Using hand loads in a self defence shooting.

[fiddletown]

The DA will have no way of knowing if it was a handload or not....

Do you really think that the Firearms and Tool Mark Examiner who examines the gun and remaining ammunition won't be able to figure it out? Remember that your gun and remaining ammunition will be taken and examined as evidence.

... and do you think they even care?...

Do you really want to bet that the DA won't care? If the DA has any interest in pursing prosecuting you, he will be interested in anything that might help him make his case. If he thinks your use of handloads can help him, he will be interested.

...Either it was a justified use of force for self defense, or it wasn't. ...

Who decides? You certainly won't have the final say. If, as it often is, the evidence supporting the claim of justification is clear, of course what you used doesn't really matter. But if you think you were justified but the grand jury disagrees, now it wasn't a "good shoot" unless the trial jury decides it was. Then what you used could matter.

I personally won't use handloads for self defense:

• Yes, a good shoot is a good shoot. But you won't be deciding if it was a good shoot. Other folks will. And if you're on trial, someone who matters didn't think it was a good shoot. Now it's not a good shoot unless the jury says so.
• If you've been involved in a shooting in which you claim self defense and if, for some reason, gunshot residue (GSR) test results will be important to your defense, GSR test results will not be admissible into evidence if you used handloads. It won't matter how good your records may be. They are suspect, because they are yours. You will not be able to establish the necessary foundation for admission of GSR test results of your handloads because you will not be able to satisfactorily establish that the handloads tested were the same as the rounds fired in the incident.
• It will be highly unlikely that any members of your jury will have any knowledge of or interest in guns or shooting. Your reasons for using handloads will strike them as too "inside baseball", and they will probably not be receptive to them.
• If you're on trial in a shooting in which you're claiming self defense, you probably have a number of problems. Handloads can become one more thing that will need to be explained, one more "wild card." As a general rule in court, the less you have to explain, the better off you'll be. You won't have to explain handloads if you didn't use them and used factory ammunition instead.
• There aren't cases on the issue because it's most likely that there are very few self defense incidents in which handloads have been used.

[Interloper]

The fear of using handloads is pure superstition. If the DA wants to hang you, he'll find plenty of other evidence of how bloodthirsty you are. Like your "arsenal" of military style weapons. Some of which you built at home with especially deadly features and accessories. Your ammunition "stockpile". Hell, even those 511 tactical pants half of you are wearing could be used to prove that you are a dangerous person who wanted to shoot someone.

No.

http://www.boiseshooters.com/index.p...ic=1883.0;wap2

The case in that link is rather unique and bizarre. I think the odds of it being replicated by one of us are pretty slim.

[fiddletown]

The fear of using handloads is pure superstition. If the DA wants to hang you, he'll find plenty of other evidence of how bloodthirsty you are. Like your "arsenal" of military style weapons. .... Your ammunition "stockpile". Hell, even those 511 tactical pants half of you are wearing could be used to prove that you are a dangerous person who wanted to shoot someone....

And how can you be so sure that it's pure superstition?

Yes, if the DA decides to prosecute, he no doubt will have all kinds of evidence to support his case. And he will use everything he has. But he wouldn't have the handloads to toss into the mix unless you used them.

As discussed in this article, the weapon you chose to keep available and use for self defense purposes could become an issue. (BTW, the author, Dr. Genn E, Meyer, is a moderator at The Firing Line.)

How you present yourself to the world, how you dress, your manner of speaking, etc., can all influence how others perceive you. See this thread on another board about a guy whose bumper-stickers could be a problem.

And I know from my own experience, from participating in post verdict interviews of jurors in matters I've been professionally involved in, some of the sorts of things that can influence a jury.

Handloads could just be one more factor. But IME, the less you have to explain in court, the better; and handloads could not be a factor unless you used them.

The case in that link is rather unique and bizarre. I think the odds of it being replicated by one of us are pretty slim.

Yes, we're pretty unlikely to see the exact circumstances of Bias (husband charged with murdering his wife, him claiming she committed suicide, and key evidence being GSR). But the issue in Bias that might concern us in a self defense case is the admissibility of GSR test results. And it's not hard to imagine GSR test results being useful to the defense in a self defense case. For example, see this post on another board.

[bsg]

for me? factory ammo for defensive purposes.

[m98]

Home hd: factory loadings is first line of defense
After that its the home brewed stuff. Ofcourse ill have to inspect the ammo first before going into the mags

Shtf: use whatevers closes. A bang is better than having no bang or having a click

[jumbopanda]

Yes, I only shoot handloads because they are a lot cheaper than factory ammo, therefore it was all I had on hand to defend myself with. Next question please.

[jumbopanda]

The fear of using handloads is pure superstition. If the DA wants to hang you, he'll find plenty of other evidence of how bloodthirsty you are. Like your "arsenal" of military style weapons. Some of which you built at home with especially deadly features and accessories. Your ammunition "stockpile". Hell, even those 511 tactical pants half of you are wearing could be used to prove that you are a dangerous person who wanted to shoot someone.



The case in that link is rather unique and bizarre. I think the odds of it being replicated by one of us are pretty slim.

Yeah, I'm sure my pimped-out AR makes me look more like a wannabe operator looking for some action than my handloads do.

[zfields]

Gold Dots in my .45

Stashed away, some loaded hot XTP 185 grain stuff. Loaded just at the max load in +P Winchester(if i remember right) once fired nickel brass.

[rockman]

Handloads for the range, factory ammo for my carry guns.

[Jonathan Doe]

I have seen plenty of reloaded ammunition in murder cases. I have never seen a reload/handload becoming an issue at a court in my career.

[gottarollwithit]

While i also roll my own and can do so proficiently, i wouldn't never even consider using my loads for personal defense. There's always that ever so slight chance that you made a boo boo in the loading process or were inconsistent in some minor way.

If my skin is on the line, newly manufactured, high end ammo is the only stuff that i'd consider running. In the unlikely event that you'll ever use it, you'll practically be guaranteed that it'll go off, hit what you're pointing at, and eff it up! Guns, money, tangible belongings are replaceable. Your life and your health is not. Granted good ammo is pricey. So what, you spend a couple hundred bucks in ammo? While my life might not be that great, i'd buy a few hundred bucks in ammo to save it in a heartbeat.

[fiddletown]

I have seen plenty of reloaded ammunition in murder cases. I have never seen a reload/handload becoming an issue at a court in my career.

Care to provide more details. What is "plenty"? Were these self defense cases?

The reason I ask is that Al Norris, a moderator on The Firing Line, did a good deal of research in Idaho. He found that from 1970 to 2007 (37 years) there were 12 self defense shootings in Idaho in which handloads were used. Of those, six weren't prosecuted, so I'd infer that they were pretty clearly justified shooting. Six, in which drugs or alcohol was also involved, were prosecuted, resulting in four convictions on plea bargains and two convictions at trial. (See http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=388901, posts 109 and 114).

[RedFord150]

...If my skin is on the line, newly manufactured, high end ammo is the only stuff that i'd consider running....Granted good ammo is pricey. So what, you spend a couple hundred bucks in ammo? ....

The small boxes of 20 or 25 are usually in the $20 to $30 range, depending on caliber. No need to spend a couple hundred if you cannot afford it.

[Oceanbob]

From the DAs standpoint

It's either a GOOD shoot or Not.

If not, then expect trouble on a Manslaughter or Homocide charge.
What bullet you used is MOOT at this point.

If it is a good shoot and the DA decides to let it slide, you are still subject to a CIVIL SUIT from the family of the Perp. Then what "Killer" ammo you used will come out in pretrial Deposition. Of course these things rarely go to trial, after all the Depo's are done your Home owners insurance will step in with a settlement claim.

(or whoever has the deep pocket coverage)

[Mr. Beretta]

for me? factory ammo for defensive purposes.

+1.............

Plain & simple.

One less thing to talk / argue about!