No reloads for self defense?

[2ndAmendmentNut]

No reloads for self defense?

A friend warned me about using reloads for self defense. When I asked why he just said something about factory ammo being more reliable.

After he left I did some thinking (scary right). My reloads are just as reliable as factory, but could there be another reason not to use reloads? Maybe a lawyer saying something like I really meant to kill the rapist because I had made special rape stopper rounds? I will appreciate your thoughts and input on this topic.

P.S. Sorry if this thread is in the wrong spot feel free to move.

[Johnch]

I am a freind of a local judge , I hunt and shoot with him

He recomends that we carry the nasty'est factory ammo we can find
Expect for Win Black Talon , to much bad press

That way if by chance I have to use my carry gun
And the family of the SOB I shot sue's me for what ever
No anti gun lawer could argue I loaded that nasty ammo just to kill
I could just say , that is what the gunshop had


He said he knows of several times the family of the bad guy
Sued the person defending themselves
He didn't think any got any $
But at least 1 case he knew of had to be apealed by the good guy
After a jury awarded big $$ to the family of the bad guy

He said even if you win , you are out lawer fees

John

[Lee]

You heard correct. The lawyers for the poor persecuted misunderstood Chicago Thug Politician, (oops I mean villian) will go after you with whatever they can. So will the Demoncratic DA's looking to advance to a cushy gubmint appointment.
They will use the arguments you have already talked about.

I'll kill the '**** and take my chances. I don't care if I have to use a shovel. I'm too old and too tired of seeing this country slide down the toilet with that feel-good PC slurping sound being promoted by the idiots bent on destroying this country and my rights.

YMMV........................Lee

[Lee]

I'd rather be out lawyer fees(besides the Big O will entitle me!) than be out my life. If the **** is takin' your TV, probably best to let him go. You can always get another TV. (AS MUCH AS I HATE TO SAY THAT!!!)
If you are in fear for your life?...well, I already told you what I'd do.............

[Marlin Hunter]

No reloads for self defense?

Besides being more reliable, the ammo companies have larger wallets and better lawyers. If you shot someone with one of your own concoctions and it goes through the person and into someone else in another house, it's your fault. Buy something from an American company that advertises "defense" on their ammunition. Stay away from "Law Enforcement," "Hunting," and "Military" rounds. (That doesn't leave you with much.)


See if you can find some articles by Masad Ayob (sp) on the internet. He writes very good information about firearm deference.

[Esau]

I read an article about that recently. In summary, a man's wife shot herself, with his gun, loaded with his reloads. He tried to stop her. So, The Prosecution assumed, he tried to kill her and just wanted to make it look like suicide. If the court had allowed the remaining reloads to be used for powder burn tests, they could have determined how close the gun was to her head, when it went off. Somehow that could have proven him innocent. Unfortunately, the court would not allow them to be used, because they were "evidence." Of course, if he'd been keeping his home defense gun loaded with factory ammunition, the court would have accepted some from the same lot, from the factory.

His lawyers advice on the matter was a little different. She thought his mistake was talking to the police, because they had used the story he gave the police, when they arrived on the scene, to try him over and over again, until they finally got him locked up for a few years.

[mike in co]

whaaa whaaaa whaaa...


lots of internet "facts" but no real facts behind the rumor mongoring.

just people saying what if.....

not one trial, not one charge, not one suite........

while i have some factory rounds, most of my self defense ammo is simply my loads of xtp's and golden sabers.

tho the 44 mag carbine is cast boolits, soon to be cast hp's.

mike in co

[mike in co]

No reloads for self defense?

A friend warned me about using reloads for self defense. When I asked why he just said something about factory ammo being more reliable.

After he left I did some thinking (scary right). My reloads are just as reliable as factory, but could there be another reason not to use reloads? Maybe a lawyer saying something like I really meant to kill the rapist because I had made special rape stopper rounds? I will appreciate your thoughts and input on this topic.

P.S. Sorry if this thread is in the wrong spot feel free to move.

yes you did mean to kill him...there is no such thing as pulling a gun to wound someone....the criteria is deadly force is required becasue he has threatened me, my family, and this was the correct response.
more to worry about witnesses.
make loud verbal warnings..... STOP OR I WILL SHOOT...PUT THE GUN/KNIFE/CLUB DOWN OR I WILL SHOOT.....

[mtnman31]

Fiddlesticks, I don't worry about the PC way to defend myself. I'm with Lee, I'll take my chances with a lawyer. Bottom line is that I'll use whatever I can get to in a life or death situation. "Sir, it was dark and I just grabbed the first thing I could." I am not going to spend much time worrying about whether I should load up this bullet or that one when my life is in peril. I am going to use whatever is at hand, be it some of my home-cast hollow points, a factory 22lr or the Mameluke sword hanging on my wall.

I also think that any reloader worth his salt can develop a load just as reliable as any factory round. One thing to consider - you need to hit what you aim at and to do that you need practice. Personally, I can't afford to practice with factory "personal defense" rounds. Reloads allow me to practice and my reloads are completely reliable. I'd feel more comfortable using my relaods than a factory load that I am not familiar with.

[Bob Krack]

Better to be tried by twelve than carried by six.

I keep my Mossberg 500 loaded with handloaded hardcast #0 buck just in case of coyote attacks on the chicken house. If'n my house is attacked, I guess the #0 buck will just have to do!

Bob

[Tom W.]

Better to be tried by twelve than carried by six.

I keep my Mossberg 500 loaded with handloaded hardcast #0 buck just in case of coyote attacks on the chicken house. If'n my house is attacked, I guess the #0 buck will just have to do!

Bob

Better to be acquitted by twelve than carried by six....

[MtJerry]

as long as you have met the conditions for using deadly force according to your state statutes, you can use a bazooka and still be within the law.

Massad Ayoob is a boob ....

[JIMinPHX]

I've had several people advise me to carry factory ammo for protection due to liability reasons. Some have advised that I should carry the same ammo as the local cops, so that a prosecutor has no way to make it out to be something horrific without badmouthing the cops.

The only case law where I could find a reference to the caliber or type of ammo used by a defensive shooter was the Harold Fish case. Fish got demonized for choosing a 10mm Kimber for a defensive arm. Fish got railroaded by an over zealous prosecutor in my opinion. He just got let out about 2 weeks ago.

[Bret4207]

I read an article about that recently. In summary, a man's wife shot herself, with his gun, loaded with his reloads. He tried to stop her. So, The Prosecution assumed, he tried to kill her and just wanted to make it look like suicide. If the court had allowed the remaining reloads to be used for powder burn tests, they could have determined how close the gun was to her head, when it went off. Somehow that could have proven him innocent. Unfortunately, the court would not allow them to be used, because they were "evidence." Of course, if he'd been keeping his home defense gun loaded with factory ammunition, the court would have accepted some from the same lot, from the factory.

His lawyers advice on the matter was a little different. She thought his mistake was talking to the police, because they had used the story he gave the police, when they arrived on the scene, to try him over and over again, until they finally got him locked up for a few years.

This is the ONLY case I'm aware of where handloads played a factor, and in truth, this guy must have had the worst attorney in the world. There is no way a good attorney would have let this slide, no way. Instant appeal.

Massad Ayoob, a professional witness and writer, started this train of thought as near as I can tell and it's a shame he did. I can assure anyone reading this in no uncertain terms that if you shoot someone your life, as you know it, will end. You will be sued no matter what you use. You may well be arrested even if it's clear self defense. In my state every shooting goes before a Grand Jury. What ammo you use will be one of the very minor points, if it even comes up. No matter what you use it'll be portrayed as a tool made for killing and that's all there is to it.

I'd worry much less about the handloads/factory question and be far more concerned with familiarizing myself with my states self defense laws.

[3006guns]

I have to agree with Bret.........besides, a simple ballistic test using the same components should prove that the load falls within accepted parameters. It would be easy to prove that cast boolits are a money saving feature and not some whoopie-do special home concocted "man killer". In other words, a widely accepted hobby with set standards.

I wonder how the attorneys would argue the bad guy being shot with, say, a flintlock of about .69 caliber? Talk about a wound channel. "Members of the jury...it's what was available at the time.................."

My defense (as if I needed one) would be that I don't trust the reliablility of FACTORY ammo, therefore I use my knowledge and skill to produce a RELIABLE round....not neccesarily one of greater power. I really don't care if the attorney produces a long history of factory reliablility...all I have to do is state that I have had factory ammo fail on occasion and refused to trust my life to a product not directly manufactured under my supervision. I don't have the right to defend my life with the most reliable ammo I can get????

[redneckdan]

Fortunately, Michigan has adopted the castle doctrine, part of our law states that if the victim who defends their self is not convicted in a criminal trial then they also are protected from civil suits for the same incident.

yes you did mean to kill him...there is no such thing as pulling a gun to wound someone....

No and yes....the only reason for a weapon to be unholstered in a confrontation is when deadly force is to be applied. However, we do not 'shoot to kill' we 'shoot to stop'. If the guy running at us with a knife stops after one hit from a squib .380 and lays on the ground cryin'...we stop shooting....if he keeps coming we keep shooting.

[softpoint]

As far as I know, here in Texas, if you are justified in the use of the deadly force, there is no questioning WHAT you used.
This advice not to use reloads is something that was started by Massad Ayoob, and I have tried to find any info where it was used against someone. He may have been refering to a particular place, NYC comes to mind, defending yourself is a risky situation there, and Chicago, from what I hear. Most places are not like that, though. I have reloads in my carry guns most of the time.
I'm not saying you should, or shouldn't carry handloaded ammo, I just don't think it makes any difference in most places.

[badgeredd]

redneckdan has it completely correct as to Michigan law. When I took the state required training for my Concealed Weapon Permit, I asked the instructor (a local police officer) about the reload issue and also if the number of shots fired had any bearing on the investigation.

He stated that unless the reload was something out there (cut-off brass wire to act as buckshot/shrapnel for instance) it had no bearing on the incident. The shooting WOULD be investigated as to whether it was a justified shooting. The number of shots made were immaterial, as long as the perp was attacking which would be evaluated. One cannot fire again after the IMMEDIATE threat has passed. Obviously, good sense has to be applied. He also said that one was obviously using deadly force with ANY firearm so reloads weren't a factor. Thank God for the passage of the Castle Doctrine!!!! That law definitely takes SOME of the worry out of defending myself.

As stated above, knowledge of ones state law is imperative, as is the use of one's weapon.

Edd

[Rocky Raab]

There may or may not be trial precedent for the "handloads versus factory" argument.

Use what you think best, but if you use factory, you won't BE that precedent.

Massad Ayoob is a recognized court authority on firearms and self-defense. I don't think any of us here are. That pretty much settles who to trust on this issue.

[HeavyMetal]

Yes Ayoob started this years ago in an article in Handgunner, think it was filler, I've heard he's taken as lot of flak over the years for this and has gotten to the point he will abruptly change the subject if persued these days.

I think it's some "out of the box" thinking to be sure but real world problem? I don't think so!

Let me pose a question: you are forced to shoot someone in self defense, you do the right thing and call "The Man"!

The usual process occurs, evidence is taken. HOW DO THEY KNOW THE AMMO IS A RELOAD?

HOW DO THEY KNOW YOU RELOADED IT?

I have made ammo for my 1911 with JACKETED bullets and Speer case's that you cannot tell are reloads from a visual inspection. I think if you don't tell them they will never think to look!

Ayoob's theory is "Smoke and Mirrows" to sell a product, himself.