Sure, ammo choice has never played a role in a conviction....
Although prosecutors in the Harold Fish case made a huge deal out of his 10mm HP ammo, and the jury bought it as proof of intent to kill. (Note that in the jury selection process, NRA members, hunters, etc typically get excluded from gun related cases - the attorneys like to paint on blank canvas.)
Fish was convicted. He won on appeal - how much did he spend in legal fees? How much did he lose in terms of sleep and jail time?
The Bias case only tangentially brought handloads into play. The lesson in that case is one of admissibility. The judge ruled that since the loads were made by Bias, and the logs were also made by Bias, that the handload evidence could not be impartially verified. Many people don't think a case about a possible suicide has any bearing.
But it could, if you claimed you shot a guy who was grabbing your weapon, but the GSR didn't seem to agree with a point-blank shot. Defense experts might not be able to get their own GSR tests into evidence, based on the Bias precedent.
Do what you want. Just remember that the jury of our peers really isn't. And remember that an unethical or even an uninformed prosecutor may go for emotion-based attacks on your character based on perceptions of your weapon and ammo choices.
And realize you may have to defend those choices. Be prepared in advance.
Although prosecutors in the Harold Fish case made a huge deal out of his 10mm HP ammo, and the jury bought it as proof of intent to kill. (Note that in the jury selection process, NRA members, hunters, etc typically get excluded from gun related cases - the attorneys like to paint on blank canvas.)
Fish was convicted. He won on appeal - how much did he spend in legal fees? How much did he lose in terms of sleep and jail time?
The Bias case only tangentially brought handloads into play. The lesson in that case is one of admissibility. The judge ruled that since the loads were made by Bias, and the logs were also made by Bias, that the handload evidence could not be impartially verified. Many people don't think a case about a possible suicide has any bearing.
But it could, if you claimed you shot a guy who was grabbing your weapon, but the GSR didn't seem to agree with a point-blank shot. Defense experts might not be able to get their own GSR tests into evidence, based on the Bias precedent.
Do what you want. Just remember that the jury of our peers really isn't. And remember that an unethical or even an uninformed prosecutor may go for emotion-based attacks on your character based on perceptions of your weapon and ammo choices.
And realize you may have to defend those choices. Be prepared in advance.