Carry Ammo, reloads or factory

[Snake45]

I am a LEO as well and don't buy into the reloads being a potential issue. A load is a load is a load. Guns when pointed at someone meaning harm to you is deadly force point blank.

Where issues arise are shady lawyers who try to throw a curve ball to the jury and at times succeeds in doing so to convince them you stay at home just trying to create a so called "Deadly Round"!

Folks...........I hate to say this but jurors are usually idiots for the most part. They are easily swayed and can't think logically or with common sense when it comes time to.

And you want to take a chance by giving a fancy lawyer a tool to work on them with? Your logic needs work.

I am experimenting with reloading myself to get the right load down for defense carry.

And I'm sure you'll soon develop much better ammunition than factories full of engineers and technicians who do it 40 hours a week (or more), and have been doing it 40 hours a week for decades. What could those fools possibly know, anyway?

So don't be afraid of the loads............just the schiester lawyer that would use cunning words and talk in circles to have a jury confused more than they were before setting on a jury trial!

Also: Be afraid of taking legal advice from someone who doesn't know how to spell "shyster." :roll:

 

[tomiswho]

Snake,
Please post some links to examples of the appropriate case law, I want to read the legal statements.

thanks,
Tom

 

[Snake45]

I'm not here to do your homework for you.

Perhaps, instead, you'd like to post links to some law enforcement agency in the US that recommends (or better yet, demands!) that its members carry handloads on duty. Or a letter from some DA somewhere stating that handloads are okay with him, and he will never make it an issue in his jurisdiction.

I won't hold my breath. :wink:

 

[Rick Courtright]

Please post some links to examples of the appropriate case law, I want to read the legal statements.

Hi, Tom

That's two of us--at least?--but, as the man said, don't hold your breath, he ain't gonna do our homework for us.

Funny thing, I've been TRYING to do MINE, and just can't find where these "alleged" cites are listed. Yet? Guess they're buried in a gun rag somewhere.

Until I find something better, I'm sticking w/ what some real live attorneys--prosecutors, no less--told me as opposed to a guy who gets paid to say what one side wants the jury to hear (pretty much the definition of "expert witness") but hasn't passed the bar.

Everyone's free to believe what they want to.

Rick C

 

[Snake45]

Until I find something better, I'm sticking w/ what some real live attorneys--prosecutors, no less--told me as opposed to a guy who gets paid to say what one side wants the jury to hear (pretty much the definition of "expert witness") but hasn't passed the bar.

Rick C

I've had "real live attorneys" tell me "If you shoot someone outside your house, drag the body inside" and "Make sure he's dead" and "Put a butcher knife in his hand before the cops come." Perhaps you think that's good legal advice, too.

I'm done with this topic. Load your SD guns with handloads all you want. I won't have to live with your consequences.

And by the way, Rick, you've just insulted a good personal friend of mine by calling him, pretty much, a whore, which I can assure you he is not. My opinion of you, whom I've never had any problem with, just took a big hit, I'm very sad to say.

 

[Rex Driver]

Until I find something better, I'm sticking w/ what some real live attorneys--prosecutors, no less--told me as opposed to a guy who gets paid to say what one side wants the jury to hear (pretty much the definition of "expert witness") but hasn't passed the bar.

Rick C

I've had "real live attorneys" tell me "If you shoot someone outside your house, drag the body inside" and "Make sure he's dead" and "Put a butcher knife in his hand before the cops come." Perhaps you think that's good legal advice, too.

I'm done with this topic. Load your SD guns with handloads all you want. I won't have to live with your consequences.

And by the way, Rick, you've just insulted a good personal friend of mine by calling him, pretty much, a whore, which I can assure you he is not. My opinion of you, whom I've never had any problem with, just took a big hit, I'm very sad to say.

Snake, with all due respect, you come in here and state you know of a case pertinent to this conversation, however, either can not, or will not give the particulars on the case.

The old drag them in after you shoot them is more of a myth than a true statement, if the man was inside of your house and you shot him, the first question you will be asked is, "Did you feel fear of bodily harm either for yourself or your family", this question and the answer will fairly much settle the case.

As far as ammo that the local Gendarmes carry, allow me to tell you a short story. When I became a police officer in 1972 we carried S&W model 10s and had them loaded with the standard 158 round nose police load, a load that was famous for glancing off of windshields and not being able to penetrate. Next we were issued the pathetic 9mm that had such limited stopping ability that all police departments were taught the "Double Tap" method of shooting. Much later, about 1997 we did go to a more acceptable 40cal.

Your premis is somewhat flawed as on most police departments very few officers are actually adept at shooting and other aspects associated with guns. They mostly go to the range a couple of times each year to be able to shoot above 75% to qualify. Last point, so many police departments are run by a Chief that is more administrative than actual law enforcement on the street level, they become more interested in the PC and possible Litigation of ANY incident, rather than the real world needing to survive issues.

As far as your writer friend, I do not dislike him, however, his main job is to write for gun magazines, I place him in about the same class as Joe Wambaugh (Spelling?). I also have a friend and ex police officer, who went back to school and became a physicians assistant and expert witness on DUI for defense lawyers. I do not mean to demean him or your friend, however, they are for hire to the highest bidder.

 

[NCMountains]

Snake sounds like a real winner taking advice like dragging a body inside. Your a real genius my friend. So before you start downing folks here maybe you should attend your local community college and take a few law classes...........because you obviously seem the most educated here to rebuttal.

 

[Snake45]

When I became a police officer in 1972 we carried S&W model 10s and had them loaded with the standard 158 round nose police load, a load that was famous for glancing off of windshields and not being able to penetrate. Next we were issued the pathetic 9mm that had such limited stopping ability that all police departments were taught the "Double Tap" method of shooting. Much later, about 1997 we did go to a more acceptable 40cal.

This isn't 1972, when the whole reload thing wasn't even an issue. It's 2009. In 1972, you might have been justified in reloading your own defense ammo. That's no longer true. There are dozens and dozens of effective loads on the market now, and many of them are being used by some LE agency somewhere.

Your premis is somewhat flawed as on most police departments very few officers are actually adept at shooting and other aspects associated with guns. They mostly go to the range a couple of times each year to be able to shoot above 75% to qualify.

Agreed and so what? Got nothing to do with the topic at hand.

Last point, so many police departments are run by a Chief that is more administrative than actual law enforcement on the street level, they become more interested in the PC and possible Litigation of ANY incident, rather than the real world needing to survive issues.

True, but he's also concerned about being sued by his own officers and their union if he doesn't provide them with effective ammunition. Again, this is 2009 and cops almost everywhere in the US are carrying effective ammunition.

I also have a friend and ex police officer, who went back to school and became a physicians assistant and expert witness on DUI for defense lawyers. I do not mean to demean him or your friend, however, they are for hire to the highest bidder.

I know nothing of your friend's working ethics and so cannot comment on them, but I DO know Mas Ayoob and he is not "for hire to the highest bidder." If he were, he'd be a lot richer than he is today. Also a lot less respected.

 

[Snake45]

Snake sounds like a real winner taking advice like dragging a body inside. Your [sic] a real genius my friend.

Ah, the old reading comprehension problem again. There's this literary concept called sarcasm. Find out about it.

So before you start downing folks here maybe you should attend your local community college and take a few law classes...........because you obviously seem the most educated here to rebuttal [sic].

My local community college wouldn't be much interested in having me take their law classes. I almost have a degree in Criminal Justice from a major university, but ended up majoring in another field. Still have far more credit hours in it than offered by the local CC, including 300 and 400 level courses.

Are you really in law enforcement?

 

[stare-decisis]

I'm carrying my reloads as we speak, I feel completely comfortable doing it. I'd be more worried about the justification for the shooting rather than if you carried some nuke hot load to dispatch the perp.
And I really only carry my reloads because I'm cheap. I'd rather spend that money on powder or primers.

 

[Rex Driver]

Snake, I was wondering are you either a current, ex or retired police officer? You are correct in one thought, this is not the 1970s, however, the same laws apply to today as they did then.

I was a cop for 26 years in a 150 man police department and worked for six different chiefs, I speak from experience, not what I have read, not what a friend has told me. We have differences in opinions, that is obvious. I will reload my practice, competitive and self defense rounds in the knowledge that they will provide the fun, copentition and reliance needed in each of the three different venues I have felt a need for.

All Expert witnesses are for hire, this is their primary reason for being. This does not make them bad, a "Whore" or anything other than a person with knowledge in a field of interest and yes, given the chance they will hire out to the highest bidder.

 

[Snake45]

Snake, I was wondering are you either a current, ex or retired police officer?

Ex.

You are correct in one thought, this is not the 1970s, however, the same laws apply to today as they did then.

And many, many more.

As far as I know, there's no law anywhere against using handloads for SD. The problem is that opposing counsel could use your use of them to make you look like a cheap, bloodthirtsty, and/or irresponsible bastard to a jury, whether criminal or civil.

All Expert witnesses are for hire, this is their primary reason for being.

So far so good.

...and yes, given the chance they will hire out to the highest bidder.

Really? All of them? I know of at least one who wouldn't, and I like to think there are plenty of other honest people in the field.

 

[Rex Driver]

I never questioned their honesty, however, in almost all cases these "Experts" are called on in behalf of the defendant, ergo, their skills are for hire and the state does not hire, they have on call, "Department Experts" who are most of the time either officers with special training, or people in the medical field who are avaliable for service.

For hire does not always equate to dishonest.

It does equate to using a particular skill to enhance the chances of the defendant.

 

[Snake45]

I know that Mas has turned down cases because the defendant is not "righteous," or where he's asked to testify to things that are not true.

I know he's also testified pro bono for good people, with no payment.

 

[tomiswho]

Here's a link to another thread on this topic. Again, lots of opinions... no case law cited.

http://www.defensivecarry.com/vbulletin ... -ammo.html

 

[DGW1949]

Here's a link to another thread on this topic. Again, lots of opinions... no case law cited.

http://www.defensivecarry.com/vbulletin ... -ammo.html

I could be wrong....but like you, I aint seen none either. And all the cussin',discussin', or rantin'-ravin' anyone else wants to do don't change that none.
I aint saying that somewhere at some time, that it hasn't come up as a possable issue in a court room...... just saying that I doubt you'll find a single case where someone has been successfully tried and/or sued for using reloaded ammo to defend himself.

DGW

 

[Rick Courtright]

Here's a link to another thread on this topic. Again, lots of opinions... no case law cited.

Hi,

I find it interesting at best, disturbing at worst, that all this "Handloads will get you in trouble" kind of discussion is one of those many "Everybody knows it, but nobody can prove it" types of things when it comes down to actually citing any case law.

My curious but legally untrained mind looks at that, and thinks, "Hmmm, maybe that's because there is none, or whatever exists is so obscure nobody can find it."

I understand, and agree, Mr. Ayoob is an acknowledged expert in his field, a noted and respected author, a man of principles, and has been an instrumental figure in many court cases over the years. But, he's not an attorney, and though he's apparently also a personal friend of some here, I believe he describes in his own words what's really important when it actually comes down to telling your story before the judge:

"From my point of view, I don't need a friend in court…I need a lawyer, and a damn good one, especially if I'm the one who stands accused."

http://www.backwoodshome.com/articles2/ayoob105.html

Perhaps my reading comprehension's not quite what it should be, but I interpret his advice as being the same that's been given for decades, perhaps centuries:

If you want legal advice, consult your attorney.

It seems a simple concept: ultimately, he's the one who's gonna get you out or let you get hung.

Nobody has to agree w/ me.

However, one needn't be disagreeable to disagree, and if that's the only way this issue can be discussed, let's take it over to the Political forum where the gloves regularly come off, and not disrupt the decorum of this one, where it seems we've always been able to put aside our differences in the quest for a greater good.

Rick C

 

[Rex Driver]

Here's a link to another thread on this topic. Again, lots of opinions... no case law cited.

Hi,

I find it interesting at best, disturbing at worst, that all this "Handloads will get you in trouble" kind of discussion is one of those many "Everybody knows it, but nobody can prove it" types of things when it comes down to actually citing any case law.

My curious but legally untrained mind looks at that, and thinks, "Hmmm, maybe that's because there is none, or whatever exists is so obscure nobody can find it."

I understand, and agree, Mr. Ayoob is an acknowledged expert in his field, a noted and respected author, a man of principles, and has been an instrumental figure in many court cases over the years. But, he's not an attorney, and though he's apparently also a personal friend of some here, I believe he describes in his own words what's really important when it actually comes down to telling your story before the judge:

"From my point of view, I don't need a friend in court…I need a lawyer, and a damn good one, especially if I'm the one who stands accused."

http://www.backwoodshome.com/articles2/ayoob105.html

Perhaps my reading comprehension's not quite what it should be, but I interpret his advice as being the same that's been given for decades, perhaps centuries:

If you want legal advice, consult your attorney.

It seems a simple concept: ultimately, he's the one who's gonna get you out or let you get hung.

Nobody has to agree w/ me.

However, one needn't be disagreeable to disagree, and if that's the only way this issue can be discussed, let's take it over to the Political forum where the gloves regularly come off, and not disrupt the decorum of this one, where it seems we've always been able to put aside our differences in the quest for a greater good.

Rick C

Rick, you are compeletly correct about the direction this thread has taken and I, for one, am sorry for my part in this. I will not respond again to anything on this thread. Please understand this is not the direction I wished when I opened the thread.

 

[mattsbox99]

If I'm carrying an autoloader, it's usually factory (I got a great deal on several cases of Federal HST ammo) if I'm carrying a revolver, I usually carry handloads.

 

[Pal Val]

My cousin is a DE with more than 20 years experience. The subject of handloads for self-defense has come up here before, and I once asked him about it. He told me that if it were his case, he would be busy enough proving the elements of the crime to go into minutiae such as who loaded the ammunition. He has heard the argument brought up in court a couple times, only to see the other party object on the basis of irrelevance and the judge rule the objection valid. It is an irrelevant argument.

A cop was shot here last year and the press made a huge deal of the fact that the bullets the perpetrator used were hollow points, according to the police report. The point was not raised in court.