Jamie Young
New member
I used Handloads verses Factory ammo for Carrying. Is this true? Please give me some feedback?
Someone told me on TFL I could have a Liability case against me if.....
- Thread starter Jamie Young
- Start date
This is an old debate.
Basically, there's two issues in handload self defense:
1) The other side can try and paint you as "particularly bloodthirsty or Rambo-ish" for rolling your own. In some situations, this is easy to fight...example, you happen to like your .44Mag wheelgun but you roll up some defense loads that are BELOW .44Mag power levels. Or you've tuned your loads purely for reasons of accuracy in a certain gun.
2) More importantly, based on powder dispersion a good ME can figure out how far away you were from the target. This can be crucial sometimes...if a guy with a knife was 3ft out when you plugged him, well gee, sounds like a threat to life and limb. But to do this sort of thing, they need to figure out how the powder from your load and gun "pattern" at various ranges, and to do that they need to get additional samples of your load. If you use factory fodder, they can score more of it from the same batch for testing...but with handloads, there's no way to be "court-certain" from one round to the next what powder type and charge amount you used.
Overall, I'd say there's so many types of defense loads out there today that you don't need to stick with homebrew. That said, I think a "good shoot" is the single biggest factor of 'em all...but it's better to avoid the "distraction" in court of homegrown ammo.
Jim
Basically, there's two issues in handload self defense:
1) The other side can try and paint you as "particularly bloodthirsty or Rambo-ish" for rolling your own. In some situations, this is easy to fight...example, you happen to like your .44Mag wheelgun but you roll up some defense loads that are BELOW .44Mag power levels. Or you've tuned your loads purely for reasons of accuracy in a certain gun.
2) More importantly, based on powder dispersion a good ME can figure out how far away you were from the target. This can be crucial sometimes...if a guy with a knife was 3ft out when you plugged him, well gee, sounds like a threat to life and limb. But to do this sort of thing, they need to figure out how the powder from your load and gun "pattern" at various ranges, and to do that they need to get additional samples of your load. If you use factory fodder, they can score more of it from the same batch for testing...but with handloads, there's no way to be "court-certain" from one round to the next what powder type and charge amount you used.
Overall, I'd say there's so many types of defense loads out there today that you don't need to stick with homebrew. That said, I think a "good shoot" is the single biggest factor of 'em all...but it's better to avoid the "distraction" in court of homegrown ammo.
Jim
This to me sure looks like a red herring. If you use a firearm the issue is: Were you justified in using deadly force? If you are justified in the use of deadly force then will someone please tell me why you may be liable if you use reloads as opposed to factory ammo? What are they going to argue the criminal would have lived 10 seconds shorter or longer. The real issue is were you justified in taking his life not whether you were justified in wounding him. LEO never shoot to disable. They shoot to kill or at least that is what they tell me.
TheBluesMan
Moderator Emeritus
Check out these threads, SodaPop: http://www.thefiringline.com:8080/forums/showthread.php?threadid=24853 http://www.thefiringline.com:8080/forums/showthread.php?threadid=26092 http://www.thefiringline.com:8080/forums/showthread.php?threadid=26648
That ought to give you some reading material for a while.
------------------
RKBA!
"The people have the right to bear arms for their defense and security"
Ohio Constitution, Article I, Section 4
Concealed Carry is illegal in Ohio.
Except for Hamilton County until August 11th.
Ohioans for Concealed Carry Website
That ought to give you some reading material for a while.
------------------
RKBA!
"The people have the right to bear arms for their defense and security"
Ohio Constitution, Article I, Section 4
Concealed Carry is illegal in Ohio.
Except for Hamilton County until August 11th.
Ohioans for Concealed Carry Website
Roybean,
LEOs do NOT shoot to kill or to disable, they shoot to stop the threat. All training and policies I have seen are shoot to stop.
The "victim's" attorney will argue that by using handloads you were out to kill someone. Keep in mind when it gets to court (and it will) the attorney's will use anything to make you look bad.
My advice would be to buy factory ammo and keep Pandora's box closed as much as you can.
LEOs do NOT shoot to kill or to disable, they shoot to stop the threat. All training and policies I have seen are shoot to stop.
The "victim's" attorney will argue that by using handloads you were out to kill someone. Keep in mind when it gets to court (and it will) the attorney's will use anything to make you look bad.
My advice would be to buy factory ammo and keep Pandora's box closed as much as you can.
mrat,
Couldn't agree more, any self defense measure's intent is to distract the miscreant from his nefarious plan.
There is little more distracting than 230 grains of lead pasing at high speed through one's brain. Being hit simultaneously by two busses traveling in opposite directions, perhaps?
Bentley
"... a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any particular individual citizen..."
— Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. App.181)
Couldn't agree more, any self defense measure's intent is to distract the miscreant from his nefarious plan.
There is little more distracting than 230 grains of lead pasing at high speed through one's brain. Being hit simultaneously by two busses traveling in opposite directions, perhaps?
Bentley
"... a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any particular individual citizen..."
— Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. App.181)
Yep, the theory being that some liberal DA will have an easy time convincing a firearms-ignorant jury that "factory ammo wasn't good enough for your purpose? You had to assemble SPECIAL ammuntion!" Doesn't matter if your handloads are puny squib loads that barely squirt out the barrel. Most juries are not supremely intelligent and I wouldn't want to even hazard a guess what percentage of jurors have a working knowledge of firearms. It's a good bet in a case like this the DA would reject anybody with half an ounce of firearms experience during jury selection. Pony up a few bucks for factory ammo and don't worry about it.
mrat
The LEO's I have discussed this issue tell me that they don't draw their firearm unless they intend to use it and they do not shoot to wound or to injure. Stopping the threat sounds like some term made up especially for LEO. However in the state where I live, i.e., Florida the issue according to our jury instructions on self-defense is whether you were justified in the use of deadly force. If you were justified in the use of deadly force then you have the right to take a life. No where in our jury instructions is one justified in wounding.
I want argue that lawyers will try to persuade you to see it their way but the jury instructions are the best place to go in my opinion.
If one is worried about being sued forget it. In this day and time you are going to be sued. That's a no brainer. The question is whether or not they have a good chance of recovering monetary damages. We have a statute that does afford protection for someone who is justified in using deadly force.
[This message has been edited by Roybean (edited July 23, 2000).]
The LEO's I have discussed this issue tell me that they don't draw their firearm unless they intend to use it and they do not shoot to wound or to injure. Stopping the threat sounds like some term made up especially for LEO. However in the state where I live, i.e., Florida the issue according to our jury instructions on self-defense is whether you were justified in the use of deadly force. If you were justified in the use of deadly force then you have the right to take a life. No where in our jury instructions is one justified in wounding.
I want argue that lawyers will try to persuade you to see it their way but the jury instructions are the best place to go in my opinion.
If one is worried about being sued forget it. In this day and time you are going to be sued. That's a no brainer. The question is whether or not they have a good chance of recovering monetary damages. We have a statute that does afford protection for someone who is justified in using deadly force.
[This message has been edited by Roybean (edited July 23, 2000).]
panzerfuehrer
New member
I am in agreement that it is best to use factory ammo for carrying purposes. If you insist on carrying handloads, you need to keep meticulous records. There is a good article on this topic in one of the rags - I will try to dig it up.
As for the Shoot to kill thinking, see this thread: http://www.thefiringline.com:8080/forums/showthread.php?threadid=28093
Slimy attorneys will most definitely use any means to discredit you in court. Put shoot-to-kill out of your head.
------------------
Panzerführer
Die Wahrheit ist eine Perle. Werfen sie nicht vor die Säue.
Those that beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those that don't.
As for the Shoot to kill thinking, see this thread: http://www.thefiringline.com:8080/forums/showthread.php?threadid=28093
Slimy attorneys will most definitely use any means to discredit you in court. Put shoot-to-kill out of your head.
------------------
Panzerführer
Die Wahrheit ist eine Perle. Werfen sie nicht vor die Säue.
Those that beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those that don't.
cuerno de chivo
Moderator
can anybody actually offer proof that ammo selection has ever affected the outcome of a civil or criminal case when justified deadly force was used?
[This message has been edited by cuerno de chivo (edited July 23, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by cuerno de chivo (edited July 23, 2000).]
So, if you handload, then you're more inclined to be more deadly with the ammo??
Does this tie in with the type weapon you use also? If, for instance, you use an HK USP, since it's all blacked out, it gotta be more sinister, than say, a firearm that's blued, or stainless?
How about if you used some statistically hotter primers, are you up to no good there also?
I suppose the arguement would then be that if you used frangible ammo, then you're intent was to indice more pain, because of the virtue that there are more wound channels... Regardless of the intent of using frangibles in the first place.
If I were to find some looney charging me in my own home, and I have a .455 Cassull close to me, with 260gr loads in it, I stand a better chance of getting off than if I used a 9mm with light load Golden Sabres.. Go figure???
All with one point. If you use a firearm, you're likely to see litigation from the survivor.
Answer: Don't leave a survivor.
[This message has been edited by Donny (edited July 23, 2000).]
Does this tie in with the type weapon you use also? If, for instance, you use an HK USP, since it's all blacked out, it gotta be more sinister, than say, a firearm that's blued, or stainless?
How about if you used some statistically hotter primers, are you up to no good there also?
I suppose the arguement would then be that if you used frangible ammo, then you're intent was to indice more pain, because of the virtue that there are more wound channels... Regardless of the intent of using frangibles in the first place.
If I were to find some looney charging me in my own home, and I have a .455 Cassull close to me, with 260gr loads in it, I stand a better chance of getting off than if I used a 9mm with light load Golden Sabres.. Go figure???
All with one point. If you use a firearm, you're likely to see litigation from the survivor.
Answer: Don't leave a survivor.
[This message has been edited by Donny (edited July 23, 2000).]
On one side of the debate: nobody has ever been legally attacked for using handloads in a defensive shooting.
On the other side: Just because there hasn't been such a case doesn't mean that there won't be.
With anti-gun hysteria on the rise, it's just a matter of time before some prosecutor decides to say "Members of the jury: not only did the defendent carry a deadly weapon with him to kill whoever bothered him, he took time and resources in his own basement to carefully construct extra-deadly ammunition! Normal store-bought bullets weren't enough for this bloodthirsty beast!"
This whole argument stems from Massad Ayoob's rather public comments on the subject, suggesting that one carry factory ammo to avoid extra legal headaches. I've discussed it with him, and his point is NOT "absolutely do not carry handloads", his point IS "be aware that if you do, you may have legal problems - just weigh the costs and benefits and decide for yourself."
On the other side: Just because there hasn't been such a case doesn't mean that there won't be.
With anti-gun hysteria on the rise, it's just a matter of time before some prosecutor decides to say "Members of the jury: not only did the defendent carry a deadly weapon with him to kill whoever bothered him, he took time and resources in his own basement to carefully construct extra-deadly ammunition! Normal store-bought bullets weren't enough for this bloodthirsty beast!"
This whole argument stems from Massad Ayoob's rather public comments on the subject, suggesting that one carry factory ammo to avoid extra legal headaches. I've discussed it with him, and his point is NOT "absolutely do not carry handloads", his point IS "be aware that if you do, you may have legal problems - just weigh the costs and benefits and decide for yourself."