Reloads for self defense

[omega]

Ive had a couple failures to go into battery with 9mm JHP reloads

you really have to make sure everything in sized right for the gun you plan on using it in, the length the shape of the bullet, brand, etc

reloads are good for the range / target practice, but for personal defense, I would recommend premium grade factory defense loads for reliability.

some guns have tighter chambers, some a little longer, some reloads might not be reliable in some guns.

[meno377]

Not true. Handloads, when assembled according to the book exhibit more-consistent ballistics than do machine-made ammunition.

Like I said, unless it's a proven load which is largely due to the reloader, factory loads are more reliable. I am not comparing ballistics. The comparison I am making is whether or not misfires happen more often with reloads than factory. In my experience, reloads have a much higher track record of failure compared to factory loads. And that is more due to the person who reloads than any component.

[bruce381]

Are there any confirmed cases of someone being convicted of murder/manslaughter/etc., because they used reloads in a legitimate self defense shooting? Any at all? Just one?

No is a myth

[bruce381]

also i will use whatever ammo is in gun or handy. Even lead SWC something is better than an empty gun

[ChuckDizzle]

There is no legal concern for using reloads in a defensive shooting.

Deadly force is deadly force. If you were justified in shooting a .22 short at the jerk you are justified in shooting 00 buck.

[ACfixer]

I think reloads are a bad idea for self defense. I can hear the jury now:

If you make the reloads lighter recoil than a factory load, it’s because you wanted to get more shots on target, in less time = more deadly.

If you make the loads heavier than factory, you wanted each single bullet to do more damage = more deadly.

If you make them identical to factory specs, why bother?

Nawwwww. Usually I agree with you but not here. Otherwise can you make the same argument for acquittal? "He loaded them with less powder and a lighter projectile so it would only hurt the perp a little bit... because you know, he didn't really want to kill him but just teach him a lesson!"

Hogwash IMO. If someone attempts to kill me, my intentions in return are lethal and that's why I carry a gun and not a belt to whip him with.

[cannon]

Sat in a courtroom for over 20 years.

Never heard any Atty, Judge or Police Officer talk or ask about trigger jobs or ammo. Well they do talk about how many rounds were in the gun or pocket but that is about it.

[Redeyedrider]

I can't think of the issue ever coming up in a criminal trial.

In a civil trial, it's quite easy for the plaintiff's attorney to prove. He/she delivers you an interrogatory or request for admissions before the trial (which you're required to respond to) or they ask you the question on direct examination. The civil process ain't too friendly to folks who try to conceal or falsify information.

Plead the 5th?

[-hanko]

Aside from a legal manner, it's not in your best interest for self defense, unless you have a proven load that has never failed you before. Factory loads are more likely reliable than reloads.

Not highly likely, at least mine. The axiom holds true as I do not shoot others' reloads, including those made by an ammo supplier.

I'll go with legal experts who say reloads for that purpose are a bad idea.

Legal "experts". Wife and I took LF I from Mas Ayoob, I followed with LF II without wife, as Mas' language would make a stevedore blush and / or get sick.

Iirc, I asked him 3 times in person and half a dozen on email for court records citing either gun mods or reloaded ammo making a difference in a "good shoot" case. He promised "I'll have to get back to you on that", but never did.

I think reloads are a bad idea for self defense. I can hear the jury now:

If you make the reloads lighter recoil than a factory load, it’s because you wanted to get more shots on target, in less time = more deadly.

If you make the loads heavier than factory, you wanted each single bullet to do more damage = more deadly.

If you make them identical to factory specs, why bother?

Vivid imagination. After a good shoot, why are you in front of a jury? If civil, most cases involving the actor and / or his survivors v. the shooter are tossed by a judge before trial.

Same question I asked Ayoob...Care to cite a single case, criminal or civil, where reloads or gun mods made any difference?

Are there any confirmed cases of someone being convicted of murder/manslaughter/etc., because they used reloads in a legitimate self defense shooting? Any at all? Just one?

None anyone's ever found. Those in the "in front of a jury" group simply say "you never know"...I haven't found one in around 2 decades of searching, nor have attorneys I've retained in California, Texas, and Idaho.

Nope. Just like the goofy “don’t modify the trigger” crowd.

Not a single example, but many who have never seen a jury work somehow know how it willl work.

Nailed it, quite nicely.

I can't think of the issue ever coming up in a criminal trial.

In a civil trial, it's quite easy for the plaintiff's attorney to prove. He/she delivers you an interrogatory or request for admissions before the trial (which you're required to respond to) or they ask you the question on direct examination. The civil process ain't too friendly to folks who try to conceal or falsify information.

If a civil case that went in favor of the plaintiff actually exists, I'd be grateful for the cite, not to mention retracting what I've posted above.

Like I said, unless it's a proven load which is largely due to the reloader, factory loads are more reliable. I am not comparing ballistics. The comparison I am making is whether or not misfires happen more often with reloads than factory. In my experience, reloads have a much higher track record of failure compared to factory loads. And that is more due to the person who reloads than any component.

Bold part is the important parts...so, are you shooting your reloads, another reloader, or the schist from half-arsed suppliers just because it's cheap?

Sat in a courtroom for over 20 years.

Never heard any Atty, Judge or Police Officer talk or ask about trigger jobs or ammo. Well they do talk about how many rounds were in the gun or pocket but that is about it.

QED, but the paranoia here swells up every month or so.

ETA...Part of protecting yourself in a good shoot is retaining a great attorney prior to needing one. Not to mention carrying liability insurance if the shoot happens to be not so good.

[meno377]

Bold part is the important parts...so, are you shooting your reloads, another reloader, or the schist from half-arsed suppliers just because it's cheap?

I only shoot my own reloads. When shooting IDPA, and clays, others have had primer only shots or clicks. With shotshells it has been primer only shots. I don't see these problems with factory ammo. I have only seen one squib with IDPA and fortunately the shooter knew it immediately after firing it. Several stuck wads.

[RickD427]

Plead the 5th?

Here's what the Fifth Amendment provides:

"...nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself"

The Fifth Amendment doesn't apply to civil cases. I'll led the JD's on this forum opine on how the Fifth Amendment may apply in a civil case where there are collateral criminal charges pending, but that's very rarely the case.

[Citadelgrad87]

Here's what the Fifth Amendment provides:

"...nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself"

The Fifth Amendment doesn't apply to civil cases. I'll led the JD's on this forum opine on how the Fifth Amendment may apply in a civil case where there are collateral criminal charges pending, but that's very rarely the case.

[fiddletown]

Plead the 5th?

The 5th Amendment protections against being compelled to testify against yourself in a criminal matter generally aren't much use when you're claiming self defense.

If you plead self defense you have effectively admitted threatening or committing an intentional act of violence against another person. Such acts would ordinarily be criminal, but you are asserting that you're entitled to be relieved of criminal liability because your actions were legally justified.

Several years ago a lawyer by the name of Lisa Steele wrote an excellent article for lawyers on defending a self defense case. The article was entitled "Defending a Self Defense Case" and published in the March, 2007, edition of the journal of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, The Champion. It was republished in four parts, with permission, on the website, Truth About Guns. The article as republished can be read here: Part 1; Part 2; Part 3; and Part 4.

As Ms. Steele explains the unique character of a self defense case in Part 1:

...Self-defense is all-or-nothing. In order to establish it, the client has to admit being at the crime scene, with a weapon, which he or she used to intentionally harm the aggressor. The client has to admit that he injured the aggressor. The client has to convince the jury that if a reasonable person had been standing in his shoes, the reasonable person would have done the same thing. In effect, the aggressor invited his fate by threatening or inflicting serious bodily harm, or by threatening to kill the client.

In one fell swoop, the client has given up alibi and mistaken identity defenses. He or she has given up any claim that the wound was made by accident. Generally, the client must give up provocation (heat of passion or extreme emotional disturbance). Logically, provocation implies an unreasonable response to a situation, and mitigates murder to manslaughter. Self-defense implies a rational response to a very dangerous situation and, if successful, results in an acquittal. Similarly, the client must give up claims of mental illness or insanity and defenses based on intoxication or drug use....
...

... Often, the defendant will need to testify in order to establish his subjective belief about the threat and need to respond defensively. This can be done through circumstantial evidence, but it is difficult....

[Nick Adams]

Probably the safest bet is to carry whatever your local cops, cary.

[AreWeFree]

Probably the safest bet is to carry whatever your local cops, cary.

Massad Ayoob defense.

Carry whatever you want, it's either a legal self defense or it isn't, the means are secondary.