Is it safe to say that hunting ammo could be used for self defense? I realize that in a pinch, any ammo could be used for self defense, but would hunting ammo (specifically Winchester Power Point 55g Varmint ammo or 64g deer rounds in .223) be adequate?

I am talking AR15 ammo, whether that be .223 or 5.56. Thanks.

__________________
S&W M&P 15 Sport II

Why would you think it couldn't be?

I assumed it could, but figured it would not hurt a thing to check...

__________________
S&W M&P 15 Sport II

It would work but you'd be better off with actual self defense ammo. I have no idea about that Winchester ammo but hunting ammo is typically designed for deeper penetration. Some of the ammo can be interchanged

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

Am sure it would mess up a crooks day pretty bad!

@SCAR333,

I would suspect that you could use hunting ammo for self defense, but I would have concerns about bullet performance and how the choice of hunting ammo might be used against me in the criminal and civil trials that would definitely follow!

From what I have read, bullets constructed for varmint hunting tend to expand with "explosive" results. Hunting ammo is designed to penetrate deep and destroy vital organs in game. I would anticipate that any prosecutor looking for a conviction would try to twist these facts into the defendant wanting to inflict a higher degree of damage, and potentially twist a self defense scenario into a stalking and hunting scenario, making the defendant the bad guy.

In a civil trial, if one is launched by either the "victim" of your "self defense" action (or their survivors) will try to paint the blackest picture of you, because you not only assaulted their loved one needlessly, but did so to inflict the most injury and pain by your choice of ammunition. Remember, in our current society, the gang member cherubs from the local boy's choir were on their way home from practice when you ambushed them.

Personally, I would steer away from hunting style ammunition and use either ammo made for self defense or run of the mill every day range ammo that has proven itself reliable. I would not want to make a judgment against me easy to obtain.

Remember, the self defense scenario doesn't stop when you pull the trigger, it is just getting started!

__________________
Judge control not gun control!

My best friend until he died always kept his mid 70s Ruger .44 Mag carbine handy for house defense. It was loaded with 240 grain soft point ammo, the same ammo he hunted deer with.

He was a very good shot and we both saw the damage done by that load.

I feel that he was well armed, with a gun he was very comfortable with.

__________________
14 S&W Revs none with locks!

Certain calibers are more on speed then others. A 44mag from a 16 inch barrel will mess up just about anything regardless of the bullet's construction. Kinda like shooting a cannon ball. Doesn't matter what it's made of or what it hits.

While in other calibers construction and speed does matter

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

The difference between hunting ammo and self defense ammo is primarily a marketing distinction. The issue is what beasts the hunting ammo is designed for.

The ammo OP proposes is designed for varmints: very small animals weighing a few pounds.

In other words, a fragile bullet offering little penetration with explosive expansion.

I've seen deer shot with this type of ammo: gruesome surface wounds that don't penetrate deeply enough to reach vital organs and insufficient bullet integrity to break bones. Very poor stuff for self defense or hunting larger game.

OP would do better with hunting ammo designed for game weighing 125+ pounds.

I am glad that you said this. I never even thought about the ramifications of the actual purpose of the hunting ammunition itself. I actually thought of this when somebody recommended the Zombie ammo, but never gave it a thought with the hunting ammo. Thank you for this.

__________________
S&W M&P 15 Sport II

What ammo would you recommend to the OP that would not result in such an attack by the survivors and their lawyers?

I really don't think it matters what .223 round you would use against a human target. The outcome is likely to the be the same.
As I live in a suburban environment with close neighbors, I won't use anything likely to penetrate wood frame/sheetrock walls to reach those neighbors. That includes .45 ACP ball.

I'm not aware of any case in which the type of ammo became an issue at trial. Citizens have used .30-06s, 12 gauge slugs, buckshot etc. You can't kill someone just a little bit. If justified, you can run someone over with an 18-wheel semi.

.223 at SD/HD distances, regardless of the bullet, will put a hurt on any BG where the distance to target is measured in feet, not yards. And those 64 gr. designed for deer would do nicely.......

I would not want to be on the receiving end of a 158gr .357 out of either of my 16/18 inch .357 carbines.... a Winchester Trapper and a Ruger 77/357

I have no problem with "hunting" bullets being used for self defense. However, I think more along the lines of handgun calibers, not rifle or carbine calibers.

I carry homebrew 140gr. XTP magnum loads in my EDC. Those are "hunting" bullets. I lose little sleep over possible legal issues if I would have to deploy those rounds.

If you have to defend yourself, you have to defend yourself. I think there is more worrying than needs to be over ammo choice legality.

Much ado about nothing. I have never heard of even a single case wherein the use of "hunting" ammunition in any justifiable self-defense shooting situation resulted in adverse consequences for the shooter. It just will not happen, and is the very last thing anyone should be concerned about.

Yeah, ya need to worry about that civil action!
Just point it at them and yell "Bang-Bang".
But don't yell it too loud or too many times because that could be construed as seeking to inflict unnecessary harm.

__________________
Regards,
Lee Jarrett

You don't want it to "put a hurt" you want it to end whatever it is asap. Plenty of people have proven they can take "a hurt" and keep going

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

Honestly, I would go with factory loaded GI style FMJ such as M193. It meets the parameters of the Geneva Accords, it is designed to disable and not maim, and it tends to be reliable. If you look at some of the "results" of M193 during 'Nam, that light 55gr bullet tumbles easy when it is "deflected", and does its own version of "pinball wizard" when it hits bone "... round and round she goes, where she'll come out, nobody knows ..."

__________________
Judge control not gun control!

In handgun calibers, hunting ammo is generally loaded with bullets that generate significant penetration. Far beyond the average size evil doer.

Someone mentioned drywall penetration. I built a small interior wall and verified that about the only thing that won't pass through an interior wall is a .177 pellet at about 300 f/s. EVERYTHING else had sufficient velocity to cause death or serious bodily injury. Never tried multiple walls.

In .223/5.56 mm, the light (40-50 gr) varmint type bullets penetrate less building material than most defensive/duty type handgun ammo. [See above paragraph and FBI ammo tests] You should know that the AR pattern rifles (and especially Mforgeries) were never designed with soft nosed ammo in mind. There are some exceptions designed for the purpose. Hollow points and the plastic tipped bullets seem to work well in general and plastic tips seem to be the trend in duty type ammo for the ARs.

That said, should you have to penetrate chance barriers (limbs of the body, interior doors etc) or have a supersized aggressor, you may not get enough penetration with the light bullets. Several ammo makers suggest ammo in the 60-75 grain weight as optimal. YMMV. The range is close, do a lot of practicing so a miss is unlikely and make sure you know your safe fields of fire in the home and use the most effective conventional ammo you can find. Leave the magic bullets to magicians.

M193 does tend to break up in tissue at <160 meters or so. However, it has a massive downside should it pass through the evil doer or you miss or the bullet defects from something. You'll get pilloried for using ammunition you had good reason to know would over penetrate and present a danger to others. A range instructor verified that it will pass completely through a pine 6x6. Leave that stuff for practice, unless you really want to give one (or more) of your neighbors your house and a substantial chunk of your retirement & future earnings.

Thankfully I live in a relatively free state with solid castle doctrine laws and a local prosecutor that helps teach my club's concealed pistol course.

I hunt with my AR and recommend to anyone wanting to use it for self defense to use a deer capable bullet. Deer around here are smaller and lighter framed than your usual tweeker and a lot easier to put down. Varmint bullets may not penetrate.

It seems to me that Jeff Cooper used to recommend a lever action .30-30 for home defense in captive states and locales that didn't look favorably on black guns or handguns. What can be more American than using your deer gun for self defense.

"Gosh, your Honor. I know that my rifle looks like an AR15, but in truth it's my deer rifle. It's all I had time to grab. Glad I didn't have to use those nasty 55 grain full metal jacketed bullets that our soldiers used in Viet Nam. Not only would they have killed the miscreant, but would have torn him up bad by bouncing around his innards like a ping pong ball. All the undertaker had to do was spackle that golf ball size hole in his back before they buried him".

FULL METAL JACKET??? Using ammunition designed for war, in a civilian environment??

First you pretend that it is not designed not to maim, then you say "that light 55gr bullet tumbles easy when it is 'deflected', and does its own version of 'pinball wizard' when it hits bone '... round and round she goes, where she'll come out, nobody knows ...'"

This is the kind of horrific maiming that you recommend, knowing beforehand that this is what it does to human flesh?

I KNOW that I would not want you on my defense team, and I don't think that I am particularly interested in your advice on choice of defensive ammunition.

(In a southern accent...) "Laaaadys and gentlemen of the jury... The deFENdant CLEARLY VIEWED my client's deceased brother (the one with 37 priors), as DESPICABLE VERMIN and chose to shoot himmmmm with a VARMITTT GRENADE! Wanted to EXXXPLODE him I suppppose. The deFENdant saw this man, WHO WAS JUST GETTING HIS LIFE TOGETHER (after spending 22 of his 32 years behind bars) as unfit to be shot with ammunition meant for PEOPLE, the defendant shot my client's brother with ammunition meant for VERMINNN..... I think this cleeeearly shows the MURDEROUS intent of the deFENdant"

__________________
Certified Curmudgeon

Just because you personally haven't heard of any cases, that doesn't mean that there hasn't been such a case or that it could never happen.

The chances of having to use a firearm, let alone an AR or "assault rifle", in SD is rather rare. But I sure wouldn't want to be the test case and have the prosecutor or plaintiffs attorney have a huge blown up picture of the ammunition box that says "varmint" on it sitting on an easel in front of a jury. Way too many ways of attacking the use of such ammo as being "malicious intent" by the defender.

I have to wonder where, waaaay down south (or even not waay down, pick most rural areas), you'd find a jury that wouldn't view the DEceased and/or relatives as someone unworthy of much sympathy, much less monetary compensation. OK, in a civil action you only need a majority of the jury. That said, there are ways to maximize your defendability.

Visit the Federal and Hornaday websites and check out the law enforcement sections. I expect other manufacturers have similar sites. You'll see gelatin tests and, possibly, other ammunition evaluations and recommendations. Print copies and/or save the data. There are publications (American Rifleman and other of similar reputation-skip the survivalist mags) that feature those occasionally, save those issues and make copies of relevant articles. Keep the copies for reference, mail the magazine issue, thumb drive and/or website printouts to yourself, return receipt requested. Put them in a safety deposit box. You now have documented evidence of prior proper research for appropriate ammunition recommended by the manufacturers for that purpose.

I'll also note that in most cases, a handgun is a much better home defense device. You only need one hand to operate it, leaving the other hand free to open/lock doors, help a member of the family, use a flashlight and/or communicate with authorities.

With an AR15 and the .223 does it really matter what ammo you use other than worrying about over penetration? Just keep pulling the trigger until you stop the attack. I'm sure that will happen before you empty the magazine, even one with less than 30 rounds...

__________________
Freedom is never free!!
SWCA #3437

I didn't say the jury or the trial was south of Mason-Dixon, and my experience is rural areas are more rational than urban ones. Guess thats why I left the city and live in a very rural place.

What I was doing is poking fun at those phoney charlatans that effect a southern accent. I used to know one from the Buffalo area, tried to sound like he was from Savannah.

As a retired police officer I despise lawyers, almost as much as judges (who are also attoneys). I have sat in on and testified at numerous trials in New York, King and Bronx Counties where EVERYONE in the courtroom including the (particle of natural fertilizer) judge KNEW BOTH THE DEFENDANT AND HIS ATTORNEY WERE LYING OFF THIER ASSES but they had zero respect for the concept that there were decent law abiding citizens who are actually negativly affected by criminal acts.

__________________
Certified Curmudgeon

Someone, maybe on this forum said that using the ammo your local PD uses eliminates a potential opening for zealous attorneys. Local PD here use GDHPs in thier carbines. (IF it isn't full auto it aint an M-16, or an assault anything. If it isn't a Colt, FN or SW it isn't an AR-15. If it has a 16" barrel its a carbine, not a rifle. Don't let the opposition mistell the story.)

__________________
Certified Curmudgeon

BTW if anyone has real verified evidence of significant injuries sustained by innocents as a result of overpenetration (a round that actually passed through its intended target), I would enjoy reading about it. I know of hundreds of cases of innocents being injured or killed by errant targeting, stray rounds, misses, unintended discharges and the like. I think overpenetration is an overblown issue, but I could be wrong.

__________________
Certified Curmudgeon

Not rifle-related, but I've posted this article multiple times. Short version: When NYPD adopted the 9mm, they started with FMJ. They then switched to JHP because bystanders and other officers were being injured by pass-throughs.

NEW YORK POLICE WILL START USING DEADLIER BULLETS - The New York Times

Gotcha, and know what you mean further on, I had to sit through the judge & opposing attorney chatter on for maybe 20 minutes displaying their vast knowledge of the law before the judge granted our motion to move the trial.

A major department in Colorado allegedly had several through and through incidents with 147 gr 9mm of unknown type and make. It was known that they changed their duty loads to something lighter & faster. I also viewed autopsy photos of an incident in the mid-west that displayed through and through wounds, early "expanding" bullets that didn't. However, the shot placement also left a lot to be desired. Don't know if there were injuries in the Colorado situation, none known in the other one cited.

.223 55gr would be my choice over 5.56 62gr steel core.

I would think over penetration with steel core.

NEW YORK POLICE WILL START USING DEADLIER BULLETS - NYTimes.com

Massad Ayoob: The Dangers of Over-Penetrating Bullets | Gun Digest

Not trying to play "No true Scotsman here". I have read many articles on the subject. With all due respect to the authors and to those who quote and link the articles for the education of others, this is my take.

1. If innocents are hit by pass throughs (instead of being hit by errant rounds) its not the fault of officers involved, supervisors, policy makers or trainers.
2. To paraphrase journalist Bill McClellan when intelligent people say things in cumbersome ways they are hiding something.
3. In 1994 when the department made (IMHO the wrongheaded) decision to drop .38s for 9s, and the typical carry went from 20 or 23 to 60 or so, the emphasis on marksmanship took a nosedive.
4. Generally those who wanted hi-cap semis also wanted hollow points, their talking point (not saying it is incorrect) is that HPs are less likely to cause pass through injuries. They characterized FMJ as likley to cause pass through injuries, then they created catagories that conflated dissimilar problems. I have read the 1995 and 1996 studies on civilians and officers injured by officers gunfire (created to justify switching to HPs). (I am NOT saying HPs are not safer than FMJs, just that the studies were designed to come to this conclusion.)
5. In order to cause a pass through injury you have to actually hit your intended target. When someone makes the poor decision to fire at a suspect standing in front of a glass window and the bullet passes through that 1/8" pane and strikes an innocent, it is not the same as shooting through a criminal's torso. But if you twist the language enough it is.

Long story short, I believe that .38 is and was superior to 9. Lead is and was superior to JHP, which is and was superior to FMJ. Marksmanship is more important than bullet selection (If the PD hits their intended target 10% of the time (it was 9+% IIRC) and 50% of those rounds overpenetrate (IIRC officially 44% (right, while about 2% of those errant round hit a person)) then you are 18 TIMES MORE LIKELY TO BE HIT BY AN ERRANT ROUND THAN A PASS THROUGH. Politicians tailor the story (the threat to the public safety) to fit the outcome they desire.

__________________
Certified Curmudgeon

Counter intuitively out of a rifle length barrel 193 penetrates more than 855 at shorter ranges due to its lighter weight, and the fact it was designed for a 5.3" longer tube.

__________________
Certified Curmudgeon

What did I post that triggered all those statements from you?

I usually write AR style rifle or MSR but neglected to this time. As for only Colt, FN or S&W qualifying as an AR15, I have a feeling Armalite might just disagree. It is their rifle after all and it carries their name.

Not everyone has to use what you consider correct and I'm still confused why you quoted me at the start of your post.

__________________
Freedom is never free!!
SWCA #3437

I don't think it really matters what ammo you use, except that I eould stay away from full-metal-jacketed stuff except maybe in .45ACP.

No one wants to be shot with ANYTHING.

The main thing is to HAVE A GUN.

It really doesn't matter. Either bullet will completely penetrate a human body in a frontal shot before they start to yaw and fragment. The yawing and fragmentation is how either bullet does much damage. I've read that M855 produces a wound channel similar to a .22 LR, particularly when fired from the abbreviated barrel of a M4. The M855 certainly proved less than satisfactory in our excursion into Mogadishu in October 1993.

I meant no offence, in general I agree with your post, but I see how I neglected to say that the first time. I don't see myself as arbieter of what is right or wrong. I am just an opinionated old man. IMHO pay attention to your environment, figure out the threat and your options, have a gun, hit your target. Ammo selection comes after these. If you are discussing what ammo you used or what to call the gun you just fired in self defence, you have survived a truly nasty situation.

Of course Armalite as well.

My last line was my main point. Don't let your opposition define the issue.

__________________
Certified Curmudgeon

While the best choices in any caliber/platform are those recommended by Doc Roberts for LE duty, the ammo used will so rarely be admissible as an issue in a trial (civil or criminal) that it should not be a concern. In order to be admitted for consideration, plaintiff (civil) or prosecutor (criminal) would have to make a conscious decision to try to introduce evidence that has nothing to do with the lawful justification for the use of deadly force (which would be malpractice or misconduct). Defense counsel would have to be incompetent (malpractice), and the judge gullible to the point of drooling idiocy.

Folklore aside, this will be a non-issue in any reasonably foreseeable circumstance. One might have to work harder to get the matter dealt with correctly in certain places, with certain prosecutors or plaintiff's counsel, but the result should be the same.

One should worry more about making their home a less desirable target; making it harder to get to the point where force is needed; understanding the bases for the use of force, especially deadly force; mindset, and the proper placement of rounds to stop the threat as rapidly as possible (terminal ballistics) than such a silly non-issue.

__________________
NHI, 10-8.

In 20+ years of appearing in court as a police officer, I saw LOTS of incompetent, disinterested and or politically motivated judges, prosecutors and defence attorneys. I heard lots of evidence that was struck as inadmissible, and lots that I think should have been. I have seen jurors sleeping or holding private conversations, and jurors that were so stupid someone else MUST have helped them get to the court that morning. While I don't believe I ever saw an innocent person actually serve time, I saw plenty of people whom had thier lives negativly effected without ever being convicted of a crime, sometimes without ever appearing in court.

I agree it would be pretty unusual to have the brand of ammo, type of ammo, type of weapon introduced in a court proceeding concerning an otherwise clean shooting. (I think this is somewhat geographically dependant.) I wouldn't say its impossible, and there are many steps before any court appearance or trial where you want to be projecting the (true) image of a law abiding citizen who wished there had been an alternative, but was forced to defend himself with lethal force due to the criminal actions of the deceased.

Police and prosecutors have lots of discretion. Evryone thinks about how thier actions will look in the media. An armed citizen should too.

Lots of weapons and even more ammo choices will do the job. So using a "Son of Sam autographed edition .44 special" loaded with "Dirt-nap" brand "grim reaper" copper plated arsenic bullets, while wearing a "God judges, I arrange the meeting" t-shirt and a "Kill 'em all" ballcap may not be the best way to project that image.

__________________
Certified Curmudgeon

An armed citizen has fewer requirements for his ammunition than police officers. FBI protocols are interesting but not necessarily relevant to the armed citizen. Obviously ammo that passes LE tests is useful ammo, but so are many that do not. .45 FMJ-FP doesn't expand much, neither does .22 LR out of a short barrel. If you have a .32 Beretta, you probably want a mag full of easy feeding non-expanding FMJ. Best, probably not. But usefull as well.

If your local PD uses 9x19 and chose 135 gn Hornady Critical Duty for its auto glass penetration and ability to remain intact after passing through barriers, well that suited thier percieved needs, .38 special target wadcutters may suit your percieved needs just fine with far less recoil.

One thing though, IMHO if your local PD uses GDHPs, and you do too, nobody in the police department or prosecutors office will give your ammo a moment of thought. If thier patrolmen carry G19s and detectives M640s, thier patrol car racks have a Remington 870 locked up, then nobody will question your use of one in your bedroom. Maybe not the most important consideration, but maybe worth the slightest consideration.

__________________
Certified Curmudgeon

While you are correct that the performance standards reflect different realities, they are known quantities and proven to meet criteria that have been determined to be objectively sound for use against human aggressors. Gary does not limit the recommendations to only LE, but advocates the same choices for private citizens.

__________________
NHI, 10-8.

I don't think any of Dr. Robert's choices will let you down. I was merely stating my belief that if the "Grand Council of Poo-Bah" says a .40 S&W with 185 grain GDHPs is "Ideal" and a .32 Tomcat is more what you will actually carry. Well, its better to have a smaller gun, without a revolving cylinder, actually on your person ALL THE TIME than no gun at all. AND the most important attribute of ammunition is that it goes BANG, every single, solitary time you pull the trigger.

__________________
Certified Curmudgeon