I read the thread on here somewhere about using hand loads for self defense and the liabilities incurred because of it's use. What about using LE marked ammo as a civilian in a self defense shooting? I prefer LE marked ammo for carry in my weapons as they have been tried and tested in mostly real world scenarios and I want what is most likely to be effective. Any input on this? I read Mas Ayoobs briefs online about the case involving the hand loaded ammo and had a thought about this. Thanks.
Using LE marked ammo for civilain self defense carry
- Thread starter Firehouse
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
Centenniel
Member
I can see no problem with carrying LE marked ammo for self defence purposes by a private citizen. Like you stated, it is generally well tested and proven ammo. The situation is quite similar to carrying one of several handguns that are commonly chosen by Police Departments across the country. Choosing either, or both actually makes a lot of sense.
The LE markings generally only appear on the packaging. However, there is one area where the practice may come back to bite you. Some LE only ammo is loaded, by contract, to different performance levels than standard ammo (+P+) or may have powders with different combustion characteristics (low flash).
If you're involved in a shooting at contact distances, and if the crime labs bother to perform residue testing to verify your statement, you may have an issue. The general practice is to look at the remaining ammunition, match it to the best of their ability as to brand, type etc. and fire comparison tests to determine the residue patterns of their exempler rounds (which are generally over the counter stuff). If there's a significant difference from the patterns on the clothing/body of the person you shot, there will be an issue. That issue will be that your statement is not consistent with test results.
The easy way out of this is to mark the ammo box showing the date loaded and which firearm. This documents the brand, type of load and lot number of ammunition for evidentary purposes. You'll also note the qualifiers in the above paragraph. Despite what you see on TV, not every shooting gets the full court press by lab techs.
BTW, minor differences in performance aren't worth worrying about. Shot placement is much more important.
If you're involved in a shooting at contact distances, and if the crime labs bother to perform residue testing to verify your statement, you may have an issue. The general practice is to look at the remaining ammunition, match it to the best of their ability as to brand, type etc. and fire comparison tests to determine the residue patterns of their exempler rounds (which are generally over the counter stuff). If there's a significant difference from the patterns on the clothing/body of the person you shot, there will be an issue. That issue will be that your statement is not consistent with test results.
The easy way out of this is to mark the ammo box showing the date loaded and which firearm. This documents the brand, type of load and lot number of ammunition for evidentary purposes. You'll also note the qualifiers in the above paragraph. Despite what you see on TV, not every shooting gets the full court press by lab techs.
BTW, minor differences in performance aren't worth worrying about. Shot placement is much more important.
hotpig
Member
So far the ammunition mfg marketing has not been a issue in court.
GatorFarmer
Member
Reputably attorneys generally don't give blanket legal advice over the internet on specific matters (though sometimes can and will explain general principles of law), esp. since they wouldn't be able to practice law in ever single state where this would be read. Thus one usually has to rely on the opinion of lay experts, gun writers, etc.
However, since the advice is free, you're getting what you pay for with all the pitfalls that implies.
The best solution would be to consult a reputable specialist attorney in your state/area and also search the applicable case law for a given area.
Since no one ever does that (it costs money), we're left with the fact that the gun mags haven't featured or dissected a case where this has been an issue. It really shouldn't be, since if something was made of the ammunition (extra lethal, etc) it might call into question why the police are using it. The obvious line of attack for a prosecutor would of course be to suggest that the shooter was a "wannabe cop"/vigalante and selected ammunition accordingly. But whatever ammo is used, there's going to be some way to attack it if someone really wants to.
As a minor note, domestic LE in the United States are in fact "civilians" themselves by virtue of not being in the military.
Wyatt Earp
Member
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2007
- Messages
- 996
- Reaction score
- 16
Massad Ayoob, who is a part time/reserve police officer in New Hampshire and a highly sought after expert witness in defensive shooting cases, has written in several books and articles that this is a non-issue that can be quickly refuted (if it even appears) by a competent defense attorney.
Bottom line, the qualities that make it desirable for police make it desirable for the law abiding to use in self defense.
Bottom line, the qualities that make it desirable for police make it desirable for the law abiding to use in self defense.
gatorhugger
Member
If Ayoob is writing it's a non issue then that is interesting.
I remember him starting the whole issue in a series of G&A Articles where he told everyone to not use handloads, don't use anything that sounded evil, don't use anything but over the counter bland bullets.
HE STARTED THAT WHOLE LUNACY THAT A CERTAIN BULLET WOULD GET YOU THROWN IN THE SLAMMER OR SUED!
I don't think there has ever been such a case, it was hysterical writing then, and now.
Ayoob is a boob.
I remember him starting the whole issue in a series of G&A Articles where he told everyone to not use handloads, don't use anything that sounded evil, don't use anything but over the counter bland bullets.
HE STARTED THAT WHOLE LUNACY THAT A CERTAIN BULLET WOULD GET YOU THROWN IN THE SLAMMER OR SUED!
I don't think there has ever been such a case, it was hysterical writing then, and now.
Ayoob is a boob.
flop-shank
US Veteran
Massad is not a "boob". He is a member of this forum and takes time out of his busy schedule to contribute here. He has debated the handload issue here in several different threads and not everyone agrees with his stance. Because we do not always agree on certain issues, does not diminish the value of any our contributions here or, in the instances that we might be wrong, invalidate everything that we say. Massad is no different. The man is a wealth of imformation and well respected for good reason.
For the record, I sit on the fence when it comes to the handload debate.
For the record, I sit on the fence when it comes to the handload debate.
nitesite
Member
The difference between a police officer and a private citizen is nothing more than (1) the first is part of a organization of citizens and (2) the latter is simply an individual citizen.
Police officers are citizens just like me. They simply decided to undertake an honored profession which serves and protects their fellow citizens.
LEOs are not part of the military with its own distinct Code of Conduct and its Uniform Code of Military Justice. They are not above the laws under which any other citizen must live. So again, I say that a police officer is simply a citizen like you and me.
Shoot LE ammo all you want. Period.
You might check out Bias vs New Hampshire as a start. The type of issue I mentioned on residue testing was in a case here in Virginia. That case was overturned on appeal after the manufacturer produced records showing a change in powder type produced the difference in residue patterns.
BUFF
SWCA Member, Absent Comrade
As a peace officer, it seems to me like a good idea for a citizen to use the same ammunition load his local police use, assuming the police choice is main-stream. Most departments choose a hollow-point load because it reduces chances of richochets, it limits penetration/reduces the chances of over-penetration and it is generally controllable by the average handgun shooter.
"I figure if my local sheriffs/police/state troopers use it to defend themselves, it must be a decent, responsible choice. They know a lot more about this stuff than I do." That kind of statement is very defensible in court and may help keep you out of court.
"I figure if my local sheriffs/police/state troopers use it to defend themselves, it must be a decent, responsible choice. They know a lot more about this stuff than I do." That kind of statement is very defensible in court and may help keep you out of court.
First of all, if you want to find out if it's illegal you will want to check your state and local laws. I wouldn't check with the local police because they usually don't know.
Secondly, even if it is legal, there is always the possibility the prosocution will try to paint you out to be a villian or a wannabe. During all the "reloads for self defense" discussions we've had, Mas always takes the position that you should give the prosocution as little as you can to use against you. There is plenty of suitable ammuniton out there that is not marked "Law enforcement only" so why push your luck?
Thirdly, as a former police officer I am 100% against civillians carrying the same ammunition as the police. We had a local shooting incident years ago. In the ensuing investigatin there was brass all over the place. Of course the two officers were using the same brand so each one had to be checked to make sure which firearm it came from. The investigation took a little longer because the deceased bad guy apparently had three different types of ammunition in his weapon, one of which was the exact same as the one the police were using. I was tempted to start carrying a .41AE on duty, so my brass would be the only one of it's kind on the scene.
Fourthly, there is no reason to carry it. There is no particular handgun ammo that is so superior to others of the same class that would make it worthwhile.
Secondly, even if it is legal, there is always the possibility the prosocution will try to paint you out to be a villian or a wannabe. During all the "reloads for self defense" discussions we've had, Mas always takes the position that you should give the prosocution as little as you can to use against you. There is plenty of suitable ammuniton out there that is not marked "Law enforcement only" so why push your luck?
Thirdly, as a former police officer I am 100% against civillians carrying the same ammunition as the police. We had a local shooting incident years ago. In the ensuing investigatin there was brass all over the place. Of course the two officers were using the same brand so each one had to be checked to make sure which firearm it came from. The investigation took a little longer because the deceased bad guy apparently had three different types of ammunition in his weapon, one of which was the exact same as the one the police were using. I was tempted to start carrying a .41AE on duty, so my brass would be the only one of it's kind on the scene.
Fourthly, there is no reason to carry it. There is no particular handgun ammo that is so superior to others of the same class that would make it worthwhile.
I forgot to mention, as I recall the case was New Jersey vs. Bias, Daniel N. Unfortunately there is very little information about it on the web.
He was recently charged with possesion of a weapon while on probation, for those of you who have better things to do with your time.
I also forgot to mention that as a forum member Mas is entitled to all the respect of any other member including yourself. And while I don't agree with his way of thinking, he still sits a little taller in the saddle than most other members as far as I'm concerned. Recently I made a post and casually mentioned my wife had surgery the night before. Mas was the only member who sent his best wishes, and that was the only thing that he said in his post. Thanks again Mas.
He was recently charged with possesion of a weapon while on probation, for those of you who have better things to do with your time.
I also forgot to mention that as a forum member Mas is entitled to all the respect of any other member including yourself. And while I don't agree with his way of thinking, he still sits a little taller in the saddle than most other members as far as I'm concerned. Recently I made a post and casually mentioned my wife had surgery the night before. Mas was the only member who sent his best wishes, and that was the only thing that he said in his post. Thanks again Mas.
Wyatt Earp
Member
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2007
- Messages
- 996
- Reaction score
- 16
How in the hell do you propose to regulate that?
Speer Gold Dots are some of the most widely used police and self defense loads. Once they are out of the package they are indistiguishable from one another.
I carry Speer Gold Dots and Winchester Ranger Bonded. One is marked LE (Ranger) the other is not. I care not what anyone thinks about that.
Well I wasn't proposing to regulate it, I was just stating my opinion. But if I were to regulate it I would propose LE use firearms in a different caliber that would be illegal for civillian possesion. Or issue them ammunition with cases that are marked LE only, and this would be a good use for microstamping for all those uninformed liberals who are so adamant about getting kickbacks from the microstampers. Or you could do both. I'm sure the reason you have ammo marked LE only is because there is no law against it Wyatt. If it was illegal, would you still insist on carrying it? Only criminals commit crimes, the other 5% of the population aren't a problem.
gatorhugger
Member
[/QUOTE]
You might check out Bias vs New Hampshire as a start. The type of issue I mentioned on residue testing was in a case here in Virginia. That case was overturned on appeal after the manufacturer produced records showing a change in powder type produced the difference in residue patterns.[/QUOTE]
Well I looked and cannot find anything on Bias Vs New hampshire so I cannot comment on it. Was it a case where someone was jailed for shooting LE marked ammo?
If not, I don't see the relevance in this discussion. Residue might disprove shooting distance, but if it's a good shoot I don't see residue testing coming into play.
Please explain what you are talking about.
My point was that Ayoob was beating a drum against any non standard bullets in the early 80's saying a district attorney would prosecute based on that.
It sounded great at the time, but as has been mentioned LE ammo often is the same as regular over the counter ammo. Now with internet sales the lines blur even more.
I would like to see a case where a "good" shooting was prosecuted SUCESSFULLY simply on the type of bullet used.
Furthermore flopshank, despite Ayoob posting here sporadically,if that is true, it doesn't mean he is off limits to direct criticism or satire like a regular board member would. He is a very public self professed firearm expert first, before being a member of this board.
Therefore he is fair game the same as any public figure to criticism. You think he is well respected, fine, your opinion.
I think he is a publicity hound and not that great of a writer, and a lot of his early writings especially, were overwrought fantasy. My opinion.
You might check out Bias vs New Hampshire as a start. The type of issue I mentioned on residue testing was in a case here in Virginia. That case was overturned on appeal after the manufacturer produced records showing a change in powder type produced the difference in residue patterns.[/QUOTE]
Well I looked and cannot find anything on Bias Vs New hampshire so I cannot comment on it. Was it a case where someone was jailed for shooting LE marked ammo?
If not, I don't see the relevance in this discussion. Residue might disprove shooting distance, but if it's a good shoot I don't see residue testing coming into play.
Please explain what you are talking about.
My point was that Ayoob was beating a drum against any non standard bullets in the early 80's saying a district attorney would prosecute based on that.
It sounded great at the time, but as has been mentioned LE ammo often is the same as regular over the counter ammo. Now with internet sales the lines blur even more.
I would like to see a case where a "good" shooting was prosecuted SUCESSFULLY simply on the type of bullet used.
Furthermore flopshank, despite Ayoob posting here sporadically,if that is true, it doesn't mean he is off limits to direct criticism or satire like a regular board member would. He is a very public self professed firearm expert first, before being a member of this board.
Therefore he is fair game the same as any public figure to criticism. You think he is well respected, fine, your opinion.
I think he is a publicity hound and not that great of a writer, and a lot of his early writings especially, were overwrought fantasy. My opinion.
flop-shank
US Veteran
Fair enough, sir. We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. I like Massad and believe there is much to be learned from the man.
Gatorhugger- Bias vs New Hampshire involved reloaded ammo. There were 2 lengthy threads here, one in Reloading and another in Ammunition(? maybe lounge?) on the subject.
Residue testing comes into play where you make a statement regarding how the encounter took place and residue testing contradicts that. In the Virginia case, the shooting ocurred at contact distance during a struggle. Due to changes in powder (lab didn't use the same lot of ammo), the lab correctly reported residue pattern inconsistent with the statement. ie, the shooter lied.
In Bias, the reloaded ammo did not display similar residue patterns to factory (lab matched headstamps to ID brand/load) exemplars, again in a contact distance shooting. [The court did not allow defendants handloading records into evidence.] Again, the conclusion was that the shooting ocurred at greater than the contact distance stipulated in the statement. ie, defendent lied about the circumstances of the shooting.
Bias was trying to prevent his wife's suicide, the other was a legitimate off-duty defensive shooting. Both went to jail. The Virginia guy managed to overturn the verdict on appeal. In each case, residue patterns helped convict in what you're terming "good" (ain't no such thing) shootings.
In my op, I noted several qualifiers and pointed how to sidestep the issue with a brief note on the LE ammo box. However, don't assume that because things seem right, they can't come back to bite you.
Residue testing comes into play where you make a statement regarding how the encounter took place and residue testing contradicts that. In the Virginia case, the shooting ocurred at contact distance during a struggle. Due to changes in powder (lab didn't use the same lot of ammo), the lab correctly reported residue pattern inconsistent with the statement. ie, the shooter lied.
In Bias, the reloaded ammo did not display similar residue patterns to factory (lab matched headstamps to ID brand/load) exemplars, again in a contact distance shooting. [The court did not allow defendants handloading records into evidence.] Again, the conclusion was that the shooting ocurred at greater than the contact distance stipulated in the statement. ie, defendent lied about the circumstances of the shooting.
Bias was trying to prevent his wife's suicide, the other was a legitimate off-duty defensive shooting. Both went to jail. The Virginia guy managed to overturn the verdict on appeal. In each case, residue patterns helped convict in what you're terming "good" (ain't no such thing) shootings.
In my op, I noted several qualifiers and pointed how to sidestep the issue with a brief note on the LE ammo box. However, don't assume that because things seem right, they can't come back to bite you.
gatorhugger
Member
Thanks for clarifying. So reloading could "potentially" cause you legal issues IF you have a contact wound shooting and circumstances are shaky.
Couple of points of my own
1- I thought this thread was about LE marked ammo. Not different powders for reloading.
2- I think the odds of this coming back to bite anyone is lottery winner numbers. Yes if your wife gets killed, and there is a question of Murder or suicide, and you handload, and there is a contact wound, and you have a 20 year old girlfriend on the side..... Lots of ifs. I won't worry about this. I Don't think anyone else carrying a weapon should lose sleep or start marking their boxes of 50 talons either.
There are plenty of good shootings.. Every Friday night in cracktown when another dealer bites the dust on the streetcorner, when a menace to society felon is firing at police, and last but not least... The guy who walks through my door at 11pm looking for trouble.
All GREAT shootings my friend. I get your point about any shootings can be a legal nightmare, but here in Florida I have never read of one instance of a legitimate self defense shooting being prosecuted for an ammo type.
And so far haven't heard of one case nationwide either for a Factory bullet of any type to get someone landed in jail. Sounds like a lot of fluff and buff. Remember Ayoob used to preach against using +p+'s. That THOSE would show some evil intent. Powder wasn't the issue. Handloading wasn't the issue.
He stated in many articles that if you were using anything that even sounded bad, it could be bad for you in court. Might land you in jail, might wipe out your savings in a civil suit.
I don't think it has ever happened except in some gunwriters fantasy scenario. Jeez louis, your odds or being in a self defense shooting at all is pretty astronomical, then to tack on more astronomical odds of being prosecuted because you used a Black talon marked LE from a gun show?
C'mon. You have a better chance of being hit with a asteroid than this coming to fruit. Carry whatever you want. Don't worry about it.
Not an issue.
Couple of points of my own
1- I thought this thread was about LE marked ammo. Not different powders for reloading.
2- I think the odds of this coming back to bite anyone is lottery winner numbers. Yes if your wife gets killed, and there is a question of Murder or suicide, and you handload, and there is a contact wound, and you have a 20 year old girlfriend on the side..... Lots of ifs. I won't worry about this. I Don't think anyone else carrying a weapon should lose sleep or start marking their boxes of 50 talons either.
There are plenty of good shootings.. Every Friday night in cracktown when another dealer bites the dust on the streetcorner, when a menace to society felon is firing at police, and last but not least... The guy who walks through my door at 11pm looking for trouble.
All GREAT shootings my friend. I get your point about any shootings can be a legal nightmare, but here in Florida I have never read of one instance of a legitimate self defense shooting being prosecuted for an ammo type.
And so far haven't heard of one case nationwide either for a Factory bullet of any type to get someone landed in jail. Sounds like a lot of fluff and buff. Remember Ayoob used to preach against using +p+'s. That THOSE would show some evil intent. Powder wasn't the issue. Handloading wasn't the issue.
He stated in many articles that if you were using anything that even sounded bad, it could be bad for you in court. Might land you in jail, might wipe out your savings in a civil suit.
I don't think it has ever happened except in some gunwriters fantasy scenario. Jeez louis, your odds or being in a self defense shooting at all is pretty astronomical, then to tack on more astronomical odds of being prosecuted because you used a Black talon marked LE from a gun show?
C'mon. You have a better chance of being hit with a asteroid than this coming to fruit. Carry whatever you want. Don't worry about it.
Not an issue.
Similar threads
