I'm sure this has been discussed before. And I'd agree that there is a valid argument that it should not be done. reasons would include the dirty lawyer trick, reliability of handloads, variety of effective factory loads on the market.
But what about the less available calibers? I have a 10mm that I prefer to carry when I can carry a full size gun. But I can't afford to buy a couple hundred rounds of the self defense ammo that's on the market to run through it for reliability testing, let alone practice. I can't buy 50 JHP's for $15 at walmart, like I can with 45's or 100 JHP for $20 like 9mm, so my Glock 20 spends most of its time in the safe or on the range.
Assuming my handloads are reliable, and they are, would a reasonable person see the expense of factory ammo would be the reason for carrying handloads as opposed to maliciousness or recklessness? Would a prosecutor or personal injury lawyer see it that way? Or would you still spend all your money educating a jury in court?
But what about the less available calibers? I have a 10mm that I prefer to carry when I can carry a full size gun. But I can't afford to buy a couple hundred rounds of the self defense ammo that's on the market to run through it for reliability testing, let alone practice. I can't buy 50 JHP's for $15 at walmart, like I can with 45's or 100 JHP for $20 like 9mm, so my Glock 20 spends most of its time in the safe or on the range.
Assuming my handloads are reliable, and they are, would a reasonable person see the expense of factory ammo would be the reason for carrying handloads as opposed to maliciousness or recklessness? Would a prosecutor or personal injury lawyer see it that way? Or would you still spend all your money educating a jury in court?