All the wrong factors indeed.
Mistakes can be made, but diligence in reloading procedures lessen them to some miniscule percentage of being injured in an accident on your way to buy factory ammo
The "time" is time well spent as part of the hobby of shooting.
The space my loading bench occupies a couple feet across the width of my gun room. That includes both loading bench, and boolet casting table.
The "value" to others is meaningless. The value to me in relaxation, interest, more economical shooting, and ammo custom tailored to optimise the accuracy of my guns is priceless.
You've entirely missed the point. According to the OP the reloaded ammo was within specs. But the gun still exploded, causing injury.
However, the Jury confused the issues and only awarded him 60% recovery and found him 40% liable for using reloaded ammo (in spite of, even if we assume, the ammo was exactly the same as factory ammo).
Let's assume for the sake of argument that the recover was $1,000,000 for pain, suffering, medical, and punitive damages. That means that he would forfeit 40% (or $400,000) for his own apparent contributory negligence. So in this case, reloading cost him $400,000.
The other point I was making was that if he had used factory ammo, he could have also sued, and possibly recovered, from the ammo maker if the ammo was the cause.
If I reload and use reloaded ammo in my gun and it explodes, I have nobody to blame but myself. Using reloads now may sever gun liability (or greatly diminish it) and there's no ammo company to pursue; conversely, if federal sends me a defective batch and I lose my eye, my hand, and my gun, I have someone to hold liable.