Ammo Purchase

[ScottsBad]

there is ZERO difference between “you loaded speshul keeeler ammo” and “so you bought the best self defense ammo money can buy”

You know that, right? Its the best money can buy because it has uniform expansion and energy transfer.

It kills people. Thats why its the best money can buy, and you shot someone with it.

For God’s sake, we are talking about shooting a handgun into someone else's body. The act itself is designed to kill. The implement you got a permit to carry is deadly.

It won’t make a difference what kind of ammo youre carrying.

Trust me. Make sure its a good shoot. That is a REAL, PROVEN issue. Nobody can come up with an ammo choice case, but everyone can remember a bad shoot case.

I totally agree with this ^. And further, what if a homeowner grabbed his 12GA loaded with 00 buck magnums instead of his 45acp? Does this mean you intended anything different then you did when shooting a bad guy with a special hand loaded 45? After all, a square shot with a shotgun loaded thus is far deadlier than a 45 or 9mm.

I just don't think you can lower your potential liability in a good shoot by choosing weaker ammo... It makes no sense, but then, nothing in Commiefornia makes sense anymore I guess.

[rm1911]

LOL. I did overlook that.



I have to say that one of my first impressions when the bill came out is that it is a way to increase sales taxes. I believe that had to be part of the thinking in Excremento.

[ScottsBad]

I don't agree with this. I'm sure that at a minimum a passing consideration was given to the impact on businesses and taxes.

The goals you listed are boringly obvious, but that doesn't mean the crackpots in Excremento are as stupid as you think. They saw an opportunity to double screw gun owners by making them pay more taxes and fees while at the same time making ammo more difficult to get and more expensive why wouldn't they do that?????

Don't be naive.

[rm1911]

I don't agree with this. I'm sure that at a minimum a passing consideration was given to the impact on businesses and taxes.



The goals you listed are boringly obvious, but that doesn't mean the crackpots in Excremento are as stupid as you think. They saw an opportunity to double screw gun owners by making them pay more taxes and fees while at the same time making ammo more difficult to get and more expensive why wouldn't they do that?????



Don't be naive.

[RestrictedColt]

I used to keep hand loads in my guns but after many conversations and considerations I've switched them to factory stuff. I shot enough of them to confirm function and now they stay home and get put back in after shooting trips where I use my reloads. I don't know of a case where reloads came into question after a defensive shooting, but I haven't researched it and I'll bet it rarely happens so it's probably not been tested much if at all. Plus there's nothing absolute about the injustice system so I see no good reason to add anything questionable over a couple bucks worth of ammo when lawyers cost hundreds per hour. And remember that in many cases the legal problems don't end with the criminal criminal system, there's also the civil suit to consider. Potentially adding anything to the pile being constructed as 'preponderance of the evidence' ain't worth it to me. And this will be amplified if a round hits an unintended target due to a miss or pass through.

There is one case of a supposed suicide where the husband was a suspect and his hand loads made the case very questionable. I don't recall the details but the problem was with not being able to duplicate the powder burns or something like that to absolutely determine if it was suicide or murder. With factory ammo and a quick firing test there would have been no question. This could be reduced if you keep good records and have established 'lots' of hand loads, but still much more questionable than keeping factory ammo in your guns.

Using common commercial self defense ammo takes one thing off the list of stuff that the prosecutor/plaintiff can use and since a box of ammo costs less than a minute of lawyer time I made the choice that makes me more comfortable. Once I move to a gun friendly state I might reconsider, but will probably still err on the side of caution.

[pennstater]

Well said. Common sense at it's finest.

[JackEllis]

The discussion about hand loads vs. factory ammunition in this thread reminds me of discussions regarding pilot emergencies (I own a small plane).

If the landing gear fails to extend, some pilots worry about making sure the prop is horizontal so they don't have to pay for an engine teardown. Completely stupid. Your life is worth more than the airplane, so worry about nailing the landing and forget about replacing the engine.

Pilots who get themselves in a jam with the weather or do some other boneheaded thing start thinking about what the FAA will have to say. Wrong. Get help to save your life and worry about the FAA later.

Same thing holds true with the debate over factory vs. hand loads. It's a nit on the end of the flea's eyelash. Heaven forbid if you have to shoot someone in self defense, by far the biggest issue is whether the shooting is justified. I'd be very surprised if the issue of hand loads vs. factory ammunition would even come up.

The likelihood you'd have to shoot someone is quite low to begin with unless you live in an inner city neighborhood. The likelihood ammo type would even be brought up is similarly low. The combined probability is tiny.

On the other hand if worrying about such things floats your boat...

[JagerDog]

I used to keep hand loads in my guns but after many conversations and considerations I've switched them to factory stuff. I shot enough of them to confirm function and now they stay home and get put back in after shooting trips where I use my reloads. I don't know of a case where reloads came into question after a defensive shooting, but I haven't researched it and I'll bet it rarely happens so it's probably not been tested much if at all. Plus there's nothing absolute about the injustice system so I see no good reason to add anything questionable over a couple bucks worth of ammo when lawyers cost hundreds per hour. And remember that in many cases the legal problems don't end with the criminal criminal system, there's also the civil suit to consider. Potentially adding anything to the pile being constructed as 'preponderance of the evidence' ain't worth it to me. And this will be amplified if a round hits an unintended target due to a miss or pass through.

There is one case of a supposed suicide where the husband was a suspect and his hand loads made the case very questionable. I don't recall the details but the problem was with not being able to duplicate the powder burns or something like that to absolutely determine if it was suicide or murder. With factory ammo and a quick firing test there would have been no question. This could be reduced if you keep good records and have established 'lots' of hand loads, but still much more questionable than keeping factory ammo in your guns.

Using common commercial self defense ammo takes one thing off the list of stuff that the prosecutor/plaintiff can use and since a box of ammo costs less than a minute of lawyer time I made the choice that makes me more comfortable. Once I move to a gun friendly state I might reconsider, but will probably still err on the side of caution.

FTR the suspect was released since the forensics wasn't duplicatable in the lab. In that case, the "questionable" nature was likely to his benefit (no powder burns so the first suspicion was it couldn't be suicide, but they couldn't prove his reloads would leave powder burns at suicide distance).

Ayoob uses it in his case for factory ammo, yet the result is counterproductive to his conclusion (IMHO).

[kcstott]

Not to mention that it’s a suicide case not a self defense case.

In a suicide case you have no control over what was loaded in your pistol

[RestrictedColt]

Can anyone cite a documented defensive shooting where hand loads were used?

[tonyjr]

Not off hand , but if you get the NRA mags , every
month there are articles on someone using a gun
in their home .
I get one and others in family get different ones ,
[ we swap after reading ]

[Supersapper]

Citadel,

I completely agree with you...my point was that I could see a time where some over zealous anti-gunner might, in the future, make a case for it and successful or not, you end up becoming some sort of test case.

The difference is that you can NOT be held accountable for the existence of something you can purchase openly in the commercial market. You CAN for something you manufactured. Even if it is a similar thing. Please understand...I'm talking about its existence, not its use. Even a screwdriver is lethal, if used thusly.

Goes to intent: By purchasing it openly, the only intent was to defend yourself with the hardest hitting stuff you could buy. Nothing further can be imputed to you. However, by manufacturing your own, there become two possible "intents" imputed to you: One, to defend yourself with the hardest hitting stuff you could make, but two...you made that "custom" ammunition to be especially lethal, underscored if for whatever reason it turns out ballistically "superior" to factory.

Do I agree with it? No. Do I think you would LIKELY get prosecuted solely on that basis? Not likely at all. Could you? Yes...and civil liability (commonly called "torte") in California is a witch with a capital B.

You are correct...the act of shooting someone regardless of circumstance is the significant act.

All I was saying is don't give the District Attorney (criminal) or plaintiff (civil) extra ammunition to actually get you with.

And yes: good, bad, clever or stupid the pun is there...

Sapper