Best hollow-point reload for 9mm self-defense
Tim Williams
Other than buying outrageously priced Glaser or Mag-Safe... it seems
Cor-bon and Hydra-shock are about the best 9mm loads for self defense.
What is a good reload equivalent?
Rod Regier
In article <6f91ir$a...@xring.cs.umd.edu>, t...@ashtoncomputer.com (Tim Williams) writes:
# Other than buying outrageously priced Glaser or Mag-Safe... it seems
# Cor-bon and Hydra-shock are about the best 9mm loads for self defense.
#
#
# What is a good reload equivalent?
Well, the Sierra #8110 115g JHP projectile is/was used by Corbon
in one of their 9mmx19 loadings.
Using Winchester Super Field, Winchester published loading data has
115g JHP's driven to 1200 fps in 4" barrels.
I've acheived a bit more with a 4.5" Glock barrel, and the
loading is low-flash, low-residue as well !
In the US, tactical preparation for a possible post-shooting prosecution
favor use of factory-loaded ammunition for self-defense applications.
Also, unless you are an experienced handloader, the reliability
of factory ammo will likely exceed your own product.
However, that is not to say you couldn't make a close-to-factory
duplication loading for practice, and load up with the small
amount of factory ammo needed for defensive applications.
Clyde Elliott
Tim,
In this age of lawyers and liabilities, it is best to use factory ammo in
your carry gun. Reloading defense ammo for carry does not present itself
in court too well.
Any of the handloading manuals will provide data for hollowpoint bullets.
Clyde
Mjbrotz
I use only Hydra-Shock ammo for self-defense. Reloads are good and cheap for
plinking and practicing, but if it's my life on the line and I have to fire,
and fire accurately, I'm only going to trust good factory loads. The peace of
mind is worth the extra money. Happy shooting.
Richard Harner
I don't recommend using reloads for self defense. Too many legal hassles
if you shoot somebody with them.
Recommend a heavy bullet (147 gr.) Hydra-shok or Black Talons. You'll
get good penetration with them.
Our dept uses 115 gr. Federal 9BP. The other night a fellow Officer I
work with,had a vehicle stopped that was stolen and carrying a large
amount of drugs, ran him down. After he was down, he managed to get 10
shots off with his Glock 17, striking the vehicle at least 6 times. Not
one round penetrated far enough into the vehicle to hit the bad guys.
(they were eventually apprehended).That's one example why my wife and I
both carry BlackTalons in our off duty Glock 19's.
Naturally the chances of you having to shoot at a moving vehicle are
slim, but you never know.
Better to be safe than sorry.
Rick
rutledge
Clyde Elliott wrote:
#
# Tim,
# In this age of lawyers and liabilities, it is best to use factory ammo in
# your carry gun. Reloading defense ammo for carry does not present itself
# in court too well.
# Any of the handloading manuals will provide data for hollowpoint bullets.
# Clyde
I'll second that, and I'm a dedicated handloader.
I would never carry handloads in a gun specifically meant for "social
defense". I do have a couple revolvers I carry when fishing or hiking
for critter defense and those often have handloads in them. Likewise,
my hunting handguns almost always have handloads in 'em.
I wouldn't recommend handloads for intentional social/personal defensive
carry. I wouldn't recommend wasting time changing ammo if a "situation"
arose when you were doing something else such that you were already
carrying a gun loaded with handloads.
So, in town, in the car, etc ... factory ammo. Down the creek playin'
with the bears, or out shootin' jackrabbits, or deer hunting ... if a
"social situation" comes up, use whatever's already in the gun.
The "format" of the gun has some impact here. If you're carrying a
double column 9mm, you better have factory ammo no matter what you're
doing, 'cause it LOOKS like a defensive gun and will be held to that
standard. If you're carrying an old single action in a cowboy holster,
you MIGHT be able to convince a jury that you were plinking, practicing
for a cowboy match, and had to make do with what was handy. (same for
deer hunting, etc)
Tom
Mike Bartel
Sorry to disagree with you, but in 23 years of reloading, the only 2
malfunctions I've had came from factory loads in a taurus .45 auto. The
last 2 rounds in the magazine had the bullets rammed into the cases too far
due to the recoil (I assume) which caused them to jam while being stripped
from the magazine. As far as accuracy is concerned, one need only look at
every accuracy record currently in existence (centerfire). Not a factory
load in the bunch. The only exception would be certain military competitions
that require standard issue ball ammo.
Mjbrotz wrote in article <6fbrbk$i...@xring.cs.umd.edu>...
#I use only Hydra-Shock ammo for self-defense. Reloads are good and cheap
for
#plinking and practicing, but if it's my life on the line and I have to
fire,
#and fire accurately, I'm only going to trust good factory loads. The peace
of
#mind is worth the extra money. Happy shooting.
#
Shotgun150
dont overlook gold dot ,give them a test.
MLK072
I wouldn't suggest you use re-loads for self defense. I have
made up lots of different loads using JHP's with a factory-
crimp die, with great reliability. But I still only use them for
practice and hunting. I want perfect reliability and ignition
with ammo that may be used to save my life (if such a thing
exists). So after shooting 1000 rounds of my choice factory
ammo w/o no problems to speak of, I am sticking with that.
Reloads for self defense can also be problematic to ignorant
District Attorneys and jury's. Just my $0.02
MLK
David Wisniewski
Clyde Elliott wrote:
#
# Tim,
# In this age of lawyers and liabilities, it is best to use factory ammo in
# your carry gun. Reloading defense ammo for carry does not present itself
# in court too well.
# Any of the handloading manuals will provide data for hollowpoint bullets.
# Clyde
AGGHHH! Has this not died yet? Please, please cite me ONE case where
the defender was convicted (criminal) or in which judgement was entered
against (civil) b/c of the ammo they used.
--
David Wisniewski **FOR SALE: EGW 38 Super Caspian IPSC Open w/ 8 mags**
davi...@erols.com USPSA/IPSC A-28835
http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Academy/9884/index.html
Dillon Blue Press Articles:
http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Academy/9884/bp_Index.html
What is past is prologue
MEHLaw
I like Speer Gold Dot.
Maurice E. Hebert
Walk Softly,.....and Carry
Very best regards, Maurice E. Hebert
Walk Softly, and Carry.
YANKee
The issue of legal liability when using handloads for defense surfaces
periodically.
<disclaimer> I certainly agree that using factory ammo is the smart
choice for any defensive use, where a shooter will need all the legal
cards they can hold afterwards.
As a point of information, can anyone please provide data on any
situations where a shooter in a justified self defense case suffered
adverse legal action ( in civil court, obviously, since we are talking
*justified* self defense with no resulting criminal charges) because he
used handloads?
Or.. has this never come up? ( perhaps because the overwhelming
majority of defensive gun use involves factory ammo?)
I would bet that there have been occasions when a defensive gun was
used with handloads even though this may have been inadvertant ( eg:
they were in the mag from target session and were not switched out for
whatever reason).
I would also bet that, in most cases of self defense, the emphasis from
a DA's standpoint is not on the ammo used, but on the circumstances of
the shooting itself. ( althought the kind of firearm used, and number
of rounds fired, must get close scrutiny)
A subsequent civil suite might focus on the ammo source, or type (
Hydra-Shok and BT users beware!), in attempt to show 'premediation' to
use ammo that caused 'excessive trauma' to the poor innocent scumbag.
If so, this should be documented <somewhere>.
I would also think that it might take sophisticated techniques to
determine if a handload WAS in fact used, especially if the load was
made up with (for example); Winchester bullets, primers, cases and
powder.
Also, bullet makers such as Hornady also sell factory made ammo,
assembled from the same components that are available for handloaders.
It's got to be the powder that would nail you, as the stuff they sell
for home reloading won't be from the same lot as the powder used at the
factory. (may not necssarily be the same kind, either)
Just curious.
BJay the YANKee
[x] No Guns [x] No Rights [x] No Future [x] No Shit
Me
I would think that there would be little reason to use handloads in a
selfdefense load, considering what a criminal lawyer (redundant, I know)
can do to you.
There are police departments carrying Hydra-Shocks, so that would cover a
lot of objections. Hydra-Shocks are among the highest rated bullets for
one-shot stops. That sounds like safety to me. nO overpenetration, no
unnecessary followup shots.
Carrying handloads is just asking for a reason for a jury to find
negligence.
-Frank Coleman
cou...@javanet.com
Clyde Elliott <cell...@dnc.net> wrote:
#Tim,
#In this age of lawyers and liabilities, it is best to use factory ammo in
#your carry gun. Reloading defense ammo for carry does not present itself
#in court too well.
Cougar Allen :{)
First they came for the machine guns and the sawed-off shotguns, and I said nothing because I didn't own a machine gun or a sawed-off shotgun....
dire...@firearmstactical.com
The concern with legal liability with handloads is that you have to pay your
attorney and any expert witnesses for their time in helping you defend your
cartridge selection. If you choose commerical cartridges instead, this becomes
less of an issue and you won't have to squander your financial resources
defensing against a non-problem, i.e., using handloads. When you shoot a bad
guy to stop him from harming you or a loved one, you're using deadly force.
The idea is to make him collapse because your bullet(s) caused fatal
hemorrhage or damaged his brain or cervical spinal cord.
The bigger concern of using handloads for personal protection is reliability.
Despite your best efforts, your handloads will probably not be as reliable as
factory ammunition.
Shawn Dodson
www.firearmstactical.com
In article <6fefde$q...@xring.cs.umd.edu>,
w...@Dartmouth.EDU ( YANKee) wrote:
> ...
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
gruhn
## In this age of lawyers and liabilities, it is best to use factory
## ammo in your carry gun.
#concrete data showing how many cases were lost because of reloaded
#defense ammo?
I'm also curious about it. This is because I'm a newbie and can't even guess
at the logic behind.
Actually, that's a big problem here. Being a newbie. Keep not knowing what's
being talked about half the time.
Charles Winters
Back to the original question - My favorite 9mm P service load is 124 gr
Hornady XTP over 8.0 gr of Bluedot with mag primers and OAL of 1.12" for
about 1185 fps out of my wife's Sig 228 (4" bbl I believe). Good
accuracy and low muzzle flash. - CW
Tony Porczyk wrote:
#
# Clyde Elliott <cell...@dnc.net> writes:
#
# # In this age of lawyers and liabilities, it is best to use factory
# # ammo in your carry gun. Reloading defense ammo for carry does not
# # present itself in court too well.
#
# I am actually curious about this. Besides hearsay, is there any
# concrete data showing how many cases were lost because of reloaded
# defense ammo?
#
# t.
# ---------------------------------------------------------------------
# Tony Porczyk * to...@infobound.com * San Jose, California
# GIT/ED d++(!d) s++:++ a? C++++ USB++++$ P+ E- W(--) N++ !k w--- M- V?
# PS+++ PE++ Y+ PGP-- t+@ 5++ X-- R* b- D---- e* V-- h* r+++(*)+++(*)>?
# ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Col. Douglas Mortimer
When asked, I advise people to if possible use the same weapon,
caliber, and ammunition that their local police use.
Mortalis
Steve Ellis
With all due respect, I have two comments:
1) If the shooting is justified, why would the type of ammo used
be an issue? I usually carry factory ammo, but I have constructed my own
loads to resemble (ballistically) the Hydra-Shoks I carry.
I will probably switch to my own loads because that is what I practice
with (and Hydra-Shoks can sometimes be a bit hard to find in my area).
My own ammo is actually loaded "down" a little from the Hydra-Shoks
but is extremely accurate in my carry gun and well within
powder and bullet manufacturers' specifications.
2) In 15 years of shooting I have only had two ammo failures--
both commercial ammo.
Steve Ellis
NRA Member
Firearm Safety Instructor
____________________________________________
dire...@firearmstactical.com wrote:
# The concern with legal liability with handloads is that you have to pay your
# attorney and any expert witnesses for their time in helping you defend your
# cartridge selection. If you choose commerical cartridges instead, this becomes
# less of an issue and you won't have to squander your financial resources
# defensing against a non-problem, i.e., using handloads. When you shoot a bad
# guy to stop him from harming you or a loved one, you're using deadly force.
# The idea is to make him collapse because your bullet(s) caused fatal
# hemorrhage or damaged his brain or cervical spinal cord.
#
# The bigger concern of using handloads for personal protection is reliability.
# Despite your best efforts, your handloads will probably not be as reliable as
# factory ammunition.
#
# Shawn Dodson
# www.firearmstactical.com
#
# In article <6fefde$q...@xring.cs.umd.edu>,
# w...@Dartmouth.EDU ( YANKee) wrote:
# > ...
#
# -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
# http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Me
You don't have to LOSE a case to make you wish you had carried factory
ammo. Your life can be expensive and miserable because of an unnecessarily
long trial. Why give a lawyer a foot in the door?
Of course, if you like spending a long time in court, and paying law
firms, and having your house and bank accounts tied up by liens for
years...then carry handloads.
Frank Coleman
On 27 Mar 1998, gruhn wrote:
# ## In this age of lawyers and liabilities, it is best to use factory
# ## ammo in your carry gun.
#
# #concrete data showing how many cases were lost because of reloaded
# #defense ammo?
#
# I'm also curious about it. This is because I'm a newbie and can't even guess
# at the logic behind.
#
# Actually, that's a big problem here. Being a newbie. Keep not knowing what's
# being talked about half the time.
#
#
#
#
#
Bill D.
Why?
It sure is not because they are experts in choosing weapons and
ammunition - trust me.
Some depts are totally driven by: cost or public opinion or by what
other depts do.
If your local PD still carries 4" revolvers with 95gr +P semi-jacketed
hollow points, are you going to recommend that to someone for
self-defense ?
If you think you will have any legal advantage, tell me what that would
be.
You better be also advising them to get the equivalent or the same
training that your local PD gets with that equipment.
Bill D.
- - - - -
Col. Douglas Mortimer wrote:
#
# When asked, I advise people to if possible use the same weapon,
# caliber, and ammunition that their local police use.
#
# Mortalis
David Wisniewski
Me wrote:
#
# You don't have to LOSE a case to make you wish you had carried factory
# ammo. Your life can be expensive and miserable because of an unnecessarily
# long trial. Why give a lawyer a foot in the door?
# Of course, if you like spending a long time in court, and paying law
# firms, and having your house and bank accounts tied up by liens for
# years...then carry handloads.
#
# Frank Coleman
You frightened the Newbies with this drivel and make no sense. Are *you* an attorney?
Have *you* gone to law school? Where do you get your information
that using reloads is going to tie you up in court more so than using,
say, the Winchester Black Talon? Please list the source(s) of your info.
MLK072
Simply put people, "justified shooting" is decided by various people who may or
may not share your (our) views. An anti-gun District Attorney will most
certainly drag you before the Grand
Jury no matter who justified the shooting may seem. And an
ignorant jury may send you to court. So unless you want to
take the risk, pay very expensive legal fees, and become a
media target it just seems practical to NOT make things easier
for that Distict Attorney. IE using standard factory JHP ammunition
(like what your local PD carries) and not wearing a t-shirt that
says BORN TO KILL. Gun ignorance is a disease that seems
to be spreading at an alarming rate. Just look at the "automatic
deer rifle" incident at Jonsboro where "grandpa" let the boy
shoot a "toy gun" which "obviously" led to the massacre. It
didn't matter that the kid was unstable and angry for years
leading up to it. Did it? Don't feed the ignorance. IMHO
MLK
c2...@mindspring.com
On 24 Mar 1998 14:29:31 -0500, t...@ashtoncomputer.com (Tim Williams)
wrote:
#Other than buying outrageously priced Glaser or Mag-Safe... it seems
#Cor-bon and Hydra-shock are about the best 9mm loads for self defense.
#
#
#What is a good reload equivalent?
Actually, any good second-generation hollow point (such as Hornady's
XTP, Speer Gold Dot, or Remington's Golden Saber) that feed *reliably*
in *your* pistol is a good equivalent. IMO, 124g bullets are the most
accurate while transferring adequate energy to do the job at hand.
As for reloads somehow magically increasing your legal difficulties
after a shooting, I think that is so much BS unless there are problems
with the circumstances of the shooting itself.
I load defensive small arms rounds that will kill human beings. If I
point the pistol at someone, my next conscious act will be to fire off
at least one round into center of mass with the intention of killing
that person. When dealing with a human target downrange, the only
reaction I want to stimulate in my target is death. Not humor,
irritability, anger, pain, curiosity, or any other human emotion. Just
death.
The pseudo-lawyers here would do well to remember that you fight like
you train.
****** AllenL ********************************************************
In a nation ruled by swine, all pigs are upward-mobile...
Hunter S. Thompson (b. 1939), U.S. journalist.
Tim Williams
Other than buying outrageously priced Glaser or Mag-Safe... it seems
David Wisniewski
Also, be aware that police requirements for ammo is going to be different
from a homeowner or CCW. The police (usually) want ammo that is going to be
able to penetrate through car bodies/windshields, etc. while still having enough
energy to inflict damage upon the person(s) that they are trying to stop.
Whereas a homeowner/CCW is going to want ammo that isn't going to overpenetrate,
but use up most, if not all of its energy on the target. There shouldn't be
much need for a homeowner/CCW to be able to penetrate a car's body or windshield.
I believe this was one of the reasons behind Federal's Personal Defense Ammo.
If you want to purchase the same ammo as your local police force uses, make sure
you know the reasons that they selected that specific brand and the exterior
balistic characteristics of it.
MikeG
Tim Williams wrote:
#
# Other than buying outrageously priced Glaser or Mag-Safe... it seems
# Cor-bon and Hydra-shock are about the best 9mm loads for self defense.
#
# What is a good reload equivalent?
I like 124 gr. 9mm Remington Gold Sabers (get mine from Wideners) atop
8.9 gr. Hodgdon HS-7 (carefull MAX-LOAD, approx 1250 f.p.s.) ouch.
(I don't know the specific stats for the Glasers or Mag-Safes)
--
Mike <wa...@erols.com>
PGP public keys available from servers.
ie. http://pgp5.ai.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xce4f5e28
Glenn E. Meyer
c2...@mindspring.com wrote:
#
# I load defensive small arms rounds that will kill human beings. If I
# point the pistol at someone, my next conscious act will be to fire off
# at least one round into center of mass with the intention of killing
# that person. When dealing with a human target downrange, the only
# reaction I want to stimulate in my target is death. Not humor,
# irritability, anger, pain, curiosity, or any other human emotion. Just
# death.
#
# The pseudo-lawyers here would do well to remember that you fight like
# you train.
#
#
With comments like this, you will have an enjoyable time in court,
if your shooting is questionable, you come up against an anti-gun
DA, you shoot a bystander, you get sued, etc.
You shoot to stop. Most stopping tactics have a significant
chance of killing the opponent. Some don't like the pelvic
shot after COM fails and you miss the bean.
But - read the literature on this - reading your statement to
a jury that you want to kill human beings and you may be sorry.
Perhaps you are trolling. No ethical person wants to kill, we
want to stop the threat.
Final, there isn't a round in a handgun that you can handload
that can guarantee a kill with one COM shot - that's crap.
This must be a troll.
Prichard
David Wisniewski wrote:
#
# Also, be aware that police requirements for ammo is going to be different
# from a homeowner or CCW. The police (usually) want ammo that is going to be
# able to penetrate through car bodies/windshields, etc. while still having enough
# energy to inflict damage upon the person(s) that they are trying to stop.
#
# Whereas a homeowner/CCW is going to want ammo that isn't going to overpenetrate,
# but use up most, if not all of its energy on the target. There shouldn't be
# much need for a homeowner/CCW to be able to penetrate a car's body or windshield.
# I believe this was one of the reasons behind Federal's Personal Defense Ammo.
#
# If you want to purchase the same ammo as your local police force uses, make sure
# you know the reasons that they selected that specific brand and the exterior
# balistic characteristics of it.
#
# --
# David Wisniewski **FOR SALE: EGW 38 Super Caspian IPSC Open w/ 8 mags**
# davi...@erols.com USPSA/IPSC A-28835
#
# http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Academy/9884/index.html
#
# Dillon Blue Press Articles:
# http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Academy/9884/bp_Index.html
#
# What is past is prologue
I would think that with cops shooting, the over penetration thing would
be of paramount importance. They generally aren't very adept marksmen.
c2...@mindspring.com
On 29 Mar 1998 18:59:26 -0500, "Glenn E. Meyer"
<gme...@express-news.net> wrote:
#With comments like this, you will have an enjoyable time in court,
#if your shooting is questionable, you come up against an anti-gun
#DA, you shoot a bystander, you get sued, etc.
#
#You shoot to stop. Most stopping tactics have a significant
#chance of killing the opponent. Some don't like the pelvic
#shot after COM fails and you miss the bean.
#
#But - read the literature on this - reading your statement to
#a jury that you want to kill human beings and you may be sorry.
#Perhaps you are trolling. No ethical person wants to kill, we
#want to stop the threat.
#
#Final, there isn't a round in a handgun that you can handload
#that can guarantee a kill with one COM shot - that's crap.
#This must be a troll.
No, I am not a troll. Just tired of disingenuous dialog that dances
around the very real issue of personal protection and an individual's
right to defend his life against a threat to that life.
Consider your response to my post. You've got enough qualifications
and if statements and pseudo-lawyer weasel words to indicate, at least
to me, that if you are ever unfortunate enough to be involved in a
gunfight, your training will adversely affect a timely response.
Your statement that "you shoot to stop" is immediately qualified (if
not negated) by stating "most stopping tactics have a significant
chance of killing the opponent." Perhaps weasel words like that can
sway the electorate, but they prove my point about disingenuous
arguments.
As for your comment that "you want to kill human beings and you may be
sorry", perhaps you don't understand English. Reread my original
post. What I said is that my training is this: *if* I point a pistol
at someone I shoot for center of mass. In doing so, I fully understand
the target may acquire enough damage to be fatal--that would be my
intention when I pull the trigger. Why else would you shoot at
someone?
I hope I am never in a situation where I have to point a firearm at a
person. That's the human side of me. But if I am ever in a
life-threatening situation, I'm not going to call a time out and look
for every conceivable way to "stop" the individual. I'm going to apply
as much lethal force on that individual as my marksmanship and weapon
will permit, in the shortest time possible.
If you truly feel that "stopping" your assailant is the Prime
Directive, I suggest you start using rubber bullets. Then your
survivors can say at least your intentions were good.
Vvmfuno
load defensive small arms rounds that will kill human beings. If I
want to stimulate in my target is death.
Not to jump the gun, but ANY REASON NOT TO SAY "BACK OFF? before you blast
someone into eternity? Having blasted folks in a war zone years back....I
would caution you that there is no glory in it...Avoid this sort of thing at
all costs......believe me.
LanceS4803
#I would think that with cops shooting, the over penetration thing would be of
paramount importance. They generally aren't very adept marksmen.
That's a pretty far reaching claim you've made there.
What statistics do you have to support this? And is this comparing LEOs to
CCW holders to the public in general?
W4ABC
It has been written about numerous times by authors such as Mas Ayoob,
who while not being a lawyer, is a professional witness. On more than one
occasion I have seen this as the topic of articles that intend to instruct
one on the sickening "political correctness" of our time.
Remember: "You shoot to stop, not to kill." This too is born out of
the same ideology.
Jon
David Wisniewski wrote in message <6fk1pg$d...@xring.cs.umd.edu>...
> ...
unnecessarily
> ...
an attorney?
> ...
Todd Louis Green
On 30 Mar 1998 00:44:40 -0500, c2...@mindspring.com wrote to all in
rec.guns:
#Consider your response to my post. You've got enough qualifications
#and if statements and pseudo-lawyer weasel words to indicate, at least
#to me, that if you are ever unfortunate enough to be involved in a
#gunfight, your training will adversely affect a timely response.
If I may enter the conversation at this point:
I think it's rather silly for you to assume that someone isn't
prepared to use a firearm in self defense just because he's considered
WHY he would use it and what his goals are. His goals and yours
aren't the same. That doesn't make him a weasel.
And yes, I *am* an attorney. 8-)
#In doing so, I fully understand the target may acquire enough damage to
#be fatal--that would be my intention when I pull the trigger. Why else
#would you shoot at someone?
The target may "acquire" damage? Sounds like you're weaseling
out, to me. Don't you mean you'll fill 'em full of lead until he
gasps his last?
#If you truly feel that "stopping" your assailant is the Prime
#Directive, I suggest you start using rubber bullets. Then your
#survivors can say at least your intentions were good.
Perhaps you should go back and reread the responses to your first
post. No one is saying "I want to stop the BG but not hurt him" or "I
want to stop the bad guy but not kill him" or anything like that.
It's just a matter of priorities.
Obviously, you're priority is to kill. Therefore, if you shoot
someone and he dies ten minutes later, you've succeeded. If he rapes
your wife and kills your children in the meantime, who cares, right?
You just want him dead. As Julius Chang once suggested, why not try
ebola? It requires less skill to deliver than a bullet and it's
almost always fatal ... eventually.
My priority, and the priority of most people I know who've
actually prepared for a lethal encounter, is to STOP the attacker. It
doesn't matter one whit to me whether this happens through fear,
injury, incapacitation, or death. If I miss but scare the bejeezus
out of the guy so he runs away, I'm fine with that. Your "kill"
priority suggests that you would shoot him in the back. Is this
correct?
From a legal standpoint (in most parts of the US, if you shoot
someone even in self-defense, you're likely to face at least the
possibility of a criminal and/or civil trial), "I wanted to kill him"
doesn't evoke the same response from a jury as "I wanted to stop him
from trying to kill me (or rape my wife or kill my children or
whatever)."
The classes I took from COMTAC and Ken Hackathorn both stressed
"shoot to stop," not "shoot to kill." Friend who've been to LFI,
Gunsite, and Thunder Ranch report the same. I also know that both the
FBI Academy and FLETC teach "shoot to stop the threat," not shoot to
kill. In fact, I've never heard a *single* qualified instructor teach
it any other way. Perhaps you should rethink your position, or at a
minimum admit that some people are reasonable in having a different
priority. The "I'm right and everyone else is wrong" thing just isn't
very convincing.
Oh, and getting back to the original point of this thread: my
advice is NOT to use handloaded ammo for personal defense. You simply
can't make a round "better" than what's already on the market, and the
potential legal pitfalls aren't worth it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Todd Louis Green .40something
IDPA A-1313 The .40S&W and .45ACP Page
Certified Glock Armorer http://www.greent.com/40Page
----------------------------------------------------------------------
rutledge
LanceS4803 wrote:
#
# #I would think that with cops shooting, the over penetration thing would be of
# paramount importance. They generally aren't very adept marksmen.
#
# That's a pretty far reaching claim you've made there.
# What statistics do you have to support this? And is this comparing LEOs to
# CCW holders to the public in general?
I dunno where *his* info comes from, but mine is from personal
experience shooting with 'em at the range. Cops, in general, are pretty
crappy shooters. There are a few who are dedicated shooters and they
stack up about like dedicated shooters everywhere. The rest are pretty
scary. If they had to fire a shot in the line of duty, they'd as likely
as not miss. I'm not even sure they're alert enough to take time to
look behind the target before they start hosing away. I even saw one
accidentally shoot a deer that was about 100 yards downrange from his
7-yard human silhouette target.
When you think about it, there is no reason a cop who is unenthused by
shooting should be any better than a taxi driver or desk jockey who owns
a gun but is unenthused about its use.
Tom
YANKee
In article <6fgme0$56i$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
dire...@firearmstactical.com writes:
# The bigger concern of using handloads for personal protection is reliability.
# Despite your best efforts, your handloads will probably not be as reliable as
# factory ammunition.
#
# Shawn Dodson
# www.firearmstactical.com
I use (my own) reloads exclusively in my CIII guns, ever since a
FACTORY Winchester round cost me a bulged barrel in my vintage TSMG.
:-0
I certainly trust my own ammo to perform as reliably as any
factory-made stuff.
Of couse, we all know that one does not use CIII arms for personal
defense.
( unless you are part of the LE community..)
I also find it fascinating that no one has (as yet) posted information
on a documented case where a shooter in a justifiable self defense
shooting has been prosecuted for using handloaded ammo.
OK, let's make it easier: SOME of you folks out there have been
involved in defenseive shootings, I'm sure. Do you know if the police
ran ballistics tests on your firearm and ammo to make sure you were
using approved ammunition?
Did they even ASK you?
E.G. Clayton
On 30 Mar 1998, Todd Louis Green wrote:
# From a legal standpoint (in most parts of the US, if you shoot
# someone even in self-defense, you're likely to face at least the
# possibility of a criminal and/or civil trial), "I wanted to kill him"
# doesn't evoke the same response from a jury as "I wanted to stop him
# from trying to kill me (or rape my wife or kill my children or
# whatever)."
Yes, this reflects the general cravenness of the society we are stuck
in nowadays. It is acceptable to be overcome with terror and to whine
about your fears to a jury (in fact that is likely to elicit their sympathy;
and an absence of fear is likely to be interpreted as "cold-bloodedness",
to your detriment). But it is a sure stroke of doom to confess that you
were enraged by the audacity of some ANIMAL trying to take your life and
smote him down as he richly deserved. Confessions of fear, and remorse
afterwards at what you were forced to do, win brownie points in court
while righteous anger exposes you to legal persecution. It's quite a
disgusting state of affairs, don't you think?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed Clayton
Baton Rouge, Louisiana
Plus P Inc
There is NO legal concerns for which type of ammunition you use and it is never
an issue in court if the shooting is legal. It is a gun magazine urban legend
that hangs on for years and years. If the shooting is legal you can shoot
bowling balls. If it isn't, the ammunition won't be of a concern to your fate.
Placement is a far more important key than any choice of ammunition. Keep in
mind if you get into trouble you won't wish you had a SMALLER gun. Chose the
most powerful you can for your skills and abilities.
The difference between FMJ and hollowpoints is very small if all things are
equal. Ignore the non-substantiated "stopping power" crapola. NYPD has and
still uses FMJ in 9mm ammunition and has had no complaints about
performance....a portion of their PD has switched to hollowpoints but NOT for
the reason of stopping power. It was do to penetration on a single isolated
one time incident that caused a knee jerk reaction.
I carry hollowpoint ammunition, but by no means do I assume it will solve all
my problems. What do you do when you dump three shots from a gun into a thug
and he askes, " is that the best you can do?" It happened to someone I know.
(please email for verification if you need it). Such cases are not hard to
find.
The gun rag experts never tell you what to do when their highest rated and best
reccomended load doesn't work. They leave that for you to find out yourself.
Plus...@aol.com
Specialists in lethal force
Richard Siebold
The stats I've seen, published by the FBI or possibly the DOJ, indicate
that something
like 80% of the LE shots fired in anger DON'T hit what they're aimed at.
Rich
Prichard
LanceS4803 wrote:
#
# #I would think that with cops shooting, the over penetration thing would be of
# paramount importance. They generally aren't very adept marksmen.
#
# That's a pretty far reaching claim you've made there.
# What statistics do you have to support this? And is this comparing LEOs to
# CCW holders to the public in general?
Where's the statistics that negate this? Seems like 25% is the number
that comes up in 'cop' gun rags. I could very well be wrong (I would
hope that I am). I doubt that 'marksmenship' in 'real life' situations
is in high quantity in most groups including cops, CCWers, and
the public. I'm not saying that ammo choices should be limited for cops
or citizens. But that they should make wise decisions. I think that you
have even mentioned that department training is not frequent enough.
Cops shoot around the public too. Overpenetration should also be their
concern.
ltl919
Tim Williams wrote:
#
# Other than buying outrageously priced Glaser or Mag-Safe... it seems
# Cor-bon and Hydra-shock are about the best 9mm loads for self defense.
#
# What is a good reload equivalent?
The Federal 9BP is another highly regarded standard pressure
non-premium defensive grade JHP (it comes in 50 round boxes)
Soren LaForce
W4ABC wrote:
#
# It has been written about numerous times by authors such as Mas Ayoob,
# who while not being a lawyer, is a professional witness. On more than one
# occasion I have seen this as the topic of articles that intend to instruct
# one on the sickening "political correctness" of our time.
#
# Remember: "You shoot to stop, not to kill." This too is born out of
# the same ideology.
I think we are all aware that one is *advised* by the *experts* to
carry only factory ammunition.
That aside, does anyone know of *one* case where the use of handloads
led to (i) an extended trial, (ii) a civil suit, (iii) a conviction
that would not have occurred had the shooting been done with factory
ammunition?
I certainly don't, but given the circles I travel in, I wouldn't
expect to.
Does Ayoob mention or refer to any specific examples?
Or does he simply *advise* against carrying handloads just be extra
careful (or to cover his own rear!)?
--Soren
aaron
# #I would think that with cops shooting, the over penetration thing would be of
# paramount importance. They generally aren't very adept marksmen.
#
# That's a pretty far reaching claim you've made there.
# What statistics do you have to support this? And is this comparing LEOs to
# CCW holders to the public in general?
I'll agee with it, in a general sense- I shoot at the Seattle PD range from
time to time, and the guys not in uniform generally have tigher groups than
the ones in uniform.
Of course, this could just be the difference between rookies and off-duty
officers practicing. Obviously, someone willing to put in some practice
time after hours is going to be a better shot...
YMMV. It's not like I was going around and asking 'are you a cop?'.
--
aaron[at]herringn.com
Photo35744
Do not use reloads for defence. If you do and have to go to court you will be
keel hawled. Use only factory ammo for defence. If you have any questions
about this calla lawyer.
Robert P. Pielli--Portraits by Pielli
chang
YANKee wrote:
#
[snip]
#
# OK, let's make it easier: SOME of you folks out there have been
# involved in defenseive shootings, I'm sure. Do you know if the police
# ran ballistics tests on your firearm and ammo to make sure you were
# using approved ammunition?
# Did they even ASK you?
#
FWIW, the local dept (San Francisco Bay area) does not test to see if
the ammo used in shootings are handloads or not. My source? A friend
who's worked in the forensics lab for the last 25 years. The only time
he's ever been asked to test is when the gun blew up. Further, he
doesn't know of any nearby agencies (city, county, state, or federal)
that tests for handloads as a matter of course.
IMHO, it's a myth that using handloads will result in criminal charges
that would not otherwise have been brought against the shooter. At least
in this part of the country.
YMMV
Phil
Andrew Walls
YANKee wrote:
#
# As a point of information, can anyone please provide data on any
# situations where a shooter in a justified self defense case suffered
# adverse legal action ( in civil court, obviously, since we are talking
# *justified* self defense with no resulting criminal charges) because he
# used handloads?
One which surfaced very recently was in "Guns" magazine, in the February
or March issue. During a home-invasion scenario the homeowner peppered
the shotgun wielding intruder with bullets and killed him. The
intruders shotgun turned out not to be loaded. The cartridges in the
homeowners Beretta 92 pistol were 9 mm lead round nosed home made
reloads that he normally used for competition shooting. The article did
not mention that the homeowner incurred any problems for using reloads -
I'm sure that it would have if it had been the case. If anyone is
really interested I can find the article and quote it here.
--
Andrew Walls
Near the Arctic Circle
Norway
Ronald Shin
Col. Douglas Mortimer wrote:
#
# When asked, I advise people to if possible use the same weapon,
# caliber, and ammunition that their local police use.
#
# Mortalis
While this may be sensible, if the police use a decent combination, this
isn't always the right thing to do. Down here in Columbia, SC, we have
a police chief that refuses to allow any combination except for round
nosed lead ball in a bunch of aging .38 special revolvers. In all of
the surrounding communities, they have either switched to hollowpoints
in the 9 mm Parabellum or .40 S&W semiautomatics, or at least carry
Hydrashok hollowpoints in a .357 magnum revolver.
Cheers!
--
"The First Amendment is crucial. Of course it is. So are all
the others. And the Second Amendment is the one that guarantees
that people can bear arms to protect themselves."
Charlton Heston, VP of the NRA
MLK072
People....no wonder we have so much trouble standing up together against the
anti-gun lobby when we argue and argue
about every little thing. Use factory ammo for defense, use
reloads for defense. Either way good luck in court. I have
known DA's to confiscate relaoding equipment to help prove
the shooter was a fanatic, and list the dozen+ guns the shooter
owned, talk about piles of guns'n'ammo, a video on self defense
shooting: See the guy was obviously a killing nut! Ditto with the
factory shooters. This guy told a friend of mine who was a security officer at
Kmart 13 years ago when they carried german mausers, blah blah blah. (Yes I am
being pissy.) So here's the deal! Call
your local cop shop and chat with them, all your local DA and
chat with him, get your local and state laws regarding the issue and study
them, seek out your local gun / defense guru and chat with him, call your local
law professor, etc. etc. KNOW before you
pull the trigger what's gonna happen after you do! Ignorance is the weapon of
choice for the anti-gun movement, dont feed that
ignorance. We have to be smarter. We have to work harder
than they do. We have to stand together.
MLK
c2...@mindspring.com
On 31 Mar 1998 15:06:30 -0500, w...@Dartmouth.EDU ( YANKee) wrote:
#I also find it fascinating that no one has (as yet) posted information
#on a documented case where a shooter in a justifiable self defense
#shooting has been prosecuted for using handloaded ammo.
<snip>
I find it fascinating, too. I'm sure there are lawyers or legal
assistants who post here with access to law libraries or LEXUS. I've
never seen a single cite or legal reference to this, as one poster put
it, "urban legend".
Equally fascinating, at least to me, is the constant barrage here of
what can befall you after a shooting, justifiable or not. You will be
held accountable for using hollow points, round nose, SWC, reloading
your own ammunition, using factory ammunition, using a caliber greater
than .17, using a caliber greater than your local police carry
weapons, having a vast store of pre-loaded, unloaded, or component
ammunition in your home arsenal, using the wrong deodorant, going for
the X-ring, A-zone, or crotch, shooting to stop, shooting to kill,
shooting to wing.
So many choices to make and, as the pseudo-lawyers say here, you
*will* be judged by a jury of your peers after a shooting, justified
or not.
Assuming you are still alive.
dire...@firearmstactical.com
If you were to go back and read the thread, most people have been advising
against using handloads for CIVIL liability reasons, not criminal liability.
One post stated it very succinctly, something like: "You don't have to LOSE a
civil case to have it ruin your life!" That's the idea here, to protect
yourself against this becoming an issue in which you have to pay your attorney
hundreds of dollars per hour to defend you against. Handloads really
shouldn't matter because you used DEADLY FORCE! But that simple fact won't
stop someone intent on getting money from you for damages from making it an
issue in CIVIL court.
Shawn Dodson
www.firearmtactical.com
In article <6fuhtn$c...@xring.cs.umd.edu>,
mlk...@aol.com (MLK072) wrote:
#
# People....no wonder we have so much trouble standing up together against the
# anti-gun lobby when we argue and argue
# about every little thing. Use factory ammo for defense, use
# reloads for defense. Either way good luck in court. I have
# known DA's to confiscate relaoding equipment to help prove
# the shooter was a fanatic, and list the dozen+ guns the shooter
# owned, talk about piles of guns'n'ammo, a video on self defense
# shooting: See the guy was obviously a killing nut! Ditto with the
# factory shooters. This guy told a friend of mine who was a security officer
at
# Kmart 13 years ago when they carried german mausers, blah blah blah. (Yes I
am
# being pissy.) So here's the deal! Call
# your local cop shop and chat with them, all your local DA and
# chat with him, get your local and state laws regarding the issue and study
# them, seek out your local gun / defense guru and chat with him, call your
local
# law professor, etc. etc. KNOW before you
# pull the trigger what's gonna happen after you do! Ignorance is the weapon
of
# choice for the anti-gun movement, dont feed that
# ignorance. We have to be smarter. We have to work harder
# than they do. We have to stand together.
#
# MLK
#
#
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Jim Nichols
In article <6ftr93$a...@xring.cs.umd.edu>, andrew...@nbr.no says...
#
#YANKee wrote:
#
##
## As a point of information, can anyone please provide data on any
## situations where a shooter in a justified self defense case suffered
## adverse legal action ( in civil court, obviously, since we are talking
## *justified* self defense with no resulting criminal charges) because he
## used handloads?
This is the exact reason Cottonwood Insurance developed the Texas CHL
liability insurance program. The stories are many... Check it out at
http://www.blrco.com/cottonwood
Jim
Andrew Walls
c2...@mindspring.com wrote:
#
#
# #on a documented case where a shooter in a justifiable self defense
# #shooting has been prosecuted for using handloaded ammo.
Well this is the one you all have been waiting for:
"Guns Magazine" February 1998 pp. 30 - 31. "On Deadly Ground, Firing
Blind" by Andy Stanford.
If you want to read the entire article get hold of the magazine. Below
is a brief summery, verbetum quotes are marked thus " ". The incident
involved a homeowner who lives "In a small Southwest town".
When he answered a knock on the door one evening he was shocked to find
a masked shotgun wielding youth at the door. The robber pushed the
homeowner into the house then demanded his guns. The homeowner unlocked
his gun safe. Among the guns in the safe was a Beretta M92 he used in
"local tactical pistol matches" loaded with "124 grain LRN handloads".
He pulled out the Beretta, turned, aimed and fired the gun eleven times,
hitting the robber with nine bullets, despite having lost his glasses in
an earlier struggle. The robber was killed. After spending the night,
under questioning at the police cells the homeowner is released, "No
further legal action is taken against him."
[end of summery]
I know that the absence of a prosecution, either criminal or civil, is
not the same as a prosecution for using handloads, but this time at
least it appeared to have no bearing on the case. Of course Lead Round
Nose bulleted rounds, probably loaded down to "Minor" (though this is
not stated in the article) are possibly the least effective 9 mm rounds
available for self-defense. Any lawyer attempting to sue or prosecute
the homeowner for use of "Super deadly home-cooked ammo" would be
laughed out of court.
Plus P Inc
This is the exact reason Cottonwood Insurance developed the Texas CHL
liability insurance program. The stories are many... Check it out at
http://www.blrco.com/cottonwood
#>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Seems strange you can't look into any of the legal search engines and find a
case where the ammunition used was involved in a legal action. If the shooting
is legal the ammunition is of no concern andif isn't a legit shoot, the ammo
will be the least of your concerns.
Ammunition concerns when they are presented in court are quickly shot down and
highly defendable. Gun magazines have tried to bring about this urban legend
and writers are doing the same and most such writers have interests in certain
ammunition manufacturers they promote. Most such writers are known as "bullet
salesmen" among the medical/legal community and thus profit from being anti
reloads and pro certain brands trying to convince you that you reduce liability
if you use certain ammunition.
Some lawsuits have been filed against ammunition companies but they have been
against manufacturers of NEW ammunition, NOT users of reloads which is
interesting if you are seriosu about liability. To date such legal actions
have failed.
Worry more about legality of your actions. The ammunition question isn't worth
the effort. If it is a legal shooting, bowling balls are allowed.
Nick Sredy
# Of course Lead Round
# Nose bulleted rounds, probably loaded down to "Minor" (though this is
# not stated in the article) are possibly the least effective 9 mm rounds
# available for self-defense. Any lawyer attempting to sue or prosecute
# the homeowner for use of "Super deadly home-cooked ammo" would be
# laughed out of court.
Dream on.... You are making the assumption that jurors would understand
the concept of "loading down" a particular pistol cartridge. Wrong.
Or, you assume that the jurors would even take an interest in hearing
expert testimony about such ammuniton. Wrong.
A friend of a friend shot a man in self-defense. The man he shot had
several misdermeaner convictions and one felony conviction. No bit
deal, the assistant DA wanted to make a name for himself so he
prosecuted this case anyway. MY friend went to see some of the jury
trial. He said that the assistant DA kept picking-up the gun and
walking back and forth in front of the jury box. He was trying to
intimidate the jury with the sight of that firearm.
In my opion, many lawyers become lawyers in hopes of someday running for
political office. This is so that they don't have to do any real work
in their lives. (I said many, not all. I know some really good,
upstanding lawyers.) These guys (and gals) are great actors and love
grandstaning. Remember the OJ trial? Frankly, I did not see much of
it, so I have absolutely no opinion of the outcome. However, from what
I did see, I can tell you that it was a three-ring circus.
Equal justice under the law? Next week the Easter Bunny is coming too!
- Nick
Ollie
On 3 Apr 1998 22:42:55 -0500, plus...@aol.com (Plus P Inc) wrote:
#
#This is the exact reason Cottonwood Insurance developed the Texas CHL
#liability insurance program. The stories are many... Check it out at
#http://www.blrco.com/cottonwood
##>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
#Seems strange you can't look into any of the legal search engines and find a
#case where the ammunition used was involved in a legal action. If the shooting
#is legal the ammunition is of no concern andif isn't a legit shoot, the ammo
#will be the least of your concerns.
#Ammunition concerns when they are presented in court are quickly shot down and
#highly defendable. Gun magazines have tried to bring about this urban legend
#and writers are doing the same and most such writers have interests in certain
#ammunition manufacturers they promote. Most such writers are known as "bullet
#salesmen" among the medical/legal community and thus profit from being anti
#reloads and pro certain brands trying to convince you that you reduce liability
#if you use certain ammunition.
#Some lawsuits have been filed against ammunition companies but they have been
#against manufacturers of NEW ammunition, NOT users of reloads which is
#interesting if you are seriosu about liability. To date such legal actions
#have failed.
#Worry more about legality of your actions. The ammunition question isn't worth
#the effort. If it is a legal shooting, bowling balls are allowed.
#Plus...@aol.com
#Specialists in lethal force
#
I will have to differ with you on this. Just because you are unable to
find any case law on the web pertaining to this does not mean that the
use of "handloaded" ammo is not something that a lawyer will jump on.
I do not think that it would make a whole lot of difference in the
criminal side of your defense unless you were using a "junk yard dog"
load (lengths of wire in a Speer shot capsule such as was recommended
by a writer several years ago). But the flip side of any self defense
shooting is going to be the civil suit that *will* follow. In the
civil suit you can bet it will come up if the plaintiff has a good
lawyer. Yes, you will most likely "shoot it down", but at what cost?
You will probably need to have expert witnesses to counter his
"experts"....and that costs money. Why opens up that can of worms,
even if you can beat it? You are going to have enough to worry about
without allegations that you were trying to "punish" the plaintiff
through the use of a load that was"intended to cause undue suffering".
With the quality of factory ammo today, save the handloads for
practice.
--
===================================================
"Here's another fine mess you've gotten us into..."
===================================================
Ollie
John Grove
# This is the exact reason Cottonwood Insurance developed the Texas CHL
# liability insurance program. The stories are many... Check it out at
I checked it out and found *zero* stories of homeowners with ammo reload
incidents. Still no documented cases?
======================================================================
I don't play well with others,
it seems "others" have a problem with losing.
======================================================================
JohnG
======================================================================
A1gunner
If and when I shoot someone, I want them dead, not wounded...My reloads are as
hot as I can make them, in order to do just as much damage as they can...If an
intruder is not dead, a second, third, forth or fith shot will make him that
way...and if the holes are the size of soft balls, more the better...I don't
use factory ammo, ever....That's why I reload...And no kevlar vest yet invented
will stop a 308 steel core round anyway...The point to deadly force, make the
target dead...I shoot to kill, no other option is available, nor would it be
preferred---jim
A1GU...@AOL.COM
The US Constitution spells out our rights, we must secure them ourselves.
Jim Nichols
#or March issue. During a home-invasion scenario the homeowner peppered
#the shotgun wielding intruder with bullets and killed him. The
#intruders shotgun turned out not to be loaded. The cartridges in the
#homeowners Beretta 92 pistol were 9 mm lead round nosed home made
#reloads that he normally used for competition shooting. The article did
#not mention that the homeowner incurred any problems for using reloads -
#I'm sure that it would have if it had been the case. If anyone is
#really interested I can find the article and quote it here.
#Andrew Walls
#Near the Arctic Circle
#Norway
Texas CHL holders,
This is why you should concider liability insurance as a backup to your chl,
protect yourslf from lawyer jerks. http://www.blrco.com/cottonwood
Jim
W. M. McLaughlin
On 26 Mar 1998 20:18:52 -0500, Me <col...@ntplx.net> wrote:
#I would think that there would be little reason to use handloads in a
#selfdefense load, considering what a criminal lawyer [...]
#can do to you. [...]
#Carrying handloads is just asking for a reason for a jury to find
#negligence.
Or, malice aforethought.
I'm currently using MagSafe for internal home defense rounds:
1. Best (fastest) _stopping_ power, per Strasbourg goat tests.
I am not a judge or jury, I am shooting _only_ to stop a lethal attack
on me or my family.
2. Least over penetration of target.
3. Breaks up after passing through typical home interior wall,
or on ricochet.
4. I live on a hill. If round exits house it will break up or
lose velocity relatively quickly due to its light weight.
5. Am using same gun/caliber as Virginia State Police (Sig229,
357Sig), but I don't have their penetration requirements within my
home. (I live in Virginia).
Unfortunately, the little MagSafe boogers _are_ expensive. I've
fired two (2) rounds, mixed in with JHP, to test feed and point of
aim. No problem at 7 yards.
After I have the remainder in service for a year, I will order &
receive replacement rounds, then test fire the old ones.
Constructive comments, including constructive challenges,
appreciated.
--
"It's a magical world, Hobbes . . . Let's go exploring!"
Mike = W. M. McLaughlin = <mi...@shentel.net>
Ken Marsh
Hi,
In article <6frive$1...@xring.cs.umd.edu>, Plus P Inc <plus...@aol.com> wrote:
#There is NO legal concerns for which type of ammunition you use and it is never
#an issue in court if the shooting is legal. It is a gun magazine urban legend
#that hangs on for years and years. If the shooting is legal you can shoot
#bowling balls. If it isn't, the ammunition won't be of a concern to your fate.
As usual, our beat cop is wrong, and completely unswayed by the facts.
I've given up on trying to educate him (remember, practicing shooting
won't ever help you, only taking his class will!), but I post this
in case someone else might be duped by this nonsense.
Below is a post made 1997/07/07 on the very real legal hazards that
PlusP ignores. Unless he's willing to pay YOUR $20K legal fees, I
wouldn't take his advice!
(I recovered this from rec.guns "old" archive. You can find it using:
http://x5.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=255373215&CONTEXT=892088832.1350631687&hitnum=36
or, search www.dejanews.com for "rec.guns ammo smg" and then
re-search on the "old" archive.)
________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Justifiable?
From: "Geoffrey D. Stewart" <ste...@fgp.ufl.edu>
Date: 1997/07/07
Message-ID: <5ps1rk$q...@xring.cs.umd.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Yes. I have had such an experience. About 12 years ago my apartment =
was broken into while I was home. I greeted the breaker with an HK P7 =
PSP loaded with European ball "SMG" ammo. The breaker attacked and I =
was forced to shoot. Of six rounds fired total, five penetrated =
completely and one lodged in the breaker's spine (it was the shot that =
killed). The Deputy DA pressed murder-one charges because, "...there =
was an obvious, premeditated intent to cause severe bodily harm, at the =
least, with a great probability of inflicting a mortal wound." My =
lawyer's response was, "No kidding!"
The charges were dismissed by the Grand Jury and a recommendation for =
complete dismissal (other charges included reckless endangerment, =
because of the "overpenetrative nature" of the ball ammo, and =
discharging a firearm within city limits) of all charges. I spent three =
days/nights in the county lock-up and paid $20,000+ in lawyer fees.
Oh yeah, the "victim's" family tried to sue for lost wages and wrongful =
death; but since the SB was an unemployed welfare lifer, that didn't go =
very far.
Stick to standard, commercial ammo...or get a really good lawyer.
GDS
PS: Any Doubting Thomases can check the various local newspapers for =
verification of this story. You can e-mail me for specifics as I have no =
intention of either broadcasting my where-abouts or airing my dirty =
laundry in such a public forum. AIA if this seems like a flame.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mail: kmarsh at charm dot net | Edit a binary .INI file, then tell
WWW: http://www.charm.net/~kmarsh | me that UNIX is too complicated.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeff Bryant
W. M. McLaughlin wrote:
# Unfortunately, the little MagSafe boogers _are_ expensive. I've
# fired two (2) rounds, mixed in with JHP, to test feed and point of
# aim. No problem at 7 yards.
# After I have the remainder in service for a year, I will order &
# receive replacement rounds, then test fire the old ones.
# Constructive comments, including constructive challenges,
# appreciated.
You could always do what Joe Zambone (owner and developer of MagSafe
ammo). He started out by drilling out commercial FMJ bullets, and
filling the cavity with small lead shot and epoxy. I lived in Lacey, WA
a few years ago and a friend took me to meet Joe. at that time he lived
in a trailer and had a little workshop (porbably a converted bedroom or
bathroom.
He had a small drill press, reloading stuff, small TV, tape player,
etc. Very labor intensive, but he finally started getting some gun rag
press and is doing pretty well.
Anyway, there is no rocket science to MagSafe loads, just Jacketed
bullets drilled and filled with light weight shot suspended in epoxy.
Maybe create your own for practice and reliability testing. Then use
the real MagSafes for carry/defense.
TSBench
In article <6girap$7...@xring.cs.umd.edu>, kma...@charm.net (Ken Marsh) writes:
> ...
________________________________________________________________
> ...
Sorry, but I don't find this guys story indicative of anything, except that he
lived in a ball-breaking juristiction. He used factory ball ( European SMG ammo
differs mainly in having harder primers for use in open-bolt smgs and a little
higher pressures and velocities to guarantee proper functioning, the velocity
difference not being great enough to make a greater penetration much of an
issue at normal, up-close-and- personal self-defense ranges) and got hammered.
What makes you think it would have been any different if he had used jacketed
hollow points, or Glasers, or .22 shorts? They were going to try to get this
guy no matter what he did. The biggest thing going against him probably was
that he SHOT THE GUY 6 TIMES.
All this really proves is that if you live where this guy does, and the same
asst DA is on the job, defending yourself with a firearm, and any kind of
ammunition, is going to lead to an expensive legal hassle, although in the end
you'll probably walk if its a righteous shoot.
Regards,
TSB
Bill Walker...Producer and Cohost of The Shooting Bench radio program...Curator
of Small Arms, US Naval & Shipbuilding Museum in Quincy, MA....General Manager,
WDIS-Radio, Norfolk, Massachusetts.
Scout
Jeff Bryant <jbr...@europa.com> wrote in article
<6gis81$7...@xring.cs.umd.edu>...
# W. M. McLaughlin wrote:
#
# # Unfortunately, the little MagSafe boogers _are_ expensive. I've
# # fired two (2) rounds, mixed in with JHP, to test feed and point of
# # aim. No problem at 7 yards.
# # After I have the remainder in service for a year, I will order
&
# # receive replacement rounds, then test fire the old ones.
# # Constructive comments, including constructive challenges,
# # appreciated.
#
# You could always do what Joe Zambone (owner and developer of MagSafe
# ammo). He started out by drilling out commercial FMJ bullets, and
# filling the cavity with small lead shot and epoxy. I lived in Lacey, WA
# a few years ago and a friend took me to meet Joe. at that time he lived
# in a trailer and had a little workshop (porbably a converted bedroom or
# bathroom.
#
# He had a small drill press, reloading stuff, small TV, tape player,
# etc. Very labor intensive, but he finally started getting some gun rag
# press and is doing pretty well.
#
# Anyway, there is no rocket science to MagSafe loads, just Jacketed
# bullets drilled and filled with light weight shot suspended in epoxy.
# Maybe create your own for practice and reliability testing. Then use
# the real MagSafes for carry/defense.
#
Actually, the easiest and best way to obtain jackets is to chuck a bunch of
HP into your lead pot. Wait for the jackets to collect on the surface, then
just scoop them off. All preformed, and ready to load. You can then turn
around and cast yourself a bunch of bullets for practice. :-)
John Will
On 9 Apr 1998 14:27:31 -0400, tsb...@aol.com (TSBench) wrote:
#What makes you think it would have been any different if he had used jacketed
#hollow points, or Glasers, or .22 shorts? They were going to try to get this
#guy no matter what he did. The biggest thing going against him probably was
#that he SHOT THE GUY 6 TIMES.
If someone is attacking me in my house and I'm armed with my Glock 17,
the only thing I'm sure of is that he'll be shot 18 times or less.
Ken Marsh
Hi,
TSBench <tsb...@aol.com> wrote:
#Sorry, but I don't find this guys story indicative of anything, except that he
#lived in a ball-breaking juristiction. He used factory ball ( European SMG ammo
Not just any factory ball. The point is, ANYTHING that was out of the ordinary
was used against him. How much cheaper would his legal bill have been had
there been one less piece of "evidence" against him?
#All this really proves is that if you live where this guy does, and the same
#asst DA is on the job, defending yourself with a firearm, and any kind of
#ammunition, is going to lead to an expensive legal hassle, although in the end
#you'll probably walk if its a righteous shoot.
It's not just that he walked, but which would you rather do, walk for
$10K of legal fees, or walk for $20K? It's your choice. I choose to take
Ayoob's advice over the anonymous PlusP, who is clearly wrong in this matter
when he said that it was never an issue. It was.
Ken.
c2...@mindspring.com
On 9 Apr 1998 22:33:40 -0400, jew...@erols.com (John Will) wrote:
#If someone is attacking me in my house and I'm armed with my Glock 17,
#the only thing I'm sure of is that he'll be shot 18 times or less.
Now, now. Remember that the pseudo-lawyers on this NG constantly
remind us that we must shoot to stop. Whatever the hell that means.
MLK072
"You'll probably walk if it's a righteous shoot"?? That's
comforting. As I am sure was the 3 days he spent in jail
and 5 years he'll spend paying off the $20,000.00 in legal
fees. This is indicative to alot of things where I stand,
much more than living in a ball-breaking jurisdiction
(although that is surely included). For starters it is indicative
of my needing thorough knowledge of all applicable self
defense laws in my location including case law from past
attempts to charge persons who seen fit to defend themselves
with firearms. Second it means that I should not go out of
my way to make the DA's prosecution easier by using a
firearm / ammo that has a poor public and political perception
(albeit an ignorant perception on both counts). To make a long
post short: a "righteous shoot" is determined by alot of different
people, with different perspectives and bias, different beliefs
and different subjective views. We can all pretend that if
it is justified on rec.guns that good will prevail, but we know
that to be BS. Cover your ass and don't be a victim.
MLK
_, ,_______________,,__
| |||||||| \____| |
/--------------------------------------
````\ / ((`````//``````````
/ /_____\\
/ /
/ /
-------------
TSBench
In a message dated 98-04-09 23:38:54 EDT, you write:
<< Not just any factory ball. The point is, ANYTHING that was out of the
ordinary was used against him. How much cheaper would his legal bill have been
had there been one less piece of "evidence" against him? >>
I spoke today with the former ATF agent who now runs the firearms division of
the Massachusetts Dept of Public Safety (State Police, etc) and asked him. I
mentioned that my self defense gun is loaded with PMC jacketed semi-wadcutters
and would I have a problem. He said nope, not if the shoot is legitimate. In
fact, he mentioned that as long as you don't do something really hinky, like
drill out the nose and fill it with rat poison, what you use is pretty much
irrelevant to how you use it. He said that if you have to shoot someone, the
law supposes that you were trying to kill them, because in most cases you're
not allowed to shoot anyone except in defense of innocent life, so you better
have a good reason for using deadly force.
There is nothing magical about 'submachinegun' ammo; it is about as 'plain
vanilla' as ammo gets. If this guy was hassled, the ammo is being used as a
straw man. I don't even recall from his letter if he mentioned his assailant
had a firearm.
<<<<t's not just that he walked, but which would you rather do, walk for
$10K of legal fees, or walk for $20K? It's your choice. I choose to take
Ayoob's advice over the anonymous PlusP, who is clearly wrong in this matter
when he said that it was never an issue. It was.>>>>
It's only an issue when someone wants to hang their hat on it. Let's face it,
no matter what this guy used, he was going to rack up $20K in legal fees,
because the family was going to come up with a reason to go after him. Imagine
if he had used one of those nasty-looking JHP or, heaven forbid, a wadcutter
or jacketed semi-wadcutter.
If you shoot somebody, you're usually in for a hassle regardlessn of how it
turns out. If they want to pick on your gun, or trigger sensitivity, or the
type of ammo you used, well, thats the way it goes. There is nothing to stop
anyone from suing you if they want to.
But the idea that he was beat up for using ball ammo, and wouldn't have been
if he had popped the bad guy with a JHP, just seems counterintuitive. Somehow,
I think there may be something that this guy is leaving unsaid in his letter.
Anyway, he walked in both cases. He ran up legal fees. He would have also run
up legal fees if the guy had fallen down his stairs while casing his house and
sued him. It is one of the bains of the contingency fee system.
If Aayoob is saying not to use mil spec ammo, I don't see the rationale for
it, since it is Hague Convention legal. I've also read read him saying that
you should use a double action handgun rather than a single action as a
defense against being accused of 'accidentally' shooting a bad guy. Could be,
but I've never heard of a righteous shooting going against somebody because of
the firearm used.
If you want to take Aayoob's advice, take it. I can't imagine that it will
hurt. It's just that I don't see how a lot of it will help, either, provided
what you do is legitimate.
Regards,
TSB
PS: By the by, don't e-mail me and then, when I go to the trouble of spending
my time checking out my references and e-mailing back a reply, I get some
cutesy automated bullshit about how you're not accepting mail from undesireable
correspondents or spammers. I don't consider 45 minutes of my time worth the
.005 seconds of time you'd have to spend hitting the g**d**n delete key. Why
not find a program that won't let you send to us undesireables either?
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
Return-Path: <>
Received: from relay21.mx.aol.com (relay21.mail.aol.com [172.31.106.67])
Arne Carlsten
Ollie <olli...@flash.net> wrote:
: I will have to differ with you on this. Just because you are unable to
: find any case law on the web pertaining to this does not mean that the
: use of "handloaded" ammo is not something that a lawyer will jump on.
: I do not think that it would make a whole lot of difference in the
: criminal side of your defense unless you were using a "junk yard dog"
: load (lengths of wire in a Speer shot capsule such as was recommended
: by a writer several years ago). But the flip side of any self defense
: shooting is going to be the civil suit that *will* follow. In the
: civil suit you can bet it will come up if the plaintiff has a good
: lawyer. Yes, you will most likely "shoot it down", but at what cost?
: You will probably need to have expert witnesses to counter his
: "experts"....and that costs money. Why opens up that can of worms,
: even if you can beat it? You are going to have enough to worry about
: through the use of a load that was"intended to cause undue suffering".
: With the quality of factory ammo today, save the handloads for
: practice.
And your source for all of these scary possibilities being genuine threats
would be...?
The typical self-defense shooting involves no civil lawsuit; few scumbags
or their next of kin are that audacious; and even the slimiest
bottom-feeder lawyer knows there's no point suing someone with shallow
pockets. Even 66.7% of nothing is no victory...
The biggests shills for the "Never use handloaded ammunition for defense"
line seem to have their thumbs firmly planted in the expensive "high
performance" defensive ammunition pie. Mere coincidence?
--
Arne Gustav Carlsten
Flagstaff, Arizona
Chomh da/na le muc...
Plus P Inc
The biggests shills for the "Never use handloaded ammunition for defense"
line seem to have their thumbs firmly planted in the expensive "high
performance" defensive ammunition pie. Mere coincidence?
Arne Gustav Carlsten
Flagstaff, Arizona
#>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I call them the "bullets salesmen" writers. They always have ONE brand they
LOVE. Ammunition is NOT a problem in a self defense shooting. worry not.
There are enough legitimate legal boogie men to worry about. Civil suit is
also not a problem as your ammunition is very defendable if some lawyer was
silly enough to bring it up.
Yes, it gets mentioned at times, but only by the unwise lawyer.
I dare and double dare and defy ANYONE that can find a case where a handload
was a prime issue. I've never even heard of a case where the fact it was a
handload was mentioned or anyone cared. Kinda like running someone over with
your car and someone asking if you changed your own oil. Get a grip. Taint a
problem. Only in gun magazines, not out here in the legal world.
A. H. Williams
The best advice is to use the factory ammo used by any well recognized PD. We
carry the .45 Golden Sabre and no one could say its ineffective. You will
have a possibility of a civil suit and don't give the lawyers a bone to chew
on. If you follow this advice your response is "simply I use what the police
use."
Howard Williams
St. Joseph County Police Attorney
Arne Carlsten wrote:
> ...
Robert J. Christman
Arne Carlsten wrote:
# Ollie <olli...@flash.net> wrote:
# : I will have to differ with you on this. Just because you are unable to
# : find any case law on the web pertaining to this does not mean that the
# : use of "handloaded" ammo is not something that a lawyer will jump on.
# : I do not think that it would make a whole lot of difference in the
# : criminal side of your defense unless you were using a "junk yard dog"
# : load (lengths of wire in a Speer shot capsule such as was recommended
# : by a writer several years ago). But the flip side of any self defense
# : shooting is going to be the civil suit that *will* follow. In the
# : civil suit you can bet it will come up if the plaintiff has a good
# : lawyer. Yes, you will most likely "shoot it down", but at what cost?
# : You will probably need to have expert witnesses to counter his
# : "experts"....and that costs money. Why opens up that can of worms,
# : even if you can beat it? You are going to have enough to worry about
# : without allegations that you were trying to "punish" the plaintiff
# : through the use of a load that was"intended to cause undue suffering".
# : With the quality of factory ammo today, save the handloads for
# : practice.
#
# And your source for all of these scary possibilities being genuine threats
# would be...?
#
# The typical self-defense shooting involves no civil lawsuit; few scumbags
# or their next of kin are that audacious; and even the slimiest
# bottom-feeder lawyer knows there's no point suing someone with shallow
# pockets. Even 66.7% of nothing is no victory...
#
# The biggests shills for the "Never use handloaded ammunition for defense"
# line seem to have their thumbs firmly planted in the expensive "high
# performance" defensive ammunition pie. Mere coincidence?
Not to mention that a number of states (Indiana among them) have passed laws
specifically stating that anyone injured or killed while breaking into an
occupied dwelling is the "proximate cause" of their injury and they or their
decedents, as appropriate, cannot sue the homeowner.
Bob C. NRA Endowment USN (Ret)
John Will
On 10 Apr 1998 23:44:36 -0400, Arne Carlsten <a...@primenet.com> wrote:
#And your source for all of these scary possibilities being genuine threats
#would be...?
#
#The typical self-defense shooting involves no civil lawsuit; few scumbags
#or their next of kin are that audacious; and even the slimiest
#bottom-feeder lawyer knows there's no point suing someone with shallow
#pockets. Even 66.7% of nothing is no victory...
I'm curious as to where your source for the statement "The typical
self-defense shooting involves no civil lawsuit" comes from. Can you
cite some actual studies on the topic, or is this just your opinion?
Maybe that bottom-feeder lawyer knows that some of us don't have
shallow pockets. Personally, if I'm ever involved in a defensive
shooting, I suspect that the civil lawsuit is going to be the most
troublesome, since when I shoot I intend that it'll be pretty clear
cut that it was a legal shoot. OTOH, that bottom-feeding lawyer knows
that legal doesn't translate into some uninformed jury not lining his
pockets.
Boba Fett Youth Brigade
I don't know if this little pearl has been offered yet but this is
a bit of advice I got from a friend who is a trainer of local cops.
IF you ever have to shoot someone, and are legally in the right
and do in fact shoot someone, the best thing you can possibly shoot them
with is the same round or type of round that your local PD carries.
Example: You shoot and kill bad man in your house. Doesn't matter that
He has prior convictions for rape because you used a some
special hand loads or hydroshocks or something. The asshole's
lawyer (which may be the prosecutor this time) says you wanted
and intended to kill and that is why you fussed over ammo. To
maximise your chance of killing. It isn't true but that counts
for dick anymore.
NOW, say the man wants to attack your ammo choice and you are
carrying the same thing the local PD carries. He has to attack
them as well. "Well your honor, I figured that I lived and
worked in the same area as the local police officers so what
ever they found to be best must be best for me too. And, I
don't have anywhere near the time and resources of my local
PD to test, analyze, evaluate, and choose ammo. Besides, like
the local PD, I am on a budget"
In AZ I have CCW and carry. This might be less relevant for home use
but I think it is a pretty good strategy.
-Jef
Midgaard
If I'm not mistaken Massad Ayoob of LFI also frowns on using Reloads for
Self Defense.
--
Mad Mardigan's Anti Spam Filter initiated.
Member of the Golden Eagles Rifle and Pistol Club in Brooklyn NY
http://www.excelsior.net/saruman
http://www.nra.org
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3964
Arne Carlsten
Midgaard <sar...@excelsior.net> wrote:
: If I'm not mistaken Massad Ayoob of LFI also frowns on using Reloads for
: Self Defense.
Massad Ayoob is _the_ foremost example of an ammunition salesman seeking
to line his own pockets by shilling for a high-priced line of defensive
ammunition (Cor-Bon in this case).
Sorry; but I lost almost all respect for Ayoob long ago. Between his
constant pitching of various products as critical to safety and
self-defense (products he's just coincidentally selling...) and his
strained and bizarre "examples" that he uses to push "this month's
theory"... Come on now, _seriously_, using a bullet that passed through a
police officer's _wrist_ to strike and kill another officer as an example
of the "dangers of over-penetrating ammunition"? Or his claims about
"don't use 'assault weapons' for self-defense" in which his "example"
(Massey) did about a dozen wrongful and even criminal things in his
"self-defense" shooting incident. That guy would have (and should have)
gone to jail no matter what sort of gun or ammunition he might have
used...
--
Arne Gustav Carlsten
Flagstaff, Arizona
Chomh da/na le muc...
Arthur Sprague
On 10 Apr 1998 23:44:36 -0400, Arne Carlsten <a...@primenet.com> wrote:
> ...
This thread goes on and on, and I wonder why. I do reload, and I do
keep handguns for family protection and such as most of us do, and I
do practice a lot. So what is the big deal? Find out what the local
law enforcement people use for carry ammo. Make sure it functions
well in your particular handgun. Use it as your "duty" load. Find a
load that duplicates it for recoil and ballistics and train with that.
It is just one less possibility for hassle if you ever have to use it.
What is the big benefit of using hand loads? One percent (????)
increase in stopping power? A savings of $2.50 or whatever per box?
YANKee
In article <6gnojj$qrt$1...@gte1.gte.net>
"A. H. Williams" <a...@gte.net> writes:
# If you follow this advice your response is "simply I use what the police
# use."
#
# Howard Williams
# St. Joseph County Police Attorney
That's why an MP5K loaded with 124 grain Gold Dot HP is highly
recommended for home defensive use.
"Hey! I simply used what the Police use!"
8^)
Sorry, I just HAD to inject a bit of humor into this thread!
BJay the YANKee
[x] No Guns [x] No Rights [x] No Future [x] No Shit
JD Hollingsworth Jr
Arne Carlsten wrote:
#
# : I will have to differ with you on this. Just because you are unable to
# : find any case law on the web pertaining to this does not mean that the
# : use of "handloaded" ammo is not something that a lawyer will jump on.
# : I do not think that it would make a whole lot of difference in the
# : criminal side of your defense unless you were using a "junk yard dog"
# : load (lengths of wire in a Speer shot capsule such as was recommended
# : by a writer several years ago). But the flip side of any self defense
# : shooting is going to be the civil suit that *will* follow. In the
# : civil suit you can bet it will come up if the plaintiff has a good
# : lawyer. Yes, you will most likely "shoot it down", but at what cost?
# : You will probably need to have expert witnesses to counter his
# : "experts"....and that costs money. Why opens up that can of worms,
# : even if you can beat it? You are going to have enough to worry about
# : without allegations that you were trying to "punish" the plaintiff
# : through the use of a load that was"intended to cause undue suffering".
# : With the quality of factory ammo today, save the handloads for
# : practice.
#
# And your source for all of these scary possibilities being genuine threats
# would be...?
#
# or their next of kin are that audacious; and even the slimiest
# bottom-feeder lawyer knows there's no point suing someone with shallow
# pockets. Even 66.7% of nothing is no victory...
Hi Group,
I misplaced a phone# and was hoping that one of you might have it. While
I don't remember the name of the company(I think it started with T) they
manufacture adjustable cheekrests for the M14/M1A rifles. They're
located in Portland OR. and used to advertise in SGN. If you can help,
please email. TIA.
--
Later,
JDH
66 Charger 78 1/2 FLH-80
55 F-100 79 80" Custom
Patrick Pauley
You are definitely NOT mistaken. Also the county SO here abouts highly
advises against it in their CCW class. I'm not talking about a liberal area
either, very conservative, *very* pro-gun.
Pat
Midgaard wrote in message <6gp4om$n...@xring.cs.umd.edu>...
#If I'm not mistaken Massad Ayoob of LFI also frowns on using Reloads for
#Self Defense.
#
#--
#Mad Mardigan's Anti Spam Filter initiated.
#
#Member of the Golden Eagles Rifle and Pistol Club in Brooklyn NY
#
#http://www.excelsior.net/saruman
#http://www.nra.org
#http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3964
#
Plus P Inc
Midgaard wrote in message <6gp4om$n...@xring.cs.umd.edu>...
#If I'm not mistaken Massad Ayoob of LFI also frowns on using Reloads for#Self
Defense.
#
#>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
.45 ACP
" I won't argue that the .45 hardball has a fine reputation for stopping
power."
Guns Magazine May 1979.
.38 Special
" In a factory load, I'd recommend Federal or Winchester 158 gr +P lead
hollow-points if you're an experienced shooter, otherwise midrange wadcutter
loads."
Guns Magazine 1980
.45 ACP
"Thus I recommend the 185 grain Remington for anybody with a stock .45 auto
with a 5 " barrel. In my own guns, I carry a Speer in the Chamber and either
Federal or Super-Vel hollowpoints in the magazine."
Guns Magazine 1980
.38 Special
" Another alternative is the popular hollowbase wadcutter bullet reversed with
the cavity forward, over a medium handloaded powder charge."
Guns Magaine 1980
Ayoobs comments on self defense loads. Note he DOES approve of handloads.
Plus his views flip flod each issue and he dances all over the place depending
on who he is selling bullets for. It was Corbon, then Triton etc. FLIP FLOP
FLIP FLOP.
Patrick Pauley
Plus P Inc wrote in message <6i9vs3$s...@xring.cs.umd.edu>...
#.38 Special
#" Another alternative is the popular hollowbase wadcutter bullet reversed
with
#the cavity forward, over a medium handloaded powder charge."
#Guns Magaine 1980
#
#Ayoobs comments on self defense loads. Note he DOES approve of handloads.
#Plus his views flip flod each issue and he dances all over the place
depending
#on who he is selling bullets for. It was Corbon, then Triton etc. FLIP
FLOP
#FLIP FLOP.
#
#
#Plus...@aol.com
#Specialists in lethal force
#
Thanks for the reply. I need to point out two things though. The first is
that the "rag" clips you posted are almost 20 years old, a **LOT** (legal
liability) has changed in 20 years. The second is that *THE* county agency
that *I* took CCW course from (even though I had adequate prior training to
excempt), stated repeatedly, "Stay on the firm ground as you move through
the swamp of a justified shooting, this includes using handloads for
practice and factory for the street." Both of the primary training people
said this. I would suspect that you contact the issuing agency that applies
to you and ask them. Better yet, call a defense attorney with experience in
CIVIL trial for their advice. Heck they might even have two different fees
for the defense involving factory Vs "home rolled," I would!
Do as you must, I will "stay on the firm ground."
Pat--
Patrick Pauley
torste...@hotmail.com wrote in message
<6iafcg$6h1$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
#My only questions is, if lethal force is indeed justified, what is the big
#deal with using the ammo that happens to be in the firearms that is handy
at
#that moment?
Council for "perp's" (aka: fine upstanding youth that had worked his way
though some hard times but had got his act together, been accepted to
college, and just gotten a new job so that he could finally get engaged)
family:
Mr. Selfdefender, just why did you have that particular gun "handy
at that moment? Also, why is it that you just happened to have it loaded
with ammunition that you made? Oh, and why was it that you felt that you
needed to increase the velocity and consequently the "killing capability" a
full 8% above what the commercial ammunition of this type is? No further
questions your Honor.
#
#It isn't that I disagree with using high-quality factory ammunition for
self-
#defense,
That would then make this topic moot.
# but you'd think there are more important things than who made the
#ammo that killed the perp.
That might be what you would think. I happen to know that to the right
person (grieving family) there is NOTHING more important than this fact.
Like I posted, do as YOU must (save the energy for your own defense), I will
continue to use Fed. Hydra's and "keep on the safe(st) ground (possible)."
Pat
#
#T.
#
#
#In article <6i8n82$p...@xring.cs.umd.edu>#1/1,
# "Patrick Pauley" <c2b2p...@email.msn.com> wrote:
# > ...
#
#
#-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
#http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
#
Nosy
<In article <6i9vs3$s...@xring.cs.umd.edu> plus...@aol.com (Plus P Inc) writes:
< .45 ACP
< " I won't argue that the .45 hardball has a fine reputation for stopping
< power."
< Guns Magazine May 1979.
That says that a lot of people other than Ayoob
believed in 1979 that .45 ACP FMJ had "stopping power",
clearly.
< .38 Special
< " In a factory load, I'd recommend Federal or Winchester 158 gr +P lead
< hollow-points if you're an experienced shooter, otherwise midrange wadcutter
< loads."
< Guns Magazine 1980
That is not an unreasonable suggestion in 1980. I suspect
that some peace officers would have made that suggestion,
in that day and time.
< .45 ACP
< "Thus I recommend the 185 grain Remington for anybody with a stock .45 auto
< with a 5 " barrel. In my own guns, I carry a Speer in the Chamber and either
< Federal or Super-Vel hollowpoints in the magazine."
< Guns Magazine 1980
This says that Ayoob himself suggests the 185 grain Rem
or the Speer JHP (200 grain "flying ashtray"?) in 1980.
It doesn't contradict the previous observation about
.45 ACP FMJ's popularity, clearly.
< .38 Special
< " Another alternative is the popular hollowbase wadcutter bullet reversed with
< the cavity forward, over a medium handloaded powder charge."
< Guns Magaine 1980
This suggestion was common in the 1960's and 1970's. It isn't
too much of a surprise to see Ayoob agreeing with it, 18 years
ago. It says "another alternative", it doesn't say that this
is the best, or the only, alternative, does it?
<Ayoobs comments on self defense loads. Note he DOES approve of handloads.
No, that's not an accurate statement.
He DID approve of handloads in 1980, 18 years ago, going
by the statements above.
<Plus his views flip flod each issue
That may be true, but not in the examples shown above.
Simply reading the sentences for meaning tells me
that in 1979-1980, a lot of people still relied on
FMJ in .45 ACP and Ayoob acknowledged that, but his
personal suggestion was either the 185 grain Rem or
an un-named Speer cartridge. In .38 Special he suggested
in 1979-1980 either the 158 grain +P LSWCHP (which he
STILL recommends, 18 years later) or wadcutter target loads,
and he acknowledged another possibility consisting of a handloaded
reverse wadcutter (which was not uncommon 20 years ago).
Clearly he's changed some opinions in the 18+ years that
have passed since then, and not changed other opinions.
The fact is, though, that plus p inc hasn't made a case
above with his examples from when Jimmy Carter was President
and the hottest issue was the Iranian hostage crisis.
<and he dances all over the place depending
<on who he is selling bullets for. It was Corbon, then Triton etc.
This is a more substantial charge, and it is accurate
that Ayoob has been fond of CorBon when he was selling it.
However, he's also always offered other alternatives as well,
in every article that I've read, over a decade, in diverse
gunzines.
<FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP.
That's certainly one view. I don't see the facts to
support this claim, though.
Perhaps the Plus P Inc account can offer its suggestions
for ammunition, rather than attacking someone else?
Grant Cunningham
Plus P Inc wrote:
# .45 ACP
# " I won't argue that the .45 hardball has a fine reputation for stopping
# power."
# Guns Magazine May 1979.
#
# .38 Special
# " In a factory load, I'd recommend Federal or Winchester 158 gr +P lead
# hollow-points if you're an experienced shooter, otherwise midrange wadcutter
# loads."
# Guns Magazine 1980
#
# .45 ACP
# "Thus I recommend the 185 grain Remington for anybody with a stock .45 auto
# with a 5 " barrel. In my own guns, I carry a Speer in the Chamber and either
# Federal or Super-Vel hollowpoints in the magazine."
# Guns Magazine 1980
#
# .38 Special
# " Another alternative is the popular hollowbase wadcutter bullet reversed with
# the cavity forward, over a medium handloaded powder charge."
# Guns Magaine 1980
#
# Ayoobs comments on self defense loads. Note he DOES approve of handloads.
Note that he DID NOT "APPROVE" of handloads; he simply acknowledges that
they are a "popular" alternative.
# Plus his views flip flod each issue and he dances all over the place depending
# on who he is selling bullets for. It was Corbon, then Triton etc. FLIP FLOP
# FLIP FLOP.
There is nothing in the above quotes that would indicate a "flip-flop".
In #1, he won't argue about the "fine reputation" that the .45ACP
hardball has; note that he didn't recommend it, just admits that it has
a "reputation". #2 is a recommendation, but (as I've pointed out)
doesn't contradict (and is not contradicted by) #4. #3 is the same
situation. It is interesting to note that these quotes -- almost TWENTY
YEARS old -- were made long before the appearance of
self-defense-specific ammo, and thus represent the best opinion of the
day. That they don't agree with what he writes in 1998 is surprising
only to those who haven't learned anything new since Nixon was in the
White House.
As far as the Triton vs Corbon issue, you've been apprised of the
relevant dynamics of the matter more than once and still don't get it.
After all, isn't the mark of a *real* "specialist" to be able to learn
about and adopt the best tools available as they are developed?
I'm not here to defend Ayoob -- he certainly doesn't need my help, and I
have my own disagreements with him -- but when tripe like this is
trotted out time and again as some sort of "fact", it begs to refuted.
That someone would keep quotes about a specific personality for twenty
years just in the hope that they can be used against that person is in
itself bizarre (and probably unhealthy.)
# Plus...@aol.com
# Specialists in lethal force
If this is your idea of "evidence", how did you get to be a "specialist
in lethal force"?
--
-=[ grant ]=-
Reply-to: gra...@hevanet.com
"Where there are no men, strive to be a man" - Pirke Avot
torste...@hotmail.com
Patrick,
I also use Federal Hydrashocks in my handguns, and have no objection to
recommending commercial loads for self-defense -- in fact, personally, I
would never consider anything else.
The point I was trying to make is this: if I am in a position where lethal
force is justified, why would someone object to the particular type of
ammunition that is used? I can see the lawyer for the perp (or possibly
prosecutor) arguing that the shooting itself may not have been justified, but
commercial hollowpoint will kill someone just as dead as a handload, shotgun,
or muzzleloader. Whining about the ammunition itself is moot at that point,
and you'll wind up with a manslaughter/murder indictment either way if the
prosecutor has a bad day...
Regards,
T.
In article <6ickvc$8...@xring.cs.umd.edu>#1/1,
"Patrick Pauley" <c2b2p...@email.msn.com> wrote:
> ...
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
Patrick Pauley
Your points are valid. It is moot and *should* make no difference.
However, when you don't have much legit. "ammo" you start looking for smoke.
I wouldn't want to give them any.
Good Shooting,
Pat--
torste...@hotmail.com wrote in message
<6idbmr$dh7$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
> ...
but
> ...
shotgun,
> ...
c2...@mindspring.com
On 29 Apr 1998 22:21:54 -0400, "Patrick Pauley"
<c2b2p...@email.msn.com> wrote:
#You are definitely NOT mistaken. Also the county SO here abouts highly
#advises against it in their CCW class. I'm not talking about a liberal area
#either, very conservative, *very* pro-gun.
#
I'm currently working on a project involving the use of handloaded
.45ACP rounds that have 80 grains of lead azide surrounding a
beryllium capsule containing 600 millicuries of Californium 252.
Should produce an explosion approximately equal to 2 kilos of C4. No
longer will you have to shoot for COM.
For home defense, of course.
XTPHP1
If I go to a gun show and buy factory ammo, how do I know for sure that it is
100% factory ammo, and not a box of reloads the guy selling it stuffed in the
factory container just for larger profit margins? Sounds strange, but it
happens lots. I've opened up boxes of Federal Hydra Shocks boxes, only to find
regular Remington hollowpoints inside. I've seen Hornady .223 that say the
V-max on the box, and opened it up to find just plain old soft points. These
two episodes were at different tables, at different shows, in different cities.
I figure, who is gonna be able to tell if someone uses deadly force, and
they've got reloads or factory.
What if you use 3-4 different factory loads in your magazine? Say a
Remington, then Speer Gold Dot, then a Hydra shock, and a roundnose. What
then? Do you think lolly pop lawyer is gonna screem that I really did want the
guy dead because I mixed my ammo up to settle all scores?
If you can't cite one case where reloads caused a person to loose at trial,
then you don't have much to stand on. It's kinda of like saying that becaus I
put aftermarket tires on my car, thats why I wrecked and killed the family in
the yugo, and the ice on the road had nothing to do with it.
Andrew Walls
c2...@mindspring.com wrote:
#
# I'm currently working on a project involving the use of handloaded
# .45ACP rounds that have 80 grains of lead azide surrounding a
# beryllium capsule containing 600 millicuries of Californium 252.
#
# Should produce an explosion approximately equal to 2 kilos of C4. No
# longer will you have to shoot for COM.
#
# For home defense, of course.
I can't wait for the "one-shot-stop" stats to be published for this
round. I suppose that it will it be dearer than magsafes?
--
Andrew Walls
Near the Arctic Circle
Norway
Patrick Pauley
XTPHP1 wrote in message <6im7gc$s...@xring.cs.umd.edu>...
#
#If you can't cite one case where reloads caused a person to loose at trial,
#then you don't have much to stand on. It's kinda of like saying that
becaus I
#put aftermarket tires on my car, thats why I wrecked and killed the family
in
#the yugo, and the ice on the road had nothing to do with it.
#
I just reported what the recomendation of the local SO was. Also, I stated,
"do as you must, I will stick with factories," so............Do As You
Must.
Simply put, why "court" additional trouble, real, perceived, or otherwise?
Good luck,
Pat--
Plus P Inc
Council for "perp's" (aka: fine upstanding youth that had worked his way
though some hard times but had got his act together, been accepted to
college, and just gotten a new job so that he could finally get engaged)
family:
Mr. Selfdefender, just why did you have that particular gun "handy
at that moment? Also, why is it that you just happened to have it loaded
with ammunition that you made? Oh, and why was it that you felt that you
needed to increase the velocity and consequently the "killing capability" a
full 8% above what the commercial ammunition of this type is? No further
questions your Honor.
#
#It isn't that I disagree with using high-quality factory ammunition for
self-
#defense,
That would then make this topic moot.
# but you'd think there are more important things than who made the
#ammo that killed the perp.
That might be what you would think. I happen to know that to the right
person (grieving family) there is NOTHING more important than this fact.
Like I posted, do as YOU must (save the energy for your own defense), I will
continue to use Fed. Hydra's and "keep on the safe(st) ground (possible)."
#>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
OLD gun magazine logic has made some think that handloads or certain bullets
are a liability problem. That is pure gun magazine nonsense. to date nobody
has shown a single case where such use has cost anyone a dime. IF a lawyer is
silly enough to bring it up they deserve to have thier legal head handed to
them in court. IF the shooting is legal, the ammunition choice is not an
issue..if it isn't legal your problems are much worse than ammo.
Rather than ammo, the concerns in self defense are much greater in other areas.
The ONLY problem is handloads is reliability. But that is a choice the
SHOOTER makes. They live or die with it.
geoff beneze
In article <6iojs8$6...@xring.cs.umd.edu>, "Patrick Pauley"
<c2b2p...@email.msn.com> wrote:
# Simply put, why "court" additional trouble, real, perceived, or otherwise?
Because every time we cater to these "demands", we give a bit more of our
"rights" to the bottomfeeding element of the legal profession. Self
defense is just that - the means to the end, given a "clean shoot" SHOULD
make no difference at all, be it a rock or a Pontiac.
I've carried handloads for many years, and will continue to do so.
--
geoff beneze (geo...@beast-enterprises.com)
NRA Life member
******************************************
BEAST Enterprises/Arizona Shooting Sports
http://www.beast-enterprises.com
BEAST Gunsmithing -- Target Stands
The unofficial Dillon Tech Page
******************************************
Carl Donath
Andrew Walls wrote:
# I can't wait for the "one-shot-stop" stats to be published for this
# round. I suppose that it will it be dearer than magsafes?
The laser-guided rounds here sure will be:
http://www.snipercountry.com/bullet.htm
--
Carl Donath http://www.ei.kodak.com/~donath
http://www2.rpa.net/~ctdonath
--------- The Millenium Bug: The Monsters are Due on Maple Street ---------
Hodgson Todd
Lawyer Boilerplate On:
Always use factory ammo. Period.
Lawyer Boilerplate Off:
Reality Check:
Can anyone actual CITE a case (criminal or civil) where the use
of handloaded ammo ACTUALLY figured against the defender in an otherwise
lawful shooting?
Ayoob is all over this, but he has a nest to feather with the procedes of
his factory ammo sales.
Obvious second question:
Can anyone CITE a case where the choice of FACTORY ammo was so used
against the defender? In all the VERY hypothetical 'prosecutor speaches'
I have read in threads like this, one could as easily substitute 'Corbon'
for 'handload'.
'Mr. Schmuck, why did you feel the need to load extra deadly Corbon
ammuntion rather than ordinary factory ammo.?'
Don't get all in a twist about why other ammo is demonstrably inferior or
why Corbon is no better than hydra-talons or whatever. Reality isn't the
point here any more than it is in the 'handload' question. The issue is
that if the prosecutor is going to go after ammo selection, then is there
any case of them going after one factory load over another?
We've seen this come up over and over in hypothetical terms. I would very
much like to know if it has ever come up meaningfully in a courtroom.
Warm Hearth!
Jake
P.S. If I WERE alowed to carry in this beautiful but benighted country I'd
probably carry whatever the cops carry.
.
I totally agree that the paranoia surrounding the use of handloads for
defense is unsubstantiated B.S. . As the man below says, can anyone of you
out there who believes that retoric support any of your claims with an
actual court case or two if you could find more than one. In court there
must be a precedent to base your case on and if you don't have one you're
going to have to work hard to prove to the jury what actual relavance this
has to whether this was a case of justfiable homicide or not. Remember, in
such a case the burden of proof is with the prosecutor and not the defense.
You might use the evil hand load line of questioning if your trying to
establish that the defendant had Mens Rea and it was therefore a
pre-meditated shooting but then the defendant would have to know the victim
or some other strange scenario. To simplify things, it would be difficult
if not impossible to pursuade a jury of twelve that are from the same
population as our shooter that a man had Mens Rea to commit murder on the
very weak grounds that he loaded his own ammunition. And if you could do
this beyond a reasonable doubt they ought to make you the next Attorney
General of the United States.
##>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
#OLD gun magazine logic has made some think that handloads or certain
bullets
#are a liability problem. That is pure gun magazine nonsense. to date
nobody
#has shown a single case where such use has cost anyone a dime. IF a lawyer
is
#silly enough to bring it up they deserve to have thier legal head handed to
#them in court. IF the shooting is legal, the ammunition choice is not an
#issue..if it isn't legal your problems are much worse than ammo.
#Rather than ammo, the concerns in self defense are much greater in other
areas.
# The ONLY problem is handloads is reliability. But that is a choice the
#SHOOTER makes. They live or die with it.
deme...@iquest.net
#Obvious second question:
#
#Can anyone CITE a case where the choice of FACTORY ammo was so used
#against the defender? In all the VERY hypothetical 'prosecutor speaches'
#I have read in threads like this, one could as easily substitute 'Corbon'
#for 'handload'.
I don't have the official cite. But I put the newspaper clipping in a
file "somewheres".
I remember it because it happened at the intersection about 1 block
from where I used to live.
It started as a traffic altercation. One driver shot and killed
another driver, and claimed self defense. I don't remember other
details, so I have no opinion if it was legitimate self-defense, or if
self-defense was just used as an excuse to blow away someone who cut
him off in traffic.
However, it shocked me to read in the paper a quote from the assistant
district (county) attorney during the trial, and it was about the
shooter using Black Talons. It was really stupid, but it was said by
the prosecutor in the trial. Quoting from memory: "Those aren't
hunting bullets, those are killing bullets."
The newspaper did not report if the defense attorney made any kind of
response to that accusation.
The defendant was convicted of some degree of murder.
So *YES*, it is POSSIBLE for your ammo choice to be brought up.
I also asked this question of my lawyer, and he said it was easy to
counter the "more deadly" bullet accusation as long as one is
justified in the first place.
Rick Povich
On 6 May 1998, Plus P Inc wrote:
# Mr. Selfdefender, just why did you have that particular gun "handy
# at that moment?
If the guy is licenced to carry, that question shouldn't be relevant. You've
got the gun for personal protection and are legally entitled to carry it to
bed with you if you so desire. The intent is to have a weapon available in the
event of lethal threat--which has taken place in this hypothetical. The issue
of why the guy had the gun "handy" is unimportant--he's legally permitted to.
# Also, why is it that you just happened to have it loaded with ammunition
# that you made? Oh, and why was it that you felt that you needed to increase
# the velocity and consequently the "killing capability" a full 8% above what
# the commercial ammunition of this type is? No further questions your Honor.
How's the lawyer gonna know if it's "8%" or 58% above commercial velocity.
Would a coroner's report provide the info on what amount of powder was used?
You could say you followed the Lyman manual. Mebbe you had a bad experience
with comercial ammo and felt more secure with your own, etc.
The important question is, if it's a "good" shoot (definitely justifiable
self-defense) then the bullet issue shouldn't be more than a futile attempt by
a prosecutor to hassle you. It may tie up an extra few hours of court time
with the blather but not $xx,xxx worth of legal expenses.
In many jurisdictions, if you're justified in defending your life with lethal
force, and if the perp was commiting some kind of crime in the process, their
heirs don't have a civil-lawsuit leg to stand on.
Rick Povich
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Rick Povich University of Pittsburgh
Media Producer Audiovisual Department
SHUT...@PITT.EDU (814) 269-7103 Johnstown, Pa. 15904
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
< It's not whether you screw up, >
< but how you recover that counts >
< Squid Factor:18.99 DoD#032653 >
<1976 R90/6 1981 R100RT 1991 R100GS/PD >
< Paris Daycare Mudbog and Dirt Flingin' Society >
< http://www.pitt.edu/~shutter >
< N 40 17.697 W 78 59.867 >
< P226 P228 P230 P239 >
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
chai...@gunssavelives.com
. wrote:
#
# I totally agree that the paranoia surrounding the use of handloads for
# defense is unsubstantiated B.S. . As the man below says, can anyone of you
# out there who believes that retoric support any of your claims with an
# actual court case or two if you could find more than one. In court there
# must be a precedent to base your case on and if you don't have one you're
# going to have to work hard to prove to the jury what actual relavance this
# has to whether this was a case of justfiable homicide or not. Remember, in
# such a case the burden of proof is with the prosecutor and not the defense.
Talk about B.S.!!! In most states, the law EXPLICITLY states that if
your defense is self-defense/justifiable homicide, the burden is on THE
ACCUSED (you, the guy claiming self-defense) to prove it. This means
you must prove no malice, for example. Even where this is not explicit
law, it is how things work.
why make things harder in such a situation for lack of a $12 box of
ammo?
--
Don't agonize. Organize.
http://GunsSaveLives.com
(Opinions here are personal and not those of any organization.)
Patrick Pauley
Rick,
Since some of *my* original material was used in this, I feel obligated to
respond.
I'll use the "walk 'n talk" method so please read on through.
Pat--
Rick Povich wrote in message <6itak7$i...@xring.cs.umd.edu>...
#On 6 May 1998, Plus P Inc wrote:
#
## Mr. Selfdefender, just why did you have that particular gun
"handy
## at that moment?
#
#If the guy is licenced to carry, that question shouldn't be relevant.
You've
#got the gun for personal protection and are legally entitled to carry it to
#bed with you if you so desire. The intent is to have a weapon available in
the
#event of lethal threat--which has taken place in this hypothetical. The
issue
#of why the guy had the gun "handy" is unimportant--he's legally permitted
to.
You are absolutely correct, that first question *should* be irrelevant.
However it serves two purposes. 1) It requires that you admit in *THOSE*
proceedings that you did in fact use lethal force in this situation. 2)
*THAT* then lays solid foundation for the rest of the questioning.
#
## Also, why is it that you just happened to have it loaded with ammunition
## that you made? Oh, and why was it that you felt that you needed to
increase
## the velocity and consequently the "killing capability" a full 8% above
what
## the commercial ammunition of this type is? No further questions your
Honor.
#
#How's the lawyer gonna know if it's "8%" or 58% above commercial velocity.
#Would a coroner's report provide the info on what amount of powder was
used?
#You could say you followed the Lyman manual. Mebbe you had a bad
experience
#with comercial ammo and felt more secure with your own, etc.
The first thing that the "civil prosecution" will have done is the tossing
of your home and loading area. Impound your notebooks, manuals, etc. That
evidence, along with your testimony (remember you are under oath) will
determine velocity, energy, etc. You can bet that Mr. Prosecutor will have
at least one (and probably more) ballistics programs loaded on a lap top in
the courtroom. This quick number crunch will be checked against industry
standards an "Boom," there's the how. This info *WILL* then be
substantiated by the ME.
#
#The important question is, if it's a "good" shoot (definitely justifiable
#self-defense) then the bullet issue shouldn't be more than a futile attempt
by
#a prosecutor to hassle you. It may tie up an extra few hours of court time
#with the blather but not $xx,xxx worth of legal expenses.
If you are willing to bet your piggy bank on that, cool deal, I for one am
not. Especially when the "insurance" against it is a $10.00 to $12.00 box
of factories. So I have to disagree with your "important question."
Instead, I'll ask (what *I* think is the important question
here).........For $12.00 + Tx, why give them one damn thing that they can
use to move attention away from the *FACT* that it was a justified act?
#
#In many jurisdictions, if you're justified in defending your life with
lethal
#force, and if the perp was commiting some kind of crime in the process,
their
#heirs don't have a civil-lawsuit leg to stand on.
That may be true where you live. But it is not universal, so it is moot. I
will state **AGAIN** (this is also my position for the "anti" crowd) do as
you must, I am glad that you are content with your decision. I in turn will
play it conservative and use factory fodder. I have backed this position by
quoting the Ada County, ID SO CCW training personnel. They don't spout that
stuff because they own stock (they don't make enough) in Federal, Remington,
or Winchester.
Also I would extend the invitation for all who are unsure to contact their
*LOCAL* LE and DA to find out what *LOCAL* attitude is on the matter. That
is what I did and that played a big part in making my decision.
I find your closing line interesting, "It's not whether you screw up, but
how you recover that counts" If you practice "damage control" **BEFORE**
you have damage, you are both, less likely to screw up AND will have an
easier time recovering.
Patrick Pauley
#
#Rick Povich
#
# ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
# Rick Povich University of Pittsburgh
# Media Producer Audiovisual Department
# SHUT...@PITT.EDU (814) 269-7103 Johnstown, Pa. 15904
# >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
# < It's not whether you screw up, >
# < but how you recover that counts >
# < Squid Factor:18.99 DoD#032653 >
# <1976 R90/6 1981 R100RT 1991 R100GS/PD >
# < Paris Daycare Mudbog and Dirt Flingin' Society >
# < http://www.pitt.edu/~shutter >
# < N 40 17.697 W 78 59.867 >
# < P226 P228 P230 P239 >
# <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
#
#