/min analysis:
1) Using factory ammo will not get you into more trouble.
2) Using handloads will not get you into less trouble.

Now do the math.

Garbage In, Garbage Out.

If you do math with the wrong numbers---

see http://www.haroldfishdefense.org/

YubaRiver
05-30-2012, 10:16 AM
Frankly, if I was on the jury and you were accused of using handloads a 17 round magazine, I'd wonder why you felt the need.

Careful.

Glock22Fan
05-30-2012, 10:27 AM
Careful.

I'd have no problems with you using a full capacity magazine as that has obvious advantages over a restricted magazine. But the only "advantage" of handloads is that you can load hotter rounds. There is, IMHO, no reason to need these as commercial ammo is generally of a high standard and more than good enough to do the job.

And, I didn't say it would greatly prejudice my judgement. But I would wonder, and I'd hate it to be a marginal decision with that in the wings - even though I'd give you the benefit of the doubt.


Garbage In, Garbage Out.

If you do math with the wrong numbers---


I'm doing the math with my assumptions. I've heard nothing from anyone else that makes me doubt this. No-one has yet made what I consider to be a valid reason for using handloads, whether there is any valid case law or not. So why take the risk? If your mileage varies, that's your decision, but don't come crying to me when you meet the wrong D.A. in court. That's what you are gambling with.

YubaRiver
05-30-2012, 10:58 AM
I'd have no problems with you using a full capacity magazine as that has obvious advantages over a restricted magazine. But the only "advantage" of handloads is that you can load hotter rounds. There is, IMHO, no reason to need these as commercial ammo is generally of a high standard and more than good enough to do the job.

And, I didn't say it would greatly prejudice my judgement. But I would wonder, and I'd hate it to be a marginal decision with that in the wings - even though I'd give you the benefit of the doubt.



I'm doing the math with my assumptions. I've heard nothing from anyone else that makes me doubt this. No-one has yet made what I consider to be a valid reason for using handloads, whether there is any valid case law or not. So why take the risk? If your mileage varies, that's your decision, but don't come crying to me when you meet the wrong D.A. in court. That's what you are gambling with.

So we have a case where using factory ammo like the FBI uses is an element
in sending someone to prison for 10 years in a self defense shooting (later
reversed, but at great expense.) Then we have a noted expert who thinks
using handloads might be a problem in future cases.

So what is the risk of each? I guess I am more worried by having some of
my fellow gunnies on a jury, judging from the responses.

jwkincal
05-30-2012, 11:01 AM
The folks asking "why take the risk" may not have considered that those people reloading their ammunition are mathematically at greater risk of personal injury from that very activity than from being jeopardized in a legal forum for doing so...

Which begs the question... after reading the disclaimer on the canister of cartridge propellant, do you really think what statistically amounts to anecdotal forensics is going to sway their behavior?

rugershooter
05-30-2012, 12:30 PM
If a DA wants to persecute you he will do it regardless. Hollow points are murderous and malicious, FMJ’s are cop killers. They will find a way to vilify a nerf ball.

That's exactly my point. I just don't see any hard evidence to suggest that people are more at risk of a DA persecuting them for using handloads than they would be for using hollowpoints instead of non-expanding bullets. If he wants to persecute someone, he's going to use any possible reason to do so; using police issue ammo makes you look like a wannabe cop, using a common police/military gun makes you look like a wannabe cop/soldier. FMJs can go through vests (at least according to the media), hollowpoints are some type of magic death ray bullet, etc. etc. It seems as though there have been a few cases where it has made a difference using handloads, or where the DA tried to make it an issue. But it also seems like those very few cases have been spread out over several decades. So the question is; is there a real threat of it being used against you? It doesn't seem like there is.

SilverTauron
05-30-2012, 12:58 PM
It seems as though there have been a few cases where it has made a difference using handloads, or where the DA tried to make it an issue. But it also seems like those very few cases have been spread out over several decades. So the question is; is there a real threat of it being used against you? It doesn't seem like there is.

Careful. This line of thinking is deceptive, because we are only aware of cases which are known to expert witnesses plugged into the 2A "network" , so to speak. There are probably dozens of cases where these arguments came up and for lack of anyone involved being a member of a 2A forum or RKBA legal club, they never saw the light of documented day.

Massad Ayoob, Jim Cirillo, the SAF,and other pro 2A legal experts comprise but a FRACTION of the entire legal establishment. If they've seen these issues come up in their letter box view of the court system, that's enough reason to suspect these arguments can come up far more often behind closed doors. Not everyone who uses a firearm in self defense winds up on the news or posts about their experiences online.

Glock22Fan
05-30-2012, 1:20 PM
There's a potential downside, however small, to using handloads, or even using factory 10mm, .44Mag, S&W .500 etc.

The upside is . . .

Oh, wait a minute, there is no upside. Not one that's worth taking the risk for.

I'll stick with my production hollowpoints (outside Mass) (in either .40 or .45ACP) and leave you all to weigh up what you want to do.

NotEnufGarage
05-30-2012, 2:49 PM
Can you show me where using handloads have caused a similar or worse problem?

The point of my position is not that it has been used against anyone in the past, it's that I don't want to have it used against me should the situation arise.

The less "ammunition" you give the DA or plaintiffs attorney, the less likely they'll be able to build a case against you. It's about mitigating risk, real or perceived. If that point is lost on anyone, I wish you the best of luck in paying your defense attorney and retaining your property and freedom in the event you do have to use you HD weapon with handloads in it.

Nobody sued a major corporation for burning themselves with hot coffee before the McDonalds incident. That case speaks volumes about some of the stupidity that occurs in our judicial system. Are you willing to bet it all on 12 people who couldn't get out of jury duty?

Glock22Fan
05-30-2012, 3:44 PM
The point of my position is not that it has been used against anyone in the past, it's that I don't want to have it used against me should the situation arise.

The less "ammunition" you give the DA or plaintiffs attorney, the less likely they'll be able to build a case against you. It's about mitigating risk, real or perceived. If that point is lost on anyone, I wish you the best of luck in paying your defense attorney and retaining your property and freedom in the event you do have to use you HD weapon with handloads in it.

Nobody sued a major corporation for burning themselves with hot coffee before the McDonalds incident. That case speaks volumes about some of the stupidity that occurs in our judicial system. Are you willing to bet it all on 12 people who couldn't get out of jury duty?

Exactly. The upside, if there is one, is not worth it.

rugershooter
05-30-2012, 11:57 PM
Careful. This line of thinking is deceptive, because we are only aware of cases which are known to expert witnesses plugged into the 2A "network" , so to speak. There are probably dozens of cases where these arguments came up and for lack of anyone involved being a member of a 2A forum or RKBA legal club, they never saw the light of documented day.

Massad Ayoob, Jim Cirillo, the SAF,and other pro 2A legal experts comprise but a FRACTION of the entire legal establishment. If they've seen these issues come up in their letter box view of the court system, that's enough reason to suspect these arguments can come up far more often behind closed doors. Not everyone who uses a firearm in self defense winds up on the news or posts about their experiences online.

That's true. I didn't think of it like that. My point was basically that if it's as much of a risk as some people (like Ayoob) think, one would think that there is more evidence to show it. I agree that it does introduce a variable into the courtroom-which isn't desirable- and I probably wouldn't use handloads unless I had to. But it just doesn't seem like there's enough evidence to show that using handloads for SD is any more risky than using anything that could be perceived or portrayed as evil, such as expanding bullets, OLLs, military weapons, etc.

boxcab
05-31-2012, 4:32 AM
Cost.

I reload because I shoot so much that ammo costs are a real issue. I use my reloads for HD because I know they work and are reliable in my gun. If you only "refresh" the ammo in your self defense gun once a year, how do you know the reliability of the gun/ammo?

My sights are set for my handloads. Switching back and forth with hand loads and factory ammo is unwise. Will the factory ammo (that you rarely shoot through your gun) function when needed in a crisis? It is very narrow sighted to assume everyone can afford the best factory self defense rounds and to expect them to always shoot those rounds. If you can afford to shoot several hundred/thousand of factory rounds every year, that is great. Do not assume everyone else can.

If asked in court why I used extra deadly hand load ammo, I'll reply "cost". I used what I always use in my gun, every day, for taget practice and for self defense. Those who purchase "special" ammo for carring or HD are setting yourselves up for the DA to ask "Why did you go out and purchase special extra deadly ammo to shoot the victum? That is not the choice of ammo you shoot at the range. You went out and bought special ammo to kill someone, thats premeditated murder!"

Good luck with that.

Yankee Clipper
05-31-2012, 9:21 AM
I don't think anyone would recommend using FMJ for SD purposes these days.

That said, I can remember hearing on a number of occasions back in the nineteen-eighties from a number of presumed reliable sources (including one who was an expert witness on firearms matters and another who was an police range instructor), that no civilian should never use hollow-points especially Hydra Shoks and the like in a defensive weapon, because any DA worth his salt could quickly convince a jury that loading anything but ball ammo (plenty lethal for the military, after all) was conclusive evidence of premeditation, and murderous intent.

I remember the same stories/conversations and the answer at the time was: "If your target load is at least as reliable as factory fodder then use it for SD purposes. Within the 7 yards, where most defensive shootings take place, target loads are plenty deadly. You won't look like a sadistic killer with target loads to a jury." I'm not sure anybody still buys that reasoning.

NotEnufGarage
05-31-2012, 9:32 AM
Cost.

I reload because I shoot so much that ammo costs are a real issue. I use my reloads for HD because I know they work and are reliable in my gun. If you only "refresh" the ammo in your self defense gun once a year, how do you know the reliability of the gun/ammo?

My sights are set for my handloads. Switching back and forth with hand loads and factory ammo is unwise. Will the factory ammo (that you rarely shoot through your gun) function when needed in a crisis? It is very narrow sighted to assume everyone can afford the best factory self defense rounds and to expect them to always shoot those rounds. If you can afford to shoot several hundred/thousand of factory rounds every year, that is great. Do not assume everyone else can.

If asked in court why I used extra deadly hand load ammo, I'll reply "cost". I used what I always use in my gun, every day, for taget practice and for self defense. Those who purchase "special" ammo for carring or HD are setting yourselves up for the DA to ask "Why did you go out and purchase special extra deadly ammo to shoot the victum? That is not the choice of ammo you shoot at the range. You went out and bought special ammo to kill someone, thats premeditated murder!"

Good luck with that.

So, you're a cheap bastard who want to make sure that whoever you shoot dies immediately?

A safer (legally) approach would be to purchase factory HD load, preferably the same ammo your local PD carries and work up practice loads that mimic its performance. That way when the DA asks why you had "special ammo" for HD, you can truthfully answer that you asked your local PD what they use and you purchased the same thing, since if it's the best and safest for them, it would be the best and safest for you. The DA probably wouldn't even ask that question.

YubaRiver
05-31-2012, 12:10 PM
Nobody sued a major corporation for burning themselves with hot coffee before the McDonalds incident. That case speaks volumes about some of the stupidity that occurs in our judicial system. Are you willing to bet it all on 12 people who couldn't get out of jury duty?



Several people sued McDonalds before this lady. They had exceptionally
hot coffee that could cause terrible burns and then served it through a drive through window with cups with flimsy lids, where they knew some spilling would occur.

Someone was imprisoned partly for using factory ammo that was considered
too powerful (FBI's choice 10mm). No one has been imprisoned for using hand loads.

You have it all backwards.

I suppose if you really want to play it safe you should use only tiny hardball
factory rounds. Go back to the 38 long colt or something.

YubaRiver
05-31-2012, 12:13 PM
There's a potential downside, however small, to using handloads, or even using factory 10mm, .44Mag, S&W .500 etc.

The upside is . . .

Oh, wait a minute, there is no upside. Not one that's worth taking the risk for.

I'll stick with my production hollowpoints (outside Mass) (in either .40 or .45ACP) and leave you all to weigh up what you want to do.

Mr Fish used a 45acp.

Wherryj
05-31-2012, 1:06 PM
Would you let someone else pack your 'chute?

I could show you the velocities of my handloads, with written records, over time,
that have lower standard deviation, by far, than factory loads. They also match
load data recipes for velocity in the loading manuals. This is
something anyone with a little time to test can do, not than I am any kind
of superior being when it comes to pouring powder into a piece of brass. I just
have the gun to work with which the ammo factory does not.

When your life depends on something, why go with an inferior product if you
can do a better job yourself?

Actually, if I was ever to decide it necessary to jump out of an airplane, I would most certainly want someone else to load my parachute-I have no expertise in doing so.

Fortunately home loading isn't quite the same thing. So long as you can follow the "recipe" and have good attention to detail, home loads should be at least as good as factory loads.

vincewarde
05-31-2012, 1:42 PM
Here is one such case. The jury believed he was a carrying a 10mm gun
(as issued then by the FBI) and he was convicted. " prosecutor to argue that one of the two combatants had a powerful 10 mm gun loaded with hollow point bullets while the other had nothing."

Fish appealed and the decision was reversed. Cost him a bunch of money.

http://www.haroldfishdefense.org/

Can you show me where using handloads have caused a similar or worse problem?

I believe that Fish was using handloads - but I am not positive. He was backpacking and carrying for defense against Mt Lions. The incident happened as he was almost back to the road.

The jury, when interviewed after his conviction, said that the power of the gun was THE SOLE FACTOR the tipped them towards conviction. Had he used a less powerful gun, they would not have convicted him. Absolutely absurd.

What does this prove? It proves that the prosecution will do it's very best to keep "gun people" off the jury. We understand handloads well. We know that the practice is common - most non-gun owners do not even know it is done. It is one more case you have to make - so why create it?

Besides, I don't reload pistol ammo to use in self defense. I load practice/target ammo. I'll hunt with my reloads. After 40 years I trust them totally - but I think the argument that it creates one more issue is convincing.

YubaRiver
05-31-2012, 2:09 PM
"I believe that Fish was using handloads "

Would be good to know. I didn't see handloads mentioned in the article I read
or remember hearing about handloads when the case was discussed on Guntalk.

boxcab
05-31-2012, 3:06 PM
So, you're a cheap bastard who want to make sure that whoever you shoot dies immediately?


Not sure where this insult is going, so I'll ingore it.

A safer (legally) approach would be to purchase factory HD load, preferably the same ammo your local PD carries and work up practice loads that mimic its performance. That way when the DA asks why you had "special ammo" for HD, you can truthfully answer that you asked your local PD what they use and you purchased the same thing, since if it's the best and safest for them, it would be the best and safest for you. The DA probably wouldn't even ask that question.

Sounds like "premeditated intent" to me. By using the same ammo I always use, for any situation, I feel very safe that I can explain my use of it. You go ahead and shoot your "special ammo" and then explain to the DA why you restrict it's use to only the bad guys.

Glock22Fan
05-31-2012, 3:10 PM
Mr Fish used a 45acp.

Pretty sure it was 10 mm.

YubaRiver
05-31-2012, 3:39 PM
Pretty sure it was 10 mm.
My bad.

misread this part of the info. Thought it said defendant not decedent.

http://www.haroldfishdefense.org/

" Under the Court’s rationale, the State would have been allowed to deceive the grand jury into believing that the decedent was unarmed while carrying a loaded .45 caliber pistol concealed in his back pocket based solely upon the fact that the concealed loaded gun could not be seen by Mr. Fish."

el chivo
06-01-2012, 12:24 AM
the only "advantage" of handloads is that you can load hotter rounds.

...or that you can shoot reduced rounds if you want to avoid penetrating walls and endangering your neighbors.

In CA, don't you have the right to shoot to kill in defense? We're not obligated to shoot to wound or shoot the the perp's hand so he drops his weapon.

If it's a righteous shoot, you're in fear of your life, you're in your home, etc, you shoot to eliminate the threat, not to warn or scare them away.

By the way, all factory rounds I've tried are very hot, I've always reloaded reduced loads.