Niche ammo in court(Buffalo Bore,etc)

Status
Not open for further replies.
H

HiBC

New member
No need to rehash the handloads vs Factory loads for carry. I accept that factory loads have the advantage in court.

If I were to choose BuffaloBore or Cor-Bon,etc as carry ammo,would I still have the same forensic evidence advantage in court that handloads lack?

How does it work if I have my first 1911 with me,in 38 Super,and its loaded with Buffalo Bore?

(Please,spare all the comments about using something else.My EDC for now is an M+P 9C,and I use mainstream ammo. Federal,Hornady,etc.The question is about niche ammo.)
 
If I was carrying a boutique ammunition or caliber* I would be prepared to intelligently articulate why I was doing so. For instance once I settle on a gun for my runs (my wife says I am going to be armed for them) I will use Underwood Extreme Penetrator ammo because I the firearms I am looking at are under powered for most four legged threats and penetration will be paramount.

*I am going to define this as basically anything perceived as more powerful than 9MM, .40, or .45 loads that are commonly carried by law enforcement.
 
Lohman,perhaps I was not clear.
If I am in court after a SD shooting,my lawyer may not have me on the stand to articulate anything.
Its about admissible evidence.

No need to rehash the reasons to use factory loads.I suggest a review of past threads and advice from Massad Ayoob.

I'm looking to learn something other than my own assumptions,guesses,and opinions. I have those. They sometimes fail.But I would guess,if I used 9mm Hydra-Shok,there may be databases of admissible forensic evidence available for retrieval.
Maybe not with niche ammo. Forensic data may be admissible,but it might entail very expensive independent testing.I may have to hire an expert witness to buy Buffalo Bore ammo to test.
I don't know that. So I'm asking
 
Are we discussing criminal or civil liability? In criminal court using boutique ammunition may be brought up as to your frame of mind. Something to the effect "you were using ammunition (or a caliber) more deadly than law enforcement personal carry and you were looking for a chance to use it". This can be easily defended without putting yourself on the stand by basically any "expert" who points out the ammunition you were using was never intended for human threats but was specifically designed with four legged threats in mind.

Of course the term "easily defended" is not exactly accurate.

I think it best to leave this for the qualified individuals to answer. My thoughts are my own and are worth what you paid for them. Free from an unqualified individual does not generally equate to necessarily good advise.
 
in a shooting that is clearly a self defense shooting it is most likely that you will never be charged. If you are charged then there is reason to have all your ducks in a row and have the ability and funds to call on expert witnesses as necessary. As to ammunition the witness will be from the manufacturer and rarely anyone else. The level of lethality is rarely a topic that either side wants to peruse because all ammo is considered to be lethal and if one is less lethal than another, setting a precedent is not something that the law wants. There is no way that one could claim a 9mm is more lethal than a 357 but at the same time a 357 can't be considered more lethal than a 44 mag. If you are using a full auto it might be a point of contention - and would likely be a problem but limited to revolvers or semi autos nobody wants to call one less lethal than another.
 
OK,I'll narrow this down a bit. The two calibers I'm wondering about are 38 Super and 9x18 Mak.
The hotter 9x19loads come pretty close to equaling 38 Super Remchester loads. About 100 fps can be gained in Buffalo Bore.
Its still not a .357 Magnum. We are talking maybe 1350 fps with a 124 gr bullet or 1200 +fps with a 147.

I'm really not asking anything about the political correctness or sensitivity or touchy feely psychology of the load,or whether I should be using a 9mm,or Remchester ammo.

I want to know if the forensic evidence of gunshot residue at 24 inches will be admissible as evidence with something like Buffalo Bore.


To back up a bit,the "Handloads vs Factory loads "debate has been well covered. We just don't need to go there.Read the old stuff.All the answers are there.
A major point is the forensic evidence of handloads will not be admissible.That evidence may be very important to a defense.
That evidence is why I choose to carry factory loads.
My question is about that evidence.
 
Last edited:
Whether handloads, standard factory or boutique, your ammo is not going to make one smidgen of difference in a court of law as long as it was legal in the jurisdiction you used it in. The only issue there is with handloads is because of the fear that the performance of the ammo at the time of the shooting cannot be duplicated, it has nuttin' to do with intent. Most of us us handload because our handloads are more consistent that factory, thus as long as we have records or left over ammo of the same used in the shooting, performance and GSR is easily duplicated. The same is true for Boutique type ammo. If the DA is making accusations about distance in relation to the shoot being justified or not, he will test the ammo in the gun that was used, as GSR will vary from gun to gun, just as it does from different types of ammo and distance.

Last thing I worry about when I strap on my CWC is the ammo, other than knowing it's the most accurate ammo I know from the particular gun I have on me and that it will terminally perform. Come time to use it, I doubt if any one else will worry either, other than the dead BG.
 
Yes, any aspect of the case can be used as evidence. If the gunshot residue is felt needed by either side then it will be considered. The distance from your target had better be close or the evidence might say you were trying to cover up your actual distance. That makes you look guilty. The prosecutor is likely to order tests that could be used to estimate the distance. If you are close enough to leave powder residue the bad guy was close enough to be a threat regardless of the weapon he had.
 
I think we all know by now that the issue of ammunition in court is near and dear to my heart . . . I realize that the question at issue here isn't about handloads, but I'll begin by suggesting two of our Law & Civil Rights Articles, because they lay out the principles involved:
Carrying Hand-Loads for Self Defense
The Peculiar Problem of Handloads in Self-Defense Shootings

If you've read those, great. We can move on. If not, please do.

The issues in ammo selection are twofold: (1) evidentiary; and (2) perception-based; and (2) evidentiary. Handloads face both sets of problems. Defensive ammo built by a neutral third party should avoid the first set of problems (evidentiary), but could run into the second (perception). In the case of Harold Fish, I believe it was the use of 10mm ammo that caused at least one juror some concern.
 
ShootistPRS said:
in a shooting that is clearly a self defense shooting it is most likely that you will never be charged.
Click to expand...
"In a shooting that is clearly a self-defense shooting . . . " That's the rub, though. As defenders, we don't get to pick the circumstances in which we'll be attempting to put holes in another human. If we did, we'd get the title, "Assailant." All is takes is for the police to think that things "just don't add up," and felony charges may be coming your way.
 
buck460XVR said:
Whether handloads, standard factory or boutique, your ammo is not going to make one smidgen of difference in a court of law as long as it was legal in the jurisdiction you used it in. The only issue there is with handloads is because of the fear that the performance of the ammo at the time of the shooting cannot be duplicated, it has nuttin' to do with intent.
Click to expand...
10mm ammo was perfectly legal in Arizona, where Harold Fish shot a man, and I'm pretty sure that .38 handloads were legal in Daniel Bias' jurisdiction, when he was accused of murdering his wife based, in part, on GSR residue. No, let's please not rehash complaints about the admissibility of the history of the man that Fish shot, nor about why (handload-SD-round proponents) claim that Bias was different because it was a murder charge. I've addressed those in the past.

Jury perception has little to do with whether the ammo was legal in a jurisdiction. There's a reason I wouldn't advise a client to carry "Exxxtreme Mankiller 3000" rounds, whether handloaded, factory made, or boutique.
 
HiBC said:
I want to know if the forensic evidence of gunshot residue at 24 inches will be admissible as evidence with something like Buffalo Bore.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, there's no way any of us can give you a 100% solid answer. There are too many variables going into it. With that said, and all factors being equal (it's a third party manufacturer, record-keeping is thorough, subpoenas for records get properly served, etc.), I see no reason that Buffalo Bore's ammunition would suffer from any more admissibility problems on that evidence than any other major manufacturer. Does that answer your question?
 
Even if everything does add up and the police and prosecutor agree the shooting was justified that doesn't mean you won't be sued in a civil proceeding and those questions can come up there as well.
 
hdwhit said:
Even if everything does add up and the police and prosecutor agree the shooting was justified that doesn't mean you won't be sued in a civil proceeding and those questions can come up there as well.
Click to expand...
Absolutely correct.
ShootistPRS said:
Thanks Spats! You always add that information that is sometimes lost between the lines.
Click to expand...
You're very welcome. Right, wrong, or indifferent, the answer in the legal field is very frequently "it depends."
 
Thanks,Spats.
You understood my question.

I think you pretty much answered it.
One assumption I have is that GSR testing results for mainstream SD and LEO ammo MAY be compiled in a retrievable database somewhere.Perhaps that might be useful at minimal expense. Like FBI lab data or ?
Lack of data in a database might require testing,which means hiring an expert witness to buy a stock of Buffalo Bore ammo and conduct tests. Sounds expensive.

On the perception/Fish thing....Yes,that may be something to think about.

But on a 1350 fps 124 gr bullet I don't see why.

A dramatic lawyer can make HydraShok sound like crazed assassin ammo,even if its what Barney Fife carried.
 
Last edited:
HiBC said:
Thanks,Spats.
You understood my question.

I think you pretty much answered it.
One assumption I have is that GSR testing results for mainstream SD and LEO ammo MAY be compiled in a retrievable database somewhere.Perhaps that might be useful at minimal expense. Like FBI lab data or ?
Lack of data in a database might require testing,which means hiring an expert witness to buy a stock of Buffalo Bore ammo and conduct tests. Sounds expensive.
Click to expand...
Glad I answered your question.

I'm unaware of any such database, but I that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It just means I'm unaware of it.

HiBC said:
On the perception/Fish thing....Yes,that may be something to think about.

But on a 1350 fps 124 gr bullet I don't see why.
Click to expand...
Don't see why . . . ? A jury would care? Juries care about all kinds of things. No matter how disheveled a defendant looks at first appearance on felony charges, they're almost always clean-cut with a suit at trial. There's a reason for that. I'm pretty confident that juries will not care so much that a bullet is described as X fps or Y grains. For the most part, they won't know what that means unless someone gets on the stand and explains it. Even then, the explanation may bore them to tears.
 
I wonder if smaller, "niche" manufacturers like Buffalo Bore keep the same kind of records of exactly what went into the cartridges in batch number XYZ238-19R the way the major manufacturers do.
 
In my limited experience, attorneys (or at least some of them) will use any "edge" they can get. I am thinking of the name "Buffalo Bore" itself. "Tell, us, Mister Cowboy, why you would use a bullet meant to kill buffalo to shoot a poor, innocent 54-year old child....do you often play Buffalo Bill in your warped imagination...?"

Jim
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top