If you load unaltered factory bullets within manufacturers guidelines for powder you have not done anything that the factory doesn't do so I can't see how it could come back on you. I would be more worried if I was using something like CorBon +P ammo which is definately designed to be more lethal and faster than "normal" factory ammo used by most law enforcement agencies, though it would also be the best ammo to have in a life or death situation.
Factory Vs. Reloads for Personal Defense
- Thread starter Violator22
- Start date
Big JD-From the hills
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Saskatchewan.
My thought is that if your handload does go through, your probably even more liable if that bullet hurts someone else? Its not the most econimical/practical for us to do the balistic gelitan, live pig, human cadaver ect testing. I wouldn't hesitate to use most of the big name jhp rounds, favorites are federal hdrashock and speer GDHP in .40s&w.
But I don't disagree that you can handload ammo that is more reliable, accurate, and whatnot than some factory rounds. Some bullets are not availble to reload that I know of(like hdrashock?)
But I don't disagree that you can handload ammo that is more reliable, accurate, and whatnot than some factory rounds. Some bullets are not availble to reload that I know of(like hdrashock?)
Last edited:
Just tossin' in my 2 cents on the issue.
An Instructor I had in college was asked by the defense how hard he hit the defendant while he was trying to arrest him and the defendant was actively resisting. My instructor promptly replied, "as hard as I possibly could".
He explained to us that if you use force you are to only use it because it's justified. If you suggest anything to the contrary with the defense / prosecutor you are just putting yourself on your heals and will be playing the defensive for all of your actions rather then getting the judge or jury (as the case may be) on your side. Cops don't shoot people in the arm, not just because it's against the law to maim someone, it because the situation required immediate resolve and there was no other option. Never offer an alternative solution to a problem to a lawyer ... it's just putting blood in the water for the shark.
Deadly force is deadly force. If you point and pull your goal is to end the threat. If you do not feel that your 'factory rounds' can hit with the precision that your 'power loads' can then I feel it would be reasonable to articulate you load choice in that manner rather then in stopping power or looking for the bigger bang.
I mean the world is always in need of a few extra cowboys, but I really don't think being on the stand trying to explain your need for deadly force is the time or the place.
An Instructor I had in college was asked by the defense how hard he hit the defendant while he was trying to arrest him and the defendant was actively resisting. My instructor promptly replied, "as hard as I possibly could".
He explained to us that if you use force you are to only use it because it's justified. If you suggest anything to the contrary with the defense / prosecutor you are just putting yourself on your heals and will be playing the defensive for all of your actions rather then getting the judge or jury (as the case may be) on your side. Cops don't shoot people in the arm, not just because it's against the law to maim someone, it because the situation required immediate resolve and there was no other option. Never offer an alternative solution to a problem to a lawyer ... it's just putting blood in the water for the shark.
Deadly force is deadly force. If you point and pull your goal is to end the threat. If you do not feel that your 'factory rounds' can hit with the precision that your 'power loads' can then I feel it would be reasonable to articulate you load choice in that manner rather then in stopping power or looking for the bigger bang.
I mean the world is always in need of a few extra cowboys, but I really don't think being on the stand trying to explain your need for deadly force is the time or the place.
Last edited:
- Location
- Calgary, AB
No, you chose a laser hoping it would deter the assailant as he saw a red dot on his chest. That is another intermediary step before lethal force. Besides, you won't even use your sights in a lethal threat encounter which nullifies the worry of adjusting your sights for factory or handloads. Most every encounter, the shooter will admit that he never even used his sights, although he won't say any of that to the authorities.Violator22 said:
Last edited:
- Location
- Calgary, AB
The theater has changed recently.
Something relatively new has evolved on this. We used to have a criminal trial (and DA's and cops would ask about custom loads). If you were found not guilty of criminal charges, then the civil trial would come anyway, by the family of poor johnny scumbag who you dispatched to the other side of the sod. You see, he was just turning his life around.
Over the last year, many states have passed legislation to the effect that if you are cleared criminally, a civil action cannot be brought. Civil trials are where more of the "evil handload" crap has been dealt and that is somewhat mitigated now.
Notwithstanding, the word on the street is still factory, nothing funky for the DA or cops to ask about.
gushulak said:
Something relatively new has evolved on this. We used to have a criminal trial (and DA's and cops would ask about custom loads). If you were found not guilty of criminal charges, then the civil trial would come anyway, by the family of poor johnny scumbag who you dispatched to the other side of the sod. You see, he was just turning his life around.
Over the last year, many states have passed legislation to the effect that if you are cleared criminally, a civil action cannot be brought. Civil trials are where more of the "evil handload" crap has been dealt and that is somewhat mitigated now. Notwithstanding, the word on the street is still factory, nothing funky for the DA or cops to ask about.
- Location
- Calgary, AB
Uh yea, and the answer would be. Well, I was concerned about personal protection so I asked the experts (Your own law enforcement) what they load. They load this so I thought it would be the right choice. I don't imagine you are suggesting they load it because they would much rather kill eveyone they shot instead of just incapacitating them, are you? If so, please explain to me the proper incapacitation technique for target ammo, that won't kill the assailant? This is dumb.joe-nwt said:Lawyerease: "So Mr. Canadian gunowner, please tell the courts why you felt you had to buy "man-stopper ammunition" that has beeen proven by factory testing to be more efficient at killing instead of using some of the less lethal "target ammunition" that was found on your premises at the time of your arrest? How long have you been planning on killing someone in self defense rather than incapacitating them?
OK, so I'm not actually a lawyer.......
- Location
- Calgary, AB
The reason it will come back is because they won't believe you. At least, any group of soccare moms in a jury and a good DA will sneer at your logical and balanced discertation that you loaded everything just right or even less powerful than factory. The DA will determine his course of action based on crime lab analyses of your stuff and report any anomalies. The DA will have a hey day. Remember his job is to discredit you anyway he can. Why go there?Silverback said:
That aside, you can and maybe be OK in some states, Do what you want.
Last edited:
- Location
- Colorado Springs, CO
safeguardguy, your right, I am Amry trained so i point and shoot for the center mass. I don't use lasers as they are a crutch. and yes, I will not shoot to wound bigger chance of getting sued. The goblin will not get up when I am finished. Les
- Location
- Calgary, AB
Sorry for being so irate Joe. I need to go to the range.
There is one universally cool rebut on any question about a gun or ammo being "lethal" or "more lethal" that others.
"A firearm is an effective tool. In a defensive encounter it is presented to stop the violent assault, not to kill. The assailants aggression, or surrender, determines the rest."
There is one universally cool rebut on any question about a gun or ammo being "lethal" or "more lethal" that others.
"A firearm is an effective tool. In a defensive encounter it is presented to stop the violent assault, not to kill. The assailants aggression, or surrender, determines the rest."
- Location
- Colorado Springs, CO
This is where you are incorrect, you do not want to incapacitate or wound, you must kill the assailant, see, here the predators tend to get more rights if they live than if they were dead. Case in point, Burglar climbing on a Overhead light window falls into the kitchen onto a butcher block full of knives. Said burglar survives, and sues home owner for a large amount of money for damages and wins. This happened in either Cleveland or Cinicinatti. I got news for you, they will not be talking upon entry of my house or threating my family. But that is me, I will do what it takes, I was not a LEO, I was Infantry, not shoot to wond in my playbook. Les
- Location
- Calgary, AB
You understand. One has to shoot for high completion. If you don't shoot to efficiently and surely defeat the threat, you might as well just shoot yourself. If the assailant dies as a result of his poor choice to engage you, that is on him.Violator22 said:
- Location
- Colorado Springs, CO
Center mass usually means a Chest shot, very few can survive a center shot with 45 ACP, now if I am using something smaller yes, I use the finger point method of aim. Gets the job done. I do understand what you are saying, most people don't fire in tense situations and really don't know how they will react. You have to train yourself to act on action. Les
I don't know how things are in the US but in Canada the police are trainned to engage until the threat has stopped. For any use of force s25 of the Canadian Criminal Code will be there for any person who exercises justified deadly force when in fear of one's own life is in Danger.
That said, s26 also holds anyone who can not justify that use of force criminally responsible.
Google the 'Use of Force Model', that is a court defendable standard that police are held to when using force. If a civi follows those pracitices it would be very hard for a jury of their peers to find them liable for their actions.
Now with out Anti-Pistol government here you wouldn't surprise me if you get changed for 'unsafe storage of a firearm' if you were to use a pistol for home defence and the end result involved the loss of life.
That said, s26 also holds anyone who can not justify that use of force criminally responsible.
Google the 'Use of Force Model', that is a court defendable standard that police are held to when using force. If a civi follows those pracitices it would be very hard for a jury of their peers to find them liable for their actions.
Now with out Anti-Pistol government here you wouldn't surprise me if you get changed for 'unsafe storage of a firearm' if you were to use a pistol for home defence and the end result involved the loss of life.
Cocked&Locked
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- S. Ontario
Violator22 said:
Actually, it's effectivness is very little more then that of a 9mm, and with a good hollow point, the 9 is better. But every one has anacdotal evidence to support thier bias
, there is a reason most agencies use .40 and 9, easier to shoot, better results.....(let the S#$Tstorm begin
)
- Location
- Colorado Springs, CO
I'll give you the .40 cal,but 9mm Blows Dog, too many incidents of goblins not going down, the 40 doesn't have that problem. That high velocity 9mm round tends to burn up its energy upon first impact, the 40 and 45 keep going, basically from bullet weight. Les
- Location
- Calgary, AB
Ahhh! now we enter the mysterious world of ballistics.
Seriously though, I have seen 9 bounce off windsheild and shot a dog through with a double tap and he ran around angry for quite a while. I think that is why God invented the 45 acp. OK, Browning invented it and I admit I am a 45 fanatic. There are so many factors to consider. I really do stay with 40 or 45 for carry. When you enter the world of terminal ballistics there seems to be a recurring theme that the larger the wound channel diameter, the higher the completion rate. But then you have the anomaly of shot placement. For example a Los Angeles police officer shot 5 times with a 357 magnum revolver and chased the assailant over a block and took him down. One of the largest grizzly taken down in Alaska was with a 22 through the eye. Wow! THe nine mil is an impressive calibre for its size but really the smallest calibre I would even consider for personal protection. In agreeance with Violator; Street proof suggests the 9 may not be a good choice.
Seriously though, I have seen 9 bounce off windsheild and shot a dog through with a double tap and he ran around angry for quite a while.
I think that is why God invented the 45 acp. OK, Browning invented it and I admit I am a 45 fanatic. There are so many factors to consider. I really do stay with 40 or 45 for carry. When you enter the world of terminal ballistics there seems to be a recurring theme that the larger the wound channel diameter, the higher the completion rate. But then you have the anomaly of shot placement. For example a Los Angeles police officer shot 5 times with a 357 magnum revolver and chased the assailant over a block and took him down. One of the largest grizzly taken down in Alaska was with a 22 through the eye. Wow! THe nine mil is an impressive calibre for its size but really the smallest calibre I would even consider for personal protection. In agreeance with Violator; Street proof suggests the 9 may not be a good choice.- Location
- Calgary, AB
I agree wholeheartedly, but in legal circles you downplay the "I shot to kill him and I'm glad I didViolator22 said:
" and go with the "I shot to stop the threat. It is a tradgedy that the assailant died because of his poor choice to engage an armed victim. "The robber event you are talking about happened in California (land of fruits and nuts - go figure). We are on the same page. Its just that one must be careful who you say what to.
Last edited:
- Location
- Colorado Springs, CO
I see you have read Alaskan Bear tales too, 22 LR followed up with a Story of a Griz taking 458 Win Mag and still doing some damage. I have to admit, I am in the bigger is better camp when it comes to side-arms. Nothing smaller than 357 in my house. My hunting handgun is a SRH in 454 Casull, which is only out classed inperformance by the 500 S&W. Les
