In Texas, if someone is justified by law to shoot someone in self-defense, when it comes to a civil or even a criminal case, does it really even matter whether reloads were used instead of factory ammo? I'm curious if this would even be an issue in Texas. Please, try not to spectulate too much.
Not asking for myself because when I do carry, I'll carry factory ammo mainly because I still get the ballistics I'm looking for.
Defense Legalities with Reloads?
Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton
Ianal nor instructor nor a cop. and I wouldnd't even know what it feels like to be one.
I don't think it would matter much in Texas, and it will mater even less than that after Sept 1ts when the castle doctrine kicks in.
However A lawyer could always mention that you had custom super special man killing bullets. Doesn't have the same evil sound as "Federal Personal Defense Rounds"
I don't think it would matter much in Texas, and it will mater even less than that after Sept 1ts when the castle doctrine kicks in.
However A lawyer could always mention that you had custom super special man killing bullets. Doesn't have the same evil sound as "Federal Personal Defense Rounds"
-
HankB
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1394
- Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 2:03 pm
- Location: Central TX, just west of Austin
(If you do a search, you'll find this topic has surfaced on most of the reputable gun boards repeatedly.) 
With the high performance ammunition available today, there's much less opportunity to "improve" on defense ammo by handloading than there was 30 or 40 years ago.
IANAL, but IMHO the "dangers" of handloads are overblown, provided they're used in a good shoot. Sure, some bottom-feeding lawyer may try to make a case of it - they've tried to do so in good police shootings involving department-issue ammo - but they can do so no matter WHAT ammo is used.
* Use the same ammo as local cops, and you're a poser, a cop wannabe.
* Use premium ammo, and you're looking for "extra powerful, extra deadly" rounds.
* Use FMJ, and you're using "Warfighting, Extra Penetrating" ammo.
* Use hollow or soft points, and it's "Dum-Dums, even banned in warfare."
A good attorney, prepared in advance, can defuse all of these and make opposition counsel look like an idiot . . . but it still wouldn't be a good idea to fill the hollow points with cyanide or dip the rounds in rattlesnake venom.
With the high performance ammunition available today, there's much less opportunity to "improve" on defense ammo by handloading than there was 30 or 40 years ago.
IANAL, but IMHO the "dangers" of handloads are overblown, provided they're used in a good shoot. Sure, some bottom-feeding lawyer may try to make a case of it - they've tried to do so in good police shootings involving department-issue ammo - but they can do so no matter WHAT ammo is used.
* Use the same ammo as local cops, and you're a poser, a cop wannabe.
* Use premium ammo, and you're looking for "extra powerful, extra deadly" rounds.
* Use FMJ, and you're using "Warfighting, Extra Penetrating" ammo.
* Use hollow or soft points, and it's "Dum-Dums, even banned in warfare."
A good attorney, prepared in advance, can defuse all of these and make opposition counsel look like an idiot . . . but it still wouldn't be a good idea to fill the hollow points with cyanide or dip the rounds in rattlesnake venom.
Original CHL: 2000: 56 day turnaround
1st renewal, 2004: 34 days
2nd renewal, 2008: 81 days
3rd renewal, 2013: 12 days
1st renewal, 2004: 34 days
2nd renewal, 2008: 81 days
3rd renewal, 2013: 12 days
-
sparx
- Senior Member
- Posts: 249
- Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 11:50 am
- Location: North Richland Hills, TX
- Contact:
Drats. I guess I better dump those snakes out of the bin now. And to think that I had a fresh box of "Deadly Strike" custom hollow point handloads ready to fill... oh well, another great business plan bites the dust!HankB wrote:A good attorney, prepared in advance, can defuse all of these and make opposition counsel look like an idiot . . . but it still wouldn't be a good idea to fill the hollow points with cyanide or dip the rounds in rattlesnake venom.
NRA, TSRA, TXGR, SAF, GOA & FPC
"I'm not terrified of guns, I'm terrified of gun-free zones!"
"I'm not terrified of guns, I'm terrified of gun-free zones!"
-
casselthief
- Banned
- Posts: 632
- Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 5:05 pm
- Location: yes, I have one.
I know this thread has surely been repeated on other gun boards. However, I posted it on here because this is a board specifically to Texas and I'm curious about the issue in Texas. This topic on other boards has no interest to me if it concerns other parts of the country.
But I agree with what you are saying, Hank. I more or less follow your logic. The reason I asked to see if it's even an issue in Texas if the shooting is justified.
My ideal power band for self-defense is a big bore going about 1,000 to 1,100 FPS. Think of a .45 ACP on steroids. Problem is that there's only a handful of factory ammo in that power band. I think a .41 Special would be an ideal self-defense cartridge, but the thing is it's a Wildcat.
But I agree with what you are saying, Hank. I more or less follow your logic. The reason I asked to see if it's even an issue in Texas if the shooting is justified.
My ideal power band for self-defense is a big bore going about 1,000 to 1,100 FPS. Think of a .45 ACP on steroids. Problem is that there's only a handful of factory ammo in that power band. I think a .41 Special would be an ideal self-defense cartridge, but the thing is it's a Wildcat.
Hey Geister,
Throwing speculation out the window, I'll just give you my take on it the way I see it.
I wouldn't have a problem carrying my own reloads, I have a few times in the past. Yes, I was very careful in assembling the reloads to make sure the powder charge was correct and everything was within spec's. My reloads were also out of a well published reloading manual, and the more I look around the loads are fairly light for some rounds in the manual.
I had made up my mind when I needed to carry reloads due to lack of factory ammo and money to purchase more that I would carry the reloads on the basis that I had made the reloads using published data within SAAMI spec's (right, wrong or indifferent), and if anything bad did happen my reloads would be the least of my worries. But I know the published muzzle velocity of my reloads vs. published data for factory ammo of the same type (158 grn .38 Spl FBI load), and was prepared that I might have to defend my choice. Know your ammo and what you were doing and be prepared to explain yourself and prove to your lawyer that you were not assembling anything out of the ordinary.
I do not know of any case where reloads were used in a shooting and the fact was brought up in court, maybe someone else here knows something I don't. My own opinion, be smart about what you're doing, stay within published data for the load (both for legal reasons and for preservation of your firearm while practicing with your carry ammo), and know what you are doing.
JLaw
Throwing speculation out the window, I'll just give you my take on it the way I see it.
I wouldn't have a problem carrying my own reloads, I have a few times in the past. Yes, I was very careful in assembling the reloads to make sure the powder charge was correct and everything was within spec's. My reloads were also out of a well published reloading manual, and the more I look around the loads are fairly light for some rounds in the manual.
I had made up my mind when I needed to carry reloads due to lack of factory ammo and money to purchase more that I would carry the reloads on the basis that I had made the reloads using published data within SAAMI spec's (right, wrong or indifferent), and if anything bad did happen my reloads would be the least of my worries. But I know the published muzzle velocity of my reloads vs. published data for factory ammo of the same type (158 grn .38 Spl FBI load), and was prepared that I might have to defend my choice. Know your ammo and what you were doing and be prepared to explain yourself and prove to your lawyer that you were not assembling anything out of the ordinary.
I do not know of any case where reloads were used in a shooting and the fact was brought up in court, maybe someone else here knows something I don't. My own opinion, be smart about what you're doing, stay within published data for the load (both for legal reasons and for preservation of your firearm while practicing with your carry ammo), and know what you are doing.
JLaw
-
srothstein
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5319
- Joined: Sat Dec 16, 2006 8:27 pm
- Location: Luling, TX
Just my idle speculation, but I think the fact that you are using reloads might be able to be used against you. I have never seen it done, but I can see lawyers arguing that it shows premeditation and the intent to kill.
Think of the emotional appeal that something like this line of questioning would have to a jury:
Lawyer: Sir, did you shoot this man with the intention of killing him?
Answer: No sir, I had the intent to stop the threat of his killing me.
Lawyer: When you shoot someone, do you aim for his arm or his chest?
Answer: I aim for the center of the mass available to me.
Lawyer: Could you point to your center of mass please?
Answer: About here (pointing to center of chest).
Lawyer: Could you tell me what vital organs are located in that part of the body? (side note, look at sneaky way to get in vital)
Answer: I believe it is the lungs and heart
Lawyer: So you agree that the area you are most likely to shoot at contains the organs most vital to the person's continued life?
Answer: Yes
Lawyer: Now, let's look at the weapon you used. Could you tell me what kind of pistol it was?
Answer: Yes, it was a ________ ( for me, a Glock Model 22C or a Taurus PT1911).
Lawyer: Could you tell me why you had a pistol available?
Answer: Yes, I believed that I might need to protect myself from criminals
Lawyer: So you had prepared yourself to shoot a criminal, right?
Answer: If I had to do so to protect myself.
Lawyer: That is a yes, correct?
Answer: Yes.
Lawyer: Can you tell me why you selected that particular weapon?
Answer: (for me, yours will vary) It was my duty weapon from my police work.
Lawyer: And what kind of record does this weapon have in shootings in the past?
Answer: My weapon has never been used in a previous shooting.
Lawyer: What about that type of weapon in general?
Answer: It has been used in several shootings by the police.
Lawyer: Did the police kill the suspects?
Answer: I don't know.
Lawyer: Do you think it may have killed some?
Answer: Yes, I do.
Lawyer: So you knew the weapon was capable of killing a person?
Answer: Yes.
Lawyer: could you describe the ammunition you were using?
Answer: 185 grain Jacketed Hollow point rounds.
Lawyer: Who made this ammunition?
Answer: I loaded the rounds myself.
Lawyer: Wasn't there any factory made ammunition available for this weapon?
Answer: Yes there was
Lawyer: And it was not satisfactory to you?
Answer: No, it was too expensive
Lawyer: Do you have the same equipment a factory does for making this ammunition?
Answer: No
Lawyer: Is it possible for you to load this ammunition to different standards than the factory does?
Answer: Yes
Lawyer: That means it could be lower power or higher power than a factory, doesn't it?
Answer: Yes.
Lawyer: Do you load the rounds to a higher or lower power rating than the factory ammunition?
Answer: About the same or a little lower
Lawyer: If a round is loaded to a higher power than the factory ammunition, would you think it has a higher or lower chance of killing the person who it hits?
Answer: I don't know. There are too many factors other than just the power to make a conclusion.
Lawyer: What are some of these factors?
Answer: The pistol, the person that is hit, the location on the body where the hit occurs, the distance between the shooter and the person hit, maybe others.
Lawyer: If all of the other factors are the same, what about the higher loading round then?
Answer: Probably higher chance of killing
Lawyer: Do you have any way to prove that the round you used to shoot my client was loaded to a lower power rating than the factory ammunition?
Answer: I always load the rounds the same and my other ammunition could be checked.
Lawyer: Have you ever heard of the mistake made while loading of a double charge of powder?
Answer: Yes
Lawyer: As I said a moment ago - do you have any way to prove that the round you used to shoot my client was loaded to a lower power rating than the factory ammunition?
Answer: No
Lawyer: So, you deliberately chose to carry a firearm to shoot a criminal, chose a firearm type that had a record of killing people, and loaded the pistol with special homemade ammunition. Can you give me any reason to believe that you did not plan to shoot and kill this person?
Answer: Yes, he attacked me first.
Sorry for the long list, but lawyers will do that in court. They try to build a few small points into one large one against you. They do twist things you do and say. That is their job. Of course, your lawyer is going to object to some of these questions, but the damage was already done when the jury heard the question. The image left is pretty bad.
The good news on this is that after Sep 1 of this year, this is a moot question for civil cases in Texas since we now have immunity if it was a good shooting. The bad news is that this could also happen in a criminal trial, and we have proven history that some D.A.'s will try things like this to get a conviction on a gun carrier. They could even ad din that you got a CHL just to carry and were trolling for someone to attack you just so you could shoot them.
I don't think it is much of an issue, but it is better to avoid the potential problem, IMHO.
Think of the emotional appeal that something like this line of questioning would have to a jury:
Lawyer: Sir, did you shoot this man with the intention of killing him?
Answer: No sir, I had the intent to stop the threat of his killing me.
Lawyer: When you shoot someone, do you aim for his arm or his chest?
Answer: I aim for the center of the mass available to me.
Lawyer: Could you point to your center of mass please?
Answer: About here (pointing to center of chest).
Lawyer: Could you tell me what vital organs are located in that part of the body? (side note, look at sneaky way to get in vital)
Answer: I believe it is the lungs and heart
Lawyer: So you agree that the area you are most likely to shoot at contains the organs most vital to the person's continued life?
Answer: Yes
Lawyer: Now, let's look at the weapon you used. Could you tell me what kind of pistol it was?
Answer: Yes, it was a ________ ( for me, a Glock Model 22C or a Taurus PT1911).
Lawyer: Could you tell me why you had a pistol available?
Answer: Yes, I believed that I might need to protect myself from criminals
Lawyer: So you had prepared yourself to shoot a criminal, right?
Answer: If I had to do so to protect myself.
Lawyer: That is a yes, correct?
Answer: Yes.
Lawyer: Can you tell me why you selected that particular weapon?
Answer: (for me, yours will vary) It was my duty weapon from my police work.
Lawyer: And what kind of record does this weapon have in shootings in the past?
Answer: My weapon has never been used in a previous shooting.
Lawyer: What about that type of weapon in general?
Answer: It has been used in several shootings by the police.
Lawyer: Did the police kill the suspects?
Answer: I don't know.
Lawyer: Do you think it may have killed some?
Answer: Yes, I do.
Lawyer: So you knew the weapon was capable of killing a person?
Answer: Yes.
Lawyer: could you describe the ammunition you were using?
Answer: 185 grain Jacketed Hollow point rounds.
Lawyer: Who made this ammunition?
Answer: I loaded the rounds myself.
Lawyer: Wasn't there any factory made ammunition available for this weapon?
Answer: Yes there was
Lawyer: And it was not satisfactory to you?
Answer: No, it was too expensive
Lawyer: Do you have the same equipment a factory does for making this ammunition?
Answer: No
Lawyer: Is it possible for you to load this ammunition to different standards than the factory does?
Answer: Yes
Lawyer: That means it could be lower power or higher power than a factory, doesn't it?
Answer: Yes.
Lawyer: Do you load the rounds to a higher or lower power rating than the factory ammunition?
Answer: About the same or a little lower
Lawyer: If a round is loaded to a higher power than the factory ammunition, would you think it has a higher or lower chance of killing the person who it hits?
Answer: I don't know. There are too many factors other than just the power to make a conclusion.
Lawyer: What are some of these factors?
Answer: The pistol, the person that is hit, the location on the body where the hit occurs, the distance between the shooter and the person hit, maybe others.
Lawyer: If all of the other factors are the same, what about the higher loading round then?
Answer: Probably higher chance of killing
Lawyer: Do you have any way to prove that the round you used to shoot my client was loaded to a lower power rating than the factory ammunition?
Answer: I always load the rounds the same and my other ammunition could be checked.
Lawyer: Have you ever heard of the mistake made while loading of a double charge of powder?
Answer: Yes
Lawyer: As I said a moment ago - do you have any way to prove that the round you used to shoot my client was loaded to a lower power rating than the factory ammunition?
Answer: No
Lawyer: So, you deliberately chose to carry a firearm to shoot a criminal, chose a firearm type that had a record of killing people, and loaded the pistol with special homemade ammunition. Can you give me any reason to believe that you did not plan to shoot and kill this person?
Answer: Yes, he attacked me first.
Sorry for the long list, but lawyers will do that in court. They try to build a few small points into one large one against you. They do twist things you do and say. That is their job. Of course, your lawyer is going to object to some of these questions, but the damage was already done when the jury heard the question. The image left is pretty bad.
The good news on this is that after Sep 1 of this year, this is a moot question for civil cases in Texas since we now have immunity if it was a good shooting. The bad news is that this could also happen in a criminal trial, and we have proven history that some D.A.'s will try things like this to get a conviction on a gun carrier. They could even ad din that you got a CHL just to carry and were trolling for someone to attack you just so you could shoot them.
I don't think it is much of an issue, but it is better to avoid the potential problem, IMHO.
Steve Rothstein
srothstein, that's purely spectulation. A lawyer could easily have said that you carried factory hollow points, premium factory ammo, etc. which shows premeditation. If you shoot and kill someone in self-defense and are justified in doing so, why would premeditation even come up? A criminal trial probably would never occur.
I'm not asking for spectulation. I've seen what you've said plenty of times on other boards. All I'm asking is in Texas, does it really legally matter whether one uses reloads or factory ammo in a self-defense situation? Has it ever come up in a civil trial, assuming the shooting it justified enough not to warrant a criminal trial?
Personally I carry factory loads because they fill my needs ballistically, so I don't have a reason to carry reloads.
I'm not asking for spectulation. I've seen what you've said plenty of times on other boards. All I'm asking is in Texas, does it really legally matter whether one uses reloads or factory ammo in a self-defense situation? Has it ever come up in a civil trial, assuming the shooting it justified enough not to warrant a criminal trial?
Personally I carry factory loads because they fill my needs ballistically, so I don't have a reason to carry reloads.
-
HankB
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1394
- Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 2:03 pm
- Location: Central TX, just west of Austin
So does the use of factory-loaded hollowpoints - banned by the Hague Accords - rather than FMJ.srothstein wrote:Just my idle speculation, but I think the fact that you are using reloads might be able to be used against you. I have never seen it done, but I can see lawyers arguing that it shows premeditation and the intent to kill.
Or, for that matter, the use of a gun at all, rather than pepper spray or a Taser.
Personally, I carry factory-loaded ammo, not because of liability concerns, but because virtually all of what I load for practice isn't ideal for defense - it's done either for economy (cast bullets) or hunting (Heavyweight slugs.)
Actually, a good answer here would be "It has a reputaton for saving lives . . . like it did mine!!"Lawyer: Can you tell me why you selected that particular weapon?
Answer: (for me, yours will vary) It was my duty weapon from my police work.
Original CHL: 2000: 56 day turnaround
1st renewal, 2004: 34 days
2nd renewal, 2008: 81 days
3rd renewal, 2013: 12 days
1st renewal, 2004: 34 days
2nd renewal, 2008: 81 days
3rd renewal, 2013: 12 days
-
srothstein
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5319
- Joined: Sat Dec 16, 2006 8:27 pm
- Location: Luling, TX
Yes, Geister, my answer was pure speculation. But, it is based on my experience with lawyers in court and how they tie little things together to create an image in the juries mind. This same argument (the image created by the name) was what caused Black talon ammunition to be pulled from the market until it could be renamed.
If I use factory ammo named "Blue balls of death", is it more or less likely to create a bad image in the minds of a jury than the exact same ammo named "Glaser Safety Slugs"?
Now, the question you asked was also answered by me and many others. Has it ever been used against a person in a trial? I don't know but it is no longer anything to worry about for civil trials, based on the new laws. Would a D.A. hold it against you? Steve Hilbig was the Bexar County D.A. and tried to call a police officer guarding his home "waiting in ambush" when the officer had reported trouble with gangs and tried to get the department to stop the criminals vandalizing his house.
There is no law on the ammo used, but my advice is to not give them the possibility of anything extra to use against you.
If I use factory ammo named "Blue balls of death", is it more or less likely to create a bad image in the minds of a jury than the exact same ammo named "Glaser Safety Slugs"?
Now, the question you asked was also answered by me and many others. Has it ever been used against a person in a trial? I don't know but it is no longer anything to worry about for civil trials, based on the new laws. Would a D.A. hold it against you? Steve Hilbig was the Bexar County D.A. and tried to call a police officer guarding his home "waiting in ambush" when the officer had reported trouble with gangs and tried to get the department to stop the criminals vandalizing his house.
There is no law on the ammo used, but my advice is to not give them the possibility of anything extra to use against you.
Steve Rothstein
Stephan - I am 100% with you on the dialog you posted.
Guys, if you think court is like Boston Legal or any other courtroom drama you have seen on TV, then you are sadly misinformed. Attorneys will twist around everything you say, and then ask you follow up questions to which you can only answer "yes" or "no". You don't get to elaborate, and by the time it's over, even YOU might believe you are guilty!
I shoot only reloads when I practice, and then unload and put factory ammo in my mags before I leave the range. I sincerely hope I am never involved in a self defense shooting. But, if I am, I don't want to give the other side anything to make their case any easier!
Guys, if you think court is like Boston Legal or any other courtroom drama you have seen on TV, then you are sadly misinformed. Attorneys will twist around everything you say, and then ask you follow up questions to which you can only answer "yes" or "no". You don't get to elaborate, and by the time it's over, even YOU might believe you are guilty!
I shoot only reloads when I practice, and then unload and put factory ammo in my mags before I leave the range. I sincerely hope I am never involved in a self defense shooting. But, if I am, I don't want to give the other side anything to make their case any easier!
But I specifically asked for no speculation. I keep reading the same spectulation on the gun boards; the reason I asked on this board is to see if it has any legal weight in the state of Texas at all.srothstein wrote:Yes, Geister, my answer was pure speculation.
I'm not really interested in wondering what a lawyer MIGHT say because there's no way to know whether or not they will say it or if will even have any weight. That lawyer argument that you presented can be easily defeated with an expert defense witness anyway.
But does the Castle Doctrine also extend to CHL holders outside of their homes, in public places?Has it ever been used against a person in a trial? I don't know but it is no longer anything to worry about for civil trials, based on the new laws.
I'm pretty much with HankB on this issue.
-
jimlongley
- Senior Member
- Posts: 6134
- Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 1:31 pm
- Location: Allen, TX