If you are forced to defend yourself with a lethal weapon, your best defense is to not say a word until your attorney arrives, and do what he says.

This is way above what ammunition, caliber, type of weapon, etc. will do for your case.

Since this has turned into a replay of most of the other discussions on the subject, let's look at the original question. Not in order.

1. Factory produced defensive ammo is far, far better now than it was 20 years ago. A handloader might do as well, if they can get the same bullets and load them to the same velocities. With modern designs, velocities measured in warp factors aren't necessary for proper performance.

However, with all the legal variables-and by that I refer to the attitudes and ethics of prosecutors in various and sundry jurisdictions- I simply don't see any point in possibly creating issues that might need to be dealt with at trial. Anyone else remember Mike Nifong and the Duke "rape case"? If those kids hadn't had parents with substantial funds, I expect they might be in jail.

In the appellate case mentioned earlier where the factory was able to demonstrate that the ammunition tested by the state wasn't the same as the ammunition used (ball powder vs flake powder), they were an independent party uninvolved in the case. Your reloading records, if any, wouldn't be viewed in the same light, they certainly wouldn't be in as much detail. I wouldn't want to bet my freedom on my records.

2. If you pay attention to what you're doing and use reasonable care, you can produce practice ammuntion yourself for a fraction of the cost of factory new. I produce all my practice and hunting ammunition, and the vast majority of my match ammo. I may buy the occasional box of factory shotgun ammo for 3 gun matches. I also buy factory ammo for defensive use, the cost doesn't amount to much as I try to remember to rotate ammo about every year.

Do as you please, it's your life.

In all the murder trials I have ever sat through, never, not once, have I EVER seen the type of ammunition used EVER brought up. Usually the DA goes after intent. Never seen an expert witness ever asked about the lethality of one type of load or round vs. another.

And who the heck is 1SG? That's driving me nuts.

__________________
Un-Reconstructed Southerner

I'm not a lawyer, but doesn't NJ vs. Daniel Bias show this exact thing? He served three years and is a convicted felon.

Glock says nothing about this in their warranty.

The use of reloads did not convict Bias of wrongdoing.

Care to elaborate?

The whole article is here (inappropriately titled) "Hand Loads For Self Defense". Bias' story didn't make any sense to begin with. No doubt; He shot his wife point blank in the head.

Handloads for self-defense: the Daniel Bias case | American Handgunner | Find Articles

I think that this "myth" had its origin from the days when some Police Officers, stuck with only 158 lead roundnose cartridge, would pull the bullet, or hand load, the same, to a higher velocity to get a little better performance. And then because it was brought out in court or supervisors wanted you to think it would be, reloads were painted as a possible evil thing.
Of course I would think an officer would have alot more worry about this, than a civilian. Because they could be portrayed as a nut or evil for not trusting what ammo had been issued or was Dept standard.
Where as a civilian could simply say I reload to save money, and thats how all my cartridges are loaded. Just my opinion.
Never heard of it( reloads) actually coming up.

I totally agree! I was an LEO for more than 25 years, have been involved in many firearms related shootings investigations and have read everything I could get my hands on related to this subject. I have never actually seen a case cited where the subject of reloaded ammo ever came up.

Food for thought. People get sued daily for auto accidents. How many of us drive a car that is still to factory specs? ( same tire size & quality, not suped up etc.)

__________________
Support your Police, & NRA

I actually sat on a murder trial.. I was amazed that the defense attorney didn't blow me off the jury. Heck I worked with cops all the time. Now as to the jurors..Oy Vey..and I ain't even Jewish.. I honestly think we had an alternate that couldn't read!! The defense attorney made sure he had a couple of women on the jury that wouldn't have voted for the death penalty if he had killed their mother. The guy was without a doubt guilty and the vote for the death penalty was just that..10 to 2..it had to be unanimous of course. One of the women actually made a statement that if we gave him the death penalty his daughter wouldn't have a father any longer...like it would have been carried out in 6 months..more likely 25 years.. she was 3 and a half years old at trial date and he had seen his daughter one time. It took 6 weeks to find him guilty and sentence him..and it was an exhausting ordeal..not a joke. Many jurors are quite ...well...dumb is a good word..oh life without parole

I humbly disagree. Some slimeball attorney could try to spin that in a negative light, but nobody with a shred of common sense would buy it and legally there is no support to turn what I said into a "See? This guy just wants to kill... Look at all the deadly ammo he made!" Defense will turn around and go "How deadly is a +P or +P+ Hydrashok round, or for that matter _any_ bullet, that is commercially available?"

If you are forced into a position of using a firearm against another human being, you obviously felt that life was in immediate danger and needed to stop an attack as quickly as possible. Having the most effective round possible within the confines of law (meaning no explosive or bi-metal rounds) accomplishes that.

Have you seen how horrendous solid copper bullets are? They expand to about the size of a golf ball and tears out fist fulls of meat. And they are commercially available. All I have to do is go to my local store and pay $50 for 20 of them.

You are entirely correct, they do not specifically mention the reason for not firing reloads. It does however state in the owner's manual that they recommend against firing reloads. +P+ loads will specifically void your warranty and are not safe to use. At least that's what my partner's Glock 17 manual states.

Two logical reasons that I can see for this are;

A: Unsupported chamber, which is something virtually every auto-loading pistol has and I feel (no, this may NOT be fact, it is my opinion) that this is just something people have latched on to to have something to complain about. I don't see the exposure of less than 1mm more brass at the base of the case where it tends to be thicker, for an area of about 15-20% of the case's circumference, to be a specific issue unless you're loading very hot rounds or firing .40, which tends to be where the typical KB happens. The .40 seems to have real bad issues with cases bulging in that area. I admittedly don't know why it is this caliber specifically since I have little interest in it. My opinion is that if you're going bigger than 9mm and want a standard, non-niche caliber just go for the powder keg that is .45 and have a nice day. :P

B: Octagonal rifling, which fouls when using unjacketed or unplated bullets. Reloaders may inadvertently foul the barrel, get a squib and blow their hand off.

I'm not an expert on this stuff, so consider the above my opinion based on much reading, research and experience. I am always open to changing my opinions, being proven wrong, and accepting correct facts.

Take it with a grain of salt the size of the empire state building and educate yourself on the facts.

The lack of forensic GSR was not because of the light reloads. It was because the muzzle was a considerable distance from the wound.

Some contemporary news reports to look at:
2nd Expert Says Suicide Unlikely In Bias Case - Morning Call

Gun Expert Hurts Defense In Bias Murder Trial - Morning Call

Bias Didn't Shoot Self, Medical Examiners Say - Morning Call

It's not "easier with factory ammo", it's ONLY possible with factory ammo. If its reloads, there's no way to prove the remaining reloads are the same as the one(s) used in the shooting....therefore no way to prove things like gun shot residue patterns, etc.

I've read all these replies and just to add my 2 cents worth in, I've been a police officer for 43 years and still working part-time doing prisoner transports, reloading since 1970 with absolutely no problems other than the usual ones that go along with reloading, the only thing I have to say is this: "WHAT EVER HAPPENED TO PLAIN OLD COMMON SENSE"?

REMEMBER THIS ALWAYS WEAR YOUR VEST AND WAIT FOR YOUR BACKUP AND YOU TOO MIGHT LIVE TO BE A RIPE OLD AGE, WHERE THE YOUNGSTERS THINK YOUR ARE NUTS AND DON'T KNOW ANYTHING.....
Sorry, if I offended anyone, if I did I sure didn't do it on purpose.......
CookE..

This gets banged around all the time & really comes down to personal pref. I will not intentionally use handloads for SD purposes. Not that I think I will be jailed for it but it does make the following civil case easier for the BG or his survivors to get money from you & for what? You can't make a better load than the best factory stuff & cost is not an issue. Practice w/ equiv handloads & carry tested factory, done.
As to voiding warranty, true, but so what? If you are stupid enough to KB your gun with poorly made handloads, why should the factory warranty their guns?

Re: OP. Reloading is a very rewarding hobby that will allow one to enjoy shooting to a much greater degree than possible using only factory loads. The perspective of the 1SG reflects simple ignorance.

Warranty performance lies entirely with the manufacturer. Some will cover problems with any ammo, factory or reload. Some will not.

As to legal issues with the use of reloaded ammunition in a SD/HD incident, there is of course always the possibility of a politically/ideologically motivated misuse of the legal system as a weapon to strike out at someone who has legally acted in self-defense.

If one is going to maintain and possibly have to use a firearm for SD/HD, it is extremely wise to make absolutely certain what exactly are the laws that pertain to that usage in your local area and your state. Personally, I've always preferred to use whatever was the caliber typically used by local policemen... even if possible buying the same brand/style of ammunition typically issued. This would preclude a prosecutor from trying to make an issue of the caliber/round/firearm that might be used in a SD/HD incident.

__________________
<><

Those are the precise reasons TO reload.

Reloading makes it "Harder" for the BG to prove anything ammo related. Why use factory ammo with spec sheets that say exactly how a factory bullet performs in a "test gun", and have that possibly used against you in your own gun that was nothing like the test gun.

Reloading makes a better load than the best factory stuff. Better accuracy. Better reliability. If not, then you are doing something wrong. Why use reloads for practice, then use factory if you life depends on it? Practice with what your life depends on.

Somebody please shot this thread with a more deadly reload, it keeps coming back to life.

LOL, there are more threads on this than I thought...

I carry factory, but that is a good point that evidence would be harder to get with reloads.... Especially because my record keeping is so poor.

A note to anyone that thinks reloads are somehow inferior to factory ammo. HOGWASH!

A skilled reloader can produce ammunition that is MUCH BETTER than factory ammo. I have a friend that buys factory bullets and balances each one looking for perfect centerline stability. He culls out the straightest and puts them on a lathe and sizes them all exactly. He tries to get a perfectly straight, perfectly balanced bullet, with equal mass around the spinning axis. Then he resizes each case and trues it. With a perfect primer set and precise charging, he sets the bullet so the tip just touches the lands of the rifling.

This is the perfect bullet for his gun. A factory could NEVER produce this round, as it would only work in a handful of guns. My friend does this for marksmanship and I can tell you he can shoot. He is nationally ranked even.

When I reload I do some of these things, especially sizing the round for my rifle and assuring the perfect powder charge. No factory is as accurate as I am. They couldn't afford to be.

Wasn't there a case in NJ a long time back where the DA painted out the shooter as a "mad scientist cooking up killer bullets in his basement"?



.

A lot of these "rules" and suggestions come from dealing with erroneous public opinion.

CCW ammo suggestions in class are usually all about keeping your intent and credibility clear. It would probably be a bad idea to load up a CCW gun with Hornady Zombie rounds, even though we all know these are just Critical Defense loads with a green tip. Carrying with rounds that are boxed with words like "Defense" and "Protection" may help support your claim that the gun and it's ammo are for self defense.

As far as reloading goes. At some point in time it became popular belief that a person that reloads ammunition is making hotter or more deadly rounds. So is born the stigma that a person walking around with a gun loaded with reloads is out to kill.

If you have a judge and or jury that knows reloading is a hobby and cost saving act, and that any round customization is generally applied only to competition... then it won't matter. But what do think the odds of that are?

If only all prosecutors lived by that mantra...



.

This might be of interest for this thread. From an article written by Marty Hayes for the June Newsletter of the Armed Citizens' Legal Defense Network.

June 2012 - Page 5
June 2012 - Page 6
June 2012 - Page 7


The lab will try to get samples of the ammunition from the same lot or, failing that, from a lot the manufacturer can certify as being identical. The ammunition will then be tested under conditions that simulate the alleged conditions and possible distances. From that, the actual distance the shot was fired at can be more accurately estimated.

What makes this testing possible is the existence of the careful records and the exemplars from each lot that some ammunition manufacturers keep. More importantly, these records are presumed to be unbiased. While the same kind of testing can be down on reloaded ammunition, it would be difficult to get it admitted into evidence precisely because the records are not unbiased. Even if it was admitted, the prosecution could argue to the jury that the handloads tested cannot be assured the same what was used in the actual shooting thereby casting doubt on any defense claims that rely on forensic data related to the ammunition used.

There are two kinds of trials to be concerned with if you shoot in self defense; The criminal trial to see if the accused committed a crime and a civil trial to determine if the shooter is liable for damages. The familiy of the alleged victim (the dead guy you shot) can try to prove in a civil trial that you are somehow responsible for their loss and grief because you used murderous ammo and are a vicious guy who intended to harm their innocent family member. The standards of proof and guilt are less in a civil trial.

A simple majority of jurors in a civil trial can find that you were probably a mean vicious guy who set out to do violent harm to their loved one.

In a criminal trial all of the jurors must find the accused guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

It would seem likely that the shooter is at more risk of an unfavoravle verdict in a civil trial.

Having that, the risk of such an unfavorable and unfair outcome can be reduced by carrying only commercial loads.

It is also possible to be found innocent in a criminal trial and still be found liable in civil trial in for the same act (remember OJ?).

__________________
Andy

Common sense died with dignity, self-respect, respect, courtesy and responsibility at the end the last century.

Now the name of the game is "Who can I blame my self-created problems on that's not me?"

In theory couldn't a prosecutor attempt the same argument if you are carrying any military or police caliber? That you are wanting to do more damage with a larger caliber and are a wannabe LEO.

I believe the Magnuson-Moss Act prohibits manufactures from outright voiding a warranty based on consumer use without reasonably demonstrating that the use contributed to the product failure. However, they also know if you want to challenge their decision to void your warranty you will spend more than the price of the firearm in litigation costs.

The warranties I've read that mention reloads are cleverly worded to make you think reloads will void the warranty without actually saying it. They will use words like "may" or like the S&W manual says "never use non-standard, reloaded, or “handloaded” ammunition which has not been subjected to internal ballistic pressure testing." Sounds kind of scary, but published loads have been subjected to internal ballistic pressure testing.

If you return a damaged firearm, don't you think the factories are going to evaluate the proximate cause of your problem? Get an independent 3rd party evaluation? Metal failure due to excessive pressure leaves characteristic evidence that experts can verify.

Also, just because the published data has been pressure tested in their equipment doesn't take you off the hook. Where are your records documenting your QC program and the frequency with which the calibration of your scales has been certified to be within acceptable tolerances? The accuracy of your check weights if you have and use them? Documentation that you actually verified the scale setting with those weights? I really don't want to beat this to death, but this is the stuff that wins or loses cases at trial.

As an example, the factories have written QC programs and procedures where certified techs using certified instruments test loads prior to starting production of each lot. Random samples are pulled during the production run, some are tested as QC, others held as exemplars and some are sent to independent labs to have third party documentation of the quality. If you expect to have your ammo accepted as equal in quality, you will be expected to be able to prove that. I doubt most of us can.

It's been pointed out that so far as criminal cases are concerned, the major issue is in close/contact type engagements. However, the door is also opened for ethically and/or politically motivated folks to use the home brewed stuff to raise additional issues that you really don't need during a trial for your freedom and financial well being.

But, it's a free country.

...Still never happened....

What HAS happened over and over is good people being wrongly convicted in a both civil and criminal courts using a registered firearm, using "appropriate" ammunition, and using sufficient force in a life-or-death situation.

If the person carrying a firearm has a fear is being sued over things that have never happened without regard to things that have, I submit that person should not be carrying a gun in the first place.

As above it's a free country.

If I was in a situation where I needed to defend myself with deadly force, and all I had in reach was a illegal M16 with a 3lb trigger with unobtainium tipped hand-loaded +P+ rounds loaded in a 500 round drum decorated in pro-Al-Qadi furniture... I'd use it and deal with the consequences later... it was that or laying down my life after all.

BUT if I don't have to put myself in that situation, if I designate an industry accepted self defense weapon with industry accepted self defense ammunition, that's one less headache for later.

Is a lot of it marketing? Of course it is. But that doesn't change the fact that most people would agree it to be the norm. And that's the one thing you don't want labeled on you in any trial... Abnormal. With label other labels are too easily attached... excessive, aggressive, protagonist, etc.

At least that's my reasoning for "conforming"... to each his own.

To each his own indeed. I am not telling anyone else what to put in their gun.

I do take exception to others telling me that my reloads will cause a legal problem later. Or that they could cause a legal problem later.

Because reloads have never caused a legal problem in a self-defense case. Not once.

The point I keep trying to make that is being missed is that using hand loads is not a headache, has never labelled anyone in court as being abnormal (which I am but that's a whole 'nother thread!), excessive, aggressive, or a protagonist or anything else.

It has never been an issue.

It is a myth.

It has never been brought up in court.

The thought process seems to be "Well it could happen sometime in the future so I won't take a chance." Fine. Do as you will. I do not have a dog in that fight.

My issue is with those who think that it has happened or that it is an imminent threat. There is no evidence to support this conclusion.

Remember,

If LAWYERS don't sue,

and Surgeons don't cut,

THEY DON'T GET PAID.

__________________
NRA Pistol/Rifle Inst. RSO

No, I don't think that at all. I believe unless the firearm is completely blown apart, the manufacture of the firearms I own will just repair and return even if they believe the the shooter was likely responsible for the damage.

Actually, if it goes to court, the only thing I have to prove is that my firearm was under warranty and they did not repair it. For them to win the manufacture must prove my reload caused the problem.

We had a duty weapon fail. HP White did an engineering review and determined that the weapon failed due to an ammunition defect. The ammo manufacturer paid for the repairs.

It isn't rocket science or brain surgery.

Actually an engineering review is equivalent to rocket science, but they still can't legally void a warranty based on the simple fact reloads are used. They must demonstrate the reload caused the malfunction.

Since my handloads consist of either a 158 grain lead semi-wadcutter over 5 grains of Unique or a 230 grain round nose lead over 5 grains of Bullseye, I am neither concerned or worried about how they will function or how they will be perceived. YMMV

__________________
I believe in the wadcutter.

There actually was an episode of Police Story back in the late 70s that had this as a plot element.

Groo here
Or you all can do what I have done..
Go to a custom " manufacturer " and have your carry ammo made.
In my case my 10mm ammo is a 155 gr bullet at 1400fps
put up in nickel cases.
As this company is a Licensed Manufacturer I have "factory"ammo,,,
To My Specs [like Hornidy custom]

I don't think you understood my point. In court words matter a lot. You didn't say you wanted the round most capable of stopping an attack. You said you wanted "the most lethal round possible." The round most capable of stopping an attack may, or may not, be the same round that is the most lethal, but that makes no difference. The difference between manslaughter and self-defense can often boil down to nothing more than your intent. It conveys two entirely different intents to say "I wanted the round most capable of stopping the attack" vs "I wanted the most lethal round" is huge. One conveys the intent to kill the other conveys the intent to stop an attack.