Concealed Carry Ammo Question

[82ndShooter]

So, I've heard mixed thoughts on the following questions:

Is it illegal to use your own reloads for concealed carry? Is it mandatory that you carry the same type of ammo the LEO's use?

What is the correct answer for each question?

[Irving]

Not illegal at all. You can get different answers about whether it is advisable or not, depending on who you ask though.

[275RLTW]

No and No.

Many recommend using factory ammo based upon the premise that if each bullet has a lawyer attached to it, let the liability fall back to the big mfgs. In the end, it comes down to one question: does the ammunition work (accureate, reliable) for your gun? If factory ammo does not meet your requirements for accuracy, reliability, etc.. then shoot what does work, stop the threat, get yourself (or others) back home safely, and worry about the legal BS later.

[ChadAmberg]

Nope, perfectly legal according to this non-lawyer, in that there are no laws I've ever seen in a free state (not counting New Jersey) restricting what ammo you may carry. The internet lawyers come up with scenarios where you'd have "deadly bullets" but when asked for actual case citations, the crickets come out.
Now, remember you can be sued for anything of course, but under what scenario would a properly functioning handload be illegal when a normal self defense hollow point wouldn't? Can you really load a round to be so powerful it shoots through the bad guy and then an elementary school?
Nope, the only thing that really matters is "stopping power" performance. Don't use a wadcutter in the winter unless you want to see bullets bounce off someone's coat.

[TFOGGER]

The way is has been explained to me, is that reloading defense ammo, while not in the least illegal (in Colorado), is not the best idea. While the spectre of having a prosecuting attorney spouting off about your home brewed super duper extra lethal killer special bullets to a jury is remote, it would be an unnecessary obstacle in your legal defense, given the effectiveness of available commercial loads. My other concern would be reliability, particularly in wet or other adverse conditions and over the passage of time. Many loads marketed as defensive ammo feature sealed primers, nickel cases, and special crimps to prevent degradation, which is not the case with most reloaded ammo. Additionally, commercial ammo has thousands of rounds of testing under varied conditions, against different targets, to ensure optimum performance, which is is beyond the budget and time constraints of most reloaders.

[Byte Stryke]

Don't use a wadcutter in the winter unless you want to see bullets bounce off someone's coat.



Why would someone have a coat over their face?
[ROFL1]

[Bailey Guns]

Nope, perfectly legal according to this non-lawyer, in that there are no laws I've ever seen in a free state (not counting New Jersey) restricting what ammo you may carry. The internet lawyers come up with scenarios where you'd have "deadly bullets" but when asked for actual case citations, the crickets come out.
Now, remember you can be sued for anything of course, but under what scenario would a properly functioning handload be illegal when a normal self defense hollow point wouldn't? Can you really load a round to be so powerful it shoots through the bad guy and then an elementary school?
Nope, the only thing that really matters is "stopping power" performance. Don't use a wadcutter in the winter unless you want to see bullets bounce off someone's coat.

I'd adamantly disagree with most of this statement...with the exception of your statement that handloads are legal.

Personally, I always recommend factory loaded ammunition. Handloads provide an opportunity for more scrutiny on the shooter using them and the potential for having to answer lots and lots of questions in a civil and/or criminal trial that could easily be avoided by using factory ammo. Not only that, handloads generally don't provide much in terms of performance that can't be had by factory loads. Factory loaded ammunition has a long history of QC standards, manufacturing tolerances, testing, expert research, etc...that you won't get with handloads.

Few gun manufacturers will warranty their products if handloads are used in them.

Frankly, I don't see it as an issue. But others might...others that might be able to severely affect your future. I'll stick to factory loads.

Now...you were saying about crickets???

From Massad Ayoob on THR:


Cases Where Handloads Caused Problems in Court

As promised, here are the sources for records for any who feel a need to confirm the cases I have referenced previously where handloaded ammunition caused problems for people in the aftermath of shootings.

As I have noted in this thread earlier, and as the attorneys who have responded to this matter have confirmed, local trials and results are not usually available on-line. However, in each case, I have included the location where the physical records of the trials are archived.

NH v. Kennedy

James Kennedy, a sergeant on the Hampton, NH police force, pursued a drunk driver whose reckless operation of the vehicle had forced other motorists off the road. The suspect ended up in a ditch, stalled and trying to get underway again. Advised by radio that responding backup officers were still a distance away, and fearing that the man would get back on the road and kill himself and others, Kennedy approached the vehicle. At the driver’s door, the suspect grabbed Kennedy’s Colt .45 auto and pulled it towards himself. It discharged in his face, causing massive injury.

The reload in the gun was a 200 grain Speer JHP, loaded to duplicate the 1000 fps from a 5” barrel then advertised by Speer for the same bullet in loaded cartridge configuration.

This was the first case where I saw the argument, “Why wasn’t regular ammunition deadly enough for you,” used by opposing counsel. They charged Kennedy with aggravated assault. They made a large issue out of his use of handloads, suggesting that they were indicative of a reckless man obsessed with causing maximum damage.

Defense counsel hired the expert I suggested, Jim Cirillo, who did a splendid job of demolishing that argument and other bogus arguments against Kennedy at trial, and Kennedy was acquitted.

This case dates back to the late 1970s. The local courts tell me that the case documentation will be on file at Rockingham County Superior Court, PO Box 1258, Kingston, NH 03843. File search time is billed at $25 per hour for cases such as this that date back prior to 1988.

NJ V. Bias

This is the classic case of gunshot residue (GSR) evidence being complicated by the use of handloaded ammunition, resulting in a case being misinterpreted in a tragic and unjust way. On the night of 2/26/89, Danny Bias entered the master bedroom of his home to find his wife Lise holding the family home defense revolver, a 6” S&W 686, to her head. He told police that knowing that she had a history of suicidal ideation, he attempted to grab the gun, which discharged, killing her. The gun was loaded with four handloaded lead SWC cartridges headstamped Federal .38 Special +P.

Autopsy showed no GSR. The medical examiner determined that Lise Bias had a reach of 30”, and the NJSP Crime Lab in Trenton determined that the gun in question would deposit GSR to a distance of 50” or more with either factory Federal 158 grain SWC +P .38 Special, or handloads taken from his home under warrant for testing after Danny told them about the reloads. However, the reloads that were taken and tested had Remington-Peters headstamps on the casings and were obviously not from the same batch.

Danny had loaded 50 rounds into the Federal cases of 2.3, 2.6, and 2.9 grains of Bullseye, with Winchester primers, under an unusually light 115 grain SWC that he had cast himself, seeking a very light load that his recoil sensitive wife could handle. The gun had been loaded at random from that box of 50 and there was no way of knowing which of the three recipes was in the chamber from which the fatal bullet was launched.

We duplicated that load, and determined that with all of them and particularly the 2.3 grain load, GSR distribution was so light that it could not be reliably gathered or recovered, from distances as short as 24”. Unfortunately, the remaining rounds in the gun could not be disassembled for testing as they were the property of the court, and there is no forensic artifact that can determine the exact powder charge that was fired from a given spent cartridge.

According to an attorney who represented him later, police originally believed the death to be a suicide. However, the forensic evidence testing indicated that was not possible, and it was listed as suspicious death. Based largely on the GSR evidence, as they perceived it, the Warren County prosecutor’s office presented the case to the grand jury, which indicted Danny Bias for Murder in the First Degree in the death of his wife.

Attorney John Lanza represented Danny very effectively at his first trial, which ended in a hung jury. Legal fees exceeded $100,000, bankrupting Danny; Attorney Lanza, who believed then and now in his client’s innocence, swallowed some $90,000 worth of legal work for which he was never paid.

For his second trial, Bias was assigned attorney Elisabeth Smith by the Public Defender’s office. Challenging the quality of evidence collection, she was able to weaken the prosecution’s allegation that the GSR factor equaled murder, but because the GSR issue was so muddled by the handloaded ammo factor, she could not present concrete evidence that the circumstances were consistent with suicide, and the second trial ended with a hung jury in 1992. At this point, the prosecution having twice failed to convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt, the judge threw out the murder charge.

It was after this that I personally lost track of the case. However, I’ve learned this past week that the case of NJ v. Daniel Bias was tried a third time in the mid-1990s, resulting in his being acquitted of Aggravated Manslaughter but convicted of Reckless Manslaughter. The appellate division of the Public Defender’s office handled his post-conviction relief and won him a fourth trial. The fourth trial, more than a decade after the shooting, ended with Danny Bias again convicted of Reckless Manslaughter. By now, the state had changed its theory and was suggesting that Danny had pointed the gun at her head to frighten her, thinking one of the two empty chambers would come up under the firing pin, but instead discharging the gun. Danny Bias was sentenced to six years in the penitentiary, and served three before being paroled. He remains a convicted felon who cannot own a firearm.

It is interesting to hear the advice of the attorneys who actually tried this case. John Lanza wrote, “When a hand load is used in an incident which becomes the subject of a civil or criminal trial, the duplication of that hand load poses a significant problem for both the plaintiff or the prosecutor and the defendant. Once used, there is no way, with certainty, to determine the amount of powder or propellant used for that load. This becomes significant when forensic testing is used in an effort to duplicate the shot and the resulting evidence on the victim or target.”

He adds, “With the commercial load, one would be in a better position to argue the uniformity between the loads used for testing and the subject load. With a hand load, you have no such uniformity. Also, the prosecution may utilize either standard loads or a different hand load in its testing. The result would be distorted and could be prejudicial to the defendant. Whether or not the judge would allow such a scientific test to be used at trial, is another issue, which, if allowed, would be devastating for the defense. From a strictly forensic standpoint, I would not recommend the use of hand loads because of the inherent lack of uniformity and the risk of unreliable test results. Once the jury hears the proof of an otherwise unreliable test, it can be very difficult to ‘unring the bell.’”

Ms. Smith had this to say, after defending Danny Bias through his last three trials. I asked her, “Is it safe to say that factory ammunition, with consistently replicable gunshot residue characteristics, (would) have proven that the gun was within reach of Lise’s head in her own hand, and kept the case from escalating as it did?”

She replied, “You’re certainly right about that. Gunshot residue was absolutely the focus of the first trial. The prosecution kept going back to the statement, “It couldn’t have happened the way he said it did’.”

The records on the Bias trials should be available through:
The Superior Court of New Jersey
Warren County
313 Second Street
PO Box 900
Belvedere, NJ 07823

Those who wish to follow the appellate track of this case will find it in the Atlantic Reporter.

142 N.J. 572, 667 A.2d 190 (Table)

Supreme Court of New Jersey
State
v.
Daniel N. Bias
NOS. C-188 SEPT.TERM 1995, 40,813
Oct 03, 1995
Disposition: Cross-pet. Denied.
N.J. 1995.
State v. Bias
142 N>J> 572, 667 A.2d 190 (Table)

TN v. Barnes

The decedent attacked Robert Barnes and his young daughter with a large knife and was shot to death by the defendant with SJHP .38 Special reloads from a Smith & Wesson Model 36. The distance between the two at the time of the shooting became a key element in the trial, and a misunderstanding of that distance was a primary reason he was charged with Murder. The evidence was messed up in a number of ways in this case, and I do not believe the reloaded ammo (which the prosecution did not recognize to be such until during the trial) was the key problem, but it definitely was part of a problem in reconstructing the case. We were able to do that without GSR evidence, and Mr. Barnes won an acquittal. In this case, I believe the use of factory ammo, combined with proper handling and preserving of the evidence by the initial investigators, would have made the defense much easier and might well have prevented the case from ever being lodged against him.

The records of TN v. Barnes are archived under case number 87297015 at:

Criminal Justice Center
201 Poplar
Suite 401
Memphis, TN 38103

Iowa v. Cpl. Randy Willems

A man attempted to disarm and murder Corporal Randy Willems of the Davenport, IA Police Department, screaming “Give me your (expletive deleted) gun, I’ll blow your (expletive deleted) brains out.” Willems shot him during the third disarming attempt, dropping him instantly with one hit to the abdomen from a department issue factory round, Fiocchi 9mm 115 grain JHP +P+. The subject survived and stated that the officer had shot him for nothing from a substantial distance away. GSR testing showed conclusively that the subject’s torso was approximately 18” from the muzzle of the issue Beretta 92 when it discharged. Randy was acquitted of criminal charges in the shooting at trial in 1990. Two years later, Randy and his department won the civil suit filed against them by the man who was shot.

I use this case when discussing handloads because it is a classic example of how the replicability of factory ammunition, in the forensic evidence sense, can annihilate false allegations by the “bad guy” against the “good guy” who shot him. The records of State of Iowa v. Corporal Randy Willems are archived in the Iowa District Court in Scott County, Davenport, Iowa. Those from the civil suit, Karwoski v. Willems and the City of Davenport, should be at the Iowa Civil Court of Scott County, also located in Davenport, Iowa.

A final word: I did not research the above and place it here to placate lightweight net ninjas. I did it because three recent Internet threads led me to believe that a number of decent people had honest questions about the real-world concerns about using handloads for self-defense, and were possibly putting themselves in jeopardy by doing so. For well over a decade, certain people have been creating an urban myth that says, “No one has ever gotten in trouble in court because they used handloads.”

This is now absolutely, and I hope finally, refuted.

Respectfully submitted,
Massad Ayoob
Granted...not all cases involve handloads or self-defense shootings. But the all have information pertinent to this discussion. For example, in the last case above, IA vs Willems. The point here is:


I use this case when discussing handloads because it is a classic example of how the replicability of factory ammunition, in the forensic evidence sense, can annihilate false allegations by the “bad guy” against the “good guy” who shot him.Then again, sometimes it boils down to a juror who doesn't like your choice of factory ammunition after listening to a prosecutor who doesn't like it, either.


Elliot: The whole hollow point thing bothered me. That bullet is designed to do as much damage as absolutely possible. It’s designed to kill.That quote was taken from an article from the infamous Fish self-defense shooting in AZ where a man (Fish) shot an unarmed man with two arguably vicious dogs.

Read the very interesting story HERE (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15199221/page/5/).

[Byte Stryke]

Anyone with any sort of ballistics information at all would realize that firing a Hollow point into a target at Home/personal defense ranges instead of a FMJ is actually more responsible and makes better sense.

*IF*, God forbid, I am forced to fire a round into someone that has broken into my apartment, the range from me to target is probably going to me >15 feet.
at this range a FMJ from a .40S&W or a .45ACP will probably through and through. This posses 2 problems:

There is now an errant round endangering a non-target behind the original target.
The Original Target did not receive the full energy of the initial discharge and is probably still a Threat to myself and my Family.I know the rules about awareness of people/things around and behind your target. But to be honest in an apartment setting, there will always be something/Someone around/behind and intruder. The best I can do is aim true and hope all of the energy from the round STAYS IN MY TARGET as the JHP is designed to do.

The above is also a reason I think NJ Laws are ignorant.
(HPs are illegal for civilian use)

[sully3acr]

Fuck Massad Ayoob!, ball ammo / hand loads have been killing people 4. years!

[Byte Stryke]

F**k Massad Ayoob!, ball ammo / hand loads have been killing people 4. years!


[Wow2]

Such a well thought out and well articulated point.
Your eloquent mastery of the English language is absolutely phenomenal. Surely, are you a master novelist.
The counter arguments you highlighted are so well expressed I cannot help but to see your point of view.


[/sarcasm]
[ROFL1]

[sully3acr]

[Wow2]

Such a well thought out and well articulated point.
Your eloquent mastery of the English language is absolutely phenomenal. Surely, are you a master novelist.
The counter arguments you highlighted are so well expressed I cannot help but to see your point of view.


[/sarcasm]
[ROFL1]

Woops!! Sorry for speaking out loud. I can't stand that guy........Sully

[Bailey Guns]

Fuck Massad Ayoob!, ball ammo / hand loads have been killing people 4. years!

Edited...I see you self moderated somewhat.

Besides...the point was simply to illustrate there are potential issues in court when using handloads. It wasn't to personally attack someone for the information they presented.

[sully3acr]

Edited...I see you self moderated somewhat.

Besides...the point was simply to illustrate there are potential issues in court when using handloads. It wasn't to personally attack someone for the information they presented.

Yeah, sorry I just can't stand that guy. This talk just makes people so scared to act! I. Mean really, if you have to defend your self or your family who cares what ammo you do it with!!

[Bailey Guns]

I agree there are other things far more important to worry about "in the moment". But if it takes a bad turn for you in court - and you could've easily avoided it - why wouldn't you?

I've spent a lot of time in court and I've seen what type of arguments lawyers (on both sides) can make, to know that I'll take my chances with factory ammo. One less thing to worry about.

BTW...I don't necessarily disagree with you about Ayoob. But I think he's pretty much right on regarding this issue.

Cheers...[Beer]

[SA Friday]

Woops!! Sorry for speaking out loud. I can't stand that guy........Sully
I don't necessarily agree with everything he says either. Never the less, the case precedence sited and the numerous times he testified as an expert witness in self defense shootings shouldn't be disregarded. Bailey's post pretty much summed it up. If you are going to carry, the amount on some factory ammo is minuscule to the other costs. Why on earth would you feel the need to carry reloads instead is beyond me.

[sully3acr]

You guys are right! I have spent alot of time in the court room too, its all about what you can articulate. I carry factory Ammo in all my guns. I just hate the thought that someone would hesitate to act because of the ammo they are using. I agree just carry factory loads!

[Byte Stryke]

I. Mean really, if you have to defend your self or your family who cares what ammo you do it with!!

The Prosecuting attorney trying to make a name for himself does. He will do this by vilifying you, your hand loads, your guns and then mine.
He's going to stand in front of the camera in a slick suit and fear monger the public about how we are terrorists for firing deadly assault weapons with overpowered cop-killer hand loaded bullets.
He will mix in other keywords like irresponsible, reckless, and needless.
Then he will show how some ballistics test somewhere proves that your hand loaded ammunition could have killed some ones baby in the house next door.

For all of that fight and argument I prefer to let Hornady fight that fight.
They have a larger legal fund than I do.

[sully3acr]

[QUOTE=sully3acr;306368]Fuck Massad Ayoob!

[sully3acr]

The Prosecuting attorney trying to make a name for himself does. He will do this by vilifying you, your hand loads, your guns and then mine.
He's going to stand in front of the camera in a slick suit and fear monger the public about how we are terrorists for firing deadly assault weapons with overpowered cop-killer hand loaded bullets.
He will mix in other keywords like irresponsible, reckless, and needless.
Then he will show how some ballistics test somewhere proves that your hand loaded ammunition could have killed some ones baby in the house next door.

For all of that fight and argument I prefer to let Hornady fight that fight.
They have a larger legal fund than I do.

You do have a valid point! But!! I think everyone is reading way too much into this. How would anyone know, "I feared for my life and they gave me no other choice". I just think bullets are bullets.

[DeusExMachina]

Fuck Massad Ayoob!, ball ammo / hand loads have been killing people 4. years!


You guys are right! I have spent alot of time in the court room too, its all about what you can articulate. I carry factory Ammo in all my guns. I just hate the thought that someone would hesitate to act because of the ammo they are using. I agree just carry factory loads!

You obviously missed the point.

[sully3acr]

You obviously missed the point.

I guess so........

[82ndShooter]

Thanks everyone for your input! I'd have to agree that factory loads are probably the best choice to avoid any BS in court.

However, it's bullshit that people have the nerve to try and sue because their "POS" family members broke the law and threatened someones life enough that they had to do the unthinkable and defend themselves.

It shouldn't matter what type of ammo I use to defend myself, as long as its not an incendiary or explosive round. I realize that my example is a bit extreme, but who loads their own ammo to a level that is that so intense w/o their gun blowing up in their hands when it fires such a "killer" load, that super exceeds the factory loads available?

[Irving]

Is the choice of ammo going to be enough, on its own, to effect whether or not a shoot falls under the castle doctrine law?

So, if you are in your home, would it even get to the point where anyone even asked what kind of ammo you used?

[275RLTW]

However, it's bullshit that people have the nerve to try and sue because their "POS" family members broke the law and threatened someones life enough that they had to do the unthinkable and defend themselves.


You must not have read the thread about Dep. Brownlee's killer's family trying to sue the County.... Those type of people are out there and unfourtanately, they're local.

[gnihcraes]

Load and shoot all factory until it runs out, which might only be 5 rounds or a magazine full, if there are no other factory rounds available, I'm shooting defensive reloads, then I'm down to ball and cast practice rounds.

I'm on the fence about this reload vs factory thing. You honestly cannot create a reload that is much beyond the maximum in the load books, you'll blow your hand off or cause some other major damage to yourself. You can't buy any super duper bullets to stuff on top of your reloads. Hornady XTP, Golden Sabre, Silver Tips, etc. are not any more than what is already on top of factory loads. (right?)

I see the point of arguing the "Special Homemade Bullets" in court, and with enough money can be proved they are not special most likely.

I choose to carry factory to save the hassle and money in the long run.

I will ask a few lawyer type friends to get their opinions and report back.

[Bailey Guns]

For you guys who are saying that reloads aren't any more powerful or deadly than factory loads, etc... You're right.

But you're not going to be arguing that point to other gun people. You're going to be trying to convince people who get their gun training from Hollywood and Michael Moore movies.

[cstone]

For you guys who are saying that reloads aren't any more powerful or deadly than factory loads, etc... You're right.

But you're not going to be arguing that point to other gun people. You're going to be trying to convince people who get their gun training from Hollywood and Michael Moore movies.

You mean the twelve citizens who didn't have anything better to do than get $12 per day to hear stories from lawyers about why you should have shot the misunderstood, unfortunate, mother's son in the leg?

Should we have special rounds just for all of the warning shots many citizens think we should fire before double tapping little Johnny?

[cstone]

I understand the possible liability issue with factory vs personally reloaded rounds, but where does that leave people who use a reloading company that uses commercial components including bullets?

I'm not picking on Bullet Boy Ammo, but in my mind, the only difference there between factory and reloaded is recycled brass, better quality control, and a better price into the bargain from Bullet Boy.

If you like to practice with what you carry and you are going to shoot a 1000 rounds to make certain that you have the right handgun, ammunition, and skills for the job, then using non-exotic reloads make a lot of sense.

If you aren't up to being sued, you probably shouldn't leave your house. It's like an accident, nobody wants it to happen, but when it does, you just have to deal with it.