View Single Post
Old September 14, 2012, 10:56 AM   #57
Marquezj16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2011
Posts: 2,088
From earlier post
Quote:
I think if your load was developed to perform as the manufactured ammo (published load, chronographed and tested side by side on gel medium) your lawyer could argue that your ammo is no more deadlier than the manufacturer ammo.
Quote:
I actually agree with this earlier statement of yours earlier statement:

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmortimer
I suppose the best practice would be to reload as close as possible to the uber-factory load that you carry and practice with the reload.

Quote:
Quote:
1) How will the reloading manual tell the jury what was actually loaded into the cartridge? Answer: it won't. It will only tell the jury what was recommended. For actual loading information, you'll have to turn to the reloader himself. There's a challenge to "suffient" right there.
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.
Today 01:42 AM
1 -the expert testifies to the validity of the load as printed in the book after testing it in a lab (read quotes above about loading as close as possible to factory spec).
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.
Marquezj16 is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.02426 seconds with 8 queries