24hourcampfire.com
24hourcampfire.com
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 2 of 4 1 2 3 4
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 4,274
G
Campfire Tracker
Online Content
Campfire Tracker
G
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 4,274
I carry reloads. I shoot Gold Dots; 45 acp in my Ed Brown Special Forces and 38/357 Mag in my BUG S&W 340CT. I first buy a box of the factory stuff for each cartridge and chrono it. I then find a powder like Solo 1000 that gives me the accuracy I demand as well as zero to nil muzzle flash. I then load it to the same velocity as the factory stuff. It's easy to prove my loads run the same velocity as the factory stuff.

Alan

BP-B2

Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 34,261
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 34,261
I would use factory loads for SD because factory loads can be tested against a standard and certified. Hand loads can not be tested against a standard and cannot be certified.Pick your poison.


Don't vote knothead, it only encourages them. Anonymous

"Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups." Anonymous

"Self-reliance, free thinking, and wealth is anathema to both the power of the State and the Church." Derby Dude


Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,510
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,510
Originally Posted by Savuti
guys are currently doing hard time because they weren't using factory ammo. One of them involved shooting the defendant's wife, he said suicide, prosecutor said murder.


I'm curious as to what jurisdiction it's okay to shoot your wife, as long as you use factory ammo?

Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 57,368
R
Campfire Kahuna
Offline
Campfire Kahuna
R
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 57,368
Originally Posted by RufusG
Originally Posted by Savuti
guys are currently doing hard time because they weren't using factory ammo. One of them involved shooting the defendant's wife, he said suicide, prosecutor said murder.


I'm curious as to what jurisdiction it's okay to shoot your wife, as long as you use factory ammo?


Was thinking the same thing... using different ammo won't change the charges... sounds pretty stupid to me.

Now what if you have tritium sights. Especially aftermarket? Sounds like you are looking for a fight at night.
What about the folks that don't use out of the crate guns? Modify them? Or heaven forbid a custom gun DESIGNED to protect you and kill others? Or worse yet one you smithed yourself?

And then heaven forbid if you touched the factory sight setting to zero the gun?

Non standard holster? Crap my wife will be in deep as she carries in a shoulder bag that we sewed a holster into...

Or if I'm wearing handmade clothing from Mom or such when I have to protect myself....

Whatever... you are either right or wrong. its the Indian and not the arrow as always.


We can keep Larry Root and all his idiotic blabber and user names on here, but we can't get Ralph back..... Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, over....
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,087
G
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
G
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,087
Originally Posted by RufusG
Originally Posted by Savuti
guys are currently doing hard time because they weren't using factory ammo. One of them involved shooting the defendant's wife, he said suicide, prosecutor said murder.


I'm curious as to what jurisdiction it's okay to shoot your wife, as long as you use factory ammo?


It was an enormous clusterhump of a case. To cut it short the problematic part was what DD alluded to a few posts up. The rounds were super-soft handloads intended for his wife to shoot with almost no recoil. The result however was a load that left practically no GSR on the "victim" at a range that, the prosecution's argument went, should have had at least some GSR. The court ruled that handloads weren't admissable since it's essentially impossible to provide a testable/repeatable exemplar. You don't KNOW what THAT cartridge did until you fired it, basically destroying the evidence. Sure, you can testify that it's POSSIBLE to create a load that left the GSR signature in question but there's no way verify that the one used in the actual shooting was the same. (don't try to argue it, that's what the case said)

I don't particularly like this case since any SD ammo I can imagine anyone here would load would be roughly a factory analogue so the above wouldn't have happened with anything I, for instance, would have loaded in a SD weapon. Still, there IS the issue of factory ammo providing a vetted exemplar for forensic testing that is on MUCH firmer ground than anything a court is likely to accept from handloads.

I'm sticking with my "death by meteorite" position. You would have to be one SERIOUSLY unlucky bastage to have things turn out where the fact you were using handloads mattered...but that doesn't mean it couldn't happen.


If there's one thing I've become certain of it's that there's too much certainty in the world.
IC B2

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,059
S
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
S
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,059
Don't recall all the details, but if you really were interested in the subject I'd suggest contacting Ayoob. He doesn't bite.

GAAR and I overlapped. Thanks for the post.

Pete

Last edited by Savuti; 11/21/12.

There is nothing made by man,
which cannot be broken by woman.
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 57,368
R
Campfire Kahuna
Offline
Campfire Kahuna
R
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 57,368
anything is possible, just saying that in the scheme of things worrying about your ammo, other than it being totally reliable, is about the last thing I'd worry about.

You can get sued for damn near anything.


We can keep Larry Root and all his idiotic blabber and user names on here, but we can't get Ralph back..... Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, over....
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 20,379
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 20,379
#1 - Biggest myth on the internet since e-mails saying microsoft will give you money for using their e-mail.

#2 - If you can't rely on your reloads, under any conditions, you should take up knitting.


Originally Posted by captain seafire
I replace valve cover gaskets every 50K, if they don't need them sooner...
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,087
G
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
G
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,087
Originally Posted by rost495
anything is possible, just saying that in the scheme of things worrying about your ammo, other than it being totally reliable, is about the last thing I'd worry about.

You can get sued for damn near anything.


IMHO it's the extremes on both sides that are overwrought. Anyone that claims there are NO actual risks involved in carrying handloads hasn't boned up on the legalities. What some other the other side posit would have you think that it's better to just leave your weapon at home than risk carrying handloads.

There IS a risk and there are actual cases that set this forth.

BUT

You are almost as likely to be driving by a river and be the only person there to pull the Victoria's Secret models to safety after their bus crashed, thereby earning their profound sexual gratitude, than having handloads (or caliber, or trigger, etc) be an issue in a shooting. (unless you really did screw up and then they really will throw anything and everything at you)


If there's one thing I've become certain of it's that there's too much certainty in the world.
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 11,369
L
Campfire Outfitter
OP Offline
Campfire Outfitter
L
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 11,369
Originally Posted by guyandarifle
Originally Posted by RufusG
Originally Posted by Savuti
guys are currently doing hard time because they weren't using factory ammo. One of them involved shooting the defendant's wife, he said suicide, prosecutor said murder.


I'm curious as to what jurisdiction it's okay to shoot your wife, as long as you use factory ammo?


It was an enormous clusterhump of a case. To cut it short the problematic part was what DD alluded to a few posts up. The rounds were super-soft handloads intended for his wife to shoot with almost no recoil. The result however was a load that left practically no GSR on the "victim" at a range that, the prosecution's argument went, should have had at least some GSR. The court ruled that handloads weren't admissable since it's essentially impossible to provide a testable/repeatable exemplar. You don't KNOW what THAT cartridge did until you fired it, basically destroying the evidence. Sure, you can testify that it's POSSIBLE to create a load that left the GSR signature in question but there's no way verify that the one used in the actual shooting was the same. (don't try to argue it, that's what the case said)

I don't particularly like this case since any SD ammo I can imagine anyone here would load would be roughly a factory analogue so the above wouldn't have happened with anything I, for instance, would have loaded in a SD weapon. Still, there IS the issue of factory ammo providing a vetted exemplar for forensic testing that is on MUCH firmer ground than anything a court is likely to accept from handloads.

I'm sticking with my "death by meteorite" position. You would have to be one SERIOUSLY unlucky bastage to have things turn out where the fact you were using handloads mattered...but that doesn't mean it couldn't happen.
ok let ask a different way if the round fired in this case had been a factory , would the defendent have walked ?

Last edited by ldholton; 11/22/12.
IC B3

Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,087
G
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
G
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,087
Originally Posted by ldholton
Originally Posted by guyandarifle
Originally Posted by RufusG
Originally Posted by Savuti
guys are currently doing hard time because they weren't using factory ammo. One of them involved shooting the defendant's wife, he said suicide, prosecutor said murder.


I'm curious as to what jurisdiction it's okay to shoot your wife, as long as you use factory ammo?


It was an enormous clusterhump of a case. To cut it short the problematic part was what DD alluded to a few posts up. The rounds were super-soft handloads intended for his wife to shoot with almost no recoil. The result however was a load that left practically no GSR on the "victim" at a range that, the prosecution's argument went, should have had at least some GSR. The court ruled that handloads weren't admissable since it's essentially impossible to provide a testable/repeatable exemplar. You don't KNOW what THAT cartridge did until you fired it, basically destroying the evidence. Sure, you can testify that it's POSSIBLE to create a load that left the GSR signature in question but there's no way verify that the one used in the actual shooting was the same. (don't try to argue it, that's what the case said)

I don't particularly like this case since any SD ammo I can imagine anyone here would load would be roughly a factory analogue so the above wouldn't have happened with anything I, for instance, would have loaded in a SD weapon. Still, there IS the issue of factory ammo providing a vetted exemplar for forensic testing that is on MUCH firmer ground than anything a court is likely to accept from handloads.

I'm sticking with my "death by meteorite" position. You would have to be one SERIOUSLY unlucky bastage to have things turn out where the fact you were using handloads mattered...but that doesn't mean it couldn't happen.
ok please tell me there wasa lot more eveidence that got one convicted than questioable hand load


The defendant's name was Daniel Bias. The case is NJ v Bias. If you're curious enough you can look up the whole thing but the part germane to the topic is pretty much summed up by this quote from John Lanza, the defense att in the first* case:

�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. 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."

*There were actually 4(!) trials. The first and second trials both ended in hung juries. So after giving up on trying to get him on murder charges the state fell back and on the third attempt, though falling short of the Agg Manslaughter charge they did manage to make a Reckless Manslaughter stick in the third trial. There were enough questions to actually get him a 4th trial but he got RM in that one too.



If there's one thing I've become certain of it's that there's too much certainty in the world.
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 18,005
D
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
D
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 18,005
Sonofabitch. Ayoob had it right, after all.

Who'd a thunk it?





"I'm gonna have to science the schit out of this." Mark Watney, Sol 59, Mars
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 39,301
S
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
S
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 39,301
I cast a 235 grain truncated cone and load it for all my 45 shooting. It is my bowling pin load, my plinking load and my every day carry and defense load.

I believe in the KISS principle.


The first time I shot myself in the head...

Meniere's Sucks Big Time!!!
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,510
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,510
Originally Posted by DocRocket
Sonofabitch. Ayoob had it right, after all.

Who'd a thunk it?





Yeah. We have one case that is completely irrelevant to use of reloads in a defensive situation, and another "mystery" case we have no details on. Sorry, not buying it.

A couple years back Ayoob was involved in a long piss-fight type thread on the smith-wessonforum. He was defending Marshall and Sanow, which is itself irrelevant, but his arguments and demeanor were less than impressive to me for someone supposed to be a font of wisdom. His name alone, which is essentially all that we have been presented with here, isn't enough to convince me.

Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,510
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,510
Here's a question for the tinfoil crowd:

If your factory ammo uses a bullet that is available separately as a component, how do you intend to prove that your ammo was not a special "baby-killer" handload you concocted specifically to violate your victim's civil rights?

Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,087
G
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
G
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,087
Originally Posted by RufusG
Originally Posted by DocRocket
Sonofabitch. Ayoob had it right, after all.

Who'd a thunk it?





Yeah. We have one case that is completely irrelevant to use of reloads in a defensive situation, and another "mystery" case we have no details on. Sorry, not buying it.

A couple years back Ayoob was involved in a long piss-fight type thread on the smith-wessonforum. He was defending Marshall and Sanow, which is itself irrelevant, but his arguments and demeanor were less than impressive to me for someone supposed to be a font of wisdom. His name alone, which is essentially all that we have been presented with here, isn't enough to convince me.


Forget Ayoob, it's the lawyer's statement I quoted concerning forensic evidence that's carrying the water here. There is absolutely demonstrable court precedence that handloads can badly muddy the water in the forensic dept of reconstructing a shooting. If that evidence would have proven exculpatory wouldn't it be best to have it on the firmest ground possible?

Setting aside the actual "likelihood" of it being an issue it's simply not possible to rationally dismiss the fact there IS a risk associated with handloads over factory IF forensic reconstruction of a shooting matters.


If there's one thing I've become certain of it's that there's too much certainty in the world.
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,510
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,510
Originally Posted by guyandarifle

Forget Ayoob, it's the lawyer's statement I quoted concerning forensic evidence that's carrying the water here. There is absolutely demonstrable court precedence that handloads can badly muddy the water in the forensic dept of reconstructing a shooting. If that evidence would have proven exculpatory wouldn't it be best to have it on the firmest ground possible?

Setting aside the actual "likelihood" of it being an issue it's simply not possible to rationally dismiss the fact there IS a risk associated with handloads over factory IF forensic reconstruction of a shooting matters.


I'm not all that impressed with the lawyer's statement either, and the precedent doesn't seem remotely relevant to a defense shooting.

What if I provided 100 or more of my reloads to an independent lab to take down and measure the powder charge or do whatever they wanted to? That would provide more than enough statistical "certainty" that the effects could be recreated. And I'm not sure I even see how this would come up in a defense shooting, to be honest.

I blew up a 1911 once with factory ammo. I'd like to hear something about the certainty of that powder charge.

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 11,369
L
Campfire Outfitter
OP Offline
Campfire Outfitter
L
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 11,369
Originally Posted by guyandarifle
Originally Posted by RufusG
Originally Posted by Savuti
guys are currently doing hard time because they weren't using factory ammo. One of them involved shooting the defendant's wife, he said suicide, prosecutor said murder.


I'm curious as to what jurisdiction it's okay to shoot your wife, as long as you use factory ammo?


It was an enormous clusterhump of a case. To cut it short the problematic part was what DD alluded to a few posts up. The rounds were super-soft handloads intended for his wife to shoot with almost no recoil. The result however was a load that left practically no GSR on the "victim" at a range that, the prosecution's argument went, should have had at least some GSR. The court ruled that handloads weren't admissable since it's essentially impossible to provide a testable/repeatable exemplar. You don't KNOW what THAT cartridge did until you fired it, basically destroying the evidence. Sure, you can testify that it's POSSIBLE to create a load that left the GSR signature in question but there's no way verify that the one used in the actual shooting was the same. (don't try to argue it, that's what the case said)

I don't particularly like this case since any SD ammo I can imagine anyone here would load would be roughly a factory analogue so the above wouldn't have happened with anything I, for instance, would have loaded in a SD weapon. Still, there IS the issue of factory ammo providing a vetted exemplar for forensic testing that is on MUCH firmer ground than anything a court is likely to accept from handloads.

I'm sticking with my "death by meteorite" position. You would have to be one SERIOUSLY unlucky bastage to have things turn out where the fact you were using handloads mattered...but that doesn't mean it couldn't happen.
let me ask a different way if this round that was fired in the case had been a factory round , would the guy have walked ?

Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,202
A
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
A
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,202
Factory ammo is assembled with the freshest of components, pass through innumerable double checks and safeguards, and are developed after extensive testing, including terminal bullet performance. How do your reloads stack up against that? My error rate for handloads is practically nonexistent, but the factorys error rate is much lower than mine.

Would I use my own ammo for self-defense if necessary? Without question. Is it my first choice? Nope, but it should be adequate.


Those who believe there is safety in numbers never heard of Auschwitz- Me



Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,087
G
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
G
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,087

Originally Posted by RufusG
Originally Posted by guyandarifle

Forget Ayoob, it's the lawyer's statement I quoted concerning forensic evidence that's carrying the water here. There is absolutely demonstrable court precedence that handloads can badly muddy the water in the forensic dept of reconstructing a shooting. If that evidence would have proven exculpatory wouldn't it be best to have it on the firmest ground possible?

Setting aside the actual "likelihood" of it being an issue it's simply not possible to rationally dismiss the fact there IS a risk associated with handloads over factory IF forensic reconstruction of a shooting matters.


I'm not all that impressed with the lawyer's statement either, and the precedent doesn't seem remotely relevant to a defense shooting.

What if I provided 100 or more of my reloads to an independent lab to take down and measure the powder charge or do whatever they wanted to? That would provide more than enough statistical "certainty" that the effects could be recreated. And I'm not sure I even see how this would come up in a defense shooting, to be honest.

I blew up a 1911 once with factory ammo. I'd like to hear something about the certainty of that powder charge.


And what, exactly, would be your answer to the lawyers's observations GLEANDED FROM WHAT HE ACTUALLY FACED AT TRIAL. There is nothing hypothetical about the issues that CAN arise from the use handloads vs factory. None. I have stated many times in this thread that I condisider the conditions that would make that an issue "unlikely" but it can happen because it HAS happened. The SD aspect is a bit of a red herring. Think of it this way- if a case, ANY case, comes down to forensic evidence being pivotal then wouldn't it damn well behoove a person to have that evidence on the most solid ground possible?

Your second question shows you've not yet grasped what the lawyer was trying to impart. With handloads YOU literally manufactured the evidence and there is no way you're going to be able to demonstrate, to a court's satisfaction, that anything else YOU produced is necessarily going to be indicative of what was actually used in the shooting itself as the firing of a round destroys that evidence. Look at it yet another way-just because what you are trying to argue makes sense in YOUR head or even MY head does not mean it's going to be allowable in whole or even in part at trial.

We've got 20/20 hindesite on this one. It absolutely (no statement of likelihood here mind you) CAN AND HAS mattered.


If there's one thing I've become certain of it's that there's too much certainty in the world.
Page 2 of 4 1 2 3 4

Moderated by  RickBin 

Link Copied to Clipboard
YB23

Who's Online Now
644 members (1234, 257 roberts, 1lessdog, 2500HD, 257Bob, 257 mag, 71 invisible), 2,768 guests, and 1,309 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums81
Topics1,187,648
Posts18,399,130
Members73,817
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023


 







Fish & Game Departments | Solunar Tables | Mission Statement | Privacy Policy | Contact Us | DMCA
Hunting | Fishing | Camping | Backpacking | Reloading | Campfire Forums | Gear Shop
Copyright © 2000-2024 24hourcampfire.com, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5
(Release build 20201027)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 7.3.33 Page Time: 0.116s Queries: 15 (0.004s) Memory: 0.9187 MB (Peak: 1.1018 MB) Data Comp: Zlib Server Time: 2024-03-28 18:11:25 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS