|
Post by CXM on May 20, 2017 11:36:50 GMT -5
Whats your take? Do you carry re-loaded ammo in your concealed carry weapon? Lots of arguments here... but it is usually a subject that interests lots of people.
Where do you stand?
V/r
Chuck
|
|
|
Post by Carolinaman on May 20, 2017 12:16:01 GMT -5
Hello, I generally carry factory ammo in all of my defensive weapons. I have read a handful of accounts over the years published by well known expert Masad Ayoob on the subject and a very forensically mentored prosecutor can add hand loads to the list of evidence in this respect. Here is his viewpoint on the discussion: backwoodshome.com/blogs/MassadAyoob/2017/05/05/the-problem-with-handloads-for-defense/I have been reading Mas's work for years and respect his actual "real world" experience as far as testifying as a "Expert Witness" in court. I generally use hand loaded ammo for range work and testing. Chris
|
|
|
Post by gt40doc on May 20, 2017 14:26:45 GMT -5
I stick with factory ammo for my SD loads. I can purchase some of the SD bullets for handloading, but not all of them.....not the newest ones. I use my handloads for fun at the range, and factory rounds for "social occasions".
|
|
|
Post by jaypee on May 20, 2017 17:12:45 GMT -5
No, I stick with factory ammo for defense, usually selecting a load that has a good track record in police service.
|
|
|
Post by huntershooter on May 20, 2017 20:14:03 GMT -5
I carry factory ammo in 9mm and .45 ACP but do carry my reloads in .38 Super. Near impossible to find factory ammo in the flavor I want and I'm of the opinion that a righteous shoot is a righteous shoot.
|
|
|
Post by thomgetch on May 20, 2017 21:32:25 GMT -5
I carry underwood defender in my 9 and 10 mm guns. However I would not hesitate to carry freedom munitions in those calibers. Those FM rounds can be found in my "get home" pack.
|
|
|
Post by chris623 on May 23, 2017 7:24:03 GMT -5
I have a friend who is a criminal law defense attorney.............and he's also a shooter. When I asked that question of him, he said for me to do what I liked but.....................he says what he does is carry with a commercially made round, but train with a round he loads himself to match the ballistics of the commercial round. That way his practice closely mimics his carry load so there's no surprise difference in recoil or point of impact change from "home rolled" to commercial. So that's what I've done with my .40 S&W and what I'll be doing with my HP, as soon as I get some reloading dies for my Dillon 550.
|
|
|
Post by CXM on May 23, 2017 11:49:11 GMT -5
Every one has to answer the question of the ammo you carry based on what seems best based on your individual facts and circumstances.
For example:
1. Do you live in a jurisdiction that is hostile to gun ownership and self defense.
2. What are your local laws on self defense? How do they address your states rules of engagement
3. What other cases have there been in your state on the subject of the ammo you use? (if any... )
4. How are self defense shootings handled by authorities?
Here are some interesting facts:
1. There is no known case in which the type of ammo carried was a significant issue in a trial.
2. There are only a couple of cases in which the type of ammo carried was even brought up and then it wasn't a major issue.
3. The only case involving type of ammunition I have seen myself was in New Jersey... need I say more?
4. I have never seen a state law that addresses what kind of ammo you use.
5. There are no degrees of deadly force... force is either deadly or not...
So my thought is analyze your individual situation, facts and circumstances, laws and their implementation and decide which is best for you.
FWIW
CHuck
|
|
|
Post by HRFunk on May 26, 2017 11:06:25 GMT -5
I guess I'll jump, into this discussion here. By way of introduction, I have been instructing police officers in the legal aspects pertaining to use of force for many years. I have also heard the sage wisdom offered by various attorneys (real and imagined) proffering the notion that use of hand-loaded ammunition will somehow cause a defensive shooter problems when/if a case involving the use of such ammunition is ever presented in court. The problem with any such statement of absolute certainty when used in reference to imaginary legal proceedings is the lack of any grounding in the real world.
Let's look at hypothetical incident number 1:
Johnny Lawful is just leaving his volunteer position with the Youth Choir and Junior Achievement Scholarship Foundation when he is accosted in the parking lot by a known violent drug addict. Said addict proceeds to produce a knife and demand Johnny hand over all his money. When Johnny tries to explain he left his wallet at home, the addict becomes enraged, raises the knife in a classic "ice-pick" grip and charges Johnny. Fearing for his life, Johnny draws his lawfully carried handgun and double-taps the miscreant at a distance of about 10'. No one else is harmed, and at the time of the shooting there are multiple witnesses who back up Johnny's account of the incident. Which is also recorded by the building's security video system.
In the above example, Johnny could probably be armed with a homemade pistol stoked with hand-loads featuring the use of radioactive bullets, and I doubt he would have any legal issues.
Now, let's look at hypothetical incident #2:
Tommy Questionable enters a bar. Tommy hasn't been drinking, but he is intending to rectify that situation. As he enters the establishment, he sees Billy Casonova seated at the bar. Tommy and Billy have a long, and well known, dispute over Judy Floozy. Upon seeing each other, Tommy and Billy exchange words, and a heated argument ensues. The argument eventually spills out into the back ally. A few minutes later, gunshots are heard coming from the alley. As the crowd spills out the back door of the bar, they see Billy laying dead in the parking lot, and Tommy standing 15' away holding his trusty .44 Magnum revolver. Also, about 50' on down the alley, another person is down on the pavement with a gunshot wound. There are no witnesses to the shooting. Tommy claims Billy attacked him and he was forced to defend himself with the revolver. During the course of the investigation, it is determined that one of Tommy's bullets, after perforating Billy, went on down the alley and struck an innocent bystander. Could the fact that Tommy's .44 was loaded with Elmer Keith Commerative hand-loads become a factor in later criminal or civil proceedings? - Possibly.
Personally, I carry factory produced ammunition in my defensive firearms for two reasons. First, I think the quality control measures utilized by the major manufacturers is such that they can construct more reliable ammunition than I can. Once in a great while, I will have a malfunction with my hand-loads; not often, but it happens. Secondly, if there is any liability attributable to the ammunition, I am passing that on to the manufacturer (Remchester et al, has a lot more money than I do). For all my other shooting (match, hunting, plinking, etc) I happily use hand-loads. That being said, if I happen to be heading out the door with one of my defensive firearms, and for whatever reason, it's loaded with hand-loads, I'm not going to worry myself too much about it. I'll just switch out the home brewed stuff for factory fodder when I get the chance.
HRF
|
|
|
Post by chris623 on May 26, 2017 11:29:32 GMT -5
As I previously mentioned HRF, I think it is wiser to practice with "home rolled" ammo and carry with commercial. Honestly, if people would just do a little research they'll find there are plenty of more than adequate commercial rounds for self defense. I've even posted (here on this forum and others) a link to Lucky Gunner www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/ which makes it extremely easy to make a choice. I see no reason to expose myself to the "horrors" of a trial in today's political climate of "feel sorry for the mother of the drug dealer and hang the defendant for protecting life and limb".
|
|
|
Post by Carolinaman on May 26, 2017 11:54:39 GMT -5
Hello HRF and Chris, Great comments! I do appreciate your insights.... According to Mas Ayoob, the average cost of a civil/criminal trial right now for a defendant in a self defense shooting case runs about 50K. (And that is if you don't get a "no true bill of indictment). So, if I were force into a situation involving the use of "deadly force", than I am going to carry the "best" factory ammo that I can afford... Personally, I would want to lessen the odds of the the prosecution in the case. (Nor do I wear "The Punisher" grips on my firearms). ; As far as my reloads, I am a bit "old school" and use my Lee "laptop" reloader so I can manage the quality control one step at a time... They work 100% of the time, but again I don't want to take a chance on a missed charge or defective primer... Good points folks! Best, Chris
|
|
|
Post by HRFunk on May 26, 2017 12:13:45 GMT -5
As I previously mentioned HRF, I think it is wiser to practice with "home rolled" ammo and carry with commercial. Honestly, if people would just do a little research they'll find there are plenty of more than adequate commercial rounds for self defense. I've even posted (here on this forum and others) a link to Lucky Gunner www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/ which makes it extremely easy to make a choice. I see no reason to expose myself to the "horrors" of a trial in today's political climate of "feel sorry for the mother of the drug dealer and hang the defendant for protecting life and limb". I understand what you are saying. Believe me I do; but, one of the points I was trying to make in my admittedly light-hearted example above, is that using one type of ammunition or another will not ABSOLUTELY insulate you from criminal or civil liability. You could be totally justified in your actions in a defensive encounter and, based upon the circumstances, you could still find yourself charged criminally or sued civilly (or both). In my second example, the person who fired the shots may have been acting in a reasonable manner to defend himself, but his chances of avoiding a seat at the Defendant's table are severely diminished by the circumstances of the incident. Situations where someone claims to have acted in self defense are not always clear cut. This is especially true when there are differing accounts of the incident. Physical evidence is fine, as far as it goes, but unlike the various TV shows where the DNA found on a cigarette butt eventually proves beyond all doubt that the North Korean spy, not the poor wrongly accused car wash attendant, is responsible for blowing up the Statue of Liberty, real life is many times messy and uncertain. One of the things I teach officers is the justification for their actions will eventually come down to their ability (or that of their attorney), to articulate why they reasonably believed they were in imminent danger of being seriously injured or killed AND why their chosen action was a reasonable act based on the facts and circumstances as they perceived them at that time of that act. One thing to always keep in mind. Attorneys, and by extension courts, do no operate on a philosophy of "absolutes". Everything is dependent upon the specific fact pattern of the case at hand, and their precise function in that case. Here's another thing to keep in mind. They are human. Sometimes they have agendas, biases, and misperceptions, just like everybody else. HRF
|
|
|
Post by CXM on May 26, 2017 13:12:32 GMT -5
The problem of law is that it always "depends." Depends on what? Who knows... it depends it depends on the facts and circumstances... If you live in a stand your ground state your situation will be different that if you live in Massachusetts... I, in my particular facts and circumstances like hand loads... I know I produce better ammo than the factories do... I have better quality control... of course not every hand loader does... but I have confidence in mine. A secondary reason is expense... which seems to be a pretty good explanation of why you are carrying hand loads... It's a lot cheaper... I also use a lot of old guns for which ammo is not readily available... ever walked into a store and asked for a couple of boxes of Speer 200gr. JHP in .45 Schofield? Hint... don't waste your time. How about some 9mm Steyr? Now, I'm the first to say everyone needs to consider all the factors, especial their individual 'facts and circumstances.' There are certainly times I would not carry hand loads though these days I don't go to those jurisdictions... Everyone's situation is different... and everyone who carries should consider it carefully. Of curse free advice is usually worth about what you pay for it... V/r Chuck
|
|
|
Post by jaypee on May 26, 2017 13:57:46 GMT -5
The defense against legal action resulting from a defensive shooting is, as someone just said, one expensive sonofagun. The more issues the prosecution can throw at you, the more it will disable you financially. The issues may be laughable even, but every one they add pushes you closer to financial oblivion. So my philosophy is to make sure I don't give the prosecution anything to use against me, regardless of how ridiculous their assertions may be. I don't carry a gun that has had a trigger job done on it, because the prosecution can land on that, and, even though it may have no bearing on the shooting whatsoever, and may even approach being pure bee ess, you still have to defend yourself against it at great expense. The same can apply to carrying handloaded ammunition. It prolly has absolutely nothing to do with anything, but some hotshot prosecutor aiming for a judgeship can come after you for it, and you have to defend yourself against an allegation that it contributed your "intent to kill someone." So,to give myself another layer of protection, I always carry not only factory carry ammo, but factory carry ammo that is widely used by police agencies.
JayPee
|
|
|
Post by chris623 on May 26, 2017 16:16:33 GMT -5
You know, I've been involved in these "commercial or hand-loads" discussions on more forums than I care to mention over the years. What's interesting is there are plenty of "experts" (and I'm being serious.......honest experts) out there and they all have differing opinions on this single subject. Ask a prosecuting attorney, a defense attorney, handgun experts, handgun trainers, legal defense funds, etc., etc., etc., and you get a different opinion from each one of them. So here's my opinion: (it's more of a question) Why in God's name can a defendant end up in court and be judged by differing "opinions" depending on the judge, attorney's and jury's whim? Why, in this day and age, has our legal system deteriorated to the point that it judges based on opinions and not repeatable "givens" ? It's a given that if I run a red light, I've run the red light whether I'm in a sports car of a beat up jalopy. There's no opinion to lean on. Why can't the legal system just come out and say "No hand-loads in self defense weapons" (or the opposite) instead of putting a defendant in jeopardy if he/she so happens to shoot the bad guy (and the courts seem to over look the fact they ARE the bad guy) with a bullet that he feels will defend his life better than something he can buy at Wally-World? I guess I'll never understand how our legal system has turned into a "feel good" apparatus instead of a legal tool. I long for the "old West" where this was all settled quickly without a bunch of falderal!
|
|