April 26, 2010, 11:08 AM | #51 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 27, 2010
Location: Norfolk, VA
Posts: 2,905
|
Quote:
|
|
April 26, 2010, 11:34 AM | #52 | ||
Registration in progress
Join Date: November 1, 2008
Location: I can be found on a number of other forums.
Posts: 1,333
|
Once again, I respectfully disagree and point out that arguing semantics is a poor tactic to choose, in that I can do it too.
Quote:
Quote:
I will not argue that the poll was valid. It is not. It is a simple illustration of a point to be taken at face value. But I can guarantee you that the majority, and thus consensus, of shooters, FFL's and law enforcement personnel is that using reloads in a self defense firearm is not a wise thing to do. Whether it does or does not effect a court case is debatable without any cases to examine but it does not change the "consensus". |
||
April 26, 2010, 11:42 AM | #53 | |
Registration in progress
Join Date: November 1, 2008
Location: I can be found on a number of other forums.
Posts: 1,333
|
Quote:
|
|
April 26, 2010, 11:59 AM | #54 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 8, 2007
Posts: 2,001
|
Now that everybody but SwampYankee realizes that he has misused the word "consensus", let's focus on one thing:
After debating this for decades, there STILL isn't a real example of this actually happening. So, the risk must be quite small, given that there ARE people using handloads for SD, and were probably many more before this debate went viral. So, what we are worried about is apparently PURELY speculation. MIGHT it happen? Well, it clearly isn't impossible. But, I think a much more realistic thought process is to ask: what am I gaining and what am I loosing by using handloads. If you have GOOD REASON to have great faith in the RELIABILITY of your handloads in YOUR gun, then I think you might not be wrong to choose to use them. But, if you are thinking that you are going to somehow make the handloaded bullets have a more lethal effect than premium SD factory ammo, then I think you are deluding yourself. I certainly would NOT recommend that a guy with a CCW permit start carrying his handloads as soon as he starts reloading. And, I would hope that anybody who relies on handloads for SD assembles those loads with the same type of skill, care and quality control that one should use when preparing to face dangerous game. And, that he also tests them carefully until he has reason to believe that they are 100% reliable. SL1 |
April 26, 2010, 12:01 PM | #55 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 27, 2010
Location: Norfolk, VA
Posts: 2,905
|
Never mind - my response was too snarky, considering I don't have a dog in this fight.
Last edited by ScottRiqui; April 26, 2010 at 12:11 PM. |
April 26, 2010, 12:57 PM | #56 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 16, 2008
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 11,061
|
This is from the Wyoming's Attorney General's office, DCI in response to my asking about this subject:
Quote:
I've read the court case by the well know writer who post here on this subject. It was a completely differant matter then a straight SD situation. Lawyers will reach for what ever will muddy the water, Be it reloads, factory HPs super duper SD ammo, or what ever. You're gonna have to take you chances regardless of what ammo you use. Unless you live in a state like Wyoming that protects you from Civil Suits in SD cases. As far a criminal cases, its a ligit situation or it isnt. Ammo has nothing to do with it. Thank about it, how many states tell you what ammo you must use in you CC weapon. Some states do bar certain ammo I agree, NJs no HPs come to mind. The problem I see, is are you worried about protecting your self, or getting sued. Will you hesitate because of "if I shoot, will I get into trouble because of my ammo" That [color=#FF0000]█[/color][color=#FF0000]█[/color][color=#FF0000]█[/color][color=#FF0000]█[/color][color=#FF0000]█[/color] will get you killed, or worse you love ones killed. So its my opinion that one should use what ammo that eliminates that WORRY. Like any type of shooting, its 95% mental. The less crap you are worring about, the better you are gonna do. I've done CSI work, I've been in court on many shooting cases in my 20 years in LE. What really counts is proving you were in fear of your life, not what ammo you used. Mainly carry what makes you feel comfortable, eliminate what ever worry you can so you can be of a better mind set if the situation arises. But hey, it gives us something to discuss when its too cold and windy to go out to out and shoot.
__________________
Kraig Stuart CPT USAR Ret USAMU Sniper School Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071 |
|
April 26, 2010, 01:09 PM | #57 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 20, 2007
Location: S.E. Minnesota
Posts: 4,720
|
Quote:
(Personally, I lean towards the "handloads are OK" side, but I'm still on the fence. Either way, it needs to be a personal informed decision and I think the debate is way overblown.) Quote:
__________________
"Everything they do is so dramatic and flamboyant. It just makes me want to set myself on fire!" —Lucille Bluth |
||
April 26, 2010, 01:21 PM | #58 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 16, 2008
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 11,061
|
Quote:
One needs to study his/her state laws regarding self defence. You know if you are scared you or your loved ones are going to be killed in injured. The situation will determine you need to use deadly force to prevent you from being injured. One can not give advise because all situations are differant. Many states have NO REQUIREMENT TO RETEAT. Thats fine, IN YOUR HOME, but is it in public???? The situation will tell. The only way to gurantee you wont have any problems in courts is to do nothing. If that works for a person, then ammo dosn't come into play.
__________________
Kraig Stuart CPT USAR Ret USAMU Sniper School Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071 |
|
April 26, 2010, 01:31 PM | #59 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 24, 2007
Location: Rochester, MN
Posts: 347
|
Quote:
|
|
April 26, 2010, 01:52 PM | #60 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 27, 2007
Posts: 5,261
|
Why use reloads?
Factory ammo is excellent stuff. I can't ever remember having a misfire with new factory ammo. My reloads are for rock busting, target shooting, plinking. But I will spend extra for factory rounds when it comes to self defense. |
April 26, 2010, 02:07 PM | #61 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 20, 2007
Location: S.E. Minnesota
Posts: 4,720
|
Quote:
__________________ "Because he can." |
|
April 26, 2010, 02:08 PM | #62 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 24, 2007
Location: Rochester, MN
Posts: 347
|
Quote:
|
|
April 26, 2010, 02:13 PM | #63 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 24, 2007
Location: Rochester, MN
Posts: 347
|
Oops bob:
I see you posted the answer! [QUOTE][Factory ammo is excellent stuff. I can't ever remember having a misfire with new factory ammo./QUOTE] Well I have seen more than once wher factory ammo has failed! Factories make mistake too, |
April 26, 2010, 02:39 PM | #64 |
Junior member
Join Date: March 31, 2010
Posts: 151
|
DIE THREAD DIE! Yeah factory ammo fails and
the moon is populated by UFOs.
Having fired 10s of thousands of rounds of 22LR, 38 Special, 45 ACP, 223, 7.62 and 30-06 (thank you USAF and taxpayers) I have NEVER had a round fail EXCEPT due to a defect in the gun. Today's factory ammo for almost any SD caliber is superior for shooting people, and that's the EOS. I assume nobody reads the road tests conducted by reputable writers in those gun publications that we all know are on the take.:barf: My Chief's Special carries Hornady 38 Special 125 gr XTP® (no silly +P in a snubbie) and my 1911 has good old 230 gr fmjs that killed 10s of thousands of our enemies in at least four wars. Neither have any built in bias as both are and have been used by law enforcement and the military. Avoidance is the best plan followed by plan B aka ONE witness. |
April 26, 2010, 02:49 PM | #65 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 20, 2007
Location: S.E. Minnesota
Posts: 4,720
|
Quote:
__________________
"Everything they do is so dramatic and flamboyant. It just makes me want to set myself on fire!" —Lucille Bluth |
|
April 26, 2010, 03:53 PM | #66 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 24, 2007
Location: Rochester, MN
Posts: 347
|
Brandy
The world is flat!! I wonder if that was ever said? Now we are saying trust ours lives on factories and there workers. Hear that, all Toyota drivers. I've seen it first hand also where factory ammo has failed. Shot shells, slugs, .22s and 1 .44 mag shell |
April 26, 2010, 04:26 PM | #67 |
Junior member
Join Date: April 3, 2010
Posts: 1,231
|
Factory ammo comes with factory statistics and documentation. Once again, if you are involved in a shooting, if you follow proper procedure, criminal charges are less likely the issue. You will be sued in the civil court however. How you engage in your defense will depend on many factors. Those that drink and conceal carry are at a higher risk of a large settlement in the civil court action and place themselves at jeopardy as well in the criminal courts.
Those that use their own reloads or worse, someone else's reloads place themselves at a higher jeopardy in defending themselves both in the criminal and civil court systems. It is not about whether a factory load or a reload will stop a BG. It is all about the lawyer you will be facing. One of his tactics will be to create as large a defense expendiature on your part so that you will be forced to settle, period. That strategy saves his own client money as well. The CCW instructor say flat out, it will add $100,000 to defend your case with hand loads and increases the risk of losing. That is the major reason why hand loads are problematic in home defense and ccw. Likewise, don't alter your trigger on your ccw gun as well. That could easily get you criminal charges thrown at you for carrying a hair trigger gun, or what they will call a hair trigger and that you were planning to act like a gunslinger. Impressions trump facts in court cases. If you want to use reload for home defense or CCW, go ahead, I just hope you don't mind selling your house and your kid's houses to pay for your defense fund in doing so. |
April 26, 2010, 08:16 PM | #68 | |
Member
Join Date: December 7, 2009
Location: Northeast FLA
Posts: 44
|
Quote:
|
|
April 26, 2010, 08:22 PM | #69 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 24, 2007
Location: Rochester, MN
Posts: 347
|
Quote:
All that I want to really know is why people tell others not to use reloads in SD be cause of liability when they have no proof what so ever? Kind of like telling some one no to drive on Fridays. |
|
April 26, 2010, 08:35 PM | #70 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 24, 2007
Location: Rochester, MN
Posts: 347
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
April 26, 2010, 09:44 PM | #71 |
Junior member
Join Date: April 3, 2010
Posts: 1,231
|
Dear Magnum Mike, I did a google search to see if I could find a site with stats on civil cases coming from self defense shooting. Haven't come across such a place yet.
My source is already referenced, the CCW instructor from his experience and expertise as a firearms expert stated bluntly, that his goal was to produce students from his course that would not have any criminal charges in the event of a self defense shooting and to reduce the chance of civil liability significantly. The criminial case is usually the easier of the two to defend. His experience is that even if no charges come in a criminal setting, you should expect a civil lawsuit to follow in almost all cases either from the person shot, or his estate if he doesn't survive. If you need more data than an expert firearms witness with many years of experience, then I guess I can't really help you at this time. If you ever use reloads and are involved in a shooting, you should reasonably expect an additional $100,000 to defend that case IF you are sued for that shooting in a civil court due to the extended experts on both sides, the depositions, additional court and lawyer time, etc. With so many reliable self defense loads on the market, saving a few dollars could cost a lot more IF you are ever sued. So, if you want to use reloads go ahead, but that is my understanding on why it is not prudent to do so with self defense ammunition, it is not a matter of reliability of any shell. It is all about minimizing liability risk. If you want to live dangerously, it is a free country, go for it. Use all the reloads you want in your ccw. I certainly would not tell you not to. For myself, I will keep the wise recommendations of my CCW instructor and not go anywhere near reloads for my CCW guns. |
April 26, 2010, 09:46 PM | #72 |
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2010
Location: South West Riverside County California
Posts: 2,763
|
So much to do about nothing. No one has ever been convicted to shooting another person with a reload. My point above about a "careful reloader" is that such an individual will have complete documentation as to his load - i.e. date it was loaded, type of powder, amount of powder, brand of case and bullet and possibly chronograph results. That information is the same type of information used by the "expert" witness in a trail involving factory ammunition. Again, I would rather represent a careful reloader using a hard cast bullet with full documentation than a dude with the latest and greatest frag/hollowpoint round which would cause much more damage. The "expert" in the dog case cited above was refering to a civil trial which, as I always mention, is the real "danger" as opposed to a criminal trail. Expert witness testimony in any case, civil or criminal, is expensive. Few of us have the resources to either prosecute or defend a case involving a shooting (or car accident for that matter) so the "dog case expert's" point is of no real value. That is why having homewoners' insurance is so important. The insurance company pays the experts. Having represented people in both civil and criminal matters involving firearms I can say for sure that shooting a reload is not an issue if you document what you do. A good shoot is a good shoot.
|
April 26, 2010, 10:15 PM | #73 |
Junior member
Join Date: April 3, 2010
Posts: 1,231
|
Dear jmortimer, the dog case expert that you referred to spoke that it cost $235,000 to defend that dog case of an example of how expensive it is to defend against this sort of litigation. Fortunately as you state, it was covered by his home owners policy. However, most policies will quickly exceed the liability coverage which again is one of the goals of the adversarial lawyer. The more you have to spend on different issues, the less attention to the essential parts of the case.
I can only go by "hearsay" evidence of how much more it would cost in that sort of case looking at the aspects of your own home reloading station. He listed some pretty compelling evidence of how the expert would have to go and examine your equipment, observe your technique with I believe one hundred or two hundred shells that you produce in front of the expert, or experts, and then go test fire all of those rounds, then do a deposition or depositions under oath with stenographer, lawyers on both sides present. If you believe that is the going to be the same expense as a firearms witness representing Buffalo Bore, Remington or any of the other popular self defense ammo providers, with prepared information from the factory looking at their own statistics already collated in advance, then that is fine, but it just makes common sense to me that hours of evaluation and testing and observing by at least two if not more firearms and ballistics experts on both sides of the table, with the additional court time , the additional deposition time and of course the additional lawyer time is going to add up in a much greater fashion than a deposition with prepared evidence from the factory on the specific ammo in question. Perhaps they really will be the same. Nevertheless, it just seems to me to be an additional liability that should be avoided by any prudent person. It puzzles me why any one even disputes the issue and doesn't just take it at face value that there is an additional liability attached with reloads. |
April 26, 2010, 10:48 PM | #74 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 24, 2007
Location: Rochester, MN
Posts: 347
|
Quote:
|
|
April 26, 2010, 10:58 PM | #75 |
Moderator in Memoriam
Join Date: August 28, 1999
Location: North Texas
Posts: 4,123
|
Has everyone had their say?
Okay - - If everyone's had their say, fine. I'm closing the thread. If not, too bad. I'm still closing the thread. This topic was old the first twenty times it was beaten to death.
Friends, when you beat this pore ole dead caballo, only one of two things will happen. One, you'll reinforce the stance of those in agreement with you. THEY don't need it, so what do you accomplish? Or, two, you will encounter those who will never, ever, EVER, agree with you, so what do you accomplish? Three-plus pages are way more than enough. Hit this topic again, say, sometime after April of 2011, but not until then. CLOSED |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|