Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns Why You Should Avoid Handloads for Concealed Carry

https://www.gunsamerica.com/digest/...RyI4YXU0L-k4a9c0BW_80GGAizoEtG95rH7maZjo

Upon first consideration, it would seem to be a decent idea to use handloads for self-defense. A person experienced in handloading could choose the right combination to create tailored ammunition which would be far more effective in a real-world situation than the standard ammunition available for purchase in a store. However, there is a risk. In the event that you use a handload in self-defense, you may face unanticipated consequences from a legal system that can sometimes be anti-gun and turn the table on someone acting within his legal rights.

A Night on the Town

Consider this example. You are out with your wife for a night on the town. During the evening you are approached by a person whom you perceive to be a threat. Your perception becomes reality when the man moves towards you and your wife aggressively, appearing to attack. There is a glint of light off of what appears to be a deadly weapon in the attacker’s hand. You are lawfully carrying a concealed handgun for protection. The handgun is loaded with handloads that you have created. You use the handgun to defend yourself and your wife and shoot the aggressor killing him on the spot.

You think you have acted justifiably and lawfully. You are allowed to carry a firearm for protection. You are allowed to act in self-defense. You are thankful that you were able to defend yourself and your wife. Unfortunately, The police and the prosecutor see it differently.

When the police arrive you are treated like a criminal. They put you on the ground, slap handcuffs on your wrists, put you in the back seat of a patrol car and take you to jail. You are charged with homicide and are forced to stand trial. Your life is on the line. Will the jury decide that you acted in self-defense and send you home to your family, or will you be sentenced to serve several years of your life in prison?

Handloads as an Indicator of Pre-meditation/Malice

At the trial, the prosecutor’s argument goes something like this, “Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, he intended to kill his attacker. In fact, he intended to kill anyone he shot with those bullets he designed, bullets he manufactured with the specific intent to kill. He established premeditation and malice when he loaded his handgun with those customized killer bullets, hollow-point bullets that were designed to rend and tear brutal wounds and cause horrible pain and suffering and ensure the agonizing death of his victim. There can be no other reason to manufacture customized, deadly ammunition other than the intent to kill another human being. He was carrying them just waiting and hoping for an opportunity to use them.”

In the end, your good idea of using handloads for self-defense may have just helped prove that you intended to commit murder.

An Additional Reason Handloads Can Cause Problems

The use of handloads can cause other serious legal problems for your defense team if you end up in court. Defensive shootings often happen at close range. This causes gunshot residue (GSR) from your muzzle to be deposited on your attacker’s body or clothing. The GSR can become a critical piece of evidence at trial if a prosecutor insists the attacker was too far away from you to endanger you when you took the shot.

Again, you can imagine the prosecutor’s argument, “We did scientific testing on the gunshot residue deposited on the victims clothing. The scientific evidence proves beyond any doubt that the victim was far enough away that deadly force was not necessary for the situation. Since deadly force was not reasonably necessary, there was no reason to pull out a gun and blast away with those customized killer bullets.”

Determining distance using GSR evidence is supposed to be done by firing ammunition identical to what was in your gun at the time of the shooting. If the ammunition is not standard, it will be difficult to obtain accurate results. Sometimes, the testing will be done using a factory load which can give a false indication of the distance involved. This can lead to an argument by prosecutors that the attacker was actually much farther away at the time of the shooting than he actually was.

Another problem that can arise is the potential conflict with allowing you to testify as a witness on the ammunition that was used. On the one hand, you are the expert. You know exactly how the handloads were made. You made them. You also know what your intent was in manufacturing the handloads. The problem is that putting you on the witness stand is not always a simple thing.

Normally, a person charged with a crime has the absolute right not to testify. If he chooses not to testify, then the jury deciding the case is instructed by the judge that they cannot consider the fact that the defendant did not testify in determining whether the prosecutor has proven his case beyond a reasonable doubt. However, if a person charged with a crime chooses to testify, then he is treated just like any other witness and is subject to cross-examination by the prosecutor.

In some cases, it is in your best interests not to testify. It becomes difficult to balance that interest when you are the only person who knows about the handload that was used during the shooting. If you choose to testify about the handload, you will be subject to cross-examination which may prove disastrous for your defense. Even if you are innocent, a skillful prosecutor can twist your words.

Let’s say you just testified about how you created the handloads and that you created them with the intent to be effective in stopping an attacker without killing him. You think you have helped your case, but one can imagine the following cross-examination by the prosecutor:

Question: So, you admit that you were carrying a gun believing that you might have to shoot someone.

Even if you are telling the truth, prosecutors can twist your words to fit their theory of the case. (photo/[bleep])

Answer: Yes, shoot someone in self-defense.

Question: You admit that you created those bullets.

Answer: Yes.

Question: You admit that you shot the gun.

Answer: Yes.

Question: You admit that the shot you fired killed the victim.

Answer: Yes, but he was an attacker, not a victim.

You can appreciate how taking the witness stand in this situation can be a real double-edged sword. Sure, you had a chance to tell the jury your version of what happened, 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. Even if you try and clarify what happened and tell the jury nothing but the truth, your words can be twisted to support the prosecutor’s “killer bullet” theory of the case.

The Wise Alternative to Handloads

Instead of using handloads for self-defense, it is far wiser to use the same ammunition used by law enforcement in your community. One can appreciate how that would allow a defense attorney to address the argument presented earlier in this article.

The defense attorney could easily counter the prosecutor’s argument by explaining you chose the same type of ammunition as the police use and for the same reasons. For example, with hollow points, the bullets are less likely to over penetrate the body of a dangerous attacker and strike down unseen innocent bystanders. They are also less likely to ricochet and create additional unintended victims. In addition, since hollow point ammunition has increased stopping power, the attacker would have to be shot fewer times in order to neutralize the attack. Since he will be shot fewer times, he will be more likely to live.

The inference is changed from one of a person using customized ammunition to kill with premeditation to one of a person using the same ammunition as the police in order to minimize collateral damage and possibly avoid the death of the attacker.

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.

The Times in Which We Live

It is a challenging time to be a gun owner in America. Those who are anti-gun are constantly working to change the laws and limit our Second Amendments right to possess firearms and protect ourselves and our families. It is unfortunate that we should have to think about scenarios like those presented in this article. We should be able to use handloads for concealed carry, but the times in which we live make it a wiser choice to use standardized factory loads that are similar to those used by law enforcement officers in our communities.

I'll take my chances... how about the argument..."I could not afford store bought so I rolled my own..." I hear what you are throwing down, but the perp is on trial, not the bullet...

I'm not really throwing it down as much as reposting a Guns America article. IMO there are arguments both ways but overall I disagree with the article's premise. I just thought the article itself was worth a re-post and the debate worthy of talking about again here if others are interested. If not...

Personally, I feel like somebody not wanting to use handloads is fine. Being able to best factory loaded ammo now is less likely than it was thirty years ago. You can still save money. Somebody in the Facebook comments section asked if there had EVER been more than one case where this was argued. Same has been asked here before and Mas Ayoob has been vilified as the one who if he didn't start this argument, certainly popularized it. I think if somebody believes this, they should just use factory and be able to chalk it off their worry list. OTOH I don't believe it and wouldn't hesitate to carry handloads for self defense.

I've have several guns that are stoked with handloads for use on the property. I don't change the loadout if I head into town.

Several states have recently enacted laws which protect the lawful exerciser of self defense from any further civil action.

Can YOU supply an ACCURATE account of SOMEONE being CHARGED and FOUND GUILTY of anything WRONG DOING that was DIRECTLY CAUSED by the USE of HANDLOADED ammo?
IF you can, PLEASE SUPPLY the INCIDENT and the PERTINENT info, so WE as concerned carry permit holders, can do some INVESTIGATION on our own on the INCIDENT.

I was asking questions about this very problem back when I first started to carry concealed. Everyone cited Ayoob and said "never, never, never."

I was PM'd by two LEO's on this august forum and told that, in their experience, no one had ever been convicted for using reloads.

The 45's I carry come from a batch that I loaded in early 2001, so it's going to be hard to say I used pre-meditation. The 9mm rounds and 357 Mag rounds are all a couple of years old. They're also not superlative loads. I just took Fiocchi self-defence loads with Hornady XTP bullets and duplicated the velocities.

Were I to be put on the spot over why the reloads. The honest answer is easy: "I'm a cheap bastard."

Please hold your breath while I'm doing so and continue to fail to read or comprehend my own post voicing my opinion on the subject, o' most serious of contributors here.

Since most of the so called ' Self Defense" ammo sells for $25-$30 a box of twenty, it gets darn expensive to do test run of 50-100 rounds to guarantee function in handgun. I tried both Speer and Federal and got failure to eject on both in less than 20 rounds in my P320. I have run several hundred rounds of my handloads thru with no malfunctions.Pretty easy decision for me. I am fairly convinced that should I have to us deadly force, the way bullet is propelled out of the handgun is of little consequence to jury. The same holds true if deadly force was not justified. Handload or commercial a person is in deep do-do.

Nice subject for the forum gumbies to jaw about..zzZZZZ

Sounds a lot like the old Ayoob articles which were always a good read back in the day. That said I have to ask some questions.

First, If you use handloads that have hollow point bullets how does that show premeditation to kill more than if I go out and buy a pack of 20-25 premium hollow point self defense loads made by Hornady, Federal or any other manufacturers? And does my handloads constitute custom ammunition any more than say Hornady advertising custom ammunition, Sig Sauer Elite or Federal Premium?

Second, can any ammunition taken from you actually be tested without running into court rules about destruction of evidence since anything taken from you is evidence?

I have no problem with using handloads or factory but find some of these arguments a bit on the fringe. They make for a good gun rag article not much else though.

"Yes, counselor, it was pre-meditated that should anyone attempt to do bodily harm unto me, that I would try my best to do them bodily harm firstest and mostest. I made that decision a long time ago."

Judge: "Thirty years. Next case."

I've heard this for years. I disagree with the article. The laws of evidence in the US prohibit the admission of evidence (or a line of questioning) that regards facts irrelevant to the issue of guilt. When one claims self-defense, that means he already concedes intentionally shooting the other party, but only claims it was justified. That means that the only evidence permitted must pertain to whether or not the shooter reasonably feared for his life (or serious bodily harm) at the moment he fired his weapon. Since the type of ammo used doesn't address this question, no evidence pertaining to the ammo, and no line of questioning pertaining to it, will be admitted into evidence or record.

IMO, Ayoob is an idiot who dispenses a fair amount of nonsense & made up BS, while getting paid for it, & is way past tense besides.

Handload up some Gold Dots which are the same as used in factory Gold Dot ammo, using some reloaded Speer brass with CCI primers & don't lose much sleep over it..............until I see a specific case prosecuted & won on only reloaded ammo issue, I won't be losing much sleep over this.

If anyone has any real live actual case data to show such, please post a reference................but I won't be holding my breath.

MM

That article is complete crap.

The author claims that handloaded hollow points are from the devil and will get you convicted at trial; yet, factory loaded hollow points are the kinder, gentler way to stop an attacker while looking out for his best interests.

He argues that handloads make it look like the shooter is trying to use the most lethal ammo possible. The funny thing is: I use factory ammo for self defense for the EXACT reasons the article says not to use handloads! I want a round that has been tested and retested before going into production. When you buy factory loaded ammo, you are selecting a purpose-built man-stopper, a round that the manufacturer believes will both penetrate and expand.

If I took the time to test and fine tune handloads, I’d have no reservations about using them in my carry gun. But, since I have no idea how they will perform, I don’t carry them. Granted, shooting through multiple clothing barriers into ballistic gel isn’t a perfect testing method, but it’s better than nothing.

The article also gives a possible cross-examination by a prosecutor. The “damage” he alludes to is no worse than if you’re shooting factory ammo. Once, before I became a judge, I was sitting around with some criminal defense attorneys, the elected sheriff, the elected prosecutor, and a couple judges. We got to talking about the pros and cons of handloaded versus factory ammunition in a self-defense shooting. Nobody at the table thought handloads increased your legal jeopardy—because they don’t.

Carry what you shoot accurately and gives you confidence. Other circumstances from the shooting will establish your guilt or innocence long before anybody brings up the issue of handloads.

My best wishes to us all.

Just one mess issue to deal with, IF it is an issue. Does anybody really think the cops are going to:
A. check for reloads or factory ammo?
B. Know the difference?

Ayoob published a piece in Handloader 20+ years ago on this topic, advising against use of handloads. I think he was was challenged on this topic in recent years, and managed to find ONE case where handloads created an issue in an otherwise valid case of self-defense. So theoretically possible, but very unlikely.

I do think that using reloaded cases may slightly increase the likelihood of jams, but it's hard to quantify that trend. I generally do use factory ammo for defensive loads, but some guns, like say the 10mm, 38 Super, or 9x23 it is difficult to have top quality ammo without handloading.

I figure if I ever shoot someone in self defense I'm gonna have my hands full of enough Kafka-esque problems the nature of which will make whatever ammo I used be pale in comparison.

Being from Maryland, you are likely correct.

First, I've got issues with the majority of the cited article and flatly reject the idea of handloads being an indicator of pre-meditation/malice absent some crazy outlier. ("tipped" bullets or some other such crazy modification) The wording used by this fictional prosecuter; "with those bullets he designed" is laughably false. Bullets by Hornady, Sierra, Speer, etc? Hell, I'd posit that handloading, which at one point really was something seen as a bit of a black art, is far easier to justify now. I can get reloading magazines at my local grocery store and Bass Pro sells reloading equipment for fks sake. No, a lawyer found in a box of Cheerios should be able to keep the pre-meditated/deadlier argument from ever even getting off the ground.

Now having said the above the one part that actually holds some water is the forensic evidence angle but even that was couched poorly in the argument. The problem with reloads and GSR evidence isn't what it "can" prove but what it might not be able to prove, by which I mean being exculpatory. Assuming you're the "good guy" and whatever evidence is available is supposed to bring out the truth/exonerate you then you want every scrap of evidence that could support your innocence available at trial.* Reloads will have an extremely difficult time providing exemplars that the prosecution would find acceptable. Mass produced cartridges with huge sample sizes allow for a standardization that someone's home cooked loads would not. That's real. While maybe not the only example I know of the NJ v Daniel Bias case proving how reloads muddled the forensic waters.

*Basically as an aside let's realize you are in a bad, bad situation already if GSR is coming up regarding your being involved in a shooting. That sort of evidence isn't even going to come into play (ammo be damned) unless you're way up schitt's creek in the eyes of the law.