Author Topic: Not using Reloads for home defense  (Read 13285 times)

smkymtn

  • Guest
Not using Reloads for home defense
« on: May 21, 2009, 02:31:20 PM »
 I will post the article when I find it. The summary of it is: You send somebody out your front door feet first, you could be sued by his family or a liberal DA could prosecute. Why would reloads hurt you, when they do the forensics it is different than factory load and can be used against you. I know I got pissed when I read it also, but the guy defends shooters and I want to say he is with the NRA or another gun association. And I also know in a SHTF scenario this will not matter!

 I will post it as soon as I find it again!

Offline product85

  • Survivor
  • ***
  • Posts: 130
  • Karma: 4
Re: Not using Reloads for home defense
« Reply #1 on: May 21, 2009, 02:46:07 PM »
Jack has made this point as well and i think he brings up a good point as to the possible extent of stupidity a DA could try to bring against you. I believe it is a good point but l personally feel that use what you have when you have to. I do have a box of defensive ammo for all the weapons i would ever consider for use and i carry factory defensive ammo daily.

there are a few schools of thought, The DA will use it against you as person crafting ammunition that is extra deadly with the intent to kill. The other is that there are supposedly few failures in factory ammunition than reloaded ammunition. I believe both arguments are valid to an extent, and for the record out of at least 8000 handloads i've not one round to fail, and factory centerfire i have had 3 in roughly 4000...

nonetheless i have found that to buy decent hollow points and to mimic the factory defensive ammo you are going to spend just about as much so why not just save yourself the hassle and save you handloads for the range.

Offline firetoad

  • Guardian of The Gateway
  • Global Moderator
  • Dedicated Contributor
  • ******
  • Posts: 1706
  • Karma: 170
Re: Not using Reloads for home defense
« Reply #2 on: May 21, 2009, 02:56:38 PM »
product85 said it well.

Basically, handloads, reduced trigger pulls, etc. all add to the spin factor that can be placed on an otherwise legal defensive situation. 

Offline chris

  • Survival Demonstrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 3168
  • Karma: 1034
Re: Not using Reloads for home defense
« Reply #3 on: May 21, 2009, 03:04:10 PM »
Has anyone ever heard of someone being prosecuted for using handloads, or that this has been brought up in trial? Civil or criminal?

smkymtn

  • Guest
Re: Not using Reloads for home defense
« Reply #4 on: May 21, 2009, 03:18:47 PM »
Here is the article I found it on at http://www.survivaldigest.com/2009/03/factory-loads-only-for-a-defense-gun/. I am totally with you product85 and I don't know how many rounds I have shot at home and in the military but the percentage of failure is tiny. It just always gets a hillbilly rankled when they try and try to find new ways to get you.

Defense
Factory Loads Only For A Defense Gun
By Buffalokill ? March 27, 2009 ?  Email This Post ? Post a comment
This is a great article by Massad Ayoob that appeared in the Guns Magazine April 2005 edition. It goes over some important ammo tips that could save you from some serious court issues. If you reload your own ammo, you should always carry factory loads in your carry gun, as well as your home or store defense gun. It is important that the courts can use similar ammo in testing and as evidence.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Handloads are great for hunting. The best shot I ever made in the game fields, was on an impala at 117 paces–double action–with a Smith & Wesson Model 629 .44 Magnum, loaded with a 320-grain SSK hardcast flatpoint bullet my buddy Bill Grimmett had carefully seated over a maximum safe charge of W296.

Reloads are great for training, too. How many people can afford ample, serious shooting without them? Bless you, Mike Dillon, for opening the world of “mass-produced home loads” to the individual handgunner.

 Handloads are great for match shooting, if they’re carefully put together. The majority of national bull’s-eye championships (military sponsored) and police pistol championships (law enforcement agency sponsored) have been won with factory amino purchased by the governmental entity that fielded the shooter. However, most IPSC and Bianchi Cup matches have been won with reloads homebrewed by the winning shooters themselves. That says something about individuality.

However, as an expert witness for the courts in shooting cases over the last quarter century, I’ve learned some good reasons not to use reloads for personal defense. Not in the carry gun, and not in the home or store defense gun. In the limited space of this column, let’s talk about just two of those reasons.

Malice Factor
Attorneys hungry to nail you, whether in criminal or in civil court, need some hook on which to hang their argument that your actions constituted malice against the person who forced you to shoot him. We saw it with anyone who went to court after firing Black Talon ammo in self-defense, during the period when that cartridge was ludicrously demonized by the press and the politicians. We’ve seen it for decades, right up to the present, with the use of hollow-point amino. Appellate lawyer Lisa Steele is right now speaking for multiple individuals who suffered either conviction or enhanced sentences because juries bought lawyers’ arguments that the use of HP ammunition was cruel, unusual, and malicious. A lawyer who knows his stuff–which the original trial lawyers in those cases of Lisa’s apparently didn’t–can defeat the hollowpoint argument easily. The simplest avenue is to show the jury that virtually all cops carry HPs. But that argument isn’t available for handloads.

In one case I was consulted on back in the ’70s, the shooter had used a CCI Speer 200-grain JHP he’d handloaded to equal CCI’s ballistics in a factory loaded .45 ACP cartridge. The state police who investigated, and the prosecutor who brought him to trial for aggravated assault, kept asking why regular bullets weren’t deadly enough for this man. On my recommendation, the defense brought Jim Cirillo in as an expert. He calmly explained the whole thing, including the fact the defendant’s .45 ACP handloads were less powerful than the factory amino issued to the investigating troopers for their .357 Magnums, and the jury acquitted the shooter. Still, it was an attack that could have been prevented if the defendant had simply loaded with CCI’s own factory cartridges, and used his identical handloads for training and practice.

Evidentiary Element
Many defensive shootings take place literally at “powder-burning distance,” with the assailant virtually on top of the armed citizen. Those who take the criminal’s side have been known to argue he was a safe distance away and the accused shot him for no good reason. Well, gunshot residue (GSR) will tell the tale and expose the liars if the distance has been close enough. However, to do that, we on the defense team have to perform testing with what is called “exemplar” ammunition. This is ammo identical to what was fired in the incident in question. We can’t use what was left in the gun, because it’s evidence, and the testing consumes the amino and literally destroys that evidence.

You shot him with a factory round? No problem. We call the factory, get 50 rounds of identical amino of the same lot, do the GSR testing, and determine virtually to the inch the actual distance involved. You shot him with a handload? What guarantee does the court have the ammo you provided is identical to what was fired in the case at bar? You can hear the opposing lawyer now: “Objection! Your Honor, the defendant literally manufactured the evidence!” In a case I was involved in some years ago in New Jersey, the defendant’s use of nonreplicable handloads put him through a multiple-trial ordeal when, if he’d used factory amino, the facts would have been demonstrated at the starting gate and brought a just closure much sooner.

Handloads for defense? You’ve just seen two documentable reasons why I would urge you to use factory ammo for that purpose.


Offline SteveInTx

  • Survivalist Mentor
  • *****
  • Posts: 353
  • Karma: 17
Re: Not using Reloads for home defense
« Reply #5 on: May 21, 2009, 05:34:42 PM »
This conversation always comes up at one point or another on forums like these.  I don't have the links which have been provided in the other forums, but apparently to answer your question Chris, yes.

ETA:  Tried looking up more info, but so far have not found anything concrete.  So, either you have to search better than I did or the info I read before was wrong.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2009, 05:50:38 PM by SteveInTx »

Offline product85

  • Survivor
  • ***
  • Posts: 130
  • Karma: 4
Re: Not using Reloads for home defense
« Reply #6 on: May 21, 2009, 06:10:22 PM »

This is a great article by Massad Ayoob that appeared in the Guns Magazine April 2005 edition...

I am a really big fan of Ayoob, thanks for putting this article out there.

Offline Puukko56

  • Senior Survivalist
  • ****
  • Posts: 235
  • Karma: 9
Re: Not using Reloads for home defense
« Reply #7 on: May 21, 2009, 06:26:31 PM »
It's also nice to be able to say "I shot him with the same ammo the police dept uses." Or FBI or any other law enforcement org who uses the same ammo you do. It gives a slimy prosecutor less "ammo" to use against you.

Offline firetoad

  • Guardian of The Gateway
  • Global Moderator
  • Dedicated Contributor
  • ******
  • Posts: 1706
  • Karma: 170
Re: Not using Reloads for home defense
« Reply #8 on: May 21, 2009, 06:44:45 PM »
Ayoob has a ton of courtroom and deposition expert witness testimony experience.  He is an excellent resource to answer these sorts of questions.
« Last Edit: August 27, 2018, 07:12:43 PM by firetoad »

Offline khristopher23

  • Survivalist Mentor
  • *****
  • Posts: 861
  • Karma: 37
Re: Not using Reloads for home defense
« Reply #9 on: May 21, 2009, 07:16:24 PM »
Ayoob is THE MAN IMO as far as firearms experts go, especially on legal issues. Here are a few of his articles for Backwoods Home magazine, just scroll down a little to find his articles.

http://www.backwoodshome.com/author_index.html

I haven't read all his books yet, but again, those I have read are excellent. I can definitely recommend "The Gun Digest Book of Combat Handgunnery"

http://www.amazon.com/Gun-Digest-Book-Combat-Handgunnery/dp/0896895254/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1242954756&sr=8-1

And though somewhat dated ( I think amazon says published in 1980) "In the Gravest Extreme" is also a good read.

http://www.amazon.com/Gravest-Extreme-Firearm-Personal-Protection/dp/0936279001/ref=pd_sim_b_1

Offline Stein

  • Dedicated Contributor
  • ******
  • Posts: 1862
  • Karma: 66
Re: Not using Reloads for home defense
« Reply #10 on: May 26, 2009, 12:36:03 PM »
I would also concur.  The founder of a local training group is a well-qualified instructor, former police officer and now an attorney.  He reloads tons of ammunition for the range but carries factory loads.

I don't see how factory ammunition can make the situation worse so it is worth the $20 for me.

Offline Jack Crabb

  • Survivalist Mentor
  • *****
  • Posts: 773
  • Karma: 38
Re: Not using Reloads for home defense
« Reply #11 on: May 26, 2009, 07:40:51 PM »
Some of this ground was plowed a couple months ago.

http://thesurvivalpodcast.com/forum/index.php?topic=1136.msg17995#msg17995

Offline The Sage of Monticello

  • Survivalist Mentor
  • *****
  • Posts: 332
  • Karma: 22
  • Lover of Liberty
Re: Not using Reloads for home defense
« Reply #12 on: July 03, 2009, 06:29:15 PM »
One problem in defending my home right now is the lack of manufactured ammo available. 
I have gone to Walmart, Hunting Shooting Stores, MidwayUSA, Cabelas, Midsouth, Graf & Sons, Powder Valley, and nothing is in stock. I was a late prepper, and right now all I have is reloaded ammo. Limited funds have gone to food storing. As soon as I can I will pick up commercial ammo when I can find it.

As far as reloads, I was always told better to be judged by twelve than carried by six.  :)

Hare of Caerbannog

  • Guest
Re: Not using Reloads for home defense
« Reply #13 on: July 03, 2009, 06:38:41 PM »
Just the other day the Brown's were tried in New Hampshire for tax evasion and a laundry list of charges from the "stand-off" at their "remote compound".
Dave Ridley was in the court room and said on The Ridley Report that the federal prosecutor made a big deal about every firearm they owned and made each one appear to be as scary as possible.
 :(

IdahoJohn

  • Guest
Re: Not using Reloads for home defense
« Reply #14 on: September 14, 2009, 12:36:35 AM »
When I took a firearms training course, the instructor said never to use handloads for self defense for all the reasons listed above.  I questioned this and have done a lot of searching and questioning (including LEOs and Judges), and I have yet to find a single case supporting it.  My personal conclusion is that it is urban legend.  That being said, I don't use handloads in my home defense weapons.  I figure; 1. A high quality defense ammo will be more reliable and 2. Regardless of cases, I don't want the prosecution to have any more ammo than they would already have. 

Keep in mind what Jack said about the jury.  Typically 5 or 6 of the people there are good people and the other 5 or 6 are so unbelievably stupid that they couldn't figure out how to get out of jury duty.  Those are the kinds of people that will believe anything the prosecutors tell them. 

Offline bubtech

  • Senior Survivalist
  • ****
  • Posts: 256
  • Karma: 8
    • BUBWeb.com Websites starting at $10 per YEAR... WHAT!... YEAH!
Re: Not using Reloads for home defense
« Reply #15 on: September 14, 2009, 06:36:33 PM »
Idaho John,
If Ayoob says it happened he was there and it happened, def not an urban legand.  Ayoob is one of the premier "professional witnesses" in self defense shooting cases.
B

IdahoJohn

  • Guest
Re: Not using Reloads for home defense
« Reply #16 on: September 14, 2009, 06:42:30 PM »
Sorry, I didn't see that.  I'm not saying anyone here is lying.  The only thing I was trying to say is that I've yet to see a case supporting the argument.  Also note that I did say that it could sway a jury of idiots which many times they are.  If anyone has a link to a case, I'd love to read it.  I might as well get started reading cases since I'll hopefully be heading up to law school next fall.

Offline Jack Crabb

  • Survivalist Mentor
  • *****
  • Posts: 773
  • Karma: 38
Re: Not using Reloads for home defense
« Reply #17 on: September 14, 2009, 07:22:24 PM »
Sorry, I didn't see that.  I'm not saying anyone here is lying.  The only thing I was trying to say is that I've yet to see a case supporting the argument.  Also note that I did say that it could sway a jury of idiots which many times they are.  If anyone has a link to a case, I'd love to read it.  I might as well get started reading cases since I'll hopefully be heading up to law school next fall.

Here you go . . .

http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=2129976&postcount=140


IdahoJohn

  • Guest
Re: Not using Reloads for home defense
« Reply #18 on: September 14, 2009, 07:38:02 PM »
Guess I was wrong.  :-\  That's really interesting about the gun shot residue.  I know I typically don't pay attention to the types of cases when I'm doing up a batch so I can see how in the one case the case used was from one manufacturer where other cases in the same batch were from different.  Thanks for the link!

Offline Movinfr8

  • Prepper
  • **
  • Posts: 73
  • Karma: 1
Re: Not using Reloads for home defense
« Reply #19 on: October 18, 2009, 04:40:08 PM »
Ayoob is a great gunwriter, author AND Podcaster!
check out:   http://proarms.podbean.com/

They do a podcast every couple of weeks....
and if you say his last name backwards, it is Booya!!!

Offline lzhome

  • Prepper
  • **
  • Posts: 61
  • Karma: 0
Re: Not using Reloads for home defense
« Reply #20 on: October 18, 2009, 07:14:53 PM »
I know a "guy" that loads GDHP on new Starline brass and he has purchased the same loads from Georgia Arms. Now they're all mixed up and who knows which are reloads and which were bought ???


Offline CountryRootsCityJob

  • Survivalist Mentor
  • *****
  • Posts: 491
  • Karma: 10
  • Yeehaw :D (Unicycles require little maintenance)
    • Building Rome... as fast as I can!
Re: Not using Reloads for home defense
« Reply #21 on: December 09, 2009, 11:27:23 AM »
Although Ayoob has already been mentioned, I suggest you all go out and read his book "A gun digest book on concealed carry"!  Its an excellent book and it covers this topic extensively! 

Offline liftsboxes

  • Dedicated Contributor
  • ******
  • Posts: 1636
  • Karma: 115
  • Quit Whining
Re: Not using Reloads for home defense
« Reply #22 on: December 09, 2009, 11:33:11 AM »
Just the other day the Brown's were tried in New Hampshire for tax evasion and a laundry list of charges from the "stand-off" at their "remote compound".
Dave Ridley was in the court room and said on The Ridley Report that the federal prosecutor made a big deal about every firearm they owned and made each one appear to be as scary as possible.
 :(

This was re-hashed here recently and the MSM made a big deal about Mrs Brown having " ... not just a revolver for self-defense, but an assault style pistol that had a 17 bullet clip.  She even had the safety off!"

I think most people here will recognize that what she had was a Glock 17, which is a long way from an assault weapon and doesn't have a 'safety' at all.  By the way, neither do those revolvers the reporter seemed to think defined 'acceptable.'

Offline Serellan

  • REMF
  • Moderator On Leave
  • Dedicated Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 1581
  • Karma: 97
  • Diligenter et Fideliter

Offline Dylboz

  • BANNED
  • Senior Survivalist
  • ****
  • Posts: 271
  • Karma: 27
Re: Not using Reloads for home defense
« Reply #24 on: December 09, 2009, 12:27:09 PM »
This was re-hashed here recently and the MSM made a big deal about Mrs Brown having " ... not just a revolver for self-defense, but an assault style pistol that had a 17 bullet clip.  She even had the safety off!"

I think most people here will recognize that what she had was a Glock 17, which is a long way from an assault weapon and doesn't have a 'safety' at all.  By the way, neither do those revolvers the reporter seemed to think defined 'acceptable.'

What the flying fuck is an "assault style pistol?" These reporters just write all kinds of crazy stuff on subjects about which they know NOTHING! It's universally consistent, if you know something, anything, about a particular subject like guns or medicine or business, whether through personal or professional experience, you will be absolutely infuriated by press coverage of it, because it will invariably be WRONG. It is as if they go out of their way to listen to the most dishonest and unreliable sources available... oh wait, they do! They always quote GOVERNMENT "EXPERTS" and LAWYERS!

Offline longrifle

  • Senior Survivalist
  • ****
  • Posts: 288
  • Karma: 7
Re: Not using Reloads for home defense
« Reply #25 on: December 09, 2009, 12:32:35 PM »
Quote
but an assault style pistol that had a 17 bullet clip


I'd love to see a pistol with a 17 Bullet Clip. I've never see a pistol that only holds the bullets, no case, And in a clip no less. Would love to see the schematics on that little beauty. ;D

longrifle

Offline Serellan

  • REMF
  • Moderator On Leave
  • Dedicated Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 1581
  • Karma: 97
  • Diligenter et Fideliter
Re: Not using Reloads for home defense
« Reply #26 on: December 09, 2009, 12:59:08 PM »
What the flying frick is an "assault style pistol?" These reporters just write all kinds of crazy stuff on subjects about which they know NOTHING! It's universally consistent, if you know something, anything, about a particular subject like guns or medicine or business, whether through personal or professional experience, you will be absolutely infuriated by press coverage of it, because it will invariably be WRONG. It is as if they go out of their way to listen to the most dishonest and unreliable sources available... oh wait, they do! They always quote GOVERNMENT "EXPERTS" and LAWYERS!

There actually IS a definition for an "assault pistol," at least according to the guv'ment:

"(C) a semiautomatic pistol that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of--

(i) an ammunition magazine that attaches to the pistol outside of the pistol grip;

(ii) a threaded barrel capable of accepting a barrel extender, flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer;

(iii) a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits the shooter to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being burned;

(iv) a manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when the pistol is unloaded; and

(v) a semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm; and "


Offline donaldj

  • Dedicated Contributor
  • ******
  • Posts: 1384
  • Karma: 87
    • Keep and Bear, LLC
Re: Not using Reloads for home defense
« Reply #27 on: December 09, 2009, 01:41:36 PM »
There actually IS a definition for an "assault pistol," at least according to the guv'ment:

"(C) a semiautomatic pistol that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of--

(i) an ammunition magazine that attaches to the pistol outside of the pistol grip;

(ii) a threaded barrel capable of accepting a barrel extender, flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer;

(iii) a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits the shooter to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being burned;

(iv) a manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when the pistol is unloaded; and

(v) a semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm; and "



Out of curiosity, what would the gubbint call a Beretta 93 (the full auto version of the 92) ?   (and I want one dammit!)   ;D


As for the reloads question, it is ridiculous that it has to be done like this, but that's the way it is. To me, the only thing that should matter is justifiable use of force.   After that's been established, what does it matter if it's with a rock vs a ball bearing from a slingshot, or a hand-load vs a factory load?

Like it's been stated (and I'll reword), after a justified shooting, the "overzealous" DA has to show intent to kill. Reloads provide the DA one more avenue to prove "intent". If you use an ammo "because my CCW instructor recommended it", or "That's what my cop buddies recommend", the DA hits a dead end on YOUR intent.

Offline Serellan

  • REMF
  • Moderator On Leave
  • Dedicated Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 1581
  • Karma: 97
  • Diligenter et Fideliter
Re: Not using Reloads for home defense
« Reply #28 on: December 09, 2009, 01:50:57 PM »
Out of curiosity, what would the gubbint call a Beretta 93 (the full auto version of the 92) ?   (and I want one dammit!)   ;D


As a Class III NFA weapon.


Offline Who...me?

  • Survivalist Mentor
  • *****
  • Posts: 525
  • Karma: 19
Re: Not using Reloads for home defense
« Reply #29 on: December 09, 2009, 05:23:51 PM »
only use factory ammo for self defense here, for all the above reasons.