|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
September 13, 2012, 09:03 PM | #51 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 3, 2011
Posts: 2,088
|
Quote:
2 - reloading is a known process with a long history that is proven by the thousands of reloaders 3 - if the reload is tested by a balistics expert in a lab, that expert witness can testify on the reloaders behalf. |
|
September 13, 2012, 09:41 PM | #52 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 22, 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 342
|
I dont let the thought of a jury influence me though i dont use my hand loads. I like hydrashok and Ranger T series.
|
September 14, 2012, 01:42 AM | #53 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 6, 2012
Location: Lakewood, CO
Posts: 1,057
|
I do in fact use reloads for home/self defense. My 9mm defense ammo is every bit as good as any high end 147 grain SD ammo (superior to some of it). I have loaded and fired thousands of rounds of this recipe.
|
September 14, 2012, 06:34 AM | #54 | |||||
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,815
|
Quote:
Quote:
As for 10mm, I take that to be a wholly different problem. Reloads are an evidentiary issue. The 10mm case was a jury perception problem, a totally different beast. I actually agree with this earlier statement of yours earlier statement: Quote:
Quote:
2) You won't be allowed to bring in "thousands of reloaders." I do not doubt that the process is reliable, but the key witness to the act of reloading and the data will have to be the shooter (defendant). Reliability of the data/testimony is a problem. 3) See #1 and #2.
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
|||||
September 14, 2012, 06:59 AM | #55 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 12, 2012
Location: Richmond, Va.
Posts: 353
|
About 6 Silvertips followed by 6 FMJ. Spare clip has FMJ only. I would hope it never gets to where I'm firing the FMJ too..
__________________
Frank-- Member, GoA, NRA-ILA, SAF, NRA Life Member |
September 14, 2012, 07:01 AM | #56 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2010
Location: Virginia Beach
Posts: 2,016
|
Quote:
__________________
NRA Life Member USN Retired |
|
September 14, 2012, 10:56 AM | #57 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: April 3, 2011
Posts: 2,088
|
From earlier post
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
2. It's not about bringing thousands of reloaders into court it's about your lawyer presenting reloading as a reliable process based on testing the process "if you load 1000 rounds, using the documented process, you get the same results". This can also be tested in a lab by an expert. 3. - again the expert testifies. |
|||
September 14, 2012, 11:35 AM | #58 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 28, 2006
Posts: 4,341
|
Quote:
Hard to believe a jury in the world would think that someone using range ammo in their handguns is more likely a crazed killer than someone using "Zombie Killer" or "Black Talon" ammo. Probably the same reason my local D.A. uses his own handloads in his SD firearms. |
|
September 14, 2012, 01:20 PM | #59 | ||||
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,815
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
For that matter, it's not even about handloads being deadlier than factory ammunition. Daniel Bias, by all accounts, used a light load because his wife was recoil-sensitive. It's about consistency in the loads, having a sufficiently reliable source for the load data, and someone who can testify about the powder charge without having to put the defendant on the stand (in the potential criminal case). Don't misunderstand me. I understand that handloads carry significant cost savings. I'm all for that. I'm all for developing a handload that mimics a reliable, effective factory load, for practice purposes. If I had a place to handload, I'd be cranking out my own practice ammunition. What I don't think is that the risk of having potentially exculpatory evidence excluded is worth the cost.
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
||||
September 14, 2012, 01:35 PM | #60 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 12, 2012
Location: Richmond, Va.
Posts: 353
|
Skadoosh, " Quote:
About 6 Silvertips followed by 6 FMJ. Spare clip has FMJ only. I have often considered doing this....just curious as to your reasoning." I just figure if I'm in a firefight after 6 rounds, somebody must be under cover and I need penetrating power. I'd like to hope that never happens. The most BG's I've faced at one time was 4 and there were two of us, and we got the drop. No shots fired and over with.
__________________
Frank-- Member, GoA, NRA-ILA, SAF, NRA Life Member |
September 14, 2012, 01:49 PM | #61 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 20, 2007
Location: S.E. Minnesota
Posts: 4,720
|
I usually carry 158 grain soft lead hollowpoints, but sometimes I'll carry 158 grain WFN or 148 grain DEWC. All of them loaded to the upper limit of .38 Special non +P data.
For a reload I carry a speed strip or two of Fiocchi 125 grain XTP +P. They don't weigh my pocket down as much, and the jacketed bullets and nickel cases don't mess up my clothes as much as exposed lead.
__________________
"Everything they do is so dramatic and flamboyant. It just makes me want to set myself on fire!" —Lucille Bluth |
September 14, 2012, 02:31 PM | #62 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 28, 2006
Posts: 4,341
|
Quote:
Quote:
Even if the FBI or your local police force used 'em? As I said before....folks should use what methods they are comfortable with and confident in. As long as they are legal. I believe the use of handloads is still legal. Unless you have some evidentiary rules showing they are not? I believe in our justice system and I believe in the theory that a jury of my peers will see the truth and make their decisions based on that truth. I also believe their decision will be the same as it has been in every other SD shoot trial in our country.....that type of ammo, handloads or store bought, made do difference in the decision if the shoot was good or bad. Last edited by buck460XVR; September 14, 2012 at 02:55 PM. |
||
September 14, 2012, 03:22 PM | #63 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 3, 2011
Posts: 2,088
|
Quote:
To state that we should not carry handloads because of some non-existent court ruling or law is giving in to those who would pass laws to limit your rights. BTW - My reloads are for range ammo. I don't reload 9mm so I don't have any for carry. I do reload 45 ACP but I don't carry my 1911s. I would not hesitate to use my 45 ACP reloads for HD. |
|
September 14, 2012, 09:05 PM | #64 | ||||||
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,815
|
Quote:
It can be just as relevant in an SD case as it was in the Bias case. These issues can come into play in any case where: (a) distance is disputed; but (b) can be resolved through the use of GSR evidence. IIRC, the handload data didn't come in until about Bias' third trial, after he'd lost his house, his job and spent a couple of years in jail. Quote:
Handloads are entirely legal. I've never claimed otherwise. That doesn't make them a good idea. It's also entirely legal to use Q-tips as your home defense system. Surely that doesn't seem like a good idea. Quote:
Quote:
And the ruling isn't non-existent. You and others may disagree with the judge's ruling in Bias, but it's out there. There are two things to consider: (1) it's one of the few cases out there in which this has arisen; and (2) exclusion of exemplar evidence based on a handloader's data is consistent with the principles underlying the evidentiary rules.
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
||||||
September 14, 2012, 09:09 PM | #65 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 21, 2007
Posts: 637
|
I think this is being overthought.
Just buy a hollowpoint that is reliable and common. Ammo found at walmart marked "for self defense" would be hard to hold against you in court. |
September 14, 2012, 09:28 PM | #66 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 5, 2007
Location: Monroeville, Alabama
Posts: 1,683
|
I carry my own reloads. Period.
|
September 14, 2012, 09:40 PM | #67 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 20, 2007
Location: "Undisclosed Bunker"
Posts: 1,464
|
As Long As It's Legal
I just want to preface this by saying that I realize as the OP states the "potential" ramifications of using anything other than FMJ. That being siad, I don't worry about that "possibility" so I do my research/due-diligence and select and carry the ammo that I believe will best preserve life by ending the threat.
Of late I have become completely enamored with Hornady's new line of ammo called "Critical Duty." I have long looked for a load that filled in the hollow-point with material ("flexlock") so as to avoid any potential for feeding issues while still being of a weight which I felt would provide the necessary penetration and expansion. Hornady's Critical Duty 9mm Flexlock 135gr load is arguably the best on the market and all of the ballistic tests demonstrate its effectiveness.
__________________
NRA Life Member “A free people ought...to be armed..." ―George Washington |
September 14, 2012, 10:13 PM | #68 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 3, 2011
Posts: 2,088
|
Spats - you are entitled to your opinion but that does not make it a fact. Your argument for why one should not carry hand loads have no solid evidence. You are free to chose your own defense as I am free to chose mine.
I am going to agree to diagree with you and leave it at that. As far as why I posted this thread, it's to see what people carry and to ask if having to explain their choice to a jury plays a part in their decision. Looks like the majority carry what they like or what functions with their gun and are not worried of having to explain their ammo choice to a jury. |
September 14, 2012, 10:21 PM | #69 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 3, 2011
Posts: 2,088
|
@PT92 - I bought some Critical Duty also based on the advertisement and shot 25 rounds out of my 92FS Compact. All five groups of five rounds were less than 2" at 7 yards. 100% function. I like it and carry it in my 92FS now.
|
September 14, 2012, 10:51 PM | #70 | |
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,815
|
Quote:
There are many opinions on this, but not all opinions are equal. A great deal of the practice of law involves reading cases that aren't aren't exactly like the one we have at hand, and extrapolating. figuring out what we think the result in our case will be. I am not sure what you require in order for there to be "solid evidence," but what little case law is out there says that handloads are a bad idea.
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
|
September 15, 2012, 12:21 AM | #71 |
Junior Member
Join Date: September 13, 2012
Posts: 6
|
Critical Defense. Thats what they are for. And just in case I keep a mag of Zombie Max.
|
September 15, 2012, 01:52 AM | #72 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 18, 2004
Posts: 1,944
|
Quote:
The only reason you don't see a lot of self-defense/murder cases involving reloads is just that not very many people get into shootings carrying handloads for self defense. Any self defense criminal trial is a murder case or a manslaughter case, by the way. Last edited by wayneinFL; September 15, 2012 at 01:59 AM. |
|
September 15, 2012, 09:55 AM | #73 |
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2010
Location: South West Riverside County California
Posts: 2,763
|
"The only reason you don't see a lot of self-defense/murder cases involving reloads is just that not very many people get into shootings carrying handloads for self defense."
Fake fact pulled out of thin air. There are no facts to support your opinion. The reality is that in most every self-defense shooting, no one cares what ammunition was used. A good shoot is a good shoot. No one cares what ammunition or gun was used if the gun/ammunition was legal. What we do know is that there are far more accidental shootings than self-defense shootings and therefore, no one should reload, or use a 10mm. If your dare to reload and dare to insert the reload into a firearm, you are could, possibly get in trouble, because you should never shoot someone with a reload even by accident. You are far more likely to shoot someone by accident. So, again, the take-away from the anti-reload "logic" is never reload. Quit reloading now, forthwith. And don't use a 10mm. Last edited by jmortimer; September 15, 2012 at 10:00 AM. |
September 15, 2012, 10:10 AM | #74 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 28, 2006
Posts: 4,341
|
Quote:
Quote:
That is what the thread is all about. Folks arguing the level of risk of using reloads for SD. I have weighed that risk many times in more than one process of making my decision. I am comfortable with my assessment and respect the right of others to disagree and make other decisions that concern the safety and welfare of themselves and their loved ones. I only ask they do the same. Over the years I have been told the use of reloads in a SD shoot will turn it from SD to Murder. I have been told the polishing of the trigger on my CCW revolver and the reduced springs in the 1911 on my nightstand will turn a good SD shoot into murder. None of these things has been done with the intent to kill someone. They have only been done to make my firearms more accurate and more reliable, at the range, in the field or in my home against potential attackers. IMHO, increased reliability and accuracy reduces the risk to me more than the potential increase of risk from what some claim "could happen in a worst case scenario". Especially since the "could happen" never has. No where in this thread have I said that X-Brand ammo is the best. No where have I told others that they need to use reloads. Hell, I never even suggested it. I just said they work the best for me. In the one in a million chance I need to use my SD weapon, and after that, the one in a trillion chance the DA will make an issue outta my reloads and I end up in jail after saving my life and/or the life of my loved ones.....so be it, and ol' Spats can come visit me and say I told you so. |
||
September 15, 2012, 11:19 AM | #75 | ||||||
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
For example, see this post by Marty Hayes on another board: And there was the case of Randy Willems. In about 1990, police Corporal Randy Willems of he Davenport, Iowa PD was able to successfully show he shot his accuser in self defense, and thus win acquittal, because he used factory ammunition and was able to introduce into evidence expert opinion based on GSR testing that supported his story. Here's what Massad Ayoob said about that case, as quoted by Bartholomew Roberts in this post:
Quote:
The threshold question is how often has handloaded ammunition been used in an incident in which self defense was claimed and which went to trial? Historical research is helpful only if there's sufficient historical data. If the question is something like, "Is a private citizen who shoots someone and claims self defense more likely to be charged if he used handloads compared with factory ammunition?", or "Is a private citizen who shoots someone and claims self defense more likely to be convicted at trial if he used handloads compared with factory ammunition?", the availability of useful data depends on (1) a large enough sample of private citizens having shot someone in claimed self defense; and (2) a large enough subset of those private citizens having used handloads. I suggest that the vast majority of people who keep guns for self defense aren't enthusiasts and use commercial ammunition. Indeed, even many of the members here, who are enthusiasts, use commercial ammunition for self defense. Just because there is insufficient historical data doesn't mean that professionals can't draw reasoned conclusions about how likely a particular result might be under certain circumstance. Indeed, it often happens in the practice of law that a particular issue of interest has not previously been addressed by an appellate court, and one must make a reasoned judgment without the guidance of on point precedent. As Nassim Nicholas Taleb points out repeatedly in his books Fooled by Randomness, the Hidden Role of Chance (Random House, 2004) and The Black Swan, the Impact of the Highly Improbable (Random House, 2007), "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." Taleb, a securities trader and professor at the University of Massachusetts, provides some interesting and useful insights into strategies for dealing with rare events. Quote:
You will not have the final say on whether or not your use of lethal force was justified. Other people will be deciding that. So if you think you were justified but the DA and/or grand jury disagree, it's not a "good shoot" unless your trial jury decides that it was. See, for example -- This couple, arrested in early April and finally exonerated under Missouri's Castle Doctrine in early June. And no doubt after incurring expenses for bail and a lawyer, as well as a couple of month's anxiety, before being cleared. Larry Hickey, in gun friendly Arizona: He was arrested, spent 71 days in jail, went through two different trials ending in hung juries, was forced to move from his house, etc., before the DA decided it was a good shoot and dismissed the charges. Mark Abshire in Oklahoma: Despite defending himself against multiple attackers on his own lawn in a fairly gun-friendly state with a "Stand Your Ground" law, he was arrested, went to jail, charged, lost his job and his house, and spent two and a half years in the legal meat-grinder before finally being acquitted. Harold Fish, also in gun friendly Arizona: He was still convicted and sent to prison. He won his appeal, his conviction was overturned, and a new trial was ordered. The DA chose to dismiss the charges rather than retry Mr. Fish. Gerald Ung: He was attacked by several men, and the attack was captured on video. He was nonetheless charged and brought to trial. He was ultimately acquitted. Some good folks in clear jeopardy and with no way to preserve their lives except by the use of lethal force against other humans. Yet that happened under circumstances in which their justification for the use of lethal force was not immediately clear. While each was finally exonerated, it came at great emotional and financial cost. And perhaps there but for the grace of God will go one of us. And note also that two of those cases arose in States with a Castle Doctrine/Stand Your Ground law in effect at the time. Quote:
The issue here is the use of expert opinion about how something happened based on the testing or exemplars. The only way such opinion could be relevant and therefore admissible evidence in a trial would be if it could be established to the satisfaction of the judge that the exemplars were substantially identical to whatever was used in the event that is the subject of the trial. A core principle of the rules of evidence requires that an expert opinion based on a scientific test be relevant. And for that opinion to be relevant, it must be established that it is based on a controlled and scientifically valid test that in all material respects duplicates the situation that is the subject of the trial. So when the question is the distance from which a shot was fired, and the expert will be offering an opinion on that question based on GSR produced by firing exemplar rounds, that opinion can only be relevant if it can be established that the exemplar rounds were substantially identical to the round or rounds fired in the event that is the subject of the trial. Otherwise, how could the expert form a meaningful opinion about what actually happened? If handloads were fired in the event, the only evidence of the characteristics of those rounds must come from the defendant, an extremely interested party. And therefore the only way the rounds fired could be connected with any exemplars used for testing would be through the defendant, an extremely interested party. The claim that the exemplars tested matched the round fired in the event is therefore suspect and inadequate to establish an acceptable foundation for the admission into evidence of expert opinion testimony based on the testing of those exemplars. There would be no independent verification that what was tested was anything like what was used in the event. If identified commercial ammunition was fired in the event, there would be independent verification, through the manufacturer, that the exemplars tested substantially matched what was used in the event.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper |
||||||
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|