MMCSRET
Member
All the sound legal advice I read in this thread is worth exactly what I paid to get it!!!!!!!!!!!!
I know your not supposed to but does anyone handload their carry ammo.
- Thread starter MUSICALGUNNUT45
- Start date
- Status
How would you know?
FWIW, I think both of these statements are true:
1)Carrying handloads increases one's legal risk
2)Reasonable people can choose to carry handloads
For #1, even putting aside GSR issues, the prosecutor/plaintiff's atty can certainly make the 'he wasn't satisfied with store bought and had to make his own super killer loads'. And you can say '230 grains at 900 fps is 230 grains at 900fps, whether it was factory or a handload'. Maybe the jury will believe that, and maybe they won't, and their decision may not be a rational one - if one of the jurors just doesn't like you, that juror may seize on that fact to justify conviction in their minds. Handloads are a risk factor that only cuts one way (unless you can, with a straight face, testify that you loaded powderpuff handloads in the hope they would be less lethal - which would open a whole 'nuther can of worms).
For #2, factory rounds are more expensive. Maybe that's not a lot of money, if you buy one box of carry ammo and use it for years. I sort of do that for snubbies; I bought several boxes of Nyclads years ago, and I practice with lead reloads. For autos, though, I like to run quite few of my actual carry loads through them. Failing to do that adds a (slight) risk of having a malfunction during a fight. You can say I should just buy a lot of factory rounds for my autos, but that's money I can't use to, e.g. buy training.
And that's what I did - IMHO, for me, those hundreds of dollars were better spent paying for force on force shoot/no shoot simunition training - because, having been shot in that training, and shooting when I shouldn't have in that training - I'm much more likely to make better decisions if, God forbid, I'm in an actual situation someday. Overall, I think that reduces my legal risk more than buying factory ammo.
Maybe I'm right, maybe I'm wrong. Everyone gets to make their own choice and live with the tradeoffs.
Thanks again to everyone who has posted reasoned responses.
1)Carrying handloads increases one's legal risk
2)Reasonable people can choose to carry handloads
For #1, even putting aside GSR issues, the prosecutor/plaintiff's atty can certainly make the 'he wasn't satisfied with store bought and had to make his own super killer loads'. And you can say '230 grains at 900 fps is 230 grains at 900fps, whether it was factory or a handload'. Maybe the jury will believe that, and maybe they won't, and their decision may not be a rational one - if one of the jurors just doesn't like you, that juror may seize on that fact to justify conviction in their minds. Handloads are a risk factor that only cuts one way (unless you can, with a straight face, testify that you loaded powderpuff handloads in the hope they would be less lethal - which would open a whole 'nuther can of worms).
For #2, factory rounds are more expensive. Maybe that's not a lot of money, if you buy one box of carry ammo and use it for years. I sort of do that for snubbies; I bought several boxes of Nyclads years ago, and I practice with lead reloads. For autos, though, I like to run quite few of my actual carry loads through them. Failing to do that adds a (slight) risk of having a malfunction during a fight. You can say I should just buy a lot of factory rounds for my autos, but that's money I can't use to, e.g. buy training.
And that's what I did - IMHO, for me, those hundreds of dollars were better spent paying for force on force shoot/no shoot simunition training - because, having been shot in that training, and shooting when I shouldn't have in that training - I'm much more likely to make better decisions if, God forbid, I'm in an actual situation someday. Overall, I think that reduces my legal risk more than buying factory ammo.
Maybe I'm right, maybe I'm wrong. Everyone gets to make their own choice and live with the tradeoffs.
Thanks again to everyone who has posted reasoned responses.
Inebriated
Member
I don't reload, but if I did I wouldn't carry them. Too many great defense loads, and too much legal risk carrying hand loads.
CoRoMo
Member
Well since I've been a member here, attorneys who are fellow THR members have repeatedly warned about the consequences of using hollow points, FMJ, +P, and handloaded ammo in a CCW. I'm not sure if there is an ammo category that hasn't yet been attached to a legal ramification.
Can you cite a single instance in which an attorney on this board has recommended against the use of JHP ammunition, other than for the purpose of ensuring adequate penetration in a low powered round such as a .32ACP? I cannot.
You may find posts in which an attorney has pointed out that prosecutors may try to make an issue out of a certain notorious factory load such as Black Talons, but that is usually coupled with advice to try to use what the police use.
Can you cite a single instance in which one of our attorney members has recommended against the use of FMJ loads for legal reasons, other than perhaps to point out that one of the reasons why some major law enforcement agencies have justified the use of JHP loads was the reduction in danger due to pass through bullets? I cannot.
Most of our attorney members consistently recommend the use of JHP loads. For the most part, that has had little or nothing to do with the legal aspects of the choice.
Can you cite a single post in which one of our attorney members has ever recommended against the use of +P loads for legal reasons? I cannot.
I think that you are either confused or are trying to confuse.
Kleanbore said:
The details ALWAYS matter and they simply don't add up in this case. Why does Ayoob present this case from the standpoint that Dan Bias was the innocent victim of a miscarriage of justice? Ayoob has no way of knowing if Dan Bias is innocent or guilty but he can only make his point if he convinces his readers that it's the former rather than the latter. This is a scare tactic and nothing more and Ayoob loses credibility with his 'make the point at all costs' approach.
As far as the Bias case is concerned, there are two possibilities with very different implications.
1. Lise Bias shot herself
2. Dan Bias shot Lise Bias
If the first is true, then the wisdom of Dan Bias's decision to use reloads is open to debate given that no GSR was found on Lise Bias. If the second case is true, then Dan Bias's use of reloads was a smart plan because he only served three years for the murder of his wife. Had he used factory ammunition, he would have had GSR on his hands, face and body and might still be in prison.
There are far too many questions surrounding this case to hold it up as some kind of "standard". If the prosecutor's case hinged on the lack of GSR on the victim, why does Ayoob talk about GSR at 20" and no closer? Why not test at 10", 5" or 2", and why no mention of the likelihood of GSR on the shooter's hand using a revolver with such light loads? This was a 6" revolver and there's no way to hold it such that the muzzle is 10" let alone 20" away from the head. The other cases mentioned by Ayoob are equally spurious. Until relevant information is presented regarding the use of handloads in defensive situations, I won't give any credence to Massad Ayoob, retired lawyers or anyone else.
rugerman
Member
Always have, always will!
The discussion here is not about the Bias case.
The discussion is about (1) the fact that in all kinds of shooting cases (manslaughter, premeditated murder, suicide, accident, justifiable homicide), GSR patterns or the lack of same are routinely used in establishing an estimate of the distance, or perhaps the minimum likely distance, at which a shot was fired or shots were fired; (2) that that estimate may impinge upon the reconstruction of the facts about the case and therefore, upon any charging decision or the outcome of a trial; and (3) that unless factory ammunition had been used, the rules of admissibility concerning scientific forensic trace evidence would prevent the introduction of GSR test results of the shooter's ammunition as evidence, should they be important to the defense.
The Bias case was one of several used to illustrate those points. As several of us have pointed out more than once, Whether Bias committed manslaughter or whether his wife committed suicide is completely irrelevant to the discussion.
That is your prerogative, but it it shows a very great misunderstanding of how the law functions.
It is rather like saying one will give any credence to cases involving the use of cell phone GPS records as evidence in court until it has been used in a case involving the specific kind of criminal charges you are interested in. That is simply not how the law works.
What applied in the Bias case would apply equally in any shooting case involving premeditated murder, manslaughter, accidental death, or self defense, if the factors outlined above happened to be pertinent.
CoRoMo
Member
Please don't ask me to back up something that I didn't say.
oldbear
Member
Yes and No. I don't reload but I have a great friend who does, and I carry his reloads for S/D.
You are right--it's a judgment call.
I agree with your assessment of the importance of good training.
At a recent class I attended, Mas Ayoob recommended running a several hundred carry rounds through each carry semi-auto. He agreed that that is not inexpensive.
He also pointed out hat considering the potential consequences of not doing so, it's a small investment.
Same thing applies to carrying factory loads.
Any reason you cannot duplicate your factory loads with handloads and use the hand loads for ensuring reliability? Same case, same bullet, same pressure?
[Kleanbore]That is your prerogative, but it it shows a very great misunderstanding of how the law functions.
You and fiddletown have DOZENS of times told people on this thread that they don't know how the law works!
You have not ONE time presented a case of a SD shooting in which a defendants reload data was not presented in a court of law!
My personal opinion is that neither one of you has anything more to add to this discussion!
You and fiddletown have DOZENS of times told people on this thread that they don't know how the law works!
You have not ONE time presented a case of a SD shooting in which a defendants reload data was not presented in a court of law!
My personal opinion is that neither one of you has anything more to add to this discussion!
And as much as you think you would like to see one, neither such an example nor the lack of one is in any way relevant, precedential, or predictive, as you have been told numerous times over the last six months.
Yeah, we agree, we've probably said it all, as stated here:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked