- Location
- Southeastern Michigan
JohnnyMac said:
JohnnyMac, are you sure you would put a handgun as pretty as that through the rigors of carry? Regards, Richard
CCW Recommendations. Thinking HK Tactical Compact in .45
- Thread starter Riflman
- Start date
JohnnyMac, are you sure you would put a handgun as pretty as that through the rigors of carry? Regards, Richard
Violator22 said:
Violator22,
Without putting words in JohnC's mouth, I don't think he was referring to anyone being prosecuted for using handloads. I believe what he was referring to is various lawyer's tricks, such as using the use of handloads to make one into some monster " Mr. X wasn't satisfied with simple factory ammunition, no, he had to manufacture his own even more deadly, destructive, cop-killer whiz-bang ammo just so he could do even more henious harm to my client".
I don't recall which issue it was, but within the past two years I've read one of Mas Ayoob's articles in Combat Handguns in which he concentrated on the subject of what ammo to use and what not to use, and he cited several U.S. cases in which handloaded ammo was made to be one of the central themes of what should have been a open and close case. He does mention a time or two where the good guy's lawyer wasn't up to the challenge, and the handloaded focus, among other things, contributed to the good guy actually being convicted. Always get a good lawyer, yes, but for the price of a box of carry ammo, I personally wouldn't give the ambulance chasers any more "ammo" with wich to make my life more difficult.
It's pretty hard for a sleazy lawyer to argue that you're irrisponsible when you're using the same ammunition that the police use in that very jurisdiction.
Just my $.02
- Location
- Colorado Springs, CO
True, but most, I stress most of the states that have a CCW have a defenders right clause that states the defender can't be prosocuted in a criminal court. Civil court could be a real bear thought. I have seen penetration tests with the LEO ammo and I don't like the idea of full penetration, I want that big chunk of lead to go in and stay there as I have kids and I do not want to injure any innocent bystanders. But yes, Ayoob has written some very good stuff on this. Les
JohnC
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Thanks Jaycee you've covered the points I was going to address (Brlilliant minds think alike I guess ) Besides passing on one of the eecommendations in Safeguardguys Utah CCW course, I had read more or less the same material in some of Ayoob's writings. As someone said, if you successfully defend yourself using CCW you will go from a fight for your life to the fight of your life with sleazeball lawyers, etc who will try every trick in the book to make it look like to whole thing was your fault, you planned for it, etc....
) Besides passing on one of the eecommendations in Safeguardguys Utah CCW course, I had read more or less the same material in some of Ayoob's writings. As someone said, if you successfully defend yourself using CCW you will go from a fight for your life to the fight of your life with sleazeball lawyers, etc who will try every trick in the book to make it look like to whole thing was your fault, you planned for it, etc....Violator22 said:
Unless the prosecutor believes/wants to make a case that you went too far and the shooting was unjustified. Then it is manslaughter/murder.
Is anyone willing to bet all of their worldly possessions on it? Because even if they are right, it could cost them everything in legal fees to prove it.
Remember, if anyone ever needs to defend themselves by discharging their firearm, saving of their life is only the FIRST step in the POST incident process. They WILL be scrutinized. (Attitudes within the jurisdiction will have a major bearing on how far the scrutiny goes.)
Last edited:
Richard,
I guess since I'm not allowed to carry it's easier said than done. To be honest though I kind of classify my guns into work guns or play guns. The work guns I need to accept the fact that they're going to get banged up. They get carried in the bush, while the play guns are for play (and I guess a little for show).
ex.
Work guns - Glock 20, S&W 629, marlin guide gun etc.
Play guns - Anaconda, Python, Valtro etc.
And I will admit I freaked out when I got my first nick on my Anaconda. I wouldn't carry a .45 in the bush so the CGP still falls under the category for play. If I could carry concealed I might be able to put it into the work category but I guess I can't say for sure.
I guess since I'm not allowed to carry it's easier said than done. To be honest though I kind of classify my guns into work guns or play guns. The work guns I need to accept the fact that they're going to get banged up. They get carried in the bush, while the play guns are for play (and I guess a little for show).
ex.
Work guns - Glock 20, S&W 629, marlin guide gun etc.
Play guns - Anaconda, Python, Valtro etc.
And I will admit I freaked out when I got my first nick on my Anaconda. I wouldn't carry a .45 in the bush so the CGP still falls under the category for play. If I could carry concealed I might be able to put it into the work category but I guess I can't say for sure.
I agree with everything Jaycee has said in this thread. Good insight in my opinion, and a solid line of thinking.
In regards to firearm choice, go with what works for you. I am a relatively slim guy (5'10" 165lbs) and can and have ccw'd full size sigs (220, 226), full size glocks, full size 1911's. Holster selection and clothing selection play a huge factor in CCW. Typically I carry a G26 though.
In regards to safeties/decockers. It is personal choice. Training can overcome most if not all of the "problems" that some associate with safeties/decockers. Personally I prefer point and fire for CCW, but you have to carry what you are comfortable and can shoot with, and also need to be able to manipulate your firearm so you can use it effectively.
I carry a spare mag (or two) and a surefire E2e. I carry my mags in pouches on my non-dominant side. This is for ease of access,I really don't want to be fumbling around in my pocket looking for mags, and come out with a handful of change, lint, chewing gum, etc. If I lose the capability to use one of my arms in a conflict (yes, people do get shot in gun fights, and it's not always the bad guy) I prefer to have open top mag pouches, as it makes my life easier to facilitate one hand reloads.
This is my personal preference and stance on the issue, and I believe it is a solid one. I am not over-the-top-Rambo, but I am sensible about what can happen. I can be shot and lose abilities of one of my arms (or god forbid both). If I am ever forced to shoot someone, it will probably happen in low/no-light scenario. My magazines can malfunction, my gun can malfunction. I have advanced and instructor level training from reputable shooting schools and acadamies, because I owe it to myself to be the best that I can be if I am going to defend my life. I carry equipment that I know is reliable, and I carry what I think is adequate equipment to help overcome Murphy.
As an offnote to Safeguardguy: James what school/academy is teaching shooting using 5 rounds in a gun? I have HUGE problems with that and was wondering what line of thinking they have when they teach that? (Besides stopping spray and pray). All the instruction I have had is "carry what you would carry in the real world." I think that limiting people to 5 rounds in a mag is a silly thing to do, as it teaches bad techniques and muscle memory. I can just see some guy getting into the fight of his life against multiple opponents (as it usually is in real life) and after firing 5 rounds he dumps his mag (with 3-12 rounds still in it) and starts reloading. Thinking about that sends a shiver up my spine, and makes me think that to an extent the instructor is doing a dis-service to the students. Just my two cents, your mileage may vary.
In regards to firearm choice, go with what works for you. I am a relatively slim guy (5'10" 165lbs) and can and have ccw'd full size sigs (220, 226), full size glocks, full size 1911's. Holster selection and clothing selection play a huge factor in CCW. Typically I carry a G26 though.
In regards to safeties/decockers. It is personal choice. Training can overcome most if not all of the "problems" that some associate with safeties/decockers. Personally I prefer point and fire for CCW, but you have to carry what you are comfortable and can shoot with, and also need to be able to manipulate your firearm so you can use it effectively.
I carry a spare mag (or two) and a surefire E2e. I carry my mags in pouches on my non-dominant side. This is for ease of access,I really don't want to be fumbling around in my pocket looking for mags, and come out with a handful of change, lint, chewing gum, etc. If I lose the capability to use one of my arms in a conflict (yes, people do get shot in gun fights, and it's not always the bad guy) I prefer to have open top mag pouches, as it makes my life easier to facilitate one hand reloads.
This is my personal preference and stance on the issue, and I believe it is a solid one. I am not over-the-top-Rambo, but I am sensible about what can happen. I can be shot and lose abilities of one of my arms (or god forbid both). If I am ever forced to shoot someone, it will probably happen in low/no-light scenario. My magazines can malfunction, my gun can malfunction. I have advanced and instructor level training from reputable shooting schools and acadamies, because I owe it to myself to be the best that I can be if I am going to defend my life. I carry equipment that I know is reliable, and I carry what I think is adequate equipment to help overcome Murphy.
As an offnote to Safeguardguy: James what school/academy is teaching shooting using 5 rounds in a gun? I have HUGE problems with that and was wondering what line of thinking they have when they teach that? (Besides stopping spray and pray). All the instruction I have had is "carry what you would carry in the real world." I think that limiting people to 5 rounds in a mag is a silly thing to do, as it teaches bad techniques and muscle memory. I can just see some guy getting into the fight of his life against multiple opponents (as it usually is in real life) and after firing 5 rounds he dumps his mag (with 3-12 rounds still in it) and starts reloading. Thinking about that sends a shiver up my spine, and makes me think that to an extent the instructor is doing a dis-service to the students. Just my two cents, your mileage may vary.
- Location
- Colorado Springs, CO
Johnny Mac, if only she was one of the above, but my wife lives with the wallpapers of the woman on my computer. Very understanding, but she is a Chemical officer in the Army, so occasionally I have to tread lightly as she knows how to mix up some really nasty concotions. Les
Les
I thought Ayoob had pretty much been discredited as a drunk, whose only experience being in danger was as a brief stint as a chief of police in a no name town was getting in a traffic accident. I also heard that when he wins shooting events he regularily only enters ones where the top guys dont shoot.
Ill stick with the decocker and safety on my USP. My other choices for carry would be a 226 or a P7. I think if the split second required to manipulate a safety isnt available, you wont have time to draw anyways. But its all preference, carry what you like and what your comfortable with. I bet most people would shoot a full size pistol better than a compact anyways. Not that compacts are available up here without being prohibs.
I think it would depend on where I was going and what I was wearing. LIght clothes or a suit, a pistol with no extra mag would be fine. Hiking in the woods? Pistol extra mags and maybe even the AR.
BTW, what is everybody holsters preference of choice? Belt slide? IWB? Shoulder holster? I have read that some pocket holsters and other stuff are banned in some areas.
Ill stick with the decocker and safety on my USP. My other choices for carry would be a 226 or a P7. I think if the split second required to manipulate a safety isnt available, you wont have time to draw anyways. But its all preference, carry what you like and what your comfortable with. I bet most people would shoot a full size pistol better than a compact anyways. Not that compacts are available up here without being prohibs.
I think it would depend on where I was going and what I was wearing. LIght clothes or a suit, a pistol with no extra mag would be fine. Hiking in the woods? Pistol extra mags and maybe even the AR.
BTW, what is everybody holsters preference of choice? Belt slide? IWB? Shoulder holster? I have read that some pocket holsters and other stuff are banned in some areas.
Last edited:
- Location
- Calgary, AB
No challenge or contention taken. There are almost no right or wrong answers on this one. All good ideas. Flashlight great idea. Extra mag, nothing wrong with it - personal choice. Yes guns do fail, murphy etc., et al. But you don't carry a back up gun??? I will bet my life on my primary being reliable. LEO does it all the time. As far as fighting my way back to the extra mag (in the remote to obscure chance that I ever have too), my wife is armed too and we have our personal drills and priorities already worked out. Manual safety - I agree with others here who know that manual safety gives greater safety and nobody will ever prove that they can draw and fire faster without one (unless their thumb is cut off in which case they can't draw well anyway). Release of the safety is an integral part of draw and present on a firearm with the safety in the right place. That said, again, personal preference; carry what you want. Did you know that in some states the firearm is only considered safe if it is two mechanical steps away from firing. Hmmmm. So a manual safety helps you avoid some cop or overzealous pin head from trying to charge you with unsafe firearm because they desperately want to charge you with something. Hmmm... I remember a case in Indiana where a guy was up on charges because the DA had an agenda. The sleazy lawyer made a big deal in court about the tactical/swat kill crazy/ capability of the glock firearm. He pointed out that is was not like common safe firearms in that it could go to lethality quicker with no extra effort or careful consideration. What a moron. OK, now sombody can go ahead and opinionate.jaycee said:
- Location
- Calgary, AB
In those drills and in branching video sim we were scored down for using more than 5 rounds for a specific drill. We could use more, and if we had to we did, but shouldn't have to. This is to teach people not to "spray and pray" in panic; to not aim, or because of a false sense of having lots of rounds available. We don't want extra bullets going into other peoples bodies unintended. Check out the US air marshall training drills and there are many others. It is not a muscle memory or drop the clip and reload thing.cp220 said:
Last edited:
10-4. I was thinking that the instructor was telling people to only load five rounds into a mag, and then doing live fire drills like that. Now it makes a bunch more sense to me, thanks for clarifying.
On a course a while ago they set up some of the air marshall qualification courses of fire. Certainly more challenging than many others I've seen.
USP: I've also heard bad things about Ayoob (anyone hear about the racoon in the tree at the second chance shoot a couple years ago?). However that being said, I've never met the guy, but like all other things I take what I hear with a grain of salt. I also don't take seriously a lot of content that gets printed in gun rags by "experts" because i think a bunch of that is BS as well.
On a course a while ago they set up some of the air marshall qualification courses of fire. Certainly more challenging than many others I've seen.
USP: I've also heard bad things about Ayoob (anyone hear about the racoon in the tree at the second chance shoot a couple years ago?). However that being said, I've never met the guy, but like all other things I take what I hear with a grain of salt. I also don't take seriously a lot of content that gets printed in gun rags by "experts" because i think a bunch of that is BS as well.
USP said:
I wouldn't put too much stock in claims such as these - I'd be more interested in who's making the claims. So far I've heard pretty much the same things about Jeff Cooper and Chuck Taylor, too. Do I believe them? No, I'll wait until I see it for myself.
It's pretty hard to discredit Ayoob's contributions to officer safety, CCW, journalism and firearms training - few have done more.
jaycee said:
Actually, I have taken handgun training from Chuck Taylor ...... what a chest thumping, dinosaur, has been!!!!
And I base my opinion on the fact that I received much better, professional, and up to date training from the likes of Sigarms Academy (cp220 and I were both on the same courses) and the 2003 Law Enforcement Training Camp put on by Action Target in Provo, Utah.
As for Ayoob, I hope to attend LFI in the future.....
- Location
- Calgary, AB
I know for fact that Masaad was involved in a defensive shooting when he was a police officer. He prevailed, of course. He has also been called as an expert witness many times. Yes, he drinks. Don't know about being a drunk though. I highly doubt it.
It still comes down to "Give examples of where this has happened". Short answer: it doesn't.jaycee said:
Massad Ayoob gets called on this all the time. Here's a guy that makes his living off CCW for the most part, and he can come up with exactly two examples over 30 years or so of his life's work being an expert on CCW. Ayoob brought them up some time ago on another firearms board when somebody questioned this - yet again. He was a bit hot under the collar as well, but the bottom line is that neither of the two instances Ayoob could come up with had somebody ending up in court because of "lawyer's tricks" involving the handloads they were using. The handloads became a related issue, but weren't the reason the shooters were in court to begin with. Incidentally, the two instances involved weren't even close to being squeaky clean defensive shootings to begin with.
In short, this is urban legend.
While down in Utah, I met Clark Aposhian and his sidekick Mitch Vilos and had several conversations with them. Clark Aposhian sits on the board who reviews CCW licenses and chairs the Utah Instructors Network; Mitch Vilos is a pitbull 2nd Amendment attorney who specializes in gun law and CCW cases in particular (and who has authored books on firearms use and self defense). I think it is fair to suggest that both of these people have a knowledge of firearms use in self defense which is well above the norm.
I don't recall all the specifics when this urban legend came up in the class I sat in on - which was a private one taught for Utah State assemblymen, congressmen, and senators, incidentally, so there were a few lawyers present.
But the bottom line was that this was a bogus concern. Mitch Vilas said any half competent defense lawyer can just as equally make it look more in favour of the accused than for the state; I am inclined to believe him. When he says he tracks these cases pretty closely as part of his practice and has never heard of such a thing, again I'm inclined to believe him.
When a lawyer who, like Vilas makes his living defending these cases, says Vilas is wrong, and this does happen and innocent people do go to jail, then I might pay some attention. Other than that, I tend to remind myself that writers who make part of their living writing monthly articles need to keep coming up with new and hopefully provocative stuff.
I didn't read that. But I mentioned above, online a few months ago the best he could come up with was two. He may be saying that handloads were central to the issue, but reading the one which involved his acquaintance, it was pretty obvious that the main issue was he had either a negligent discharge or shouldn't have pulled the trigger in the first place - and he was a cop. I didn't see it as a handload issue myself.
To put it another way, if only .5% of defensive uses of firearms in the US actually result in shots fired, you're still looking at about 12,500 instances each year. By the time you exclude the ones that were just warning shots, everybody missed, etc, you're still going to have around 500 or so people each year that shot their assailant with handloads. So... given the media's love of covering all the dirt... where's all the news stories quoting a District Attorney charging that the citizen was a bad guy for carrying evil handloads?
I don't see them anywhere. Not in the news media, and certainly not from the NRA. It just isn't happening. Is there some small chance it could happen? Yes, but there is also a small chance you could be disarmed and have your handgun used against you. Is the risk of that going to make you stop carrying?
Why is it that OUR lawyer is always a "good lawyer", and the opposing lawyers are always "ambulance chasers" or "sleazy"? Same mentality that has all police as being fat doughnut snappers or what?
Most people probably are better off with factory ammunition for the simple reason that something like Double Tap's ammunition is very hard to beat while handloading. However, there are also good reasons for people who know what they are doing at the reloading bench to consider the option of using handloads.
There are probably more arguments against using handloads for self defense than there are to be made favouring handloads for self defense - but claims of being sewerpiped by one of them nasty ol' lawyers because you were using handloads isn't one of them. I personally use my handloads when I carry (which is always when I am down here, which is a good amount of the time); I feel neither at a disadvantage nor threatened by legal complications by doing so. However, if I didn't want to shoot so much with my carry guns, I would simply buy Double Tap ammunition, sight that in, and call it all good.
- Location
- Calgary, AB
Rick, I understand your thought on this although your stats are kind of "wingin it". I wonder; If you are in a court case where your defensive shoot is being judged and it is not a clear cut deal. This would mean that you risk going to prision and any small thing may swing the balance. SO, the DA paints a picture that your are a gun fanatic who personally manufactured "custom hot loads", he proceeds to question the accuracy of those "custom hot loads" over factory ammo because one of your shots went astray and hit someone else. Further he denigrates your credibility as a reloader because you learned it from you grandpa or were self taught. Will that help you to not go to jail? This is the same reason why we don't load any "exotic factory ammo". We don't want to risk it, if we are ever in a legal battle for our life.
I do recall this tactic in court in California (land of fruits and nuts) and will see if I can dig it up. I recall another case in Colorado where the DA spun the "exotic ammo" phrase many times. That is what lawyer do. Anything to win.
Second, knowing Clark Aposhian, I ask you, or him; "what does he load? I know the answer. Its not that you can't. Its not that it is wrong. It is that you are taking a larger chance; remember Murphy.
I do recall this tactic in court in California (land of fruits and nuts) and will see if I can dig it up. I recall another case in Colorado where the DA spun the "exotic ammo" phrase many times. That is what lawyer do. Anything to win.
Second, knowing Clark Aposhian, I ask you, or him; "what does he load? I know the answer. Its not that you can't. Its not that it is wrong. It is that you are taking a larger chance; remember Murphy.
My press is a dillon 650 with automatic everything and buzzers galor. I have still had a couple of instances where a case had bulged or the gun didn't go bang. It's frustrating enough to have that in a competition let alone when fighting for you life. Some people check each round, and next time I am in a serious competition I will do the same. I can see the advantage for factory ammo, but I would want to shoot the same ammo all the time. Intersting thought as when I get my CCW, I guess I should use factory; however, I spent a TON of money on bada$$ equipment to relaod and can afford to shoot much MUCH more with reloads. Hmmm.
They are - because I really have no idea how to break out the numbers as to how many people are actually shot defensively each year, much less how many are shot with handloads. If somebody thinks the number I suggested is unreasonable, then lets hear what they would suggest as more accurate. I think it is reasonable to say that around 500 people are shot each year with handloads, and it doesn't seem to be an issue we read about in either the news or the NRA publications.safeguardguy said:
Okay, let's play in the world of this hardly ever happens, but "what ifs"...
In rebuttal I can point out that both the pistols I carry are more accurate with my reloads than Double Tap or CorBon, and I believe a more accurate load meant less chance of a round going astray. I can point out that they have LESS velocity, so they are not "hot loads". I can point out that my firearms are primarily for recreational use, and by carrying my handloads that print exactly to the firearm's point of aim, rather than commercial stuff that has a different point of impact, I am once again exercising due diligence in doing everything I can to ensure bullets go exactly where the sights are aligned.
And so on... as Mitch Vilas points out, if you have a competent attorney, if a DA wants to go in this direction, your attorney can just as quickly turn this in your favour.
I'm not saying this CAN'T happen, but again, this is about reasonable risk management, not every conceivable "what if". When you take into account the chance you'll ever actually have to shoot, the chance it will be questionable enough that the State will seriously examine it, the chance you run into a rabidly anti-gun DA, the chance handloads will become a significant issue in the shoot, etc... well, I think I have a better chance of winning the Powerball lottery. If I'm that concerned about that small degree of risk, I'd conclude that seeing as how Montana and Idaho where I hang out are so relatively crime free anyways, maybe I will just be better off to eliminate the chance of a bad shoot or wounding a bystander and not CCW to begin with.
On the basis of what? I have reloading logbooks going back nearly 40 years. I have loaded literally millions of rounds. I have won assorted championships and events using that ammunition in various firearms. I can discuss just about any reloading topic he or any expert witness he cares to get brings forward. As far as that goes, I can probably get myself accredited as an expert witness in reloading myself.
It is fine to say you will just be denigrated - you do have the opportunity to rebut. You have to establish that the reloads WERE unsound/unsafe/whatever, not just blithly say it is. There are lots of skills that do not come out of schools and technical degrees - how many trials are you aware of where the DA has denigrated a person's credibility as a driver because their parents taught them instead of a driving school?
Again, anywhere a DA goes, a defense lawyer is sure as hell going to follow and exploit as well.
Realistic risk management.
I'm sure they do - it's what both sides pay them to do. You're also aware, I'm sure, that when lawyers get pissy and ignorant, they run a real risk of alienating a jury and/or the judge - and they know that as well.
Once again, I'm sure this occasionally happens, particularly in the whackier states - which I don't go to. But let's keep this in context - how OFTEN does it happen? As often as Glock handguns go KaBoom? No? So it's even rarer than Glock KaBooms, which are themselves pretty rare - but you don't see citizens or even police forces suddenly deciding they better not carry Glock's for personal defense because it might cost them their life, never mind "go to jail".
Realistic risk assessment
Clark carries factory. That's fine, and he knows his stuff. But Clark is not a lawyer. Mitch Vilas is, and Mitch is the legal authority of the two when it comes to firearms law, the one who has written books on firearms law and self defense. When Mitch said in that class for state elected legislators that handloads would not be an issue, and if brought up could be just as easily turned to the defense's favour as the states, Clark did not speak up and disagree with him.
Again, there are probably many more reasons in favour of carrying factory ammunition than there are for carrying handloads. But "the lawyers will use handloads to throw you in jail" just ain't one of them. It simply isn't happening, and the odd exception where a DA tries that tactic does not prove the rule.
My reasons for carrying handloads are quite simple. I can afford to shoot them in quantities that I cannot afford to shoot Double Tap or CorBon. That means I am a better shot, and that means what I shoot recreationally and what I carry for defense perform the same, I am familiar with them, and print where the sights point. I have more liability when I start cranking my sights back and forth all the time to make up for the differences in sight adjustment. I realize that in a shooting I may not even see/use the sights - but you can be the one to tell the DA you didn't even use the sights, I sure as hell won't. If I DO ever have to shoot and DO use the sights... they sure as hell will be adjusted to exact point of impact.
On the scale of all the risks we assume when we CCW, the "handloads" issue is about as far down the scale as you can get, and if I ever get that twitchy about it, I'll simply leave the pistol at home and voluntarily join everybody else in the victim lottery.
