I'm new to the forum so if this is overly plowed ground forgive me. I am picking up on the general opinion that handloads for personal defense is not a great idea either because of reliability or legal posturing. I can guess at part of the legal reason, but why can't a good lawyer in a civil trial make the point that as a handloader/reloader you are more deliberate,more responsible than the average gun owner? I am not a hardhead, so if your opinions run strogly against using your own loads I'll buy a magazine's worth of Speer Gold Dots for every caliber I have and let it go at that, or are those too exotic for your average prospective juror also??

Get the Gold Dots. I handload and trust my ammo but I don't want any extra liability. Why take any extra chances, it would be bad enough if you had to shoot someone and worse if you had to defend your mentality. It just aint worth it. I'll bet this question comes up in most carry classes. The instructor that I went to was very specific about not using handloads.

Your not going to be in any legal jeopardy for using hand loads in your defensive encounter unless you have concocted some weird projectile in place of the bullet. Even then I doubt it. Your're either justified or not.
If you’re justified in using deadly force, what load you used makes no difference.
That would be like getting sued because you used a 12 gauge 00 buck instead of 00 buck reduced recoil.
It is urban myth that a judgment would be entered against you in this case. I have researched at great extent and have found no legal document proving this and no precedence on the books.
I carry factory loads because they work just fine.

Seems odd to me that someone would carry factory ammo but recommend handloads to others. My handloads work just fine also but I can't come up with any valid reason to expose myself to "reasonable doubt". I never researched a precedent but I bet somewhere right now, there is a guy in jail who was the first to break a law or test the system.
Would be best to read your states laws and or check with your local law enforcement agencies and see what they say.

SD and CCW questions come up all the time at my range club. Best comment I've heard to date on the "ammo" question had to do with over penetration. Say you fire your handload at a threat and by some chance, you clip some belly fat and the bullet hits the small unseen child. If you don't think an attorney will have a field day with the horrible deadly murderous ammo you created, then you have nothing to worry about.

This aint no game boys. You can talk tough and play G I Joe all you want to but if you pull that pistol, you better be right.

I agree w/ the urban myth intrepretation. Following this area of legality for over 30 years I have never heard of a single case where using handloads was germane to a case of self defense. Of course, I would appreciate being educated if I've missed anything.

Another question...just how would the cops know your loads are handloads? I can duplicate core-bon 40 SW to the extent that I've mixed up my loads w/ store bought. Used the same bullets Core-Bon uses (Sierra 135 grainers) and the same brass.

Nevertheless, for reliability, I prefer to use store bought in my personal defense guns.

I agree w/ the urban myth intrepretation. Following this area of legality for over 30 years I have never heard of a single case where using handloads was germane to a case of self defense. Of course, I would appreciate being educated if I've missed anything.

Another question...just how would the cops know your loads are handloads? I can duplicate core-bon 40 SW to the extent that I've mixed up my loads w/ store bought. Used the same bullets Core-Bon uses (Sierra 135 grainers) and the same brass.

Nevertheless, for reliability, I prefer to use store bought in my personal defense guns.

All valid points leverite and believe me, we've kicked around just about every scenario. Seen arguments at the club actually get heated over this issue. It is my understanding that if you use your carry gun, it may be taken from you until an investigation is completed as well as any and all ammo you have with you. (this could vary state to state) They tell me that in a matter of hours, every component used in the ammo can be identified by brand. I always like the simple common sense approach, why take even a remote chance when it's so easy not to have to worry about it. There are far too many laws that have gray areas and arguing you're in the right won't make any difference. Drink one beer on the way home from work, you're under the legal limit to drive....until someone pulls out in front of you and have an accident. It was their fault, alcohol was not a factor, right? The law is on your side?

All-
Please don't use handloads for self defense applications! THERE HAS BEEN lots of artlicles written on this by several authors over the years. Notably, Massad Ayoob has written alot about this and has several court cases that he has been involved with on this subject. A liberal DA may/will paint you as somesort of "mad scientist" that is making "super killer" bullets in his/her basement. If you are actually unfortunate enough to be involved in a shooting, you will have enough to worry about (no matter how right or justified you are in your actions ) legally. Do not give the other side any ammo to hurt you with in your case. The problems with using handloads has been well documented and actual in the courts over the years. Also, this has been an issue in courts around the country...not just liberal east coast towns. Contact the defensive institute and you will be able to read some more specifics.
One more topic on this subject. Don't limit yourself with one brand or the other. I carry gold dots in my 45 because it's the most accurate. Pick the most reliable and accurate modern hollow point. Reliability of function and accuracy are the most important thing. Most modern hollow point designs are going to perform pretty similar in terms of terminal performance. Speaking on that, as I am a ICU/ER RN, I have seen quite a few shootings and handgun wounds. Not to mention 6yrs in Army INfantry. There is no such thing as a handgun that's great for putting people down quick. Brain or spinal cord shots are the only thing that bring any handgun up to the same level as a rifle or shotgun. My point is to keep the limitations of your handgun in mind and don't have unrealistic expectations about it. Good Luck!:)

lda444, I don't think this has been proven anywhere. Do you have any links or proof?
I for one use hand loads in my carry guns. The last thing I would worry about after shooting someone is what bullet I used to protect myself or family.
The minute you pull the trigger you life has changed as you know it. God know, no one wants to have to take someone's else's life.

As with all of you, this is not something I take lightly.

If I want ammo that I know will perform when I pull the trigger, I use my own handloads. This means that my G20, Blackhawk, 1911, and 1895G are all stuffed with handloads.

If I brandish or shoot someone to defend the life of myself or my family, or if I brandish or shoot someone to save someone else's life, I believe the action is justified.

If I brandish or shoot someone for pretty much any other reason (anger, vengence, etc.), I believe the action is not justified.

I'll answer to the courts if either case ever occurs (assuming I survive the incident), but first I have to answer both to myself and the real Judge. Regardless of what the courts dictate, the real Judge will know the truth and judge me correctly.

I'm not concerned with whether or not the use of handloads will hurt my case.

Yes, I actually do have proof that his has been an issue in the courts and that it has caused undo legal problems. As I said in my previous post, call the Defensive Institute (ie Defense Associates ) at 203-261-8719 and they will send you the specific court cases pertaining to this matter. This organization is ran by Chuck Taylor and Massad Ayoob. Now, I am not a huge fan of Ayoobs, but he does a lot of training and is considered a expert witness. Chuck Taylor is considered one of the autorities on pistol training in the world, and he recently put a seminar on at a local range. This subject is touched on---it's not a good idea at all to carry handloads in your carry gun. Doing so opens yourself up to undo legal bs. For those who have made a stance on this issue and will not change your ways, my prayers are with you. Hopefully you will never need to know. But, there is no real measurable (for me ) advantage to doing so and only negatives. Understand, I am speaking of cc for defense against people. If your in the backwoods of nowhere and are carring a 44/45 revolver or rifle for defense against 4-leg type predators, I see no problem with handloads and I actually do load my own for that purpose. But, me ccw for the street always has factory ammo. I hope this helps and this post finds everyone in good health this morning! Keep safe!!!!!:)

Blackhawkfan, great post.

I carry factory only. I want one less thing to have to worry about if I find myself in court.

Saying there is no precedent for something in court is a VERY wishful position. There was no precedent for acquitting a murderer because his blood-soaked gloves had shrunk. There was no legal precendent for awarding a million dollars for spilled coffee.

Would I want to trust the rest of my life to sane and rational juries like those? Uh...no.

RR- Excellant points. Another resource for this is to call Combat Handgun magazine and ask them to do a resource search on articles by Ayoob on this issue. He has written several articles in this magazine alone, naming the specific case and his role as an expert witness in the case, on shootings done with handloaded ammo. It's just more trouble than it is worth. Hopefully, folks have some things to think about and will make the right decision for themselves. Good luck and keep safe!

Your not going to be in any legal jeopardy for using hand loads in your defensive encounter unless you have concocted some weird projectile in place of the bullet. Even then I doubt it. You're either justified or not.
If you’re justified in using deadly force, what load you used makes no difference.
That would be like getting sued because you used a 12 gage 00 buck instead of 00 buck reduced recoil.
It is urban myth that a judgment would be entered against you in this case. I have researched at great extent and have found no legal document proving this and no precedence on the books.
I carry factory loads because they work just fine.

I have to strongly disagree with your view. All CCH Instructors in NC have to pass the Course on Legal Issues of Lethal Force. We took the class at the NC Justice Academy, and L. Reese Trimmer, our instructor was the Lead Attorney in the Justice Departments Lethal Force Division. He suggested that hand loads was of little concern if you were justified in using deadly force, but their is more to the story.

Once you are cleared, and no charges filed because you were within your rights to use deadly force, your problems are no where near being over.
He said the odds are 90% or better that you will end up in Civil Court as a Defendant in a wrongful death suit. Mr Trimmers main job with the Justice Department was defending Law Enforcement Officers that were sued after they were cleared by Internal Affairs. As he put it, why would you not try to obtain a huge settlement, when you have a waiting line of Attorneys willing to take your case with NO money out of your pocket.

Mr. Trimmer also has been called in as a Professional Witness in many wrongful death cases involving civilians. He said that a "good" snake oil attorney can and will pick up on the smallest bit of information, no matter how inaccurate,to make the law abiding Defendant look like a Rambo type that spends every waking hour studying new and nastier ways to take someones life.

Here is where the hand load scenario was brought up, when a student asked him if he could recall for the class an actual event that he witnessed in court. He never blinked, and asked for a show of hands of those that carry hand loads in their concealed carry firearms. Roughly half of the class raised their hands. Mr Trimmer then launched into a tirade, calling us "blood thirsty, cold blooded killers! Factory ammunition just does not satisfy your desire to main and destroy a fellow human. Not only did you take his life, you did it with ammunition made by your own hands
so you can inflict the worst possible pain and suffering, instead of using over the counter ammo that is designed to wound. The fact is you designed and made your own ammunition, just to make sure there was no way a Doctor could save his life!"

It got very quite in that room. Finally someone asked Mr. Trimmer who would believe such nonsense. The only response was "A jury that knows no better". When asked if he debunked that theory when he was on the stand, he said "sure, but it's hard to convince someone that the lawyers attack was total BS. If you don't carry hand loads, the attorney loses that line of attack. It's your butt on the line, and my advice to you is to think ahead."

He ended that portion of the class with some excellent advice. His suggestion was to find out what brand of ammo your local Law Enforcement carries, and use that. If you find out what your city police, sheriff's department or State Troopers carry, odds are one of those loads will work for those that carry semi-auto carry guns. Another suggestion was any ammo that was designed for Personal defense, since they are designed to stay in the body.

I can find nothing wrong with his logic. I also agree that odds are you will be dragged into civil court, and YOU have to pay for your attorney. Every line of attack you take away from the prosecuting attorney is time saved in the trial. Even a short trial will financially ruin the average person paying his attorney fees. If your found guilty in civil court, you can tack the settlement to your legal fees, and that would be enough to drain the pockets of all but the ultra wealthy.

That is exactly what I teach in my CCH classes. After that, it's up to you.
The only one to even remotely disagreed asked me "Do you know what it would cost to test all of that factory ammo in my 1911?" Yes I do know how much it costs. If that is a problem, maybe you should use a revolver as your carry gun. You can buy one box of ammo, sight the gun in and have ammo left over. (I will never carry defensive ammo in a semi auto, unless I get 500 straight rounds with no failure of any type. Yes, it's costly. We are talking about a gun that must defend my family and my life. That being the case, I think the cost of 10 boxes of a quality defensive ammo is a bargain)

I hope this gives you all something to consider.

Thanks for the read

Gene

[quote=lumberjak;316751]
Say you fire your handload at a threat and by some chance, you clip some belly fat and the bullet hits the small unseen child. If you don't think an attorney will have a field day with the horrible deadly murderous ammo you created, then you have nothing to worry about. Quote


Lumberjack

Overpenetration can happen with factory ammo also.

I have to strongly disagree with your view. All CCH Instructors in NC have to pass the Course on Legal Issues of Lethal Force. We took the class at the NC Justice Academy, and L. Reese Trimmer, our instructor was the Lead Attorney in the Justice Departments Lethal Force Division. He suggested that hand loads was of little concern if you were justified in using deadly force, but their is more to the story.

Once you are cleared, and no charges filed because you were within your rights to use deadly force, your problems are no where near being over.
He said the odds are 90% or better that you will end up in Civil Court as a Defendant in a wrongful death suit. Mr Trimmers main job with the Justice Department was defending Law Enforcement Officers that were sued after they were cleared by Internal Affairs. As he put it, why would you not try to obtain a huge settlement, when you have a waiting line of Attorneys willing to take your case with NO money out of your pocket.

Mr. Trimmer also has been called in as a Professional Witness in many wrongful death cases involving civilians. He said that a "good" snake oil attorney can and will pick up on the smallest bit of information, no matter how inaccurate,to make the law abiding Defendant look like a Rambo type that spends every waking hour studying new and nastier ways to take someones life.

Here is where the hand load scenario was brought up, when a student asked him if he could recall for the class an actual event that he witnessed in court. He never blinked, and asked for a show of hands of those that carry hand loads in their concealed carry firearms. Roughly half of the class raised their hands. Mr Trimmer then launched into a tirade, calling us "blood thirsty, cold blooded killers! Factory ammunition just does not satisfy your desire to main and destroy a fellow human. Not only did you take his life, you did it with ammunition made by your own hands
so you can inflict the worst possible pain and suffering, instead of using over the counter ammo that is designed to wound. The fact is you designed and made your own ammunition, just to make sure there was no way a Doctor could save his life!"

It got very quite in that room. Finally someone asked Mr. Trimmer who would believe such nonsense. The only response was "A jury that knows no better". When asked if he debunked that theory when he was on the stand, he said "sure, but it's hard to convince someone that the lawyers attack was total BS. If you don't carry hand loads, the attorney loses that line of attack. It's your butt on the line, and my advice to you is to think ahead."

He ended that portion of the class with some excellent advice. His suggestion was to find out what brand of ammo your local Law Enforcement carries, and use that. If you find out what your city police, sheriff's department or State Troopers carry, odds are one of those loads will work for those that carry semi-auto carry guns. Another suggestion was any ammo that was designed for Personal defense, since they are designed to stay in the body.

I can find nothing wrong with his logic. I also agree that odds are you will be dragged into civil court, and YOU have to pay for your attorney. Every line of attack you take away from the prosecuting attorney is time saved in the trial. Even a short trial will financially ruin the average person paying his attorney fees. If your found guilty in civil court, you can tack the settlement to your legal fees, and that would be enough to drain the pockets of all but the ultra wealthy.

That is exactly what I teach in my CCH classes. After that, it's up to you.
The only one to even remotely disagreed asked me "Do you know what it would cost to test all of that factory ammo in my 1911?" Yes I do know how much it costs. If that is a problem, maybe you should use a revolver as your carry gun. You can buy one box of ammo, sight the gun in and have ammo left over. (I will never carry defensive ammo in a semi auto, unless I get 500 straight rounds with no failure of any type. Yes, it's costly. We are talking about a gun that must defend my family and my life. That being the case, I think the cost of 10 boxes of a quality defensive ammo is a bargain)

I hope this gives you all something to consider.

Thanks for the read

Gene

Gene

many states that have CCW laws also have laws that protect you from civil suits if you were justified in shooting some one in selfdefence. I would suggest that you get the NC legistlature to pass such laws. Another point on the subject, If the perp that was shot is dead there is only going to be one story and that is your story. How likely is it that some lawyer is going to take a case on behalf of a perp's relatives when the is dead. not very likely.

After 22 years of law enforcement and being retired with a CCW permit, I can tell you that I only carry factory ammo in my weapon. I would rather carry my handloads but I have spent to many days in court and been the target of lots of smart attorneys to give anyone expecially a dumb juror a reason to question my logic. If you will notice, most jurys are not made up of engineers, accountants and professional people but are folks who the attorneys have chosen that they think they can persuade with their arguments.
We used to have and old saying, "If you know they are gunning for you, don't given any extra bullets to shoot."

[quote=lumberjak;316751]
Say you fire your handload at a threat and by some chance, you clip some belly fat and the bullet hits the small unseen child. If you don't think an attorney will have a field day with the horrible deadly murderous ammo you created, then you have nothing to worry about. Quote


Lumberjack

Overpenetration can happen with factory ammo also.


Sure it can but if something goes wrong, at least you didn't assemble the ammo.

Look guys, if this is such a clear issue and the laws are black and white, why do you suppose we don't all agree?

Judges and lawyers want stupid sheep on the jury. They do not want anyone who is smart enough to think for themselves. That is why I was released from jury duty last summer. Remember that when considering anything that could lead you to being a defendant in a courtroom

Thanks Gene and Jodum and all. I failed to make the civil trial distinction in the initial post. In Tennessee we are protected from civil suits if the incident was a righteous self defense shoot, but there's always the Feds. After all, you deprived the aggressor of his civil rights to maim or kill you and interfered with his livelihood robbing convenience stores or whatever.
I guess I'll stay with the factory ammo until I can prove or give evidence that my handloads are superior at stopping (not killing) the aggressor.

This topic opened up another lively discussion at a range class recently regarding posturing for a possible civil trial. That's next.

Thanks again,
Mike, in (the very violent city of) Memphis

Thread derailment; apology in advance...

Mike, I may be landing in Memphis mid-February on a trip to research an upcoming book. Be glad to share BBQ with ya if we can tag up. You recommend the place, I'll buy the beer.

There's been a lot of talk on the forum about this subject and a search will bring it up. My 38 snubby carries a cylinder full of Speer Gold Dot personal defense ammo. I just feel the least you have to explain the better off you are. For years I carried loads made with Hollow base wadcutters turned around in the case.

My 38 snubby carries a cylinder full of Speer Gold Dot personal defense ammo. I just feel the least you have to explain the better off you are.

There it is, good common sense! Why would it be so important to carry handloads anyway? Just because you can do something does not always mean it's a good idea and we are not talking about a large expense to buy a couple of boxes of factory ammo.

If you feel compelled to do anything that could be questioned later, I strongly suggest you get qualified legal council beforehand. I doubt a judge will recess court and check this forum for legal opinions.

While we're on the subject of CC, who really understands the law? Oklahoma CC law seems to offer protection from civil liability in a clear cut case of self defense, who wants to define a clear cut case? What is clear to you only needs one idiot screw it up.

I'll admit I don't fully understand all the laws and I have read the Okla CC booklet more than once. For example, I have read where some carry rifles and shotguns in their vehicles. If I understand the law correctly, CC covers handguns only with rifles and shotguns being covered by regular state law. Use your hangun for self defense OK, but pull a loaded rifle from under the seat, whole new can of worms. Do other state laws differ on this?

All my SD rounds are Reloads- and I don't worry about the lawyers either! It's a personal choice use what you wish and don't worry about what people think! It's your life -not there's!!!:)

It certainly is your choice. I fervently hope that you (or any of us) never find out that our choice cost us everything we own, or worse. But if that happens, it WAS our choice.

Some excellent information and knowledge shared by the posts here, most anyway. As the old saying goes, "ya just gotta sift the chaff from the wheat.", and make your own decisions based upon intelligent, sensible, and realistic information - to each their own. We shall live (and maybe be brought down) by our 'own' decisions...

As I'm sure many of us here have been asked by folks who are not very knowledgeable with firearms, about "what handgun and ammunition do you think would be good for self protection use?" I'm NOT even gonna open up that can of worms about which handgun to get! Such a question is akin to having someone ask you what kind of car they should buy? There really isn't any one 'right' answer, as we are all different, none of us are the same.
Opinions are like noses, everyone has one.

For those with limited firearms experience, my standard reply goes about like this, "Get in contact with your local Police Department (or gun shop, shooting range, etc), and see if they offer firearms training courses, or know of any firearms training courses available in your area?" Nothing wrong with learning via training classes.

As for what handgun and ammunition to consider to use, I mention they should consider using the same handgun and ammunition their local Police Department, FBI, Sheriff's Office or Highway Patrol use. Why this recommendation? Because if it is considered by the local courts and legal system suitable/proper, for their law enforcement officers to use, then it would be not easy for some legal prosecution to try and come at them for using some 'other' handgun/ammunition which the prosecution might try and use the choice/selection against you as being designed to main and brutalize. I think those reading this will get the picture here. Is my view the correct or only one, certainly not, and I readily admit that here.

To those who elect to use hand loads: is this not in some way leaving an open door for potential legal attack, even if the shooting is considered justifiable? I would not seek to put myself in such a potential position, when it clearly could be avoided. I am not saying 'you' should or should not use hand loads - I personally elect to use factory proven loads, and I would would recommend this practice to anyone asking me directly on the topic: to carry factory loads. That's where my stick floats on the matter.
I have been in training and/or CCW classes where someone will blurt out "I'll kill that crook it they ever try that with me!" YIKES, to think someone would actually make such a statement in a class (or anywhere else) full of people/witnesses, just amazes me to no end! But there is living proof out there that Snow White and Dopey have had kids! I just never realized they had so many!

The very last thing in this world I would want to do, is to harm another human being. I'm sure other readers here feel the same way. If a situation of eminent peril requires the use of deadly force, one view recommended should be to "shoot to stop, not to kill." Now if the individual having to be shot (no other way around it), should expire in the process, then that is too bad...

Hand loads are great for many uses, be it training, hunting, practice, and yes, they can even be used for CCW use. For myself, and those who have asked/may ask of me in the future, my view on what ammunition to carry in a CCW firearm: it will be what the local law enforcement agency(s) use, or a similar factory load.

Thanks Guys, I had never thought about hand loads being an issue before. And I have been using hand loads in my carry gun. Factory ammo will go out with me tomorrow.

I do have one question if wounding is the main purpose of force shouldn't we be using ball ammo?

Thanks Guys, I had never thought about hand loads being an issue before. And I have been using hand loads in my carry gun. Factory ammo will go out with me tomorrow.

I do have one question if wounding is the main purpose of force shouldn't we be using ball ammo?

Ball ammo is legal but you run more risk of overpenetration. Better off with some type of hollowpoint or softnose that will stay in the target. I carry Speer Gold Dot, I don't know what's best but that's what I have.

Memorize this, for these are THE GOLDEN WORDS.

"Officer, I was afraid for my life, and I only wanted to stop his attack. I will cooperate fully, but only in the presence of counsel."

And then SHUT UP.

Indiana is a state that if you are “justified in using deadly force you cannot be sued for civil liabilities
Mr. Massad has been shown to be a great storyteller on more than one occasion and does have his critics. Although I agree with a lot of his opinions he does seem a bit over the top.
I do not carry hand loads because with the quality of some of today’s factory ammo I believe you are not gaining anything.
I have yet to see one single court case sited in this forum where the defendant was put on trial for the use of hand-loaded ammo.
I have called the numbers provided and got the run around. No cases sited just a bunch of word play with out any proof.
Bottom line is if you aren’t justified you will be tried.
I would like someone to supply a court case number and jurisdiction it took place in with dates names and verdict.
Until then I plead urban myth.

If you can be tried for hand loaded ammo in self defense than the same logic should apply to having the gun in the first place you bunch of cold blood thirsty killers. Pre-meditated self defense should apply.
Have a nice day:D

"I do have one question if wounding is the main purpose of force shouldn't we be using ball ammo?"

With regards to the above statement, "if wounding...":
The view expressed was: "shoot to stop, not to kill." Now if the individual having to be shot (no other way around it), should expire in the process, then that is too bad...

Think about this scenario a moment. Let's say you had to use lethal force in the event of eminent peril for your, or someone else's life, and the recipient of your actions
expires in the process.

Would you go on the stand in a court room and tell the world that you wanted to/tried your best to, kill that person?
Or....wouldn't it be more correct that you were sincerely trying to stop the individual from taking someone's life......oh, they expired in the process, I am truly sorry, I just meant to stop them from killing me/someone else.
Which of the two approaches might set more favorably with the court system/jury/your conscience? In a dictionary or law dictionary, look up the definition of 'intent'. Would you 'intend' to kill someone, or would you 'intend' to try and stop someone...?

Remember what the officer reading you your rights (hmmm, didn't you those rights even before he read them to you? - interesting!) says; "You have the right to remain silent.....anything you say, can and will be held against you in a court of law."

You might say "I was trying to stop the threat of eminent peril....." or would you say something more harsh/severe? Remember, it CAN and WILL be used against you in a court of law.
Actually, when being questioned, three things to consider doing are:
1. shut up
2. don't say anything
3. be quiet
Even if you get them out of order, you'll do pretty good. Wait to speak/make a statement, until you have the proper assistance of counsel, might be a good thought/approach.

There is much written of the 'after shock' from a shooting situation and how it affects each individual having gone through that trauma. Remaining quiet/shutting up, really helps one to not put their foot in their mouth at times like that. You can always make your statement later on, with the assistance of counsel and after you've regained your composure.

What bullet design will tend to 'stop' more reliably: hard ball or an expanding bullet?
Make your selection of what bullet design to carry, accordingly of your knowledge (or seek further knowledge on what is a better stopping bullet).
Provide a person with knowledge, and they should be able to make a knowledgeable decision.
---------------------------------------------------------
Again, the last thing any of us ever wants to do is hurt another person...let's all hope it never comes to that for any of us.
---------------------------------------------------------
Just as an aside here, nothing I've commented on should be considered lawful/legal counsel/advice.
Opinions are like noses, everyone has one.
----------------------------------------------------------
"Ignorance of the law is no excuse." the courts say.
Think on this a moment....and it is true. There are city, county, and state law libraries all around the country, yet how many of us take the time to read/study law? And with computers at our fingertips at home, finding out about CCW carry laws and lethal force use in each State is not all that difficult. It is a responsibility each who carries CCW has.

How many of those who lawfully carry concealed/CCW permits, have read their State's laws about CCW carrying and the use of lethal force? Kind of like putting together an erector set at Christmas, without having read the instructions...

"Well I didn't know that about concealed carry, I thought it was this way....?" That won't get ya very far, now will it?
There are books out there with each State's CCW laws, aside from what's available from within each State, or even local jurisdictions.
ANYONE who carries CCW owes it to themselves, let alone others out there, to know and understand the actual laws...
--------------------------------------------------------
All of these aspects are important subjects, be it what ammo, bullet, handgun, CCW laws, etc.
Hope I didn't get too windy here with all of this.
thank you all for your understandings...

Factory loads for my cap-n-ball belly gun are abit scarce around here. I have been using "factory made caps" though.

I figure to use pyrodex and "store bought" cast balls would be a wise move from here on.
Life is hard enough already. I don't need some lawyer taking me down because I made my own black and cast my own from scrap lead.

You folks need to remember that criminals have the same "rights" that we do. "Death by a kinder and gentler bullet" is one of them.

If you are "confronted" with a life threatening situation with handloads in a firearm, make a "T" with your hands. This is universal among criminals to mean "time out while I put factory loads in my firearm" (Please note that some newbe's will not know of this universal rule. Your call there.) Some of the more "polite crimanals" will even allow you time to go get your 12 gauge (rare).

When you are "confronted" by a polite one, Don't forget to thank him/her for thier concideration.

Cheezywan

[QUOTE=outsidebear;316970]"I do have one question if wounding is the main purpose of force shouldn't we be using ball ammo?"

With regards to the above statement, "if wounding...":
The view expressed was:[I] "shoot to stop, not to kill." Now if the individual having to be shot (no other way around it), should expire in the process, then that is too bad...

[

Good point and I didn't mean to misrepresent your quote. And I do believe a hollow point would "stop" better than ball ammo. Let's pray none of us will have to put this discussion to the test.

Not only that, but if your assailant is not there in court, but busy practicing with his new wings or pitchfork I'd consider that his testimony would hold much less credibility.

Good to just plain excellent advice outsidebear.

This would have been good to post at the beginning of this topic:

http://www.gunsnet.net/album/data//500/can_of_worms_ahead.jpg

I carry reloads in my CCW because I feel I can produce a more effective round (tailored to my application) than I can buy. I carry a CCW for one reason and ONE REASON ONLY.........to stop a fight. I can only justify, then, carrying the most effective fight-stopper load that I can. My feeling is that if carrying some "horrific concotion" load that I've made allows me to remain alive at the end of the fight.......I'll deal with the lawyers.......alive.

Which opens up a whole new can o' worms.............

My CCW is a 10mm auto. The 10mm is a butt-kicker and a name-taker and more firepower than the majority would carry. Now......should I ever (Lord help me) have occasion to light it off into a bad guy.......would some sleazy lawyer have a case against me for using some "horrifically over-effective caliber"??

[quote=outsidebear;316970
Let's say you had to use lethal force in the event of eminent peril for your, or someone else's life,

"Someone else's life". Again I am wondering if CC laws differ from state to state. In Oklahoma, the law is very specific about who you can protect. Outside of your immediate family and employee/employer, you are not protected from civil liability/prosecution. No doubt everyone should read their state's laws, several times. What state are you in outsidebear?

At present I am 'in' Maine/Maine State/The State of Maine, visiting relatives, uh.....which is why I have wayyy too much computer time - grin!

My lawful State of residence is Wyoming/Wyoming State/The State of Wyoming...and I am even there from time to time! But moving back to Alaska in the near future is high on my list of things to be doing...

Many years ago, after retiring out of Alaska, I elected to become a perpetual traveler upon the land. Since the ex elected to depart, back in 1994, I haven't been late for dinner since!

Nowadays, in my usual wandering about the northwestern States, with my custom western hat making, kayaks, and high country hiking/ways, I am primarily involved in:
'errantry' - the wandering pursuit of chivalrous adventures.

Life is good and should be savored and enjoyed as much as possible while we're still here. There is no going back to do it over again, ya only get one go around and one chance to do it...

Be sure to never stab anyone with a knife you re-sharpened, either. That'll get you in trouble for sure.... :rolleyes:

Always send your knives back to the factory for re-sharpening, before you get in a knife fight. It's the only way to protect yourself from civil suits.... right? :confused:

Makes ya wish you had went to law school don't it?
If the self defense act covers you, you are immune to civil liability as I understand it. All you have to do is pass the criminal investigation and presto, it was self defense and you are in the clear. But.....a question arises about your version of the shooting let's say as to distance. You say it was three feet and for some reason (pick something) that is questioned. Factory ammo can be tested for residue at a given distance and because they can get it from a reliable source (other than you), the findings will hold up in court. The very fact that you had factory ammo could exonerate you. If they test your reloads, would they be viewed as credible evidence? Maybe, maybe not, who knows but if you flunk the criminal part, you are now charged with a crime and no longer immune to civil liability.

Seems to me if you carry a gun for self preservation, you would be interested in any little extra thing that would add to that idea. Maybe it might not ever make a dimes worth of difference but it's one less thing I'll worry about...factory ammo for me.

Now all I have to worry is if my knife is too sharp.

There it is, good common sense! Why would it be so important to carry handloads anyway? Just because you can do something does not always mean it's a good idea and we are not talking about a large expense to buy a couple of boxes of factory ammo.

If you feel compelled to do anything that could be questioned later, I strongly suggest you get qualified legal council beforehand. I doubt a judge will recess court and check this forum for legal opinions.

While we're on the subject of CC, who really understands the law? Oklahoma CC law seems to offer protection from civil liability in a clear cut case of self defense, who wants to define a clear cut case? What is clear to you only needs one idiot screw it up.

I'll admit I don't fully understand all the laws and I have read the Okla CC booklet more than once. For example, I have read where some carry rifles and shotguns in their vehicles. If I understand the law correctly, CC covers handguns only with rifles and shotguns being covered by regular state law. Use your hangun for self defense OK, but pull a loaded rifle from under the seat, whole new can of worms. Do other state laws differ on this?

Sorry but I reload all my own ammo, why would I not reload my carry ammo? You cannot tell the difference between my reloads and factory ammo.
The best advice I see here about the whole subject was. When the police show up don't say a word without a Lawyer present. We were told in our CCW class to tell the officer we were to shaken up to talk, and request a lawyer before any statements were made.
But let me tell you one thing, if someone was going to harm one of my family members, I don't care if I use reloads or factory ammo, as long as I have one or the other in my gun, and as I said before, I pray to god I never have to go that, but I sure as **** am prepared to.

I'd use whatever I had in the gun, also. No question.

But in a gun I choose to wear for defense, I load factory. If and when...the police will take your gun and remaining ammo as evidence, and the forensics lab will test it all (partly to make sure it was your gun and ammo that was used) and they not only can but certainly will learn that those are reloads. In discovery, that fact will be made known to the other side's lawyers. And then the fun will begin - but not for you.

As I've said before, it's your choice. I sincerely hope your choice doesn't end up ruining the lives you save, but if it does, it WAS your choice to do so.

My county in Iowa requires factory loads for any CCW permit qualifications (shooting tests). And they check prior to the test to verify you don't have reloads. Their explanation is due to legal risks, factory should be used.

I've always figured the price of a box of factory is worth the price of reducing the risks. Some times self defense isn't as clear cut (could have run instead of shoot, etc.) as we would like it, as well as the political climate and a politically inclined D.A.. My reloads and factory have the same point o aim, so no problem for me.

Thankfully in Tennessee we now (like Florida) have "no retreat" law in place. Running is certainly a good idea but no longer required. It is an absurd requirement anyway as most people are unaware it exists.
Mike

I am glad I have all you Internet lawyers here, I don't know what I would do....NOT...:rolleyes:

I am no Internet lawyer. However, the content of my post DID come from Mr. L Reese Trimmer, head attorney for the North Carolina Department of Justice. Mr. Trimmer is far from an "Internet Lawyer". His capacity was instructing Law Enforcement Officers, Justice Academy Students, and CCH Instructors in the Legal use of Deadly force, and any related issues.

Mr. Trimmer's field job was representing Officers involved in a Deadly incident. Mr. Trimmer was in Criminal Court as well as Civil Court, in the capacity of an expert witness. The discussion on carrying hand loads in your defensive firearm was just one of MANY tactics used by lawyers in Civil Court cases where Mr. Trimmer was part of the Defendants Legal team.

Mr. Trimmer was correct when he warned us that at least half of those taking the Course to obtain their Concealed Carry License would disagree and try to argue the Law with us during class. His advice to us was to politely tell those students that CCH Instructors are not Attorneys, and if they choose to ignore FACTS from actual case law encountered by the Department of Justice lawyers, they are too narrow minded to comprehend that this part of the course was designed to educate the class of potential downfalls in Civil Court.

Mr. Trimmer was correct. I cited only ONE of MANY pitfalls that will jump up and bite you in court. God Forbid you ever end up in a position where Deadly Force is justified.
If you do, I hope my advice was of some help.

For those of you that know the law better than my Instructors, there is no need to respond to this thread, because you are more informed than I am. I wish you luck going up against an Attorney that is looking at a 50% cut of a huge Civil Settlement. I think some of you vastly underestimate how much information a lawyer with $$$,$$$.$$ in his eyes can pull out of his trick bag in front of a jury.

As I say in class, your own your own once the trigger is pulled.

Redhawk, none of us pretend to be "Internet lawyers."

But arrogance and bluster tends to come to a smoking halt when one has to deal with real ones. Prisons are full of people whose ego led them to do whatever they wanted because they were smarter than everybody else.

While working as an LEO, Hand Loads even in our Off Duty Fire Arm was grounds for dismissel due to liability risks to the Department.

While working as an LEO, Hand Loads even in our Off Duty Fire Arm was grounds for dismissel due to liability risks to the Department.

Interesting fact, but is it germane to the use of handloads by civilians in a defense shooting? An indoor gun club I belong to also bans handloads, but that has nothing to do with criminal culpability. It's strictly an insurance/personal liability issue, as they don't want someone w/ a double charged round sending pistol parts flying around the range.

You guys are forgetting what a huge favor ol' Mas has done for us.....

Single-handedly, he has managed to supress ALL known court cases where the fact that reloads were used, was used against the defendent. That's why you don't see any of those in print.

We can't be publishing any actual court cases where reloads were used, because that would jeapordize all of his hard work. And let the sleazy civil trial lawyers get an easy payday....

:rolleyes:

I opened this can of worms so let me try and close it up. Not all factory ammo looks the same and I refuse to carry plain FMJs, round or flat nose.
I have to agree that handloads might cause a problem. To those of you who believe using your own is a freedom you don't want to give up,(I'm leaning that way) I offer the following as a possible defense/compromise for personal defense rounds:

1. Use Speer GDHPs or any bullet that has a "factory loaded"
counterpart. Then you could prove from published load data that your
loads are not super lethal or extraordinary.

OR

2. Make a defense round using WCs or SWCs, the heaviest you can find
for your caliber if you're a big bullet lover. Then you can claim that
your ammo is designed to make neat holes in paper targets, not kill more
efficiently.

OF COURSE this is not legal advice. Check it out with your own attorney if needed. I hope none of us has to use any of this advice.
Good luck to all,
Mike

Redhawk, none of us pretend to be "Internet lawyers."

But arrogance and bluster tends to come to a smoking halt when one has to deal with real ones. Prisons are full of people whose ego led them to do whatever they wanted because they were smarter than everybody else.

Well until I see proof in writing and not on some thread with a bunch of LEO's and guys that heard from a 5th cousin. I will use and carry my reloads, when and if I ever have to use it, I know they will go bang. And that my friend is all that matters to me.

While working as an LEO, Hand Loads even in our Off Duty Fire Arm was grounds for dismissel due to liability risks to the Department..

Sounds like a departmental policy.

I'm not sure proof in writing is a good argument. Things happen everday and don't show up on the internet. I've looked for info on a trial that I know took place and can't find even a mention... not a scrap anywhere.

I found a link http://www.haroldfishdefense.org/ that may illustrate how the court may work against you in a self defense situation. Although handloads are not involved, the "big" gun theory is.

Assuming this is a legitimate case, (it looks real to me) all the more reason to do everything you can to cover your rear end.

P.S. This took place in Arizona, Maybe kdub will know if this hit the news there.

Ok Folks, I have had several Pm's concerning this subject. Most relate to case law. The fact is there have been so FEW CCH holder Lethal Force incidents, that there is not enough case law on the books to answer your questions. The last count I saw showed CCH holders involved in the .001 percentile of deadly force shootings. Needless to say, the Liberal Media will never give those numbers much coverage.

To me that is GREAT news for the anti's that STILL scream CCH laws will turn the streets into Dodge City, with the streets running red with blood.

You could also use look at that number and think " 1/10th of 1 percent! I have nothing to worry about legally, since the odds are I will never use deadly force"

I can't argue the numbers, and I pray no one ever has to take a life. I also can't offer you any pertinent case law to give you a fool proof means of carry that will protect you in civil court.

I'm sure you have all seen my post on the pitfalls of carrying hand loads in your carry rig. I also strongly advocate using a factory made ammo that was designed for Defensive purposes. I have to admit I was shocked at the backlash, by those that are adamant about using hand loads. Maybe I should clarify my reasoning on this issue.

As stated before, Legal Issues involving the justified use of Deadly Force is a MANDATORY class that Every CCH Instructor must pass to before being licensed by the State of NC. The class is taught ONLY by the NC Department of Justice.The
course Instructor is the Senior lawyer on staff. His job, besides teaching this class, is the Attorney supplied to Law Enforcement Officials that have been involved in a Deadly Force incident. He is also used as an Expert Witness in the Civil Suit for wrongful death against the LEO. The family of the deceased can file a civil suit against the officer, even if he was declared not guilty of wrongful death in Criminal Court. Considering that my Instructor has seen most every legal trick used by District Attorneys, to the other end of the scale, consisting of "ambulance chasing" Lawyers,
that he would be the most qualified person around on what to expect in court.

Just to let you know, when I was first approached about taking the required classes to become a CCH Instructor, I went to the Sheriff's Department, City Police Chief's, and Highway Patrol District Office, of the 4 County area in which I lived and had a discussion on their Personal thoughts of CCH. Every one asked me about exactly what training the students would receive in my class. The majority of them were unsure of CCH procedure, and admitted they were wary of the process. After they went over the ENTIRE course with me, the admitted that the class was much more involved than they thought, and their opinions changed to positive after seeing the course outline. Only one of the LEO's I talked to was aware that the Chief and his Assistants were required to take the Exact Same Course at the Justice Academy that the Instructors take. IMO the Officers were impressed when they learned they would be setting side by side with the Instructors on such a vital portion of the training.

After we went over the class, I asked them what I should concentrate on in my course. (This was the most crucial information I received, being that my Class outline must be presented to the Justice Academy, and only after it was approved was I given the Documents that allowed me to certify my students.) Each Officer had their own views of the potential pitfalls they thought critical. EVERY officer told me that covering your self legally was a must. They pretty much shared the opinion that Civil Court was a nightmare, where common sense meant little or nothing.

After that process was over, I made an appointment with an attorney to discuss potential liability. I ended up with two different release forms after the visit, one a standard waiver of injury during the course, and the other where the Student verified that they understood 100% of the Use of Deadly Course segment of the class, and that they made a score of 100% on the written exam given on the Legal Portion of class. I also went over the Justice Department course, and him about the hand load thing. (This lawyer was also an avid shooter). He plainly told me the key to winning in ANY court was to do as much as possible BEFORE you get to court. On the drive home, it all started to sink in. The more time you spend in court, the higher your legal fee. The Justice Academy Instructor has seen it all. His tips on no hand loads wasn't something he pulled out of thin air.(believe me, there are MANY more things to
consider before you have to defend yourself) Why would he make up a story like that? He has no motive to tell us anything but the truth. If that's the first advice he offered, it must be something he encountered a lot! If he was totally off base, there were over 100 LEO's in the same class as me, and none of them questioned him?

In closing, what possible motive would I have in posting the same advice I received?
I don't sell firearms or ammunition. Why would I lie about something so important.
One thing I learned from MY lawyer was If one of my students ends up in Civil Court, theres a **** good chance they drag me there aw well, after all, I was their instructor. It would be outright stupidity for me to give anyone bad information.

The one thing that really bothers me, and always will is why you would ever consider carrying hand loads in a carry gun? I admit I take great pride when my hunting loads drop a deer in it's tracks.
Are you going to brag about the wound channel if you take another humans life?
I'm not criticizing your choice. I honestly would love to hear your reason for using hand loads.

I do hope I give you all something to think about. There is no advantage I know of in using hand loads in a defensive gun. If there is one, please tell me. As for me, I will continue to avoid ANY thing that even gives a lawyer another subject to discuss in court. Time is money, and it takes time to remove the nonsense a lawyer can plant in the jury's mind. In the end, their decision decides if your paying on a settlement and legal fees all of your life.

Thanks for the read.

Well I tried to get a box of appropriate factory ammo for my .357 today, but no one had what I was looking for.

Basically I want a 125 grain JSP bullet at around 1100 fps. I've found this is about the best compromise in my particular 4" revolver for what I want to do. That's quite a bit below what a full power .357 runs in my gun, but a bit more than a .38 +p will do.

So until I can get my hands on a box of "Gold dot/short barrel" factory .357 ammo, i'll stick with my plan. Although this thread has given me something to think about.

I agree that the use of deadly force statues is what we need to be paying the most attention to, wholeheartedly.

But.... let's talk attorneys for a minute. You can get two kinds of answers from an attorney, when the questions is the same.

One is, "what can I get away with, considering the current laws & past cases that have been tried?" That's the push-the-envelope answer.

Second is, "what is the worst possible outcome, considering a court may come up with a new, never-before-heard interpretation of the law?" That's the worst-case, CYA liability answer.

The truth is generally somewhere in the middle.

I do carry factory ammo in my carry gun - because I simply don't have time to mess with handloading for it. I think a box of Cor-Bons is one of the best values you can get. I can't justify handloading for carry for the time I would spend driving back and forth to the range to test a handload, let alone the components.

But if I have to whack some miscreant with the gun I have at hand, and it has handloads in it, frankly that will not concern me in the least.

When the first publicly verified case of this being an issue is confirmed.... I think it will finally have some legs. Till then, I think ol' Mas and his friends are just selling fear, and setting themselves up as experts by claiming this is a huge issue (when it can't be independently verified).

After all.... when you read a report of a new super-dooper hunting rifle/gun/cartridge/bullet, don't they at least try to put a picture or two in the magazine as evidence it works? How come this is such a big secret, otherwise?????

I am new to the whole handloading thing. I got my first handgun just over a year ago and just started handloading.

I may be very wrong here, but it seems ridiculous to add the increased liability, even if it is only potential or even theorized liability for using hand loads. Can you really increase the stopping power to an extent that much greater than offered in factory loads? Are you trying to take down a bear with a .22?

Maybe instead of creating some frankenstien round, switch to a different carry weapon. I have no doubts that my .357 or my .45 could stop anything short of a moose, and thats assuming that I can't run away or get more than one shot off.

The whole concept seems a little unreasonable to me...

AVIVIII, it is the fact that one DID try to make the round more powerful/deadly/effective (choose one) that will get him convicted in a court. You hit it in the x-ring.

And you also hit it about planning versus emergency use. One should have factory ammo in a gun he PLANS to wear or use for self defense. But if you must defend yourself, you'd use whatever you had at that second: factory, handloads, axe or a five-iron.

First off, I carry factory ammo becuase like an ealier post I don't have a lot of time to go to the range and other things involved in handloading defensive rounds. I'm not rally for or against using handloads Each to his own. But I have one insight that you may want to consider, those against handloads use the excuse of liability of handloads because they were made with more power etc. Well any halfway decent lawyer could make the same arguements about our intent with the factory loads (look at how many types of factory loads are out there) we bought. The only difference is we bought the factory loads and made the handloads.

I am new to the whole handloading thing. I got my first handgun just over a year ago and just started handloading.

I may be very wrong here, but it seems ridiculous to add the increased liability, even if it is only potential or even theorized liability for using hand loads. Can you really increase the stopping power to an extent that much greater than offered in factory loads? Are you trying to take down a bear with a .22?

Maybe instead of creating some frankenstien round, switch to a different carry weapon. I have no doubts that my .357 or my .45 could stop anything short of a moose, and thats assuming that I can't run away or get more than one shot off.

The whole concept seems a little unreasonable to me...

Great thinking on your part. Most things firearm related is a matter of common sense.

As for the 357 or 45 acp stopping anything short of a moose, that is a very common theory that is for the most part untrue. The 357 & 45 do have some of the best numbers in the one shot stop category, you need to remember your talking about a handgun. Handguns simply do not have the energy of a center fire rifle or a shotgun at 7 yards, (the majority of self defense shots are in that range). A head shot increases the odds of the one shot handgun stop, and a center mass shot that catches the spinal column also increases your odds. If you encounter someone under the influence of narcotics, a head or spine shot might be the only way to stop a bad guy. Ask any LEO what persons using Angel Dust can do. It is amazing what it takes to stop someone in that condition.

In less you intend to carry the 44mag or the new breed of hand canons,(454, S&W 500, etc.) it is a good idea to condition your mind to keep firing until the threat has ceased. Since most ranges now ban rapid fire, an excellent drill is the old 2 to the chest, on to the head. Instead of randomly punching holes in paper, I load 3 rounds and take slow, deliberate shots, pretending to engage an attacker. You will be surprised how quickly you will start hitting the X ring on the chest & head. Preparation is the best tool we have, and any practice is good. A practice session that conditions your mind and body is even better.

Take Care

I am new to the whole handloading thing. I got my first handgun just over a year ago and just started handloading.

I may be very wrong here, but it seems ridiculous to add the increased liability, even if it is only potential or even theorized liability for using hand loads. Can you really increase the stopping power to an extent that much greater than offered in factory loads? Are you trying to take down a bear with a .22?

Maybe instead of creating some frankenstien round, switch to a different carry weapon. I have no doubts that my .357 or my .45 could stop anything short of a moose, and thats assuming that I can't run away or get more than one shot off.

The whole concept seems a little unreasonable to me...

All of your statement's are way off base. I don't hand load to make a more powerful round, I hand load for accuracy. So before you start making off the wall remarks such as "frankenstien round" you need to get your facts straight.
I carry a 40 S&W as my carry, a far cry from a bear killer. If I was carrying my 4 inch 500 Mag for my CCW, I might see some validity to your statements.
Also, I don't know many people reloading .22's do you.
If you don't want to carry hand loads, that is fine by me, If I choose to carry my hand loads, I will.

Think SLIMEBALL LAWYERS Factory loads are not good enough for you But YOU had to make homemade amunition that is MORE POWERFUL and MORE DEADLY To insure MORE PAIN & SUFFERING on the poor victum that you shot because he was trying to rob you, Its not worth the extra agravation or lawsuits because you don't want to spend $25 bucks on a box of good ammo or think handloads are better -- Hunting yes- self-defense no



Just my 2cents worth on the subject

Bamajohn

c'mon, the .22 comment was obvious sarcasm, seriously.

look, I am not faulting anyone for making or carrying handloads. The title of the thread and the question here is the legality thereof. All I am saying is if the legality is in question, why push it for no reason.

Now you say that your reasoning is for accuracy. Ok, I can buy that.

My question for you is, at what range do you intend to engage a would-be attacker? And if that range requires superb accuracy, above that which is available from a high-quality manufacturer, I think that your legal concern might be better focused on reasoning and justification for shooting someone at an extended range instead of diffusing the situation by leaving.

Nobody here said you CAN'T carry handloads, Redhawk. Just trying to covey what might happen if you choose to. No different than advising what might happen to you if you choose to not wear a seatbelt, or if you choose to bungee jump, or run the bulls at Pamplona, or call a SEAL a sissy. You are free to do all those things. But if you wind up bankrupt, hurt, or in prison, just remember it was YOUR choice.

Likewise, the rest of us are free to make our own.

I have used reloads in my CCW firearms for 40 years. The use of factory ammo is not an absolute defense against being sued. Police use factory ammo and get sued on a regular basis. You can be sued today for any reason or no reason. I have had one encounter with a CCW weapon and reloads and no one was concerned that I was using reloads. It is a personal decison and I have made my choice. It is better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6. All the best...
Gil

Gil, you got it right. If the screwed up judicial system cannot get you for one thing they will try to get you for another. If you get adjudicated for murder, they will go after you for wrongful death. Regardless if you use a factory round or a reload.
And I can't agree more, It is better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6

When I started this thread I was undecided but now I'm going with the other handloaders like Gil and Redhawk. First of all handloading is just plain fun and a freedom I don't want to give up. Second there is no warm and fuzzy or painless self defense bullet no matter who loads it. They (the opposing attorneys) are going to try and paint you as a cruel super killer one way or another. If I could GUARANTEE stopping a killer by using a weapon which shoots the flat side of a one pound skillet I would use it. Until then I will continue to use what bullets are available for the calibers I carry using suggested load data. For me it's all about freedom and we as a people have given up too many freedoms already for "feel good" laws like the ones that make gun opponents happy.

Good luck to all no matter which you choose.
Mike in Memphis

i carry handloads in mine but i only carry mine when im going hunting or to the shooting range. if i was to carry specificaly for defence i would use factory ammo just to be safe. i personaly like hornady and hydra shock for my 1911 they feed good and are fairly accurate in my gun(wilson combat mags will feed anything reliably) i reload because $7.00 a box of 50 jacketed hollow point accurate reload or $20 a box of 20 not as accurate personal defence rounds

I enjoy shooting handloads from my guns, but for CCW mine is loaded with hornady TAP. The legal issues are bunk either way, it was either a justified shooting or not. The ammo shouldn't matter. But it does. Why do you think the Black Talons are no longer around ?

Reputation. It got a name as being a "cop killer" when at the time thats what all of the local police carried in their 40's. The bleeding heart socialist liberal gun grabbers latched onto that rep like a pit bull. Winchester buckled under the weight and pulled the Talons (even though the Ranger SXT is eerily similar;)).

Handloads in the liberal media are always associated with super far right wing anarchist miltias. That is the same slant the prosecuter would put on it. Just like carrying spare mags apparently makes you a "Rambo" type killer. And unfortunately, that jury of "peers" most likely haven't been around guns that much, and are biased against them, and the people that practice their right to protect themselves by carrying them.


So I guess we should all be carrying 1851 Navy's with ball ammo, because whether you carry handloads or loads such as the TAP, Hydra-Shok, or Ranger SXT you will still be prosecuted as an anti-social, uber right wing conspiracy theorist that just COULDN'T WAIT to shoot someone.


But then again, what do I know? I'm just another gun crazy!

I am a dedicated handloader.I will shoot factory ammo that is given to me,but have no need to buy any--except for my S&W 38 special.That is my personal defense weapon,and is always loaded with factory ammo.
I do not want any,however slight,factor cause me to be hesitant to fire when I have a reason to do so.The ammunition that I use is designed just for that use.I cannot make any that is better.I live in a state where the legal profession will pick up on any small item to defend a criminal.
I stick with the factory ammo.
Frank

It's interesting how this constantly comes up. I carried handloads for a long time, because nothing commercially available met my needs. Now commercial stuff addresses those needs and does so better than my handloads, so I switched.

I guess there's three issues people have to consider if they're deciding what to do regarding this issue:
Given how I use my firearms, what advantages is there to me using handloads rather than factory ammunition?
How does the quality and external ballistics of my handloads stack up against factory ammunition?
What are the real life - not imagined - risks that use of handloads will actually become an issue when the police/authorities review the shooting?For most people, I believe, the answer is they're better off selecting their defensive ammunition from Double Tap, CorBon, or somebody similar.

However, that is a general statement and each person has to review their own circumstances.

As for the legal implications... I don't think so.

Ayoob has indeed written many articles referring to this. However, he always cites the same two incidents in these articles - when he cites any at all. One would think his list of examples would grow, or at least change from one article to the next, due to the piling up of additional cases over the years he has been issuing this dire warning. My personal suspicion is that he uses the same two over and over again because they are the only two he has ever become aware of - you of course are free to draw your own differing conclusion as to why this is.

In both of these instances, the handloads weren't even the major factor. In the first, his police acquaintance had loaded ammunition considerably hotter than the issue ammunition they were using back in the day, but the central point was that this was a negligent discharge where he had insufficient justification to shoot in the first place. Was the issue the fact they were nasty handloads - or the fact he violated policy on what he was supposed to use? Civilians don't get issued ammunition, and why would we presume that handloads are always more powerful than what is being issued to police? Not only that, but how do you follow the advice to "carry what the local cops carry" - within half an hour of my place I can run into four different agencies carrying four entirely separate gun/cartridge combinations. Not including the local feds of course. And that's before I start driving further beyond the immediate area.

Oh... buddy was still acquitted, BTW.

The second frequently mentioned case involved an apparently suicidal girlfriend/wife (it's been a couple of years since I read the stories of each case). The issue was whether he murdered her or she shot herself; the state used ammunition other than what he had in the revolver for ballistics testing. His lawyer, apparently, didn't feel any particular need to take issue with what was clearly an undefendable way of collecting forensic evidence. If you were using Speer's new factory Short Barrel defensive loads in your snubby, would you mind terribly if the state did their forensic testing with Speer's regular Gold Dot loads - or perhaps Winchester instead because they just happened to have some laying around? If they were all factory loads... "no problem"?

So, were the handloads a problem - or was the real problem retaining a moron for a lawyer and then the defendant being a moron himself for allowing his lawyer to accept that forensic evidence without attacking the validity of the methodology?

If there really were the evil threat of lawyers tearing people to pieces over the issue of handloads, where's all the evidence of this. Let's do some really rough gross error checking:

Nobody on this site seem's to disagree with Kleck's claim that there are around 2.5 million defensive uses of firearms each year. And that only about 1% result in any shots fired. So now we have about 25,000 incidents per year where shots are fired. Of course, some of those are warning shots, some complete misses, etc. I don't know how to break it down beyond that, but let's take a ballpark guess which I think is a little bit lowball and say about 3% of actual shootings involve the use of handloads by the "dummies" who aren't frightened witless of what might happen if they carry a handgun for self defense.... errrr... sorry, wrong argument, carry handloads for self defense. So that's... what... about 750 instances each year in the US where somebody shoots an assailant with their handloads?

Okay, 750 instances of handload use times about 25 years of intensive magazine writing on self defense by Ayood and others. So we have two instances identified where handloads became an issue in court (not the central one, BTW) compared to, (to keep the numbers simple), about 20,000 defensive shootings with handloads. So... shouldn't we be able to hear dozens of new cites to trials involving handguns, instead of the same old ones year in and year out?

So, you have about a 1/10,000 chance of having your use of handloads becoming an issue leading to court. Thinking back to your university statistical analysis courses, what do you need for a confidence interval to even have statistical significance? Most will agree that the narrowest interpretation of that would be about three σ. 1/10,000 falls so far below that test that it isn't even a significant number.

To put it on more personal terms, if somebody told you that if you carried a handgun for self defense, you had a 1/10,000 chance of having it taken from you and used against you - would you decide that carrying a handgun was just too risky?

I doubt you would.

In fact, for every cite of handloads being an issue at trial, I can probably find three or four instances where someone carrying a firearm for self defense had it taken away and used against them. Logically, if the liability of carrying handloads is too risky, than the much greater chance that your weapon will be used against you is so risky that you'll get rid of it immediately. Why would you find a minor level of risk to be too much and yet a greater risk that could cost you your life be acceptable?

Incidentally, if someone doesn't like the numbers in the best guess, ballpark estimates I used above, feel free to suggest numbers you think are more likely.

While we're on the topic of fear of the legal system, will lawyersl eat you up if you use a handgun with an aggressive name like "Cobra" or "combat masterpiece"??? Yes, Ayoob warns against that one as well; it appeared in one of his columns about a year ago. With the bad name Glocks are getting in the newspapers these days, I suppose it is just a matter of time before we shouldn't carry Glock's anymore... So those of you who wouldn't carry handloads because of the warnings of how the legal system will interprete that - will you also get rid of your sidearm if it has an aggressive or provocative model name so the lawyer's can't make something out of that?

And will they will eat you up if you've been foolish enough to attend some nasty tactical school with a name like "Lethal Force Institute".

What about if you use a laser and then deliberately drilled him right through the sternum when you could just as easily have used the laser to shoot the assailant in the leg? Better to leave the laser off than leave yourself open to that legal assault?

Now all of these things CAN happen... and in fact, all this stuff we're supposed to cringe in fear and run away from has happened at one time or another in the past. However (as we like to tell the gun grabbers when they're condemning firearms after some tragedy) the exception does not prove the rule. Or anything close to it.

There are assorted and many good reasons for factory ammunition to be a better choice in the majority of personal situations, for the majority of people, but fear of what the state might do isn't a very credible reason.

Incidentally, while on the subject of lawyers, this question was addressed to Mitch Vilas at my concealed carry course. He dealt only with the legal issues as a lawyer, not endorsing handloads or commenting one way or another. He did say, however, that any decent lawyer representing you should be able to come up with just as many arguments that put using handloads in a good light as the other side could trying to put them in a bad light. But if you hire and retain an incompetent lawyer, then you're probably going to lose no matter what the issue de jour becomes.

I'm quite comfortable carrying factory ammunition these days, even though I know that a thoughtful handloader can assemble ammunition every bit as reliable as factory ammunition, although probably not to the performance levels of factory premium ammunition within SAAMI specs. Within my treasures box are two issued service rounds that went "click" when they should have gone "boom" - fortunately, these happened at qualification shoots I was range officer on, not on duty. Factory rounds have their moments as well...

So I wouldn't be concerned if I felt a need to carry handloaded defensive ammunition again. On the other hand, given the variety and performance of personal defense ammunition these days, I suspect 99.99% of the folks out there would be better off in all ways using quality ammunition such as that put out by Speer, Cor-Bon, Double Tap, etc.

But that doesn't mean we should be dropping our guts about the possibility of being dragged through the courts because we used handloads or because the model name of our handgun is "Cobra", "Terminator", etc when at best less than a handful of instances of that happening can be produced from the last 30 years or whatever.

In the end, of course, you need to do what makes you feel comfortable. And if nothing more aggressive than a Ladysmith loaded with wadcutters is what makes you feel safest from potential legal problems, then that's what you should go with.

Thanks for the great post Jager.

Jager (sorry, don't know how to put the dots over the "a") has finally put this issue in proper perspective. When I first opened this can of worms I confess to some degree of paranoia because I was grossly outnumbered when discussing this with the group at the range, but Jager's arguments have cured this condition.

He did a good job making the case if you want to handload your personal defense ammo. Now here's my WHY:

1. It's not a pride thing. It's not that I think I can load a round superior to what the manufacturers can produce.

2. It's not a penny wise pound foolish savings issue. If I can afford the guns in the first place (I have 4 handguns) I can certainly afford a few magazines full of Speer Gold Dots or any other pricey round.

It's a FREEDOM thing. I'm doing it because I can. Every round I crank out on my little Lee 4 hole turret press is a celebration of the freedom I enjoy as a citizen of the Great State of Tennessee and the USA. How many governments (some here unfortunately) forbid owning gunpowder, much less handguns.

Finally, popularity of a given opinion has never swayed me much (and yes, I've suffered sometimes for it). It wasn't popular to volunteer for Vietnam duty in 1968 either, but I sleep very well at night. I will start using my own loads for carry soon. The only thing remaining is personal quality control. I'm averaging 1 dud for every 150 rounds or so. I need significant improvement here.

I'm grateful and thankful that I live in a land where we have these choices.
Thanks again Jager.

Mike in Tennessee

Mes49
Your a man after my own heart!! :) I agree 100% I really hate it when someone tells me I can't /shouldn't do something just because it might have consequences down the road! It's my *** don't you worry about it!! Freedom is a beautiful thing!!:)

I'm averaging 1 dud for every 150 rounds or so. I need significant improvement here.Mike in Tennessee

That number of dudds would not be acceptable to any ammunition factory. I suggest that you find the cause of that.

Quality control is a big factor for ammunition that you stake your life on!

Parachute packing comes to mind here. Fold your own or have faith in the parachute makers word that "your money will be cheerfully refunded if this chute fails to open".

I "lack control" of primers as a handloader.
I "have control" of all other stages of ammunition assembly.

I "prefer" to pack my own parachute.

Cheezywan

That "number of dudds" is not acceptable in my ammunition factory either. Didn't I admit as much? Why repeat the obvious?

Jager,

Very well said. What strikes me is that any (other) semi-serious researcher, on earth, would love to boost their credibility with documented proof of what they claim as theory.

Aside from monthly newstand rags, decent journals/periodicals are chock full of references to other published works, experiments, rulings, et al. There's a reason for that. If you want to move your pet theory from 'crackpot' to 'proven,' you need to cite proof, and show the evidence to your peers for analysis.

Ol' Mas can't, or won't, do that. Or the data doesn't exist. Or the existing data doesn't support his conclusions.

Right now, without proof, his opinion is just that - an opinion. People give him way too much credit as a serious researcher, when he's committed the grave sin of not being able to prove anything he says.

That "number of dudds" is not acceptable in my ammunition factory either. Didn't I admit as much? Why repeat the obvious?

Please pardon me mes49. I did not intend for it to be taken that way. Was ment as comment about quality control not to be taken personaly.

I tend to agree with you very much in your comments of personal freedom and the celebration there of.

jager spoke very well on the subject. Bravo

Cheezywan

It's a FREEDOM thing. I'm doing it because I can.
You, of course, have every right to do that. However, my approach is to be VERY pragmatic in the equipment I carry and the ammunition in it. We have lots of other areas to celebrate and display our freedom in, without using ammunition as one of those venues.

The reality is that it is very difficult to better the defensive potential of the ammunition on the market today. I have no idea how you would handload similar low flash ammunition, and it would be difficult indeed to match the ballistics of this special purpose ammunition within SAAMI specs.

I'm obviously not against reloading carry ammunition, but speaking only for myself, when I did that I had a very good and specific reason for doing that. That reason has disappeared with the advent of the commercial rounds I carry now that offer a similar round and at significantly higher velocity to boot. So I still do a pile of reloading, but that stuff goes to the range. When a quality commercial round can get the bullet I want moving at much higher velocities than I can handload that bullet to, and do it within SAAMI specs, using low flash powders, then to my way of thinking I would be crazy to continue carrying a handload that didn't offer all of that.

These days it is getting tougher and tougher to be able to say the bullet you favour isn't available in a premium defensive loading - usually with better ballistics than you can safely achieve with handloads. That's just a fact; it doesn't have anything to do with what lawyers might do or whatever.

The only thing remaining is personal quality control. I'm averaging 1 dud for every 150 rounds or so. I need significant improvement here.Yes you do; that's terrible reliability. You're getting oil/grease all over your primers or something. I can't remember the last time I had a dud, and I think more than a few handloaders can say the same thing. You really need to examine the components you're using and think of what you're doing.

I'm with you man. Thats my point exactly

Jager.
I admire your logic. I think I'll PM you in the future before I create another never ending thread. As I wrote, reliability is the one reason I'm not using my own as yet.
Mike

Late Entry: Firearm Laws differ from state to state.
Several members have pointed out that their states don't allow 'Good Shootings' cases to go to court.
* I can testify that in Alabama on a half dozen 'Good Shoots' that our Officers had to go to court on Civil Cases, then again on Civil Rights Violation cases. (These were all after the Officers had been cleared of wrong doing by the FBI /State District Attorneys ect... (Most states have laws simular to Alabama's)
REMEMBER THIS: Going to court is a 'Crap Shoot'.
(Surefire winning cases have lost, and some very poor cases have won)
Stay out of court if you can...

Talked to A Leo that was involved in a shooting. They took his weapon but gave him another one. He got it back later he said the bullets had ben pulled to see if he had reloaded them hotter than issue. If they checked his why not check every ones that was in a shooting. Better safe than sorry I think.

I find that hard to believe, how do they know what powder was used and how much was used ? The batches are never the same and the load may be different from lot to lot. JMO

Exactly. That would have been completely meaningless information.

"The reality is that it is very difficult to better the defensive potential of the ammunition on the market today. I have no idea how you would handload similar low flash ammunition, and it would be difficult indeed to match the ballistics of this special purpose ammunition within SAAMI specs."

Wrong I can match or surpass any factory round within SAAMI Specs!!! I don't give two ****'s about surpress flash powder! You go ahead and support the Big factory guy's and buy there over priced "SD" ammo . I'll use my High Quality reloads at pennies per round!:) Isn't freedom great!!

The very best way to stack the odds in your favor in court is to have only one witness present. You.

our instructor in nc basically said the same thing, you will wind up in civil court even if they do not press charges... also that you are going to be arrested irregardless of the circumstances of the shooting while they investigate.. personally i dont like handcuffs or the county lockup.

Get the Gold Dots. I handload and trust my ammo but I don't want any extra liability. Why take any extra chances, it would be bad enough if you had to shoot someone and worse if you had to defend your mentality. It just aint worth it. I'll bet this question comes up in most carry classes. The instructor that I went to was very specific about not using handloads.


I've never heard it come up in any of the CCW classes I've taken. And I've had a ccw here in Texas since GWB signed the CCW laws here in Tx.

[quote=lumberjak;316751]
Say you fire your handload at a threat and by some chance, you clip some belly fat and the bullet hits the small unseen child. If you don't think an attorney will have a field day with the horrible deadly murderous ammo you created, then you have nothing to worry about. Quote


Lumberjack

Overpenetration can happen with factory ammo also.


Yeah but it wasen't a home brew.

Tom j.

one question, if you do shoot and / or kill in self defense, are you 100% guaranteed to be brought to court? i had figured that if its obvious your life was in danger (i.e. a gun lying next to your assailant) you would have very few legal problems

Even if it's a real open/shut self defense situation, you'll still have to go thru a police investigation and might be put in the slammer for a time. You'll need lawyer and will probably have to post bond to get out of jail. It depends alot on the attitudes of the cops and DA's where you live as to how intense it will be. If you live in an anti-gun big city, it could be very bad.

After you're cleared of criminal charges you can still be sued by any of the victim's crazy, drug addled relatives that can find a lawyer willing to go after you for wrongful death, etc. That can take years and thousands of dollars to defend against. You can counter sue for frivolous lawsuits, but even if you won, these folks wouldn't have a pot to p*** in anyway. You might end up wishing that you were the one who got shot initially.

Even if it's a real open/shut self defense situation, you'll still have to go thru a police investigation and might be put in the slammer for a time. You'll need lawyer and will probably have to post bond to get out of jail. It depends alot on the attitudes of the cops and DA's where you live as to how intense it will be. If you live in an anti-gun big city, it could be very bad.

After you're cleared of criminal charges you can still be sued by any of the victim's crazy, drug addled relatives that can find a lawyer willing to go after you for wrongful death, etc. That can take years and thousands of dollars to defend against. You can counter sue for frivolous lawsuits, but even if you won, these folks wouldn't have a pot to p*** in anyway. You might end up wishing that you were the one who got shot initially.


There are those states that have laws protecting people from wrongful death suits if they were found justified in the shooting.

Is that the case in Texas? Great idea, but I can't see it happening in WA