I know your not supposed to but does anyone handload their carry ammo.

[CMC]

Ok what law makes it unlawful to use reloads for self defense?

What law allows a juror to decide you are guilty because you use hollowpoints?

And finally what law says a districts attorney 's opinion is the law?

Please show me those laws and statutes.

 

[Strykervet]

I do and I don't. I load for everything I shoot, all my target loads are reloads. My handloads are generally for obscure or expensive rounds. I handload Grendel, 10mm, Beowulf, and soon, .300BLK. I even load my own M855 from new components.

What I don't load are .40 carry loads, .45ACP+P, and 9mm+P and +P+. I don't mess around with the high pressure stuff, mostly because I load for and carry Glocks. I load all my own practice loads in these calibres though. I just don't want a KB, so I tend to buy my "hot" stuff. I have target rounds tailored to be close to the store bought ones, so training is pretty realistic. I tend to buy the T-Series and can't load those anyway.

But when it comes to 10mm, the gloves come off. I load those exclusively, as far as I'm concerned, that is THE handloaders auto pistol cartridge. So flexible. Subsonic 200 or 230gr. loads for suppressors, more narrow than the .45 for quieter use in one, more velocity than the 200gr. .45, better BC than .45, velocity as high or higher than 9mm comparatively, and it holds 15 rounds. Very accurate. I love the 10mm pistol. Sad thing is, nobody makes a decent loading for it. Most factory loadings are only 100fps faster than the .40 (it is capable of much more, and safely too).

Since I carry 10mm most, I do most definitely carry handloaded (and extensively tested) 10mm loads. Usually 180 or 200gr. XTP's on top of Blue Dot or 800-X.

I don't think the whole legal arguement stands up too well when it comes to light that the reason I load is because I shoot at the ranges a lot and that I carry it primarily out of convenience. See, I shoot a LOT at the range. So a true logical arguement would seem to suggest that the handloads are premeditated for range use.

Actually buying high prices of boxes of ammunition that are T-Series, Hydra Shok, etc., seem more to me as premeditated, since those won't be used wholesale at the range, and that those rounds are marketed as man killers. The handloads aren't marketed at all really, and their sole purpose is performance.

Am I missing something? I know about that case in AZ, but I also know it was such a cluster that they drated a new law just to get him out of jail and to prevent it from happeneing again...

 

[Frank Ettin]

Why would they be in your home? Most shootings that are legal the shooter doesn't even see the inside of the court house let alone a search warrent.

A shooting isn't legal unless and until the DA, grand jury, or, if you're really unlucky, a trial jury so decides.

Remember that our society takes a very dim view of one person intentionally injuring another. Our law recognizes that at times doing so may be justified; but unless and until the evidence clearly shows that your intentional act of extreme violence causing grave injury to another human was justified, you are reasonably suspected of having committed a criminal act; and your act of violence will be investigated as a suspected crime. It may be the case that it can be quickly concluded that that you were justified in using force. But if the evidence creates probable cause to believe that a criminal assault had been committed and that you did it, you will be charged.

So unless it is quickly concluded that your use of force was justified, you may very well be arrested, and a search warrant may very well be issued for your home.

...the reason I load is because I shoot at the ranges a lot and that I carry it primarily out of convenience. See, I shoot a LOT at the range...

Nonetheless, if you use your gun in self defense and if GSR test results could be important to your establishing your claim of justification, you will be out of luck.

 

[SharpsDressedMan]

Reloaded ammo is what it is. If the state wants to dismantle my ammo to see what it is made of, let them. Any ammo that I manufacture will be of normal specifications, and verifyable. If they attempt to allege that I loaded unusually dangerous, deadly, poison, or torturous ammo, they will look pretty stupid (and my case will look better) when the ammo is shown to be otherwise. It would be a legal tactic that would backfire and make the prosecution or suing attorney's case weaker.

 

[SharpsDressedMan]

Fiddletown, all your fear of courts wouldn't be from the convoluted law they practice in California, would it? You ARE in a different part of the world out there!

 

[74sharps]

I hand load for all my weapons. As much as I shoot, I would be crazy not to. And my carry weapon is no different. Besides, I have had more trouble out of factory ammo. then out of my reloads.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by CMC: Ok what law makes it unlawful to use reloads for self defense?

There is no law that makes it unlawful to use reloads for self defense.

You would be a lot less confused and a lot more informed if you read the thread.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by SharpDressedMan: Reloaded ammo is what it is. If the state wants to dismantle my ammo to see what it is made of, let them. Any ammo that I manufacture will be of normal specifications, and verifyable. If they attempt to allege that I loaded unusually dangerous, deadly, poison, or torturous ammo, they will look pretty stupid (and my case will look better) when the ammo is shown to be otherwise. It would be a legal tactic that would backfire and make the prosecution or suing attorney's case weaker.

The state has no interest in dismantling your handloads.

You would be a lot less confused and a lot more informed if you read the thread.

 

[doorman]

Yes, of course.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by CMC: A good shoot in self defense is a legal shoot ...

If you think there is the slightest chance that you will ever shoot anyone for any reason, you need to do some studying.

Start with this examination of your statement, "a good shoot is a good shoot".

 

[Cheers]

No, but only because I carry a .380, buy some fairly cheap ammo so don't bother. If I carried my .357 or .38 for defense, I would.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by P5 Guy: I asked this before when the question was brought up, if one uses all one manufacturers pieces and assembles the ammo ones self, having the only part a commercially available powder that varies from the factory's recipe, how could the lab tell? Saying all Hornady, or Winchester, or Speer components.

Toolmark analysis. Established, accepted practice. Routine.

Fiddletown had answered the question thirteen posts earlier.

 

[zxcvbob]

The reading comprehension in this thread is not very strong.

Carry whatever ammo you want; it really is a personal choice. Just make sure you're making an informed decision.

 

[Kleanbore]

Just a Thought

There have been some posts in this thread that have been rather flippantly dismissive of sound legal advice.

I suggest that people remember three things:

1. If one shoots someone else in self defense, the onus is upon him or her to produce sufficient evidence to prevail in his or her defense of justification--or he or she will be convicted of a serious crime. It has always been that way.
2. Your attorney cannot present evidence that he does not have, or undo anything that you have done, or retract anything that you have said, to help you prevail in your defense. It has always been that way.
3. You will not be permitted to introduce forensic scientific evidence that does not meet the minimum thresholds of the rules for admissibility of such evidence. While the rules have evolved over time, it has been that way for at least nine decades in this country.

 

[Cop Bob]

I cannot speak for DA's in jurisdictions other than my own.. I cannot speak for how police investigations are conducted, except in areas where I have worked..

The load on the firearms examiner is HUGE, the work load on the Medical Examiner is HUGE, the Homicide Division, each investigator has at least 80 open cases EACH that demand his/her time...

In the case of an obviously justifiable shooting, the paperwork will be done quickly, the evidence given a cursory look.. The Crime scene guys will get what they have to get and move on.. The gun will be test fired and the ballistic data (the rifling imprint) will be entered into the system and it will be checked to see if it comes back a match in any unsolved shootings, it will go to a grand jury in about 90 days, and when the no-bill comes back, you will get your gun back... The type and origin of the ammunition will be a non-point...

However, if there are problems with the case, and it turns out to be a homicide, or a "who dunnit" then all bets are off... and they will crawl up your butt with microscope...

I have carried hand-loads for most of my professional carrier.. There have been, years ago abit,, several officer involved shootings with hand loads.. there were never any issues.. except in one case, the firearms examiner, and the ME could not believe the amount of damage that was done by a .380. They wanted to say that the officer was hiding another gun, or there was another shooter, someone with a 38 super or a .357.. We settled that issue (it's in the Sierra manual), provided them with the same rounds, and that was that..

But what will happen on a case by case basis, and in other jurisdictions, or in related civil matters, is a whole different world....

Personally, for my service loads, I use virgin brass, no multiple tool marks, and less concerns over contamination. I use bullets that are found in commercial loadings.. I stick with the parameters of published load data.. no wild A** Nike Zeus rounds...

If it is a concern for you, don't do it... My old department now has a policy against carrying hand-loads, probably came down from legal, but I know for a fact, that there were some problems with hand-loads on the street that failed to fire, or were grossly underpowered, and there were function and reliability issues.. In other words, there were no guarantees as to who loaded it, experience level, what they did, cleanliness, freshness and stability of components... etc...

My suggestion is, that if you have to think about it,, DON'T... find some good factory ammo, test the heck out of it, if you find one that will, function, is accurate, and with acceptable terminal ballistics,, carry that...

Understand, that lawyers, be it civil or criminal, are going to latch on to ANY moot point that they can find to try and shift blame OFF of the crook and his actions, and lay it on the blood thirsty homicidal gun totin maniac that had the audacity to protect themselves, when they know darn good and well that that the the Governments Job through the Police Department, to do that for all of us.. Unfortunately, they will grab and any straw they can to make it look like you were out for blood.... and that the fight/confrontation was totally your doing... Especially in a Civil proceeding, their job with be to make the assailant look like a victim...

I thank God I live in Texas..

 

[Frank Ettin]

...If they attempt to allege that I loaded unusually dangerous, deadly, poison, or torturous ammo, they will look pretty stupid (and my case will look better) when the ammo is shown to be otherwise. It would be a legal tactic that would backfire and make the prosecution or suing attorney's case weaker....

And you know this how?

One can simply not state categorically that doing this or doing that will backfire in court. It all depends on the jury, the judge, the lawyer and how he presents the point. Knowing how to get this tidbit or that revelation in front of a particular jury without it backfiring is one thing the art of trial advocacy is all about.

And don't forget that in gun friendly Arizona, the prosecutor managed to effectively help turn Harold Fish's jury against him in part because of the type of ammunition he carried.

Fiddletown, all your fear of courts wouldn't be from the convoluted law they practice in California, would it? You ARE in a different part of the world out there!

[1] Throughout my career many of my clients operated all over the country, and I did a lot of work with lawyers in pretty much every State of the Union.

[2] The practice of law in California isn't necessarily different from anywhere else, except, perhaps , that because there's so much competition and activity here, we need to be very good to be successful.

[3] I'm not afraid of courts. No lawyer can be. Courts are just one of the places we conduct our business. But I do know about courts, how they work and what they can do. And I also know what kind of stress being in court can put my client through.

 

[Ryanxia]

I was told not to because of legal issues if you have to use it so never have.

 

[Owen Sparks]

Factory ammo is really quite good nowdays besides, how many people are you going to have to shoot? Three magazines full should do. You can afford it.

 

[357 Terms]

Kleanbore

There have been some posts in this thread that have been rather flippantly dismissive of sound legal advice.

Not sure if you have noticed but a lot of us aren't looking for "sound legal advice"
What I would like is something tangible, something that I can look at, grasp, something black and white that is not filled with legal jargon or arrogant, flippant, speculative what if's and could be's.
With all do respect, if I wanted sound legal advice I would look somewhere other than an internet forum.

 

[Frank Ettin]

There have been some posts in this thread that have been rather flippantly dismissive of sound legal advice.

Not sure if you have noticed but a lot of us aren't looking for "sound legal advice"
What I would like is something tangible, something that I can look at, grasp, something black and white that is not filled with legal jargon or arrogant, flippant, speculative what if's and could be's.
With all do respect, if I wanted sound legal advice I would look somewhere other than an internet forum.

With all due respect, a question was asked, answers posted, and issues were discussed. And reality is as it is.

I'm sure that we would all like the world to be tangible and black and white. But it just isn't that way. Things are messy, uncertain, and often a matter of judgment. As to those things that are a matter of judgment, an educated judgment will usually be more helpful than an uneducated judgment.

If you want things simpler, you'll need to look for simpler topics and/or a simpler world.

 

[357 Terms]

With all due respect, a question was asked, answers posted, and issues were discussed. And reality is as it is.

Yet you seem irritated that many of us are not convinced by what you have posted, of course not! You present nothing in laymans terms or anything tangible to change minds.
You just say that you have answed these questions and arrogantly move on.
Sorry, with nothing more than speculation (no real cases of handloads being an issue in a SD shooting)you essentially have a bunch of legal jargon and opinion that most will shrug of as another lawyer rambling on.
Give me something tangible, not what you think a court will do.

Because so far you have not given a single example.

 

[Rob G]

Give me something tangible, not what you think a court will do.

I found this link on the very first page of this thread, I think about the 10th post. It's a small number of cases but it does show quite clearly what a court has done in matters that related to handloads.

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

Mostly these people did okay in court but atleast one of them was convicted of a felony crime and did time for it. Is it a small chance? Yes. But I'd rather not take it myself.

To each his own though, I respect all people's opinions on the matter.

 

[GLOOB]

If I carried a gun daily, I might give it some more thought. But I don't. I keep my home defense gun loaded with reloads. I'd like to see an attorney make the case that I was out looking for trouble after I shot someone who broke into my home.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost....&postcount=140

Mostly these people did okay in court but atleast one of them was convicted of a felony crime and did time for it. Is it a small chance? Yes. But I'd rather not take it myself.

Read the whole Bias case. That case is completely useless in this argument.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...Yet you seem irritated that many of us are not convinced by what you have posted, of course not! You present nothing in laymans terms or anything tangible to change minds...

As far as layman's terms, as I said, the world is as it is. And I guess some of these concepts are difficult for some people.

Nonetheless, over the years some people have understood these issues. Some have not, and some haven't wanted to. So be it.

And as far as convincing people is concerned, that's not really my goal. Maybe some people will make better informed decisions because of it. Maybe it will never sink in for others. Either way, it really doesn't matter to me, or affect me for that matter. I've made my own decision. What others may decide can be up to them.

...You just say that you have answed these questions and arrogantly move on....

I have answered them. Kleanbore has answered them. Kleanbore, Sam1911 and I have answered them in this thread. We have answered the question multiple times in multiple ways. If after all of that, someone doesn't understand, I guess there's nothing we can do.

...Give me something tangible, not what you think a court will do...

But that's what any discussion of the law is all about -- what a court would do. That's where the law becomes important -- in court.

...nothing more than speculation (no real cases of handloads being an issue in a SD shooting)you essentially have a bunch of legal jargon and opinion that most will shrug of as another lawyer rambling on....

Do you really believe that there is precedent for everything? Much of what happens from one day to to the next hasn't necessarily happened in just that way before. In business and in law, we find ourselves having to continually make informed, considered, educated judgments about what is likely to happen under circumstances that haven't exactly existed before.

Sorry, but that's what we have to work with.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by 357 Terms: Sorry, with nothing more than speculation (no real cases of handloads being an issue in a SD shooting)you essentially have a bunch of legal jargon and opinion that most will shrug of as another lawyer rambling on.
Give me something tangible, not what you think a court will do.

Because so far you have not given a single example.

This indicates that you simply do not understand the issue at all.

Best of luck.