Reloading for self defense...

[GAgunLAWbooklet]

Springfield, you note that there were "no convictions" from those cases that involved handloaded ammo. Right.
But did you notice the part about criminal prosecutions, defense attorneys having to hire expert witnesses to generate good evidence and testimony for the defense side, and the total of over $100,000 in legal bills that left one innocent person bankrupt and left one of his lawyers unpaid?

Do you want to go through all that, only to 'win' a jury verdict of acquittal?

Don't disregard the costs of having to defend your choices of weapon or ammo in our legal system. Even if you prevail in the verdict the entire experience can be terrible for you and your family.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

As to the substance of the Original Post, I think the odds of your normal defensive handloads being used as evidence against you is slim to none. Not really much of a risk there in the real world. Now if you put poison in your hollow points, or put your kid's gerbil droppings in the hollow cavities as biological weapon, or if you inscribe your cartridges with a line like "I am the Angel of Death" then you can expect it to be used against you, as it calls into question both your motivation for shooting and your credibility as a witness when you discuss why you thought doing what you did was reasonable and necessary.

P.S.

 

[olchevy]

I never carry handloads in my auto carry guns, but I almost always do when I carry my revolvers. Never really thought to much about it.

 

[Springfield 1911]

Springfield, you note that there were "no convictions" from those cases that involved handloaded ammo. Right.
But did you notice the part about criminal prosecutions, defense attorneys having to hire expert witnesses to generate good evidence and testimony for the defense side, and the total of over $100,000 in legal bills that left one innocent person bankrupt and left one of his lawyers unpaid?

Do you want to go through all that, only to 'win' a jury verdict of acquittal?

Don't disregard the costs of having to defend your choices of weapon or ammo in our legal system. Even if you prevail in the verdict the entire experience can be terrible for you and your family.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

As to the substance of the Original Post, I think the odds of your normal defensive handloads being used as evidence against you is slim to none. Not really much of a risk there in the real world. Now if you put poison in your hollow points, or put your kid's gerbil droppings in the hollow cavities as biological weapon, or if you inscribe your cartridges with a line like "I am the Angel of Death" then you can expect it to be used against you, as it calls into question both your motivation for shooting and your credibility as a witness when you discuss why you thought doing what you did was reasonable and necessary.

P.S.

You seem to be aware of the law, right? Well, in GA if you are justified in using lethal force are you subject to criminal or civil penalties? You carry what you want and I will do the same. I will take my chances. Plus if I do get prosecuted for that, prove they were mine. I ain't telling. There are several companies that offer reloaded ammo for sale.

 

[GAgunLAWbooklet]

Hmmm.... so you seem to be aware that you have immunity from civil and criminal penalties if you are justified in using lethal force. I assume you've also read 16-3-24.2 ( immunity under criminal law) and 51-11-9 (no liability in civil actions). Let's just assume that the Title 51 statute is in fact an immunity law, not just a statute that explicitly supplies a defense and establishes the elements of the tort as a matter of tort law.

First question: Do you think that you can get the civil immunity / non-liability protection if you haven't been criminally prosecuted and didn't have an immunity hearing in Superior Court on the criminal docket?

If you agree that such an official declaration is needed-- a Judge hearing evidence from both sides and rules that your actions were justified under criminal law-- do you realize there is significant expense involved in having a lawyer represent you just to that point?

If you don't have a criminal law immunity hearing, do you think you can't be sued by the injured bad guy (or his estate/ next of kin if you killed him)?
I think you can be sued, and it will be docketed on the civil docket. And you will have to answer within the time period specified in the law. And you will have to assert any affirmative defenses, or you will have waived them.
And there may be some discovery required of both sides, to build the factual record upon which a civil court judge can make a determination about if and how Code section 51-11-9 applies.
At some point after discovery, you can move for summary judgment, and you can cite 51-11-9 as you ask for the case to be dismissed.
If it's a good shoot and you really were legally justified, you should win at this point. Case over. You are no longer in jeopardy of having a judgment against you.

Guess how much time, trouble, and MONEY it would have cost you by that point?

THEREFORE, I'm saying don't lightly dismiss some evidence that somebody could use against you by saying something to the effect of, "well that won't get you convicted or held liable. Let 'em ride that pony for all they think it's worth. You'll win in the end." Winning could be a bad experience, which would be a real shame if it went down that way only because of some choice you made about what gun or ammo to carry for defense.

Did you hear about the Gary Fadden incident? Employee of a gun company and defense arms maker is ambushed by high and drunken gang members. The good guy defends himself using a select-fire weapon that he just happened to have handy from a recent test and evaluation range session.
The prosecution attempts to crucify him in court over it, making his choice of firearm a key point in the felony charges against him.
Was the machinegun legal? Yes. Was the shooting necessary and justified under the laws? Yes.
Result? He was acquitted after a long expensive trial that cost him $50,000 and put him in debt for the next 30 years.
http://www.davehayes.org/2006/02/10/the-gary-fadden-incident

Both the armed citizen and gunwriter Massad Ayoob, who assisted the defense of the case, are SURE that if he'd used a more normal sporting firearm, he would not have been charged.

 

[Springfield 1911]

Hmmm.... so you seem to be aware that you have immunity from civil and criminal penalties if you are justified in using lethal force. I assume you've also read 16-3-24.2 ( immunity under criminal law) and 51-11-9 (no liability in civil actions). Let's just assume that the Title 51 statute is in fact an immunity law, not just a statute that explicitly supplies a defense and establishes the elements of the tort as a matter of tort law.

First question: Do you think that you can get the civil immunity / non-liability protection if you haven't been criminally prosecuted and didn't have an immunity hearing in Superior Court on the criminal docket?

If you agree that such an official declaration is needed-- a Judge hearing evidence from both sides and rules that your actions were justified under criminal law-- do you realize there is significant expense involved in having a lawyer represent you just to that point?

If you don't have a criminal law immunity hearing, do you think you can't be sued by the injured bad guy (or his estate/ next of kin if you killed him)?
I think you can be sued, and it will be docketed on the civil docket. And you will have to answer within the time period specified in the law. And you will have to assert any affirmative defenses, or you will have waived them.
And there may be some discovery required of both sides, to build the factual record upon which a civil court judge can make a determination about if and how Code section 51-11-9 applies.
At some point after discovery, you can move for summary judgment, and you can cite 51-11-9 as you ask for the case to be dismissed.
If it's a good shoot and you really were legally justified, you should win at this point. Case over. You are no longer in jeopardy of having a judgment against you.

Guess how much time, trouble, and MONEY it would have cost you by that point?

THEREFORE, I'm saying don't lightly dismiss some evidence that somebody could use against you by saying something to the effect of, "well that won't get you convicted or held liable. Let 'em ride that pony for all they think it's worth. You'll win in the end." Winning could be a bad experience, which would be a real shame if it went down that way only because of some choice you made about what gun or ammo to carry for defense.

Did you hear about the Gary Fadden incident? Employee of a gun company and defense arms maker is ambushed by high and drunken gang members. The good guy defends himself using a select-fire weapon that he just happened to have handy from a recent test and evaluation range session.
The prosecution attempts to crucify him in court over it, making his choice of firearm a key point in the felony charges against him.
Was the machinegun legal? Yes. Was the shooting necessary and justified under the laws? Yes.
Result? He was acquitted after a long expensive trial that cost him $50,000 and put him in debt for the next 30 years.
http://www.davehayes.org/2006/02/10/the-gary-fadden-incident

Both the armed citizen and gunwriter Massad Ayoob, who assisted the defense of the case, are SURE that if he'd used a more normal sporting firearm, he would not have been charged.

What? Of course you have the immunity. That is what the law says. It does not say you have to be cleared of criminal charges first. Not sure where you read that? You are either justified or not in the use of deadly force. At least that is what my laymans reading of the law is, I am not a lawyer. Seems pretty clear to me though.

The bottom case you pointed out is sad but has noting to do with using hand loads. I think I understand the parallel you are trying to draw, but to me it does not apply here. It is very easy to identify and vilify a select fire weapon, but there are several manufacturers of reloaded ammo. For someone to be able to say that I loaded it would be difficult to say the least, like I said I ain't telling, so prove I did it.

 

[Flashover16]

well not wanting to get into who has the biggest ---ahh GUN! yea thats it!
but in my personal happenings I worked in Public safety for about 32 years, worked in very bad parts of Atlanta.
I honestly do not know how many gun shot victims I have seen or how many crime scenes that I have been around, been to a couple of court cases as well.
I can not remember a single time that the question was asked by any investigator or inspector "Well What kind of ammunition did you have in your gun" mostly because many people have no idea of what they have in the gun.
also never heard of a prosecutor try to nail a "WITNESS" of his on what type of ammo they used, they are normally trying to get you help if you are the shooter and its a good shooting.
As for civil litigation, well you can be sued regardless of factory ammo or reloaded ammo, again it depends on the justification of the shooting as to how you end up.
anyone remember George Zimmerman? could he have been any closer to being wrong and still came out not guilty!
Now again that is just my personal experience, and 25,000 rounds loaded, well that's enough to be experienced but honestly I load over 10,000 rounds every year and shoot it and I been reloading now for about 45 years, man that's a lot of ammo!
as for a civil attorney interrogating you over using reloads, well so if you shoot someone with a factory Plus p or plus P plus ammo is that less lethal than a reload at a standard SAAMI pressure?
what about if you shoot someone with a hollow point factory round instead of a FMJ or lead ?
I mean all these things are just way over blown in my opinion and one reason that they do not appear in court very often.
anyway nice discussion and plenty of things for everyone to weigh.
personally there is a difference in concern and paranoia in my opinion.

 

[Wheeler]

unless you decide to tell Leos you used reloads, why would it ever come up? Maybe they would ask this or check your ammo but I think it would not be something that would be of interest.




Is that all?

So far :-)
The current situation has put a damper on my reloading lately. :-(

 

[GAgunLAWbooklet]

By the way, in the past when I was a handloader, I did carry my own handloads for self-defense.
I might still carry remanufactured ammo (commercial reloads) a few days a year, when I burn up all the factory hollowpoint defensive ammo in my gun and spare mag, and then carry "range ammo" for the next 12-24 hours until I can clean my weapon and get fresh carry ammo out of the safe.
I will also carry modified firearms-- trigger pulls made shorter and sometimes lighter. Add-on sighting options like tactical lights or lasers. I'll change stocks on rifles or grip panels on handguns. I even took out the magazine disconnect from one pistol before I made it my daily carry gun.

I'm not saying don't use handloads for defense. I'm just saying that you have to know that if the other side tries to use it against you, it can cause you more trouble and expense than you expected, even if you ultimately win in court.

 

[Darkhorse]

I've been handloading since 1971 and for decades never carried anything but my handloads in any firearm. But nowadays I only carry factory rounds in my ccw or home defense firearms. I just can't afford to give a prosecutor, lawman or family member (of deceased) anything with which to complicate things.
I also no longer modify with aftermarket parts my triggers. I do go in there and smooth out the grit but I don't really attempt to decrease the trigger pull or engagement.
I do add nite sights and will add a laser or two in the near future.
I spend a lot of time shooting my handloads to get familiar and accurate with my CCW pistols, but I just won't take the chance of using them for SD. I think it's a small price to pay in today's litigated world.
But that's just me and I respect other's decisions to differ.

 

[RamRoddoc]

This has been probably one of the best discussions on this issue.

Risk assessment begins long before the first bullet is launched. Some risk are great and some minimal but exist.

I thank God I live in a State that mostly respects individual citizen's gun rights. We can do better but that's another discussion and effort to restore rights.

New Jersey has been identified as being a state that defending one's self can become a legal quagmire for the person. New Jersey is but one of several states that have "duty to retreat" laws that criminalize the citizen who defends themselves with a weapon. In these communistic states prosecutors are noted for becoming overzealous in "persecuting" the armed citizen.

I specifically stated "persecuting" as simply having a firearm is a condition that a strong liberal push to demonize exist as an unstable mind and illness in need of a cure. Really! And it's promoted and financed by folks like Mikey Bloomturd. Bloomturd personally spends millions to destroy the 2A. How? Observe where he drops millions at. He drops it at the John Hopkins-Bloomberg school of Public Health. He also drops a similar amount into law schools. Public health and law are but two of the avenues of approach.

Thanks gentlemen for the informative debate and key points related to this important issue.