Are legal concerns over carrying handloads trivial?

[Rockstar]

taliv: Nope, didn't "miss" the point; just ignored the case cites, assuming quite correctly they they'd not be germane to this discussion.

Ayoob: Don't waste a lot of of your valuable beer-drinking, chain-smoking, gunrag-writing, seminar-giving time worrying about my well-being in the real estate market. I'm better educated, smarter, taller and have a great deal more real legal experience than you. (and am much better connected in the legal profession than you could ever hope to be) BTW, get somebody who's actually attended college to explain "subjunctive" to you. I'd find further "discussions" of civil and criminal legal matters with a phony like you about as entertaining as I find observing Clark's idiotic posts on reloading.

Choosing to use redundancy for effect, I'd repeat that I have a problem with taking legal advice from a non-lawyer. Hopefully, I'll never need to use a weapon in self-defense. Should I, however, find myself in a situation where I do have to use a weapon in self-defense, rest assured that I won't depend on phony lawyers or pretend cops/gunrag writers for my legal advice and/or representation.

 

[massad ayoob]

Hey, Rockstar...

What I like most about you, Rockstar, is your mature, well-educated civility...

With all you say you know about the law, did no law professor or seasoned trial tactician ever tell you to actually CHECK OUT the resume of the guy you were going to bad-mouth? Apparently not...must have been the same law school where they taught you not to bother checking case cites...

Please explain to us where your position in the real estate market is germane to the discussion. BTW, how much of that is inherited real estate...?

Since I just finished my last seminar of the season and don't have to write a gun magazine article until the day after tomorrow, I think I'll crack open a Rolling Rock, light up a smoke, and welcome midnight by responding to your BS.

I would almost stipulate that you are indeed taller than me (SO many people are, dammit...) but for the fact that I've been around enough not to make assumptions and pretend them to be fact. Unlike you...

Do you have more "real legal experience" than me? Can't stipulate to that, either, since I and anyone reading this can only access one side of the comparison. I post under my own name, and anyone can Google that and get an idea who I am. Clark Magnuson too, for that matter. You, on the other hand, are hiding from that.

What it is, Rockstar, is that us poor, uneducated dumbasses only know how to check out people who use their real names. For so long as you continue to hide behind the yellow curtain of your Net Ninja Nickname as you send your cowardly poison pen letters, no one can determine who or what you really are.

Well, let me clarify that. You've gone a long way in your postings here and elsewhere to clarify WHAT you are. Now, the rest of us are just working on the "who" part.

If you'd ever done the homework you should have made second nature in that advanced education of yours, you would have learned that I don't give legal advice. Like a driving instructor, I teach "the rules of the road," and the lessons that have accumulated on that long and unforgiving road.

Hey, dude, it's after midnight, and I'm gonna go to bed. Gotta get up tomorrow morning and help a human being who's in some serious trouble. Will be off line for most of the day, but will be back later...wouldn't miss the followup for the world.

The Rolling Rock was good, and the smoke was satisfying, and I'll go to bed musing on the irony of a man throwing the words "phony" and "pretend" at me when he doesn't have the guts to sign his own name.

Get a good night's sleep, "Rockstar."

 

[strambo]

Welcome to the board Mas, I always enjoy hearing anyone's real world experience on a topic. Kinda hard to make informed decisions without some evidence. Please disregard the name callers, it's not typical THR behavior (certaily not in the handloading section!).

I don't get why Mr. Ayoob's (or anyone's) personal reputation even matters. He cited several cases and the problems and arguments presented in them for consideration. Perhaps instead of attacking him, those folks should cite cases and experiences of their own so we can all make informed decisions. Rockstar, I enjoyed reading about your conversations and experience with judges and other attorneys...that is useful. The personal atttacks are not and only cause me to question your credibility and motives. Why is this personal? Roll your own and take your chances or buy factory and take different chances.

 

[Larryect]

Pax:

All:
I am curious to know who is responsible for the bar graph on the "poll." At the time I checked, only five respondents (HSmith, Taliv, Jerkface11, RecoilRob, and ThirdRail) had actually stated that they weren't worried about carrying handloads and implied that it was a trivial concern, but many more were listed under the question that appears to favor carrying reloads. Two, Pax and me, had listed ourselves as concerned with the matter and not thinking it trivial, but only one was listed.

I added to the "We don't need factory loads" by mistake. I'm tired and mis-read it.

I will tell you I have a friend that served on the jury of a "self Defense" case. An off-duty cop (I think) had some trouble with an ex's new boy friend and ended up shooting him (DRT). There was much to-do on both sides of the argument made of the fact the cop had taken his regular hollow-points out and put in FMJ's before going to a requested meeting. And, this was discussed by the jury. Any more, most jury members are not neccesarily familiar with guns. He was found inocent, but it was close.

I was recently on a jury in a case of "brandishing" One member of the jury pool stated ONLY cops and military need to use or brandish weapons. I was glad he was excused.

Do I believe ammo type or manufacture could be an issue? - ABSOLUTELY.

I carry factory "self-defense" ammo.

 

[Larryect]

No one else is concerned about factory ammo just plain not going off? Touch off some without a flashole sometime. It'll lock your gun up solid.

I'm sure it CAN happen. However, I have never had a factory round fail to fire. I probably have not shot as much as others here. What are the odds???

 

[taliv]

strambo +1

I'm sure it CAN happen. However, I have never had a factory round fail to fire. I probably have not shot as much as others here. What are the odds???

i'll answer first by asking another question: why would so many people recommend 100-200 rounds of THAT ammunition in THOSE magazines, etc. if factory ammo (and magazines) were so perfect? obviously, they don't work as often as you'd like.

i've had plenty of factory ammo failures. i'll admit though, i've never seen a case with no flash hole

 

[Larryect]

Not to hijack, but maybe sidetrack...We are takling about "customizing ammo for the purpuse of killing" (in a legitamate self defense senerio), correct. Let me step out just a bit further, how about customizing the weapon? I can only imagine the fiasco of a shooting involving a full race gun, but I'm refering to the slight mods most of us have: trigger job, beaver tail, sights, amb safety...

I guess the question would be, since I put new grips (or whatever) on my pistol, is it now considered "more deadly" or "customized to kill more effictively"?

~z

I can tell you where I am (CA) the firearm has to be listed - by make, model and SN on the CCW permit. The county I am in does not allow <.32, >.45, no 44Mag. NO modifications of the gun (including lasers) and no single actions (revolver or auto). Grips and new finish are probably okay. Trigger Smoothing or "carry tuning" probably okay, but NOT too light.

These rules bleed over from the rules imposed on the county police for off-duty carry by the department.

Oh yea, while I am at it, we were also told CCW badges are a BAD idea - Don't do it.

 

[Larryect]

strambo +1
i'll answer first by asking another question: why would so many people recommend 100-200 rounds of THAT ammunition in THOSE magazines, etc. if factory ammo (and magazines) were so perfect? obviously, they don't work as often as you'd like.

i've had plenty of factory ammo failures. i'll admit though, i've never seen a case with no flash hole

Well, I thought it was to make sure the ammo feeds correctly. I would also think the same advice would hold for hand-loads.

 

[Adventurer_96]

Excellent discussion, although I have to admit the earlier posts on this page seemed to walk a fine line. I hope the thread continues with the subject matter which has proven enlightening.

I've never been part of any incident that involved a shooting, nor do I have any friends who have been through anything similar while not on duty. What I can say is that with my limited knowledge of the legal system I have come to regard a potential court case (criminal or civil) with a little bit of a different perspective than I did even a few years ago. I used to carry in Utah off and on, but now that I've moved to CA I'm in the process of getting my permit. I think that the earlier comments about jurisdictions and states are really important considerations for those who do carry, I feel like I'm more likely to have to defend myself here but I'm more apprehensive of the repercussions.

I believe that it would be in your best interest to portray yourself in every regard as an everyman, not a Bernie Goetz vigilante or off-your-rocker gun nut. Factory loads, stock weapons, caliber selection, all of these things factor in. In a recent CCW class the instructor held up a .50 S&W revolver and asked what we would think of that if we saw it as jurors. True, it might do a great job defending you against anyone or anything that might try to hurt you, but what perception would it give to juror #6? He did say, and I do agree, that being alive to go through the court case process is better than being dead and not having to be bothered, but nevertheless it's an interesting perspective.

I think the factory ammunition issue is just part of a larger picture, but I do agree that while you may be opening yourself up to the Mitty attack you may be doing more good to your cause by carrying factory defense loads. I personally think that carrying what your local LEOs carry is a rational choice, and interestingly enough I've asked a number of non-shooters this question recently and they all thought it was a very good choice. Why do I mention this? Consider it potential jury selection research, I'd like to know what non-shooters think about these topics.

If you're so worried about a round not firing, shoot a revolver. I watched Massad Ayoob shoot one in the NH State IDPA championships last August and it was a real treat.

 

[Clark]

But Clark, my favorite part of your post #33 was when you wrote, "For me, the chance of a wimpy .380 factory load not getting the job done, is why I take the chance and carry my atomic handloads."

Ya know, Clark, if I was really in this for the money, as you and some others have falsely and cluelessly suggested, I would be on this thread taking advanced orders for T-shirts and bumper stickers that said in huge, fiery letters: CLARK MAGNUSON CARRIES A .380!

You should wear a head band that says, "I am ignorant of Clark's handloads"


1) My Browning 1903 .380:
a) Winchester factory ammo is power factor 76
b) my handload is PF 186.

2) Kel-Tec P3AT:
a) my hand load is power factor 99.

 

[gwalchmai]

I can tell you where I am (CA) the firearm has to be listed - by make, model and SN on the CCW permit. The county I am in does not allow <.32, >.45, no 44Mag.

So a bullet with a diameter of .429 inches would be OK, but one with a diameter of .451 wouldn't? The best thing about bureaucrats is their tendency to hoist themselves upon their own petards.

 

[griz]

will be vulnerable to the argument that you submitted different loads for testing and shot the "poor, innocent victim" with something else,

Please don't take this as a criticism Mas, I am just a layman trying to learn a little about our legal system from someone who knows more than I do. But knowing I am a reloader, why wouldn’t a lawyer make the same argument if I carried factory rounds? IE: “He used a deadly homemade round to shoot my client but submitted factory rounds for testing”.

And again, I am not even trying to take sides here, I just don’t know the answer.

Thanks again, Griz

 

[HankB]

Reading through this continuing thread, I see that:

1. The use of HydraShok factory ammo was an issue in at least one case.

2. The use of handloads was an issue in at least one case.

3. The use of FMJ ammo was an issue in at least one case.

This tends to support my earlier post, the gist of which was that ANY ammo may be made an issue.

And far as GSR evidence not being allowed if a handload was used . . . consider this: if the State is working the GSR angle are they more likely to be doing so to clear you or to hang you? What if - instead of keeping your mouth shut - under the effects of the adrenaline dump you made some statement to the effect that "For crying out loud, the guy was rushing me with a knife, he was only a couple of feet away when I had to shoot him!"

If GSR shows the BG was at nearly muzzle-contact distance, well and good.

Trouble is, what if, with the stress of the situation, you made a mistake? GSR shows he was 6, 7, or more feet away? Uh oh . . . there are a LOT of ways the State can spin this, none of them good for you.

A final thought . . . let's say you handload "Brand A" bullets in the same brand new cases, use the same brand primers, and the same brand powder. Yes, they can tell it's not factory ammo . . . but if they actually go to all that trouble to do a full-fledged forensic analysis on every little detail of your ammo, isn't that probably because someone in the DA's office is not your friend? (In which case, even exculpatory evidence may just end up being labeled "inconclusive" and it won't help you anyway.)

 

[Walt Rauch]

Mas is ahead on points!

 

[pcf]

And far as GSR evidence not being allowed if a handload was used . . . consider this: if the State is working the GSR angle are they more likely to be doing so to clear you or to hang you? What if - instead of keeping your mouth shut - under the effects of the adrenaline dump you made some statement to the effect that "For crying out loud, the guy was rushing me with a knife, he was only a couple of feet away when I had to shoot him!"

If GSR shows the BG was at nearly muzzle-contact distance, well and good.

Trouble is, what if, with the stress of the situation, you made a mistake? GSR shows he was 6, 7, or more feet away? Uh oh . . . there are a LOT of ways the State can spin this, none of them good for you.

What your making case for is documented training and expert testimony. The Tueller drill and documented training showing you are aware of the dangers of a knife attack will help you here. An expert can demonstrate that shooting a knife wielding attacker at 15' away can be entirely justified. You're right the state can spin it many ways, but if you're prepared, you can kill the issue before it gets out of hand. But this is what Mr Ayoob alluded to eralier, you're going to have spend serious money to defeat the state's case.

Expert witnesses get paid well for their testimony. While I disagree with many things Mr. Ayoob has printed, I won't look down my nose at a man that offers advice that may prevent him from making money off of me.

 

[Larryect]

So a bullet with a diameter of .429 inches would be OK, but one with a diameter of .451 wouldn't? The best thing about bureaucrats is their tendency to hoist themselves upon their own petards.

.44 special is okay - just not the magnum load. It is seen as excessive. I'm not saying I agree with the rules, just that those are the rules. I would like to have laser sights. But when the department swat team experimented with them, they found on a 10 man entry they could not tell which dot belonged to which officer - so no lasers for anyone. It doesn't seem to matter I won't have 10 guys backing me up :banghead: - that's just the rules. Bureaucracy, don't you know...

 

[Larryect]

3. The use of FMJ ammo was an issue in at least one case.

In the case that I mentioned. I believe the prosecution argued that the change of ammo indicated premeditation while the defense argued the cop was concerned about the situation and changed his more lethal hollowpoint ammo for less lethal FMJ :banghead:

I think in the end it was seen as a justified shoot due to actions on the part of the boyfriend.

.

 

[BigG]

Welcome to The High Road, Mr. Mas Ayoob! Note that many are interested in the thread and appreciate your input immensely. Disregard the noise, as necessary!

I have been a fan of yours since, oh, the late 1960s. I believe you had a 'fro in your magazine photo.

 

[GrantCunningham]

In his lightning analogy, already debunked on "the other board," Clark now asks you to assume that fully half of America's concealed carry permit holders use handloads for carry. My experience and input tells me that's unbelievably high. It would be interesting to hear from other experienced CCW instructors on this.

In my admittedly limited experience, I'd be very surprised if even 5% of the gun-toting population is carrying handloads. When working on carry guns, I ask each of my clients what load they're carrying (so that I can check/regulate the sights properly.) In zero cases has the answer ever been a handload. Given the types of guns I work on, and the nature of what I do, I believe that my clients are more "involved" in shooting and thus far more likely to handload than the average duffer. Yet, none of them has ever said he/she carries handloads.

Another data point: If the thousand-or-so members of my local gun club are any indication, it would not surprise me to find that less than 25% of all shooters reload. In fact, in this state - a shall-issue, fairly gun-friendly environment - I see surprisingly few gun club members who carry at all, let alone reload, let alone carry what they reload!

Again, this is only anecdotal, but based on what I know from the above I doubt you'll find all that many handloads being carried on the street. Heck, *I* reload more than most and I carry factory loads on the street!

You ask if any of us have seen a factory round with no flash hole. In my case, yes. Twice that I can remember in more than 50 years of shooting, which has included many weeks of teaching where 10,000 rounds a week went downrange, and many tournaments with many more than that. On the other hand, I have seen countless handload failures and malfunctions. Again, let's ask the experienced competition shooters and firearms instructors and rangemasters about THAT.

Well, I'm neither but I do know a couple instructors of my acquaintance now forbid handloads in their classes - they feel that the inevitable "downtime" is unfair to the other students.

 

[Brian Williams]

I also welcome Mas
New Guy buys the Ammo
I need some 158gr Nyclads for my S&W 13, so I can put away my reloads
I carry a Reload of 357 cases with 158grLSWC going about 1100fps, for everything.

 

[kimbernut]

FACTORY / RELOADS

Welcome Mas, I look forward to your input here.The one time I needed my .357 Mag. with factory HP they let me down with a misfire. The second round took the snake out no problem. I know the quality of my handloads and have made the choice to carry them exclusively.

 

[Grump]

In virtually all cases of self-defense, there's no question about who pulled the trigger or what weapon was used. Finding residue is a non-issue,

Methinks it's been fairly well established that the distance from muzzle to attacker can be disputed AND VERY relevant.

I still disagree heartily with the proposition that the remaining rounds in the gun would never be fired because that's "destroying" evidence. Chain of custody and competent testimony will very nicely establish the characteristics of the ammo before it is consumed in a GSR test. Furthermore, disassembling, weighing components and examining them and all that will fairly well establish its identical nature to the other 200 rounds remaining in the ammo can.

Just because exhaustive recordkeeping by an LEO agency made the proof in one case a lock, doesn't mean that a measly extra 10 minutes of trial testimony and exhibits couldn't do the same thing for your handloads.

There will almost always be pretrial motions in Limine and trial objections to admissibility of evidence and relevance of arguments. Given the total costs and expenses of the entire criminal and/or civil proceedings, it appears to me that "evil handloads" defenses are not much more likely than would be the "evil designed-to-kill extra-lethal factory cop specialty SWAT ammo thatnomereciviianhasarighttoown" defenses.

At the bottom line, I would anticipate ammo choice problems to amount to less than five percent, if that much, of the total legal defense bill. Now 5% of a $40,000.00 (low side?) bill is a lot, and it's a lot more if you're into it $100K. To me, that high estimate still qualifies as. . .

TRIVIAL

Put that in your pipe and smoke it, fellas & fellettes.

 

[The Bushmaster]

Grump...I see your are still grumpy....

 

[gwalchmai]

.44 special is okay - just not the magnum load. It is seen as excessive. I'm not saying I agree with the rules, just that those are the rules. I would like to have laser sights. But when the department swat team experimented with them, they found on a 10 man entry they could not tell which dot belonged to which officer - so no lasers for anyone. It doesn't seem to matter I won't have 10 guys backing me up :banghead: - that's just the rules. Bureaucracy, don't you know...

I know you aren't making the rules. I'm just pointing out their flaws. Let's assume that .45 Colt is OK, since the bureaurocrat considers it, like .45ACP, a "45" (even though both are "> .45"). All THR'ers know that .45 Colt can be loaded as hot, or hotter, as .44MAG.

 

[Clark]

In my admittedly limited experience, I'd be very surprised if even 5% of the gun-toting population is carrying handloads.

That would make being killed by lightning nearly the same risk as court trouble from handloads, if MO ever produced a court case.

Also about the same risk as being killed by a deer each day.

Let us summarize the chances of being killed for any American, next to 5% of the concealed carry American having court trouble per year:

1) If 50% carry handloads, their annual risk of court trouble .000 000 333
2) If 5% carry handloads, their annual risk of court trouble or death by lightning .000 003 333
3) All American's annual risk of being killed by a deer .000 003 333
4) All American's annual risk of being killed in an auto accident .000 143 330
5) All American's annual risk of gun homicide .000 039 430
6) All American's anual risk of drowning .000 015 000