The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: The Semi-automatic Forum

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old March 14, 2012, 02:45 AM   #101
arentol
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 11, 2011
Posts: 230
All this talk about Mas Ayoob making an incorrect cite is irrelevant you know. Even if he had gotten the citation entirely correct it would merely support Jammer Six's more relevant point that Mas cites cases that don't really mean what he claims them to mean.

For reference, Mas's article on this specific case:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m.../ai_n26806104/

Mas claimed that State vs Bias was an example of "Cases Where Handloads Caused Problems in Court". He is somewhat right, but it is not really relevant.

For one thing the case in question wasn't a case of Self Defense, it was someone claiming they tried to stop a suicide attempt and the person shot themselves anyway. That is not even close to the same thing and pretty much makes it irrelevant to a discussion of hand loads used in self defense. Self defense is an affirmative defense where you admit you fired the gun at the other person and are fully responsible for that action, but that you were justified in doing so for some legal reason, which is very different from this case.

Moving on to this case in particular, the ONLY way in which handloads caused problems in court was if he wouldn't have been indicted if he hadn't handloaded. If he would have been indicted anyway (it seems incredibly likely he would have) then the handloads no longer become relevant as all testimony about them ended up being a wash in all 4 trials. Also if we switch thing around and imagine what would have happened if Bias only had commercial loads in his house, then if it happened as he said then there would have been GSR on her, but that would not prove him guilty or innocent, and if he was guilty then the lack of GSR would have got him convicted of Murder in the first trial rather than Reckless Manslaughter in the fourth trial.

As a matter of fact from Bias's perspective there is an overall wash here. Handloading very slightly, but irrelevantly, increased his chance of being indicted, had no affect on all subsequent trials if he was innocent, and actually helped him a great deal if he was indeed guilty by giving him an excuse for the lack of GSR.

So this does not show handloading causing problems in court for the person loading them. It made the case a little more complex, but given that Bias was found guilty it seems very likely that his handloading actually lightened his sentence and was a net benefit for him.

I have nothing against Mas Ayoob. He has contributed a lot of good things to the firearms community and firearms issues. But I see Jammer Six's point being made in this case.

The reality is people like to come to conclusions and then try to make other facts support those conclusions, which I think is what has happened here. This happens all the time and it doesn't mean the person is bad or stupid, or anything like that. Indeed, such people are often admirable and worthy of praise for what they try to accomplish. It is just that while the persons conclusion may be correct, or at least mostly valid, that doesn't mean they are supportable.

Is it a good idea to handload defensive ammo? Honestly probably not. There are a host of minor issues that could cause in a courtroom or otherwise, and it just isn't worth it when you can purchase ammo for defensive use and then shoot handloads at all other times to save money. But can I support that with a legal citation? Like Mas, I can not, and so I don't try to make the point or push the issue. Also, even if I did have a case to support it I would not make the argument without thoroughly researching cases that support other conclusions. I am sure Bias was far from the only case involving handload ammo, and that in some of those other ones the handloading was deemed entirely irrelevant to the case.
arentol is offline  
Old March 14, 2012, 04:08 AM   #102
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
arentol, while the situation in particular was not the same, the issue was the permissibility of defense expert witnesses being allowed (or not) to testify about the GSR results from tests of Bias's handloads.

How could this come up in a self-defense scenario? Let's say we have a he-said / he-said shooting. The shooter claims self-defense, and says the aggressor was charging him with a knife. He shot when the guy was very close; the shootee says, no, I was nowhere near that close, and I was not attacking him.

GSR shows less than expected for the range the shooter claims.

Prosecution witness says the GSR indicates that the shootee's story is the correct one.

Defense witness can't testify that the shooter's handloads burn cleaner, and produce less GSR, because rules of evidence won't allow testing of evidence that was manufactured by the defendant. Even though the witness might run multiple tests that show the defendant's loads produce that low GSR result at the range the defendant claims, the judge might never allow that into evidence.

So Bias doesn't bear directly on self-defense, but its implications for rules of evidence do have some bearing.
MLeake is offline  
Old March 14, 2012, 05:27 AM   #103
Jammer Six
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 827
Actually, the point I'm pushing is Ayoob's citations, and very little else.

And I'm in a win-win position on that point.

If I'm wrong about what I tracked down (probable, at this point) this entire conversation is going to show that it's always better to answer a request for citations as promptly and completely as you're able.

Regardless of who the request comes from. Regardless of who you are. Regardless of who people say you are. Regardless of who you think you are.

If Ayoob's citations are accurate, as soon as I read them properly and I'm able to track them down, I'm sure that fact alone will make this point, that answering a request from an insignificant net-ninja in an insignificant thread on an insignificant forum on the internet can have great effect.

I'm planning a trip to the U.W. Law Library. (Courtesy of the Bill Gates Foundation. Very shiny new building.) I'll try to find all of the references Ayoob made. My plan is to find a librarian, wave my list of references over my head, fall to my knees and start begging. That method has brought me great success in the past.

What I want is to read, what all of us want who have been requesting citations, is to read the documents themselves, and decide, for ourselves, whether carrying reloads for self defense is a good idea.

And to get back on point, carrying reloads is too important an issue to do anything but follow the leads as far as they will go, read the transcripts, think it over and then decide.

Apparently, my research is not finished-- I haven't been able to read any documentation on a case in which reloaded ammunition was an issue in court in a self defense shooting.

Therefore, my conclusion has been un-made.
__________________
"Huh?" --Jammer Six, 1998
Jammer Six is offline  
Old March 14, 2012, 06:18 AM   #104
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
Jammer Six, if you can find any court case where analysis of GSR from factory loads has been used in evidence (and I'm pretty sure you can), then you can infer that the ability to introduce defense expert witness testimony on GSR might be important.

Handloads used in a clear-cut, black and white, observed by multiple witnesses or caught on security camera shooting aren't going to be questioned.

It's the grey area, conflicting testimony and uncertain evidence instances where this could become critical.

I can't think of a case where I've been kicked in the groin by an NFL punter; I can't think of a case where anybody has been kicked in the groin by an NFL punter. I am pretty sure we'd all infer that such would not be fun.
MLeake is offline  
Old March 14, 2012, 06:42 AM   #105
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 5,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by arentol
. . . .Mas claimed that State vs Bias was an example of "Cases Where Handloads Caused Problems in Court". He is somewhat right, but it is not really relevant.

For one thing the case in question wasn't a case of Self Defense, it was someone claiming they tried to stop a suicide attempt and the person shot themselves anyway. That is not even close to the same thing and pretty much makes it irrelevant to a discussion of hand loads used in self defense. Self defense is an affirmative defense where you admit you fired the gun at the other person and are fully responsible for that action, but that you were justified in doing so for some legal reason, which is very different from this case.
The irrelevant point is that the Bias case is about suicide. The Rules of Evidence remain the same whether the case is Murder, Self-Defense, Breach of Contract or Alienation of Affection. The standards for the admissibility of the GSR residue which might have been so helpful remain the same, regardless of the nature of the case. In most states, SD is an affirmative defense, but not all. That doesn't change the rules of evidence, either.

Quote:
Originally Posted by arentol
. . . .Moving on to this case in particular, the ONLY way in which handloads caused problems in court was if he wouldn't have been indicted if he hadn't handloaded. If he would have been indicted anyway (it seems incredibly likely he would have) then the handloads no longer become relevant as all testimony about them ended up being a wash in all 4 trials. . . . .
No, that's not right. The problem (IIRC) was that the crime lab tested a sample that differed significantly from Bias' handload. The GSR evidence from his handloads was (unsurprisingly) substantially different from the factory load GSR evidence. And distance from barrel to target was a significant factor.

Even if the result after 4 trials is the same after it would have been after 1, had the GSR residue been admissible, Daniel Bias still had to go through 4 trials, and pay boatloads of legal fees. Besides, the GSR evidence on the handloads was was inadmissible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by arentol
. . . .As a matter of fact from Bias's perspective there is an overall wash here. Handloading very slightly, but irrelevantly, increased his chance of being indicted, had no affect on all subsequent trials if he was innocent, and actually helped him a great deal if he was indeed guilty by giving him an excuse for the lack of GSR.

So this does not show handloading causing problems in court for the person loading them. It made the case a little more complex, but given that Bias was found guilty it seems very likely that his handloading actually lightened his sentence and was a net benefit for him.
This case has been beaten to death in a thread called "An Archive on Reloads and Self-Defense." It might prove helpful to spend some time reading those threads. The Bias case, while not an SD case, is a very good example of the rules of evidence at play, and certainly do show how using handloads can cause problems in court. The truth is that there simply are not many reported decisions in which handloads became an issue. Bias is the one (or one of few) cases on point, and GSR residue from handloads was held inadmissible in it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jammer Six
. . . .I'm planning a trip to the U.W. Law Library. (Courtesy of the Bill Gates Foundation. Very shiny new building.) I'll try to find all of the references Ayoob made. My plan is to find a librarian, wave my list of references over my head, fall to my knees and start begging. That method has brought me great success in the past.

What I want is to read, what all of us want who have been requesting citations, is to read the documents themselves, and decide, for ourselves, whether carrying reloads for self defense is a good idea.

And to get back on point, carrying reloads is too important an issue to do anything but follow the leads as far as they will go, read the transcripts, think it over and then decide.

Apparently, my research is not finished-- I haven't been able to read any documentation on a case in which reloaded ammunition was an issue in court in a self defense shooting.

Therefore, my conclusion has been un-made.
Jammer Six, as I noted above, there's a whole Archive on Reloads and Self-Defense. It's down in Law & Civil Rights, and it's stickied at the top. You might start there. These issues have been hashed and re-hashed, and I think you'll find citations to many of the relevant cases.
__________________
A gunfight is not the time to learn new skills.

If you ever have a real need for more than a couple of magazines, your problem is not a shortage of magazines. It's a shortage of people on your side of the argument. -- Art Eatman
Spats McGee is offline  
Old March 14, 2012, 08:41 AM   #106
Jammer Six
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 827
Thank you, McGee, I never frequent that forum, and I never would have looked there. I don't do well in political discussions on gun boards.

Obviously...
__________________
"Huh?" --Jammer Six, 1998
Jammer Six is offline  
Old March 14, 2012, 09:01 AM   #107
Noreaster
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 30, 2011
Location: New England
Posts: 1,368
Tough debate, everyone has good points. I went through this with my HD firearm and chose the 9mm for allot reasons. My Dept. just went with 40S&W, but everyone around us is going to 45acp. I like the 40S&W, it's a good round. The 45acp is excellent but expensive to shoot and sometimes the grip is a tad large. Paul Howe recently commented on Dept.s going to 45acp and the officers not being able to shoot them well when they show up for his courses. Good luck with your purchase.

Quick note on reloads. The only case I know of is a Hampton NH officer that used reloads for duty and it came up hard on him during the civil case, (he blew the suspect's jaw off during a confrontation.) The tort lawyer had a field day with him about using more deadly ammo that he had to whip up in his basement.
Noreaster is offline  
Old March 14, 2012, 09:47 AM   #108
OsOk-308
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 8, 2010
Location: Colorado
Posts: 273
Quote:
To correct a forum post, DPS(Texas Dept of Public Safety) Texas Rangers are now issued SIG P226R .357sig pistols but by SOP can carry nearly any pistol or sidearm they choose on duty.

In the hit CBS TV series; Walker Texas Ranger, actor Chuck Norris(who is also a real sworn LE officer/reserve) packed a few sidearms. A stainless N frame .44magnum, a Taurus 9x19mm, a custom 3rd gen S&W pistol(which I think was either a .40 or 9x19mm).
See www.IMFdb.org .
ClydeFrog
Sorry about the misquote, I was watching some special on them a while back, about Texas Rangers using 1911's designed specifically by Colt. But honestly it was probably a pretty old rerun.

Honestly, most of the mainstream calibers will do you just fine.
OsOk-308 is offline  
Old March 14, 2012, 10:16 AM   #109
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 5,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noreaster
. . . .Quick note on reloads. The only case I know of is a Hampton NH officer that used reloads for duty and it came up hard on him during the civil case, (he blew the suspect's jaw off during a confrontation.) The tort lawyer had a field day with him about using more deadly ammo that he had to whip up in his basement.
Noreaster, if you can give me some extra information on this, I'd love to have it. The Archive in L&CR has lots of stuff, but if this one has been overlooked, I'd like to find it for inclusion.

Edited to add: Oh, and going back to the OP. Make mine a .45, please. The .40 is (IMO) certainly an adequate round, and I would not feel undergunned if it is what I had, but I prefer .45. I like the way it shoots, and I like 1911s.
__________________
A gunfight is not the time to learn new skills.

If you ever have a real need for more than a couple of magazines, your problem is not a shortage of magazines. It's a shortage of people on your side of the argument. -- Art Eatman

Last edited by Spats McGee; March 14, 2012 at 10:23 AM.
Spats McGee is offline  
Old March 14, 2012, 02:36 PM   #110
Noreaster
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 30, 2011
Location: New England
Posts: 1,368
Mcgee I don't have anymore info on the Hampton incident. One of my guys worked there twenty years ago. I believe Ayoob wrote an article about it, or referenced it in one of his articles. Maybe you could find it through him. If I remember correctly the Officer used a different caliber handgun from what was issued and he reloaded his own rounds.

I just found this; http://www.gunatics.com/forums/gener...mas-ayoob.html
Noreaster is offline  
Old March 14, 2012, 03:13 PM   #111
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 5,202
Thanks, Noreaster. When I get a little free time later today, I'll root around and see if I can dig up some information on that NH case, as well as any others in the linked thread that I didn't know about before. I think that all of the other cases in that thread are known to me, but I'll review the thread, just to be sure.
__________________
A gunfight is not the time to learn new skills.

If you ever have a real need for more than a couple of magazines, your problem is not a shortage of magazines. It's a shortage of people on your side of the argument. -- Art Eatman
Spats McGee is offline  
Old March 14, 2012, 03:52 PM   #112
C0untZer0
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 21, 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 4,555
The power of the phrase "knock down power"

It's a concept that's firmly embedded itself in the psyche of people and it will probably live forever.
C0untZer0 is offline  
Old March 14, 2012, 11:56 PM   #113
TunnelRat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 4,667
We're taking about handloads now?

Man, I'm out of it for a bit and everyone gets delusions of grandeur .

Seriously though, use what you like best. The 45 has been killing people longer, but the 40 has been working hard to kill people too. I personally wouldn't want to be shot with either. Come to think of it, I'm not sure I would really care which you shot me with. I'd probably be pretty irate either way.
__________________
Guns don't kill people. Apes with guns kill people! - Robin Williams
TunnelRat is offline  
Old March 15, 2012, 12:58 AM   #114
arentol
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 11, 2011
Posts: 230
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mleake
arentol, while the situation in particular was not the same, the issue was the permissibility of defense expert witnesses being allowed (or not) to testify about the GSR results from tests of Bias's handloads.

How could this come up in a self-defense scenario? Let's say we have a he-said / he-said shooting. The shooter claims self-defense, and says the aggressor was charging him with a knife. He shot when the guy was very close; the shootee says, no, I was nowhere near that close, and I was not attacking him.

GSR shows less than expected for the range the shooter claims.

Prosecution witness says the GSR indicates that the shootee's story is the correct one.

Defense witness can't testify that the shooter's handloads burn cleaner, and produce less GSR, because rules of evidence won't allow testing of evidence that was manufactured by the defendant. Even though the witness might run multiple tests that show the defendant's loads produce that low GSR result at the range the defendant claims, the judge might never allow that into evidence.
Putting aside that the defense WAS allowed to testify about the handloads, making your entire argument invalid, even that is unnecessary because your example defeats itself....

If the defense can not test the handloads then the prosecution can not either. Can't have that both ways. If neither side can test them then neither can make any testimony regarding the GSR except entirely factual ones like: No GSR was found, or 10 particles were found, or 100 per square inch were found. That is all they can do, and no distance can be claimed from any of that information because they can not test the ammo to provide the evidence they need to make such a claim. So nobody can claim that less was found than expected for the range the shooter claims. At that point the GSR only helps the prosecution if there is none found, and the GSR only helps the defendant if so much is found that the shooting had to be within a few inches. Anything else and there is just too little information to say who is telling the truth.

The main lesson learned from the example is that if you are going to handload for defense keep logs of what you make and when you make it, and keep clearly marked extras that were made alongside and the same as your defensive loads for as long as you carry those defensive loads so you have potential exemplar evidence if you need it.
arentol is offline  
Old March 15, 2012, 02:11 AM   #115
arentol
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 11, 2011
Posts: 230
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spats McGee
The irrelevant point is that the Bias case is about suicide. The Rules of Evidence remain the same whether the case is Murder, Self-Defense, Breach of Contract or Alienation of Affection. The standards for the admissibility of the GSR residue which might have been so helpful remain the same, regardless of the nature of the case. In most states, SD is an affirmative defense, but not all. That doesn't change the rules of evidence, either.
As I point out above, if the prosecution can test exemplar rounds then so can the defense, if not then neither can. Yes there is a chance you won't be able to introduce evidence about GSR that might help exonerate you, but that chance is very small. The thing is that if it was a good shoot, a close shoot, and you used full-power rounds, not near-squibs like BIAS, then there will be GSR, and factual information about that GSR will be allowed. Worst case scenario the GSR has no impact, best case it proves your case even if your handloads are not allowed as evidence. If it was a good shoot and you claim it was from somewhat far away, then the GSR is irrelevant anyway. If it was a bad shoot and you lie, then too bad.

Quote:
No, that's not right. The problem (IIRC) was that the crime lab tested a sample that differed significantly from Bias' handload. The GSR evidence from his handloads was (unsurprisingly) substantially different from the factory load GSR evidence. And distance from barrel to target was a significant factor.
Read the article again. They did not test FACTORY LOADS, they tested the WRONG hand loads. Besides, the bad tests were only used in the GRAND JURY to gain the indictment. If that evidence actually made its way into the real trial then Bias's lawyers failed miserably. Getting that disallowed would be trivial after Mas pointed out to the defense that the wrong ammo had been tested by the prosecution. Also if that was allowed then Mas's test would have to be allowed, which you indicate below they were not.

Quote:
Even if the result after 4 trials is the same after it would have been after 1, had the GSR residue been admissible, Daniel Bias still had to go through 4 trials, and pay boatloads of legal fees. Besides, the GSR evidence on the handloads was was inadmissible.
In the article I read the prosecution was using handloads as admissible evidence in the Grand Jury, and there was no mention either way of that evidence being used in the trial at all. The key point though is what would have happened if he HAD used only factory loads... If he had used factory loads, and been telling the truth, then he MIGHT have gotten off after the first trial, or it might have been a hung jury anyway. But full strength handloads would have been just as useful because they would have left a lot of GSR like factory loads will. It was only the super-light loads that were in the gun that messed him up (again, only if he was telling the truth). Lesson learned, only make full strength handloads so you leave GSR on a close shoot.
However, on the other hand, he was found guilty. So it is actually quite likely he did shoot her accidentally on purpose, and in that case if he had been using factory loads there would still have been no GSR found on her (because of how far away he was) and so he would likely have been found guilty after the first trial since he would have clearly been lying about her shooting herself. If he had only heavy handloads that would also be the case. So his light handloads actually kept him out of prison for many years, through three failed prosecution attempts before he was finally found guilty on the fourth. He shot her, and handloading kept him out of jail, hand loads were incredibly helpful to him, not harmful.

Quote:
This case has been beaten to death in a thread called "An Archive on Reloads and Self-Defense." It might prove helpful to spend some time reading those threads. The Bias case, while not an SD case, is a very good example of the rules of evidence at play, and certainly do show how using handloads can cause problems in court. The truth is that there simply are not many reported decisions in which handloads became an issue. Bias is the one (or one of few) cases on point, and GSR residue from handloads was held inadmissible in it.
I still don't see how the handloads caused problems for the defendant in court even if GSR wasn't allowed in court. In that case everything I said above about what would have happened with factory ammo remains true and he would have been found guilty in the first trial. The guys light handloads actually kept him out of prison for years on end after he shot the victim. Also all that is irrelevant to a self defense case where you don't lie about what happened (because if you claim correctly a close shoot there will be lots of GSR and you likely won't be prosecuted or that aspect of the situation will then be irrelevant to why you are prosecuted, and if you claim a distant shoot, then their won't be any GSR expected anyway).

Just because something is the best example available of something else doesn't inherently make it a GOOD example of that other thing. In this case it is a mediocre example at best, and more importantly the fact that it is the only example actually shows how little evidence there is to support the idea this example is supposed to support.

Again, I do not advocate carrying handloads for self defense. I honestly see no reason to do so in the first place. I even believe it might cause issues in court if a really unusual SD situation comes up. However, what I don't believe is that Mas or anyone else has yet provided a properly supported argument to this effect. I also believe that is the case with many supposed experts in various subjects. They end up presenting their opinions as fact because it is backed by experience. But experience does not create fact, only fact does. They will fail to test things because they experienced something similar, but not identical, before, and they assume they can just modify the results from that prior experience to apply them to the current one. If you are just messing around that is fine, but in a court of law that is a very bad thing. Bias is a perfect example of this. Someone tested the GSR (from the wrong handload) and then applied it to the case without considering any other factors like how the body was handled or how much blood comes from a head wound and how that might wash the GSR away. They relied on prior experience, not the facts of this actual case.
arentol is offline  
Old March 15, 2012, 08:20 AM   #116
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 5,202
I really don't want to derail this thread any longer, so I'll simply reiterate that there's a whole archive of threads on using handloads in SD down in Law & Civil Rights. Most of your arguments have been addressed in considerable detail there.
__________________
A gunfight is not the time to learn new skills.

If you ever have a real need for more than a couple of magazines, your problem is not a shortage of magazines. It's a shortage of people on your side of the argument. -- Art Eatman
Spats McGee is offline  
Old March 15, 2012, 09:08 AM   #117
45Kimber
Member
 
Join Date: March 14, 2012
Location: Italy
Posts: 29
45 or 40 Self Defend

Hello to everybody,
just my opinion of Italian LEO, caliber is related to the capacity of undercover gun, the ability in controlling recoil and hitting the target under "gunfight adrenaline".
Then you can preferer the ancient school "one shot one drop" or modern school "spray and pray".
U.S. FBI statistically registred in a gunfight 3 shot at 7 meters in less of a minute.
Last but not least the cost of admunition for practice firing under stress.
So, I repeat it's my opinion, the problem consist in placing bullet in vital organs in few seconds independentement by caliber.
For duty carry, open or concealed I had only a choose: Beretta 92 or M9 in 9 Luger FMJ, with machine pistol Beretta M 12 in 9 Luger FMJ, a cheap caliber for my Agency's budget in training LEO and sufficient enough to destroy mob.
When off duty my EDC is Kimber Compact 45 ACP: 8 shot, easy to conceal and more than sufficient for self defence: bulleyes never fail.
If off duty I had to walk in "ghetto streets" I carry my Glock 26 in 9 x21 (IMI) with a spare.
I think 40 too snappy and similar in performance to 9 x 21 in FMJ version: the only version allowed in Italy
Just my 2 cent, as U.S. people like to say!
45Kimber is offline  
Old March 16, 2012, 01:25 PM   #118
johnwilliamson062
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 6,845
Jeez this went pretty far off topic at one point without being closed or edited.

I mentioned 50 rounds per week as I believe that is the minimum average you should shoot if you are carrying a gun and then in specific carry oriented drills, preferably with your carry gun in correct caliber. At times I fail to meet that standard and at times I easily surpass it.

I shoot Glocks with conversion barrels, so I have experience with them in 9mm and 40 on the exact same gun. I absolutely can not shoot the guns as well with a 40 in as with a 9mm in. The subcompact has the biggest difference, but there is a difference for the other sizes also.

Reloading 9mm isn't worth it if you value your labor at half of minimum wage.


If I am in a shooting the type of load I am using is the least of my worries, even after the fact. First the police/prosecutor has to ID they are handloads and my guess is most of the time they won't, and second they have to overlook all the trigger jobs, forward serrations, grip texturing, and the custom engraved skulls all over the gun.
JK, mine is stock except the barrel switch.
__________________
$0 of an NRA membership goes to legislative action or court battles. Not a dime. Only money contributed to the NRA-ILA or NRA-PVF. You could just donate to the Second Amendment Foundation
First Shotgun Thread First Rifle Thread First Pistol Thread
johnwilliamson062 is offline  
Old March 16, 2012, 08:20 PM   #119
Sarge
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 12, 2002
Location: MO
Posts: 4,911
As far as skill maintenance goes... run a few sets of double-taps from the holster, 3-4 round engagements from low ready and finish with some deliberate shooting at 50-75 feet. You can do this on about 30 rounds a week.

I am fortunate in that I can walk 200 yards to shoot, shoot anything I want any way I want, etc. If I had to drive & pay range fees fees, I would certainly shoot less often, perhaps once-twice a month, and I'd burn more ammo in a single session.

I carry both subject calibers, on and off duty. While I will always choose the larger bore, I doubt there's a substantial difference in their effectiveness.
__________________
I'm inclined to think if a man hasn't gotten his point across in 4912 attempts, 4913 probably isn't going to do it.
Sarge is offline  
Old March 16, 2012, 09:47 PM   #120
Oysterboy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 3, 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 424
I feel that 9mm is adequate especially if you have loads that are high energy such as Corbon 9mm 90 or 100 grain +P. Go to +P+ and you really have some wicked rounds.

I plan to get a 40 to have experiences with. I have a Sigma 9 so I'll get a Sigma 40.
Oysterboy is offline  
Old March 17, 2012, 12:05 AM   #121
orthosophy
Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2012
Posts: 72
I carry a .357, so that means I have to go 9mm, right?

In all seriousness, I think 9mm got a bad rap when people had stats based of NATO ball ammo. That gave rise to the .40 after the 10mm was pronounced too much for some shooters.

when I have an auto, I actually carry a .45. I shoot better with it.
__________________
"It could probably be shown by facts and figures that there is no distinctly native American criminal class except Congress." -Mark Twain-
orthosophy is offline  
Old March 17, 2012, 03:59 AM   #122
Lee McNelly
Junior member
 
Join Date: June 9, 2011
Posts: 325
50 cal glock

really give a hurtin
Lee McNelly is offline  
Old March 17, 2012, 04:58 AM   #123
NWCP
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 24, 2006
Posts: 1,812
Most often I will be carrying my HK45C for concealed carry. I like th single stack compact .45 for ease of concealment and I'm comfortable shooting it. I'm also accurate with it and with shot placement being critical accuracy it paramount. I own all three calibers mentioned most frequently and find the .40S&W to be a bit snappy on recoil whether I'm shooting my full size, or compact USP. That makes quick follow up shots a bit harder to acquire. I enjoy shooting my high capacity USP 9mm and it is the cheaper of the group to practice with. I will carry it when I feel a need for a high capacity pistol and clothing permits. I also like a single stack 9mm for concealed carry as well. I shoot my Walther P5 well and it has proven to be very accurate and easy to conceal. Which ever pistol fits you well and you can shoot with consistency should be the one you go with. A .380 that works for you is better than nothing at all. The same could be said about a .2LR. I prefer to carry the .45ACP when practical. Good luck and enjoy.
NWCP is offline  
Old March 17, 2012, 05:17 AM   #124
NWCP
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 24, 2006
Posts: 1,812
As an aside there is a true one shot knockdown that will work every time. It involves the central nervous system. Sever the spine at the base of the skull, a direct head shot, or a spine shot above the arms. The central nervous system is a true quick disconnect system on the human body. A couple of well placed center of mass shots can incapacitate a bad guy, but the head, or upper spine will drop him like a box of rocks. Lights out, battle over. It is however hard to make such a shot under duress as I'm sure any of our on board LEOs, or military can attest to. Men have taken heart shots and lung shots and still managed to return fire until they bled out.
NWCP is offline  
Old March 17, 2012, 07:07 AM   #125
Jammer Six
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 827
I'll stay with center mass and slidelock.
__________________
"Huh?" --Jammer Six, 1998
Jammer Six is offline  
Closed Thread

Tags
conceal carry , handgun , self-defense

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:37 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.14330 seconds with 7 queries