Why JHP?

[BeerSleeper]

The way I see it, if I'm justified in shooting someone to protect my family or self, I don’t know why it would matter if I used factory ammo, reloaded ammo or a ninja sword.

You have a gun that shoots ninja swords!?

I am curious if anyone has any more info on the "low flash powder" used in factory SD ammo. Any truth to that?

I shot several different loads, in 9 and 40, in twilight to near dark conditions about a month ago, to see. My test results:

Winchester and Federal standard FMJ rounds: light to average flash

Reloads over winchester 231 powder: light flash

Reloads over Power Pistol powder: flash like a camera on fire

Reloads over Ramshot Silhouette (said to be flash suppressed powder): very faint, dark flash.

Factory Remington Golden Sabers: very faint, dark flash.

I have some Hornady Critical defense, but didn't test it on that particular outing.

 

[twohightech]

Beer had the best info in his post that i found out of this anyway. I know what I need to load for SD if i get lost in the dark.

 

[35 Whelen]

Because expanded hollowpoints make prettier pictures than a boring ol' semi-wadcutter. I load all my ammo and regardless of the bullet style (I load ONLY home-cast bullets), it's all SD ammo. After all, what bad guy is going to know whether the bullet that just shattered his sternum was a hollowpoint or a semiwadcutter?

35W

 

[LiveLife]

I am curious if anyone has any more info on the "low flash powder" used in factory SD ammo. Any truth to that?

Although I like W231/HP-38 for lighter target loads, I have used WSF for full power defensive loads. I am in the process of switching to AutoComp for 9mm/40S&W as some claim it is WSF with flash retardant.

9mm, 4" barrel, CCI 500 SP:
125 GR. SIE FMJ W231/HP-38 OAL 1.090" Start 4.4 gr (1009 fps) 24,600 CUP - Max 4.8 gr (1088 fps) 28,800 CUP
124 GR. FMJ WSF OAL 1.169" Start 4.7 gr (1015 fps) 27,700 PSI - Max 5.3 gr (1115 fps) 32,700 PSI
125 GR. SIE FMJ AutoComp OAL 1.090" Start 4.7 gr (1055 fps) 28,900 PSI - Max 5.2 gr (1120 fps) 33,300 PSI

40S&W, 4" barrel, Winchester SP:
165 GR. SIE JHP W231/HP-38 OAL 1.125" Start 4.8 gr (946 fps) 28,100 PSI - Max 5.3 gr (1001 fps) 32,500 PSI
165 GR. SIE JHP WSF OAL 1.125" Start 6.3 gr (1055 fps) 28,100 PSI - Max 6.7 gr (1115 fps) 32,700 PSI
165 GR. SIE JHP AutoComp OAL 1.125" Start 6.5 gr (1037 fps) 25,600 PSI - Max 7.1 gr (1124 fps) 31,500 PSI

 

[Ridgerunner665]

For years I carried nothing but my hand loads...then I realized that since I travel all over the country, that may not be such a good idea.

My wife still carries my hand loads...and there at home I know it won't be an issue if she has to use them.

I bought a bag of cheap HP bullets for 45acp at the last gun show...after testing them in a few things (wet pack, milk jugs, plywood, and an old car door)...I've decided they are better than my beloved XTP's...thing is, I can't remember who they are made by (the guy that sold them to me told me the name...)

 

[RhinoDefense]

The handloads thing has been discussed at length so I'm going to leave that alone.

The JHP history, look up a company called Super-Vel. They needed a marketing niche and had developed JHP bullets. They marketed these high velocity super duper bullet designs and their ammunition to LE agencies citing that this prevented pass throughs in police shootings which would reduce the agency liability. It was nothing technical and purely marketing. This was not an issue before JHP bullets were developed, despite the stories.

 

[Frank Ettin]

The legal issues related to using handloads for self defense have been heavily discussed here. The background and links to past discussions may be found here. And this is a recent, and long, thread on the subject.

I'm a lawyer, and I won't use handloads for self defense. If you want to, be my guest.

 

[LiveLife]

I'm a lawyer, and I won't use handloads for self defense. If you want to, be my guest.

With all due respect, hear me out.

Factory premium JHP rounds recoil differently from factory target rounds in regards to point-of-aim (POA) and point-of-impact (POI). It does not matter what caliber/bullet weight/bullet type/bullet capacity/factory or reloaded ammunition we carry in our SD/HD pistols IF we CANNOT hit our threat, whether it be a wild four-legged animal with teeth or two-legged human with weapons.

I subscribe to the notion that we fight like we train. Due to the higher cost of premium JHP ammunition, most of us shoot a lot more of cheaper factory target or reloaded ammunition. Even for match shooters, it does take some time to get used to different bullet/powder combinations that vary in recoil/POA/POI from rounds we are accustomed to. Add to this the stress of fight-or-flight response, our usual tight shot groups will probably get larger.

For me, if I am defending my life or the lives of my family, I need to be able to hit my threat. Period. This takes deliberate practice and trigger time. If there's greater chance that I will miss my threat due to lack of practice with a particular ammunition's recoil/POA/POI characteristics, then I much rather use ammunition my body is accustomed to shooting accurately and range tested under variety of shooting situations.

I hope you understand where I am coming from as this applies to a lot of us.

 

[GLOOB]

The whole idea that a regular joe who reloads should swap to factory ammo just for the off chance they need to shoot someone, and the off chance that they go to trial, and the off chance that the forensic evidence is changed, and for the off chance that they have a dumb jury, and for the off chance that they become the first case ever where it made a difference is ridiculous. That's like advising people they should only drive a car if they're wearing clean underwear just in case they have an accident, as if they'd give a rat's behind how clean their underwear is when they've had a car wreck.

 

[beatledog7]

I will use the ammo that gives me the best chance of successfully ending a potentially lethal attack upon myself or those in my company.

Once I've had to shoot an attacker, the only thing that will keep me out of jail is the jury's recognition that given the scenario in which I chose to shoot, my decision was sound and justified.

There is less than a snowball's chance that any jury is going to think, "Mr. Smith was fully justified in defending himself against what was clearly a lethal attack by Mr. Jones, but since Mr. Smith's gun was loaded with ammunition he made himself, we have to send him to prison."

I concede that the number of documented cases where homemade ammo is called into question is not zero, but I'll take my chances.

 

[MtnCreek]

Good article below by Massad Ayoob. Worth reading IMHO.
http://www.backwoodshome.com/articles2/ayoob93.html

You have a gun that shoots ninja swords!?

I'm just cool like that.

 

[LiveLife]

Why JHP? Does anyone load their own defensive ammo? I've noticed that it seems to be heavily advised to only carry factory ammo to ensure legal safety. So why are so many excellent self-defense JHP bullets available?

Since this is the "Handloading and Reloading" category of THR, I will try to provide a "High Road" version of my take on this.

- WhistlinDixie, answer to your OP of whether any of us load our own defensive ammunition is "Yes".

- As to many advising others to only carry factory ammunition to reduce legal liabilities is done in the interest to "better protect" THR members and guests based on the legal process of how the "typical" jury would "perceive/view" the justified shooting in terms of their lack of knowledge and understanding of firearms and the reloading process. If you look below the often heated discussions, they are really trying to help save our butts.

- There are many excellent JHP bullets available to us reloaders simply because there is a market for those products and profit to be made by the companies who manufacture them.


Keep in mind that many of us reload simply because certain handloaded/reloaded ammunition combinations are more accurate than factory target or premium ammunition, whether they be FMJ/TMJ RN/FP or JHP bullets. Some of us have physical conditions (vision, arthritis, etc.) which make shooting certain factory JHP ammunition (typically loaded for higher muzzle velocities and not necessarily for optimal accuracy/less recoil) less accurate than "custom tailored" reloads. Many hold the notion that regardless of legal implications, not being able to hit the intended target may result in continued advancement of the treat and/or hitting unintended targets.


For those unwilling or unable to read through the exhaustive and numerous discussion threads on this issue, this is what some of us (including myself) have concluded and decided to do:

1. Only use factory JHP ammunition of your choice in your SD/HD pistols. This will help your legal defense team, law enforcement crime scene/forensic personnel, subject matter experts, and members of the jury.

2. Using the same JHP bullet as factory JHP ammunition or very similar type/weight bullet, duplicate the Point-of-Aim (POA) and the Point-of-Impact (POI) of factory JHP as close as possible using available powders for practice. For this reason, I use factory Speer Gold Dot and Remington Golden Saber JHP ammunition in my SD/HD pistols and practice with reloads using the same bulk GD/GS JHP bullets that produce comparable POA/POI.



FYI, if you are trying to further reduce the cost of range practice, I have found that many lower cost FMJ/TMJ/plated and even lead bullets with certain powder combinations can be developed to produce close enough POA/POI of factory JHP. Once such loads are identified for your pistols, range practice can be done to the benefit of knowing that you'll perform similarly with factory JHP ammunition.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...Factory premium JHP rounds recoil differently from factory target rounds in regards to point-of-aim (POA) and point-of-impact (POI). It does not matter what caliber/bullet weight/bullet type/bullet capacity/factory or reloaded ammunition we carry in our SD/HD pistols IF we CANNOT hit our threat, whether it be a wild four-legged animal with teeth or two-legged human with weapons...

I'm sorry, but no. That is a complete red herring.

In competition, classes and practice, I've fired many tens of thousands of rounds of various commercial ammunition. I've also fired many tens of thousands of rounds of my own handloads. Any differences in POA/POI comparing roughly ballistically similar loads, factory or handloads, are inconsequential.

The whole idea that a regular joe who reloads should swap to factory ammo just for the off chance they need to shoot someone, and the off chance that they go to trial, and the off chance that the forensic evidence is changed, and for the off chance that they have a dumb jury, and for the off chance that they become the first case ever where it made a difference is ridiculous....

That's up to you. You've participated in some of the threads I've linked to, and it's been clear that you haven't really understood the issues. So what?

You're free to make your choices. However, knowing what I know, having the training and experience that I have, I would not make the same choices. Have a nice life.

...Once I've had to shoot an attacker, the only thing that will keep me out of jail is the jury's recognition that given the scenario in which I chose to shoot, my decision was sound and justified.

There is less than a snowball's chance that any jury is going to think, "Mr. Smith was fully justified in defending himself against what was clearly a lethal attack by Mr. Jones, but since Mr. Smith's gun was loaded with ammunition he made himself, we have to send him to prison."...

Yes, if you are really unlucky, whether or not it your use of lethal force was justified, and therefore whether or not you go to jail, will be decided by a jury. You will have to put on evidence that will lead the jury to conclude that you were justified. And if you can do that, it won't matter if you did use handloads.

On the other hand, consider the case of Randy Willems. He was able to convince a jury that his shooting someone was justified, and thus avoid going to jail, in large part because he did not use handloads. His case is described in more detail in this post.

Willems was a police officer. A man tried to take his gun. During the disarming attempt, Willems shot his assailant in self defense. His attacker survived and claimed that Willems had shot him for no reason from a substantial distance.

Willems wound up on trial. At trial, Willems was able to introduce into evidence expert opinion testimony that, based on gunshot residue testing of exemplar rounds of the same type of factory ammunition Willems had been using, Willems fired the shot from a distance of approximately 18 inches. That corroborated Willems' account of what happened and impeached his accuser's testimony.

Willems was able to use that expert opinion to exonerate himself because he had used factory ammunition. He would not have been able to use that expert opinion if he had used handloads. Why is more fully discussed in the various threads I've linked to.

 

[357 Terms]

Willems fired the shot from a distance of approximately 18 inches. That corroborated Willems' account of what happened and impeached his accuser's testimony.

Most if not all reloads for personal defense will leave similiar if not identical GSR residue from 18 inches. ( as to that of factory ammo )

He would not have been able to use that expert opinion if he had used handloads.

If the GSR is obviously from a close range shot why would he not be able to call in an expert?
A shot from 20ft will leave a whole lot less GSR than one from 18in. Obvious is obvious.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...Most if not all reloads for personal defense will leave similiar if not identical GSR residue from 18 inches. ( as to that of factory ammo )...

You've also participated in the other threads I've linked to, and also appear incapable of understanding the issues. All of your questions and comments have been answered in those other threads.

...If the GSR is obviously from a close range shot why would he not be able to call in an expert?
A shot from 20ft will leave a whole lot less GSR than one from 18in. Obvious is obvious.

The short answer is that the law of evidence would not allow it. One just can't put on anything he wants as evidence in a trial. Certain requirements must be satisfied in order for something to be admitted into evidence.

In the case of expert opinion based on scientific testing, in order for the opinion to be admitted into evidence the party offering it must establish to the satisfaction of the judge (1) that the expert is really professionally qualified to render an opinion; (2) the testing was done in a manner accepted as valid in the scientific community; and (3) that the material tested was substantially identical to the material that is the subject matter of the trial.

If you fired a handloaded round, you will not be able to establish that whatever rounds are fired in GSR testing were substantially identical to the round you shot. If you fired a round of, for example, Federal .45 ACP 230 grain HST, you could establish, with a witness from Federal if necessary, that firing exemplar rounds of Federal .45 ACP 230 grain HST would be valid for comparison.

This is all discussed in greater detail here, here, here, here, here, and here.

 

[357 Terms]

The short answer is that the law of evidence would not allow it. One just can't put on anything he wants as evidence in a trial. Certain requirements must be satisfied in order for something to be admitted into evidence.

So your saying that if there was a sufficient amount of GSR around an entry wound in a SD shooting (say enough to show that there was no way, under any circumstances that the shot came from 15 or 20ft) that a defendant would not be allowed to have an expert testify to the obvious?

 

[357 Terms]

the material tested was substantially identical to the material that is the subject matter of the trial.

How do you explain GSR evidence that has been entered when the origin of the cartridge (manufacterer) is unknown?

 

[GLOOB]

Originally Posted by beatledog7
...Once I've had to shoot an attacker, the only thing that will keep me out of jail is the jury's recognition that given the scenario in which I chose to shoot, my decision was sound and justified....

No. The police decide if there's enough to bring to the DA. Then the DA decides if there's enough to go to trial. If you go to trial, like Fiddletown the lawyer said, you're either very unlucky (or you made a bad shoot, and you deserve to go to trial and get hung).

Fiddletown, I understand all the issues. I understand fully that there's a snowball's chance in hell that handloads can throw a monkey wrench in the forensic evidence. Or that an impressionable jury can feel that handloads are inherently evil. And that there's an even smaller chance that this will change the outcome of the case.

You don't understand that there's still no case that shows handloads have changed the outcome. There are only a tiny handful of cases that show that it is theoretically possible, even. If Wilems had used handloads, and if the jury wasn't allowed to know that there was imbedded GSR in the wound, and he lost the case despite all other evidence consistent with his innocence (per similar cases where factory ammo was used and the jury found innocent), then that could have been the first. Oh well. So close. Only off by a mile.

You're claiming that tying a red ribbon on your finger can significantly save your life in a car accident. Then you're proving it by showing a case where someone had a minor fender bender and they lived.

Show me one guy you think was innocent and who was found guilty, and where the outcome was clearly affected by the use of handloads.

 

[Frank Ettin]

So your saying that if there was a sufficient amount of GSR around an entry wound in a SD shooting (say enough to show that there was no way, under any circumstances that the shot came from 15 or 20ft) that a defendant would not be allowed to have an expert testify to the obvious?

A trial is a serious and formal matter. Evidence upon which serious decisions affecting someone's life and liberty must clear a high bar. "Obivious" won't do.

 

[Frank Ettin]

How do you explain GSR evidence that has been entered when the origin of the cartridge (manufacterer) is unknown?

Exactly when did this happen? Under exactly what circumstances? In exactly what context? And for exactly what purpose?

 

[GLOOB]

Even if GSR distance testing is not allowed at trial, the presence of GSR will be noted by police forensics testing and can clear you before even going to trial, handloads or not.

Originally Posted by 357 Terms View Post
So your saying that if there was a sufficient amount of GSR around an entry wound in a SD shooting (say enough to show that there was no way, under any circumstances that the shot came from 15 or 20ft) that a defendant would not be allowed to have an expert testify to the obvious?

A trial is a serious and formal matter. Evidence upon which serious decisions affecting someone's life and liberty must clear a high bar. "Obivious" won't do.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but won't the presence or absence of GSR will more than likely be allowed to be presented to the jury? Even if your expert witness isn't allowed to present tests of your reloads to establish the exact distance, the GSR will still be able to stand on its own for whatever that's worth.

IOW, you could have an expert witness testify that it's impossible for that amount of GSR to embed at a distance of 20 feet, in his expert opinion. But he wouldn't be allowed to present actual testing of your reloads. In fact, I don't see why he wouldn't be allowed to do actual tests on a variety of factory ammo and present that just for a reference. The prosecution was allowed to do exactly that in the Bias case, despite Bias didn't use factory ammo. They presented the lack of imbedded GSR as evidence, and they presented testing of a random factory round to show the presumable distance.

 

[357 Terms]

A trial is a serious and formal matter. Evidence upon which serious decisions affecting someone's life and liberty must clear a high bar. "Obivious" won't do.

You haven't, and cannot seem to definitivly answer my question.

Exactly when did this happen? Under exactly what circumstances? In exactly what context? And for exactly what purpose?

So your saying that GSR evidence has never been entered into a trial when the origin of the cartrige is unknown?....under ANY circumstances?

 

[Frank Ettin]

You haven't, and cannot seem to definitivly answer my question....

Your question has been definitively a answered by me and others In the posts I've linked to. You just don't like or can't understand the answers.

...So your saying that GSR evidence has never been entered into a trial when the origin of the cartrige is unknown?....under ANY circumstances?

My statements speak for themselves.

 

[GLOOB]

My statements speak for themselves.

+1 Completely agree!

 

[Waywatcher]

Chill out, guys. No need to act like someone shot your dog.

That being said, I appreciate fiddletown's contributions to this thread. I still feel confident in my selection of ammunition. I think BullfrogKen mirrored my sentiments, and expressed them better than I could.