John, thanks for the correction.
appreciatively,
Mas

I know I said I was done on this one, but I thought of something that was discussed before, yes by me, in the other threads, just in case jack or anyone else that has followed this far really cares.

But first, Mas, I usually try to reserve uncivility to those that deserve it. Sometimes I can just ignore it but other times I will respond to an idiot with idiocy, that's the human nature thing again. It takes two to have a civil discussion so you get credit for that as well, but I knew from our other discussions there would be no problems.

A couple points about your last post.
He gave an account of how the loaded rounds were supposed to have been loaded. If a representative number of them had been disassembled to see if he was telling the truth about it, the fired rounds could have been duplicated close enough to provide a sort of 'lab created' exemplar sample, or just to see if he was being honest about that story, then the rounds could have been reassembled. If the cartridge used in the killing was in any way similar to the ones in the box, that should have been enough to get the states testing questioned.

The second point was about his wife wanting a loaded gun in the house. Having dealt with family members that had mental issues, you should always question their motive for anything that doesn't seem like a good idea.

Anyway, the point I wanted to add is that while the major ammunition companies can supply exemplar evidence and a company representative to say what was in a certain box with a certain lot number, once the ammunition leaves the factory they don't have a clue as to what has been done to it. Even the most basic reloading tools can make that factory round anything you want and it can be easily done so that not even the factory representative can tell the difference. If the police really knew what they were looking at, the presence of loading tools would throw a monkey wrench in any investigation, but very few police officers I've ever worked with had any knowledge of relaoding at all, in fact I can only recall one, maybe two.

Jelly, I hear ya.

The problem is, asking the courts to take our word (or our reloading records) for something we can't back up through separate, independent testimony of others is like asking the jury, "Take my word for it: my diary that I wrote myself says I was in New York instead of East Oshkosh when the decedent was killed." With no independent verification to back it up, we can't expect the court to allow it in.

For good or ill, the "common custom and practice" that has evolved over the years is to assume that factory ammo in the gun is the same as all other factory ammo of the same lot, in terms of forensic evidence purposes. With handloads, as noted earlier, there's also that damning question the other side can ask, "Since he loaded each cartridge himself, how do we know the FATAL cartridge wasn't DIFFERENT, the SPECIAL cartridge he loaded to throw all us honest bloodhounds off the scent of the truth?" With factory ammo, you simply don't have that issue.

Jellybean, you ask a fascinating question that would make a great script for a "CSI" TV show: could the accused murderer have faked a factory cartridge? Given that the rounds are examined by highly trained Firearms and TOOLMARK examiners, I'd say it would be unlikely for that to go undiscovered. But in all these years (32 this year) doing the expert witness thing, I've never seen it come up. (I've also learned to "never say never," of course.) Fascinating as it is, this particular question still doesn't really impact the forensic evidence problems that can land on the shooter for using handloads.

Believe me, no one wanted the court to accept the shooter's handload data more than I did in the Bias case. It was not to be. In all the years since, NO ONE has found a case where a court DID accept it, and the reason for that is explained above. Whether or not we like the reality, as a wise defense lawyer named Jim Fleming once said, we have to accept the reality. I'm afraid brother Fleming was right on that. The rules of evidence are the rules of evidence, whether we're the aggrieved party or the accused, whether our theory of the case is murder or self-defense or something in between.

Cordially,
Mas

Well, it is possible to disassemble a factory round and reassemble it. Any moderately skilled handloader probably has all the tools necessary. I don't know for certain if it would be untraceable since the bullet would have to be reseated and crimped. However, it would only have to be the first bullet fired. All the rest could be stock ammo. The act of firing would destroy or obscure the new crimp and telltale markings from the seating die.

Maybe it is a good thing I am not criminally inclined.

Wow, this is still going on? Talk about angels dancing on the heads of pins!

What are the odds that proving your guilt or innocence would come down to your ability to get your reloading records admitted at court? (These are not automatically inadmissible, by the way: it would be left to the judge's discretion.) And, a person could testify as to what he loads were, have his own expert load identical rounds and perform the testing and give testimony as to how they worked - again, like all evidence, admission is subject to the judge's discretion.

As I've said before, I feel that there are much bigger things to worry about. If a person were to dwell on all of the horrific potential unjust outcomes that could arise from a righteous defensive shooting (or from someone unauthorized getting a hold of his guns), he would do well to sell his guns. All we can do is make responsible decisions based on likely outcomes.

I carry handloads. Not always, but I do. For the most part a good shoot is a good shoot (and an unintended shoot is always a bad shoot), and my rounds are designed to do exactly what I intend from my gun. No factory worker assembles ammo with the care that I do my handloads. I practice with what I carry, so I know how it works and I'm good with it.

But what advice would I give a client? What advice did I give my little brother when he started carrying? Bro. Mas' advice! I said, "It's unlikely to ever be an issue, but why risk it? Why add a variable to your hypothetical shooting that could in any way come back and bite you?"

I don't give advice for free, though - so this post is not advice, it's me talking about me and what I do. You see, you'll be held accountable for your actions. The world has sharp edges, and deadly weapons are certainly tricky ground. Everything is a cost/benefit analysis. You're grown-ups - do whatever you decide makes the most sense for you.

I know a way that you can guarantee that your handloads don't come back to hurt you in court: don't carry them. I also know a way that you can guarantee that you don't ever have to go to court on gun related issues: sell all your guns through a licensed dealer, and have him dispose of whatever ammo you have around the house.

Carrying handloads certainly adds another variable that could possibly come back at you. But I worry a whole lot more about not missing what I shoot at (there's something that comes up all the time in shootings) and about securing my guns so that no one takes one and hurts someone else or himself with it.

You folks be careful!

Well said.

Unfortunatly the debate will rage on, and the angels will continue to dance...

__________________
Andy

Ah, like a breath of fresh air, common sense suggestions (careful not to call it advice since you don't give that for free) without all of the hype and fear thrown in.

Very, common (which is not near as common as it used to be, sense.

Trying to use old case information, posting and writing about it seems to this layman to be more like trying to perpetuate the situation rather than providing information about a potential issue. Almost like someone wants to make this an issue. Sure folks have questions, there is no doubt about that but, Erich's information seems to be much more in line with what I would expect from folks that don't live in a major metropolitan area.

I happen to believe that most, if not all of the folks in my state are a bit more level headed when it comes to gun issues than say, someone from NH or NJ or NY. Since we have a lifetime concealed carry permit here in the state of Indiana, and I live here, and if I have to shoot some bad guy here in my state, I feel that this isn't going to ever be an issue.

Now, I have lived in metropolitan areas before, LA and Detroit. That being said, 35 years ago, as a 20 year old newly discharged US Marine, I decided I kind of liked the rural, family, Church going, sensible political landscape here in North Central Indiana.

Personally, I believe the proper suggestion to be made about this issue is much more in line with Erich. While not a professional in the gun industry, nor in our legal system (which is no longer a justice system) and I am comfortable with carrying handloaded ammunition for self defense. I know exactly what I can do with the ammunition I carry. While I cannot guarantee anything about a shooting I may be involved in, if the need arises, I can put a bullet right where I want to, right or left eye, either one, should a bad guy have one of my daughters or wife in their grasp.

Have you ever made a "plan" should something like that happen? Explaining to your family what you will do, what you expect from them, should something happen and you have to draw your weapon? We have. Been through several scenarios, just in case and have some "key words" to be uttered if the need arises.

I have been involved in only one incident with the use of deadly force. When the muzzle of the 45 that I had was thrust under the nose of the violator, they decided that that was enough of their stupidity and ceased being a threat. (No, this was not in Indiana! )

In the Corps, we were taught that deadly force consisted of ANY action that could cause bodily injury or death in another. If I was to chase a bad guy and they ran into the path of an oncoming car and get hurt, by that definition I could be in trouble. Well, I guess I am willing to take that chance too.

FWIW

Thanks Erich.

"First, with handloads you don't have the benefit of a factory backing you with experts to testify about ammunition behavior and that leaves the door open for a prosecutor or an attorney in a civil case to portray you as some sort of vigilante cowboy who is acting recklessly and needlessly endangering the public."

Maybe I'm missing something here. I thought the use of deadly force was supposed to be . . . deadly. I never realized reloaded ammo killed anyone any deader than factory ammo.

I guess I shouldn't have looked in to see how this was going. I seem to have the "I'm talking and can't shut up" syndrome anyway.

Mas, my wife loves to watch those real life forensic shows, all the time. I can't believe how little some of the lab experts seem to know about ammunition, although the lack of knowledge by the police is about normal. While it is possible to alter factory ammo there is only so much you can do to them, and by the same token there is only so much you can do to any ammunition. In a case that is premeditated it would be easy to alter a certain number of cartridges and make sure you only fire those cartridges, and as parabarbarian said, the evidence of tampering would be lost when the round was fired.

But other than than throwing GSR testing for distance off a little it won't make much difference. In a questionable suicide case even a small charge of powder will give some GSR and the complete absence would raise a guestion as before. In a self defense situation there is no question of who shot the gun and distance won't really have that much bearing, to someone that knows what they are talking about. (There are many on this forum that feel that any shooting beyond 5 feet is not self defense.) As you said, never say never and I'm sure it's possible that distance may become a factor, but there are several circumstances that will affect the GSR results and they must be considered in the investigation. I do think that many investigations are poorly done simply because the investigating officers don't know what to look for.

I believe there are a lot of things that don't come up in courts about ammunition because there are so few that even think about them, while a lot of the things that do come up are not really an issue to anyone except someone that is ignorant of the facts.

I have always said that the only sure way to not get sued or drug through the legal mud is to get rid of your guns and hide in your closet for the rest of your life. But learning the right things to say in front of a jury, regardless of what you did, can help too.

I hope some of this makes sense, I have a bus to catch and don't have time to proof read it.

What you say is true as far as it goes. AFAIK the legal system make no distinction between shooting to stop and shooting to kill. In the less oprahfied environment I grew up in the dictum was, "Do not shoot unless you have to but when you have to, shoot to kill."

The issue here is whether the use of handloaded ammunition can be used against you in a criminal or civil action and I think the argument that it can is a good one. If the legal system was ever driven by ideals like "truth, justice and the American way" it is not any longer. From my point of view as an outsider it is almost a textbook example of the "rational-legal authority" described by Max Weber: It is a driven by administratively and judicially applied rules. Because I view the legal system as simply an aspect of the bureaucracy, Mr. Ayoobs's argument makes perfect sense.

Self defense is a mind set that, when stripped of any quasi-religious baggage, enables the individual to anticipate and respond to threats. That includes the ones the system may pose to you.

The law here today worries about what bullets we used to defend ourselves. Yet across the pond in the war were shooting the bad guys with 50cal 700gr FMJ bullets? And the lawyers here are defending the victums shot with reloads. Are there rules or no set rules. I'm confused on this one. Bill

Yeah but, Bill our military is using "Green" bullets in the sandbox or at least so the news media says... After all we wouldn't want those that terrorize, torture, and/or behead us Americans to contract lead poisoning... Heck, if we didn't have those people to send all the borrowed aid money to our Congress, as Jelly said would just squander it on golf, whiskey, and hookers...

Actually, no. There is no law about what bullets or cartridges you can use to defend yourself. The whole premise of the argument is that you should not use handloads to defend yourself because it "may" cause legal issues after a justified self-defense shooting. To my knowledge, no documentation or evidence has been presented of a private citizen being charged or found libel for damages after a self-defense shooting because of the ammo that was used. Yet the argument remains... such is the power and glory of the internet.

Welcome to page 12!

__________________
Andy

What kind of a lawyer am I anyway? I haven't played golf in years!

In your case we'll make an exception.

... sqaunder it on GUNS, whiskey and hookers.

__________________
Andy

Erich, I said Congress not lawyer out of respect for you, but should you decide to run for office you would definately get my vote...

...and the rest of the money, you'll probably waste...

__________________
JR, the 500 Specialist

Aw, shucks! Time to get that exploratory committee rolling . . .

I guess all the soup bowel sized hollow points i'm purchasing are for nothing because we can't carry them.

I think it was around the 80's or early 90's when the hollow points were filled with mercury and had that little post sticking out of them. These would explode on impact. While in the gun shop at the time the leo's were buying them like crazy. When my brother passed away ten years ago i inherited these bullets from his misses with all his guns.

Lately the LEO craze here is the larger capacity mags for there pistols. I've seen the leo's grabbing these too. These are the mags that are twice the length of the orginal mags. I can't blame the leo's either way with the larger mags or the exploding bullets after all there live is on the line everyday 24/7. Bill

BTW; The way the lawyers and courts are going we'll be fighting PETA next in court for what hunting bullets were using too.

That may prove to be a wise decision......

__________________
'Nam 1968-69.DAV,VFW,NRA Inst.

This has been some very interesting reading & I thank everyone for their input. I believe that the answers given in this thread are as diverse as they are due to the fact of where people live. Different states, rural or city living all come into play along with the political climate of the elected officials of the different areas.

In the area that I live in I can see some of the local judges allowing an excessive force lawsuit to happen as a way of controlling private citizens that own guns & use them for SD. What I would call a frivolous law suit they would call allowing an attorney a chance to making a living. I’d rather not go thru an expensive lawsuit over me opening the door by using reloads for SD. I’d rather pay $50 for a couple of boxes of factory ammo than $300 an hour for a lawyer. Any good lawyer going can & will make my reloads the cornerstone of their case & I will have a battle on my hands proving otherwise.

As I stated in an earlier post in the thread, it was explained to me that perception is everything. Facts mean nothing; the way people perceive things is what counts. The advice I received seemed to have merit, it tries protects me from danger/injury, criminal & civil law suits.

I’m not trying to tell anyone what to use for SD, what the best load/weapon combo is or anything of that nature. I’m only giving examples of what I’ve decided to use & why I chose what I did to protect myself/family from danger/injury & lawsuits. I’ll list a couple of other possibilities of what ammo/firearm combo that fits the criteria of what I chose for SD for purposes of perception.

Pistols are ok but I’m a huge shotgun fan & that is what I’ll pick up every time for SD if I’m able to.
1. I use a standard 12ga 870 with a standard feed tube length & a standard 28” vented ribbed bbl with a 3” chamber, bead target sights & screw in chokes with the skeet choke installed. The load that I use for SD is the federal target load T178 in 71/2 shot & it’s a 2 ¾” load that has in big letters on the box “TARGET LOAD”.
2. I use the same shotgun as in #1 & use my reloads in it.
3. I use a pump shotgun with a 3” chamber, pistol grip, sawed off 16” bbl, an extended MAG tube filled with 3” buckshot & deer slugs.
All of the above firearm/ammo combos are completely legal to use & own. The one most likely to keep me out of lawsuits is the firearm/ammo combo in #1. It’s actually a stronger load than my reloads that have the same 1 1/8oz load but only are rated at 1200fps. The perception is that my reloads could be anything but “Target LOADs” but they are just that, target loads. The perception is that I’m using a target load in a target shotgun with a target choke in the bbl. If anyone asks me why I’m using a handicap load (heavier target load) in my shotgun. I’ll tell them I’m a terrible shot at trap and skeet & need all the help I can get.

When I do rely on a pistol I like the big heavier bullets of the larger calibers, it’s just a personal preference.
1. My 1st choice is a 45acp, I own two of them & use the 1911 that’s setup for target shooting (target trigger, target sights, target grips, ECT). The ammo that I use is federals GM45A, it’s their 230gr FMJ “MATCH TARGET AMMO” & it states so on the box.
2. I use the same pistol with my 230gr LRN reloads.
3. I use a combat setup 1911 with the hot federal PD45HS3H load with epoxy filling the HP’s just for good measure.
Again all of the firearm/ammo combos are legal but the #1 combo will be the one most likely to keep me out of lawsuits. My reloads are actually tamer than the federal target loads because I try to keep the speeds of my 230gr LRN bullets around 800fps & the federal target loads are rated at 860fps. But any good lawyer will argue differently. It’s a very powerful perception that I’m just using a target load in a target pistol when the real truth is that my reloads are truly the target load.

My choice in a backup pistol or 2nd pistol would be a revolver.
1. A S&W 44mag. With at least a 6”bbl, a target trigger, target hammer & target sights. The ammo that I use is federals C44SA, it’s a “TARGET AMMO” that’s in 44SPL with a 200gr LHP bullet.
2. The same pistol with my reloads in 44SPL.
3. The same pistol with federals P44HS1 load.
All the firearm/ammo combos are legal to use, but again #1 combo is perceived to have the least amount of overkill. I’m using a “TARGET 44SPL” load in a 44MAG & if anyone asks me why I’m using a HP bullet for target shooting. My answer will be that I was told that it would be the safest bullet to use, a soft lead HP bullet, for target shooting with bowling pins, cowboy action events or steel plates/challenges because the soft lead HP bullet will flatten out on impact greatly reducing the chance of any ricochets. Again my reloads are actually tamer than these factory loads & I use a 214gr SWC bullet, not a HP bullet & they are only traveling at around 850fps. It’s the perception of a reload VS a target load because it clearly says it’s a “TARGET LOAD” on the box.

In all the firearm/ammo combos that I use I’ve tried to use a combo that will protect my family physically as well as finically. It would be hard for any judge say that I used excessive force with any of these choices as long as I didn’t go crazy & put an excessive number of shots into a BG/BG’s. It would be hard for any lawyer to argue that any of the firearm/ammo combos are excessive. Could they be loaded down more with lighter loads? Absolutely!!! But they also could easily be loaded up a lot heavier/hotter, the shotgun could have easily been loaded with a multitude of various 3”MAG ammo. There’s a ton of different SD ammo out there for the 1911 along with seemingly endless extremely powerful loads for the 44MAG.

The perception that I’m using target firearms with factory target ammo is very compelling. These facts will go a long way in aiding me with favorable decisions the law enforcement agencies/courts will be making about any premeditation of the shooting, the justification of the shooting & any civil lawsuits that could arise from the shooting.

I’m sorry for being so long winded & I’m not trying to tell anyone what firearm or ammo to use. I would love to use reloads for SD, there’s just too many different things riding on the ammo choices I make.

The rumor that reloads will get you in trouble pretty much started with Mas' article that discussed the Bias case, that is why it is mentioned every time the topic comes up by the way. Mas has stated on this forum several times that the idea he was trying to get across was that in the case of a self defense shooting, where the shooter is required to prove justification in the use of deadly force, handloads do not offer the benefits of exemplar evidence or trusted factory documentation as tools to help prove your argument. At least that's the way I understand it, and if that is correct then we can put the "handloads can get you into trouble" theory to rest. But it will then arouse the theory that they won't get you out of the trouble that you are already in.

If this isn't a typo, then you aren't as legal as you thought and reloads would be the last of your worries.

In California we already have the so-called "condor zones" where I cannot even have a lead bullet and a firearm that will chamber it simultaneously in my possession while hunting.

Thankyou for correcting me, it should read an 18" bbl.

No problem. I'd thought about the possibility that it was a NFA weapon, but two inches isn't worth the red tape.

I don't care about all this legal mumbo jumbo, but, where do you buy the 22 ammo that makes the bad guys head explode off his body. that's my kind of ammo!!!!!

So if you are brought to a civil case.............

if you win, or the case dismissed............
can you counter sue for damages and court cost?

In what states are there any mention of weapons or ammunition in their justified self defense statutes?

This thread is 3 years old and should be buried someplace far away and very deep.

__________________
Still Running Against the Wind

Resurrecting a 3 year old thread about reloads for defense to add this meaningful tidbit to the conversation? Really?

I don't think it matters how much they know about firearms as much as how they can confuse and paint the issues.

Again I would like to point out the Arizona case of Harold Fish where the procecution contended that Fish had come to the hiking trail ready to kill someone because he carried a 10mm semi auto. He spent a couple of years in jail for second degree murder before the verdict was overturned and he was released.

That being said, I don't care one iota about being 'overarmed'. If a situation is bad enough where a trigger has to be pulled, it doesn't matter to me if it's a .22 or a .44 mag or a homemade 'Death Special'. I also don't believe a legitimate SD case in South Carolina is going to go against a victim that is forced to fire.

This thread reminds me, I miss Skip.

Unlike the Bias case there was quite a bit of information about Harold Fish on the internet, plus there was an episode on one of the 'true-crime' shows where he explained the way the incident occurred.

The prosecution had made some comments that showed their ignorance of firearms, and some general ignorance as well, which was pretty popular on the gun forums. However, there was a lot more information given during the trial that was left out of the forum debates. Having watched the show and listened to his version of the story, there was pretty much no doubt in my mind that he was guilty as charged.

Also, his verdict wasn't overturned because someone looked at the trial and decided he wasn't guilty or there was any kind of procedural misconduct. At the time of the shooting the law read that in the case of a homicide the killer had to prove he was justified in taking another persons life, in other words, he was guilty until he could prove his innocence, which he couldn't do. A short time later the law was changed to read the standard innocent until proven guilty, which the prosecution couldn't do either. His defense counsel asked the governor to change the effective date of the change in the law to the date it was proposed instead of the date it was approved, which was before the shooting took place. And he granted their request.

In just about any defensive shooting incident, including the most clear cut righteous cases, you can count on being sued (especially if you own a home, have a job, etc). The object of the exercise is to get the money, not to prove right or wrong.

Lawsuits are matters of civil law, not criminal statutes. There is no "written law", only theories of liability and precedents set in other cases. The standard used in deciding cases is "a preponderance of the evidence" rather than "guilt beyond a reasonable doubt", as used in criminal matters. Penalties sought may include actual damages (medical bills, rehab expenses, lost wages, loss of future earnings, disabilities, disfigurement, etc, etc, etc), punative and exemplary damages, as well as legal fees and court costs.

Attorneys representing each party will make every attempt to load the "evidence" presented with anything and everything that possibly makes their side look better and the opposing side look worse. Elements that might be used to sway a jury in a shooting scenario could be why a person was shot multiple times, why a person was shot in the back, why the shooter chose to carry an unusually powerful weapon, or the type of ammunition used. Anything and everything they can possibly support a claim of negligence, or wilfull and wanton behavior, might be introduced and argued.

Civil cases can drag on for several years with depositions, "expert witnesses" evaluating physical evidence or running reenactments, motions hearings, and other procedures before a trial might actually be held. In the interim attorneys' fees and associated expenses are racked up, the clock keeps ticking, and the parties to the case are put through a wringer financially and emotionally. Plaintiffs' attorneys know that many defendants (especially when there is an insurance policy involved) will choose to settle the case for an amount less than claimed, or less than what they might expect to have to pay for attorneys, expert witnesses, and other trial expenses (this is refered to as "nuisance value"), even when there is no real evidence to support the claims made. Pre-trial expenses can easily total tens of thousands of dollars, and actual trials might run into the hundreds of thousands, so making a case go away for a modest settlement could be an attractive solution to your homeowners' insurance claims department.

The issue about handloaded ammunition has been bandied about quite a bit, but I don't recall seeing any actual references to this issue being successfully used in actual civil cases. That doesn't mean that it cannot or will not be.

My suggestions for those who are put into the position of defending themselves with deadly force are:
(1) shut up, lawyer up, and let your attorney do all the talking;
(2) carry good personal liability insurance, which can make legal representation available at the insurance company's expense rather than your own (realizing that the attorneys will be representing primarily your insurance company, and you only as necessary to defend against the claims made;
(3) selection of a caliber and ammunition of the type used by your local, county, state police or FBI/US Secret Service, etc, makes it possible to bring in all sorts of evidence resulting from testing of various types for suitability in defensive handgun use. Loads of published data, plenty of expert witnesses, etc.

The guy who carries a .50 Desert Eagle loaded with handloads with arsenic pellets in the hollow points presents a different picture to a jury than the guy who carries the same handgun model chosen by his local police department or sheriff's office, loaded with the same ammunition issued to the cops.

My $0.02 worth.

Even if he is, he has NO idea what he is talking about-- period-- there is NO case on record I know of where this has been a issue-- keep posting this bilge and give the antis some more 'ammo' to use against us.

Best advice is agree to disagree. We've already lost 1 member to this topic. Don't need any more with fancy rank of "Banned" under their screen name.

__________________
-jwk-
US Army '72-'95

I guess they learn it on lawyering 101: If the evidence is weak, attack the evidence, if the evidence is strong, attack the witness. I think the admonition of not using hand loads for self defense springs from a very astute and well-meaning lawyer who hoped to shut down every possible avenue of character impeachment available to the plaintiff following an otherwise justifiable shooting.

Worse, it must be remembered that in the various criminal codes, deadly force is an absolute. That is, you can't kill someone a little bit. deadly force is exactly that; a force that makes you dead or leaves you with life altering injuries. The problem in our left-leaning liberal society is that lawyers have indeed tried to introduce degrees of deadly force as a tactic of character impeachment. Does anyone remember the hoopla raised by Black Talon Ammo? Thus, use of hand loads or ammunition with ominous names could provide the opposition with an avenue of attack, as will those bumper and door stickers promising an armed response at the slight provocation.

Considering the high quality of factory loads available to us, there's little need to resort to hand loads, and, I've been reloading for 55 years.

Actually it sprang from a magazine writer. To the best of my knowledge it's never really been an issue in a real court trial.

I see this a lot in this forum, and it really confuses me. As far as quality goes there is nothing that factory ammo offers that handloads can't deliver. It all depends on the person doing the loading and the effort they put into it. I also feel that it is possible to get better quality than much of the factory ammo available today. I know that people load for different reasons and quality isn't always at the top of everyone's list, but if you can and do load ammo that is equal to or better than factory, why would you feel the need to go to a store and buy some?

This has got to be one of the most frequently rehashed forum threads - ever. I've been tapping on my keyboard in different forums for 15+ years and I've seen this thread appear in different places at least every 3 months like clockwork. It is such an annoying thread that some forums automatically lock it when discovered.

I dunno, maybe the "Carry one in the pipe" is a tie??

__________________
Minimize the variables