How will they ever be able to prove that the cartridge which destroyed the rifle was SAAMI spec?
There's no way to do it. It's been fired and it's gone. So that's why I say that firerarm manufacturers should be exempt from damage to a firearm from the use of handloaded ammo.
That doesn't mean that I'm anti handloading or even that I anti hotloads.
It's just the nature of the beast. The firearm manufacturers have no control over what somebody cooks up and fires through their guns.
The only reasonable way for them to address the issue is to claim no responsibility or warranty for the use of handloaded ammo
How do you prove a factory cartridge was within specs? You fire it and it is gone. Factories make mistakes as well from time to time.
The standard in a civil trial is by preponderance of the evidence, not beyond a reasonable doubt. In other words, it is a 51% to 49% standard. Thus, you prove something with regard to a handloaded shell the same way you do a factory shell. You look at all the information you can find. You look at shells loaded at the same time. You look at the case. You look at the firearm. You get expert opinions and so on and so forth.
Having said all that, it IS much more difficult to prove with handloading because the perception at least, is that some guy out in his garage is much more likely to make a mistake than a machine in a factory. That isn't always so, but like I said, by the time four or five $700 an hour attorneys run you and handloading through the wringer for four or five years, you'll look like a combination of Dr. Faustus and Yosemite Sam churning out miniature grenades, just waiting for the primer to strike and maim everyone within a 50 foot radius.
So, having said ALL that, I'm very impressed that a jury found a firearms manufacturer 60% liable when there was admitted handloading. There must have been some pretty compelling evidence.
