New .45acp load

[crowbusterL579]

WENT TO A CLASS IN 1978 WHEN I STARTED WORKING IN LAW ENFORCEMENT AND ONE THING THEY TALKED ABOUT WAS USE OF HANDLOADS IN DUTY WEAPON, HOW THE ATTORNEYS WOULD CRUCIFY YOU ABOUT HOW YOU HAD LOADED UP A SUPER KILLING ROUND, AND HOW IT WOULD LOOK TO JURY !

I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6!!

 

[gh1950]

Something to consider for carry ammo.
https://www.gunsamerica.com/digest/why-you-should-avoid-handloads-for-concealed-carry/

WENT TO A CLASS IN 1978 WHEN I STARTED WORKING IN LAW ENFORCEMENT AND ONE THING THEY TALKED ABOUT WAS USE OF HANDLOADS IN DUTY WEAPON, HOW THE ATTORNEYS WOULD CRUCIFY YOU ABOUT HOW YOU HAD LOADED UP A SUPER KILLING ROUND, AND HOW IT WOULD LOOK TO JURY !

I can search all reported cases in the United States, depending on the state, going back as far as 150 years, and a in all others at least as far back as the beginning of the internet.

I have performed this search, and there are exactly 2 cases I have found where handloads were an issue in the case. That's out of tens of thousands of shootings in the relevant time period.

I haven't gone to the trouble of looking up the cases, because it takes some time. One of the cases involved a 10mm where an over zealous prosecutor in Utah or Idaho obtained a conviction that was ultimately reversed on appeal, albeit, the accused spent several years in prison.

The other case was in the northeast and involved hand loads that had TOO LITTLE powder and led the forensic investigator to make an erroneous conclusion about how close the shooter was standing to the victim. Because of the absence of powder stippling (look it up) the investigator concluded that the shooter was standing further away that he stated and thus was not "threatened". The shooter was not convicted.

The leading advocate of "no handloads for personal defense" is Massad Ayoob, who makes a living as a professional witness. Better known persons than I have challenged him to produce one case where the use of handloads was a factor in a conviction, and he has been unable to do so. The contention falls into that broad internet category "Well, it could happen." Sort of like the moon crashing into the earth. The use of handloads is a total NON-FACTOR in our legal system.

Here are the facts from a legal perspective. Law enforcement or civilian, you are authorized to use "deadly force" under certain circumstances. The law defines "deadly force" in terms of its consequences. No where does it define "deadly force" in terms of what it consists of. If you are authorize to use "deadly force" under the law applicable to the location where you find yourself, you can use handloads, hand grenades, a flame thrower, RPG, a car, frying pan, axe, piece of firewood, knife, sword, or anything else likely to result in death to the perpetrator.

At the end of the day, your actions will be judged by the provocation, not the means by which you obtained the results.

I can remember the 1960s, 70s and 80s where exactly the same arguments were made against the police using hollow points (or magnums), and to date there have been exactly no cases where that was an issue. If it is a "good shoot" it really doesn't matter what you shoot him with.

This discussion is one of many in the internet world that exists between keyboard jockeys who "know" what the truth is, and will go one forever, but as one more "keyboard jockey" who actually has some experience, I can tell you that this is completely a non-issue legally.

P.S. Reading the Gunsamerica article, I find this piece of crap,

but you also gave the prosecutor the chance to have you admit in front of the jury that you shot and killed the alleged victim

This bull**** statement demonstrates a complete ignorance of how the criminal justice system works. "Self defense" is an affirmative defense that has to be pleaded by the defendant. So from the get go, the first statement from the defendant's attorney, is that the defendant killed (or severely wounded) the victim, but was legally entitled to do. If you don't admit that you killed or wounded the victim, then "self defense" is not an issue, and it doesn't matter what bullets you DIDN'T use.

Again this is a clear example of a keyboard cowboy not understanding the subject matter, and having to spew something out to reach his word count.

Then there is this:

Instead of using handloads for self-defense, it is far wiser to use the same ammunition used by law enforcement in your community

So that means we all should be using Glock double stacked 9mm, and all you 1911 fanboys and .357 manly men are at risk.

What this idiot statement overlooks is that ammunition decisions are not made by the PD for the effectiveness of the ammunition, but by bean counters in whatever government controls the PD. Sure the LEO has input, but the ultimate decision is made by the bean counters.

BTW, what is my community law enforcement to which I should look, we have the local police, UGA police, sheriff's dept, GSP, GBI and other state and federal LEOs.

And more b.s.:

Also, using factory ammunition means that you can subpoena an engineer from the factory that can testify as to the design, testing, performance, and advertised use of the ammunition product without having to testify yourself.

First, an engineer will only be able to testify to whatever small slice of the performance envelope he worked on, and nothing about the advertising. In fact he is likely to mock the advertising.

Secondly, you will be tried in a state court. Good luck trying to subpoena an engineer from Federal or Hornady.

Thirdly, if you have the wherewithal and knowledge to subpoena an engineer from the manufacturer, you can hire and subpoena your own engineer to testify about any handloads you may have used. Hornady, Barnes, Hodgon, Alliant, Speer, Lee aren't pulling those handloads out of their asses.

Bottom line is that the cited article from Gunsamerica is total crap,. written by someone who has ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA how the American legal system works.

If you want to use it as your life's guiding light, more power to you, live long and proper.

 

[1006]

All the law suite potential aside, I am a “path of least resistance” guy.

Given the price of Gold Dolts, HydraShocks, etc and the amount of engineering that goes into creating them, I prefer to use them in my carry pistol.

If I ever have to use it: having to wonder about defending the use of my hand loads, is one thing I won’t worry about. It is just a distraction with which I do not want to concern myself. But, I would not hesitate to use whatever happened to be in the gun at the time, if justified.

 

[1006]

Adam5:

Your load looks like a good place to start to me. Just load as directed (cartridge length, crimp, etc), and see how it shoots.

 

[palmettomoon]

The "don't use handloads fer seff defense" canard has been published for as long as I've been reading gun rags, at least 40 years. John Thomas (the author) reads like a "know it all" boomer at the gun counter sounds, spewing nonsense and grits couched as knowledge.

 

[EMC45]

The "don't use handloads fer seff defense" canard has been published for as long as I've been reading gun rags, at least 40 years. John Thomas (the author) reads like a "know it all" boomer at the gun counter sounds, spewing nonsense and grits couched as knowledge.

It's also a Massad Ayoob trope as well. It's nonsense is what it is.

 

[fotog54]

Ouch! Best wishes on the healing process!

Thank you, everyone for the responses. It may have to wait a bit. I tripped this morning, and fell on my elbow. I managed to break my strong side lower arm when I did it.