Hey fellas, I've been thinking, probably my first mistake but wouldn't lead bullets be better for expansion and less penetration than your favorite hollow point. Just thinking in case I or my wife miss the intended target in a self defense situation. To make things clear I'm talking about all lead bullets versus' copper jacketed bullets. Thanks, SPM
Suppressors self defense ammo, leaded or unleaded
- Thread starter SPM
- Start date
Re: self defense ammo, leaded or unleaded
Less penetration is definitely NOT what you want. Penetration is what stops the target. Don't let anyone convince you that what you really want is less penetration.
The purpose of hollow point bullets is to increase tissue damage while maintaining an acceptable level of penetration.
There is some sort of myth out there that there exists some such thing as "over=penetration" and that changing bullets will alleviate this. This is nonsense. Show me any type of self defense shooting where the person doesn't miss and you can claim some sort of relevance to that argument. A round that misses sure will penetrate the "wrong" thing a lot deeper than a round that has already passed through the target. If your tactical plan involves shooting a target and hoping the bullet doesn't exit or if it does, doesn't damage what is beyond your target, I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but that's a pretty shitty plan.
Discussions of this nature go for pages and pages on the internet. Get yourself a decent, modern-designed hollowpoint like a Federal HST, Winchester Ranger SXT, Speer Gold Dot, etc, make sure they work in your gun, and carry those in the heaviest bullet available for your caliber (147s, 180s, and 230s) and be done with it.
Less penetration is definitely NOT what you want. Penetration is what stops the target. Don't let anyone convince you that what you really want is less penetration.
The purpose of hollow point bullets is to increase tissue damage while maintaining an acceptable level of penetration.
There is some sort of myth out there that there exists some such thing as "over=penetration" and that changing bullets will alleviate this. This is nonsense. Show me any type of self defense shooting where the person doesn't miss and you can claim some sort of relevance to that argument. A round that misses sure will penetrate the "wrong" thing a lot deeper than a round that has already passed through the target. If your tactical plan involves shooting a target and hoping the bullet doesn't exit or if it does, doesn't damage what is beyond your target, I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but that's a pretty shitty plan.
Discussions of this nature go for pages and pages on the internet. Get yourself a decent, modern-designed hollowpoint like a Federal HST, Winchester Ranger SXT, Speer Gold Dot, etc, make sure they work in your gun, and carry those in the heaviest bullet available for your caliber (147s, 180s, and 230s) and be done with it.
G
Guest
Guest
Re: self defense ammo, leaded or unleaded
I can't believe i'm saying this, but Downzero makes a good point.
The real liability comes with the misses. SO DON'T MISS. If you hit your intended target, and it's a "good shoot", you shouldn't have much trouble...especially since the human body is pretty good at slowing down pistol bullets.
There are a lot of experts that just use FMJ in .45 ACP because it's plenty heavy to get the job done. And on the flip side of that coin, a 9mm hollow point has a surprising amount of penetrating capability. There is no "magic bullet" that will stop the bad guy in his tracks, but not penetrate 2 sheets of drywall.
And concerning the OP's post, are we talking hand-loaded lead bullets or factory purchased? I would not recommend using any handload specifically for self-defense unless it were an absolute emergency.
I can't believe i'm saying this, but Downzero makes a good point.
The real liability comes with the misses. SO DON'T MISS. If you hit your intended target, and it's a "good shoot", you shouldn't have much trouble...especially since the human body is pretty good at slowing down pistol bullets.
There are a lot of experts that just use FMJ in .45 ACP because it's plenty heavy to get the job done. And on the flip side of that coin, a 9mm hollow point has a surprising amount of penetrating capability. There is no "magic bullet" that will stop the bad guy in his tracks, but not penetrate 2 sheets of drywall.
And concerning the OP's post, are we talking hand-loaded lead bullets or factory purchased? I would not recommend using any handload specifically for self-defense unless it were an absolute emergency.
Re: self defense ammo, leaded or unleaded
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SPM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Thanks for the reply. Why use the heaviest bullet? SPM </div></div>
To maximize penetration. Once again, penetration is what stops targets, not magic bullets.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Pointblank4445</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
And concerning the OP's post, are we talking hand-loaded lead bullets or factory purchased? I would not recommend using any handload specifically for self-defense unless it were an absolute emergency. </div></div>
I carry (and defend my home) with handloads. I trust my ammo way more than any factory's. I've never seen a shred of empirical evidence that this could come back to haunt me, either.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SPM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Thanks for the reply. Why use the heaviest bullet? SPM </div></div>
To maximize penetration. Once again, penetration is what stops targets, not magic bullets.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Pointblank4445</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
And concerning the OP's post, are we talking hand-loaded lead bullets or factory purchased? I would not recommend using any handload specifically for self-defense unless it were an absolute emergency. </div></div>
I carry (and defend my home) with handloads. I trust my ammo way more than any factory's. I've never seen a shred of empirical evidence that this could come back to haunt me, either.
G
Guest
Guest
Re: self defense ammo, leaded or unleaded
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Downzero</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I carry (and defend my home) with handloads. I trust my ammo way more than any factory's. I've never seen a shred of empirical evidence that this could come back to haunt me, either. </div></div>
We should just grab a beer and argue in public for a change.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Downzero</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I carry (and defend my home) with handloads. I trust my ammo way more than any factory's. I've never seen a shred of empirical evidence that this could come back to haunt me, either. </div></div>
We should just grab a beer and argue in public for a change.
Re: self defense ammo, leaded or unleaded
This topic has been debated for years and to be honest, while the heaviest bullets for a particular caliber will penetrate the furthest, they are not necessarily the best choice. The 147 gr 9mm and 180 gr .40 are notoriously known for their horrible stopping performance but yet the 115 gr 9mm and 135gr and 155 gr .40 have the highest percentage of quick stops. The all-time king is the 357 Magnum loaded with Federal's 125 gr JHP. Rarely did this round penetrate completely but "dumped" all its energy into the target and caused massive internal damage. This round was the whole reason behind the development of the 357 SIG...officers wanted their 357 performance back but in an autoloader.
A high velocity jhp will send secondary fragments and destroy more surrounding tissue then a bigger, slower moving bullet. The problem being that a jhp isn't worth a shit if your target is behind a barrier (windshield, car door), so the reason the bonded hollow point was developed. There still seems to be better results with the lighter, faster bullets of a particular caliber due to cavitation or the suction and expansion of the projectile as it passes through a liquid medium, providing it has "enough" penetration to reach the CNS or vital organs. I have tested this theory many times on scraps of meat from a butcher shop and have not been disappointed. Larger bullets expand, penetrate and leave a good-sized hole front and rear, lighter, faster bullets spray me with debris every time.
Finding the right balance of speed, expansion and penetration is key, but training to hit what you aim at can't be stressed enough.
This topic has been debated for years and to be honest, while the heaviest bullets for a particular caliber will penetrate the furthest, they are not necessarily the best choice. The 147 gr 9mm and 180 gr .40 are notoriously known for their horrible stopping performance but yet the 115 gr 9mm and 135gr and 155 gr .40 have the highest percentage of quick stops. The all-time king is the 357 Magnum loaded with Federal's 125 gr JHP. Rarely did this round penetrate completely but "dumped" all its energy into the target and caused massive internal damage. This round was the whole reason behind the development of the 357 SIG...officers wanted their 357 performance back but in an autoloader.
A high velocity jhp will send secondary fragments and destroy more surrounding tissue then a bigger, slower moving bullet. The problem being that a jhp isn't worth a shit if your target is behind a barrier (windshield, car door), so the reason the bonded hollow point was developed. There still seems to be better results with the lighter, faster bullets of a particular caliber due to cavitation or the suction and expansion of the projectile as it passes through a liquid medium, providing it has "enough" penetration to reach the CNS or vital organs. I have tested this theory many times on scraps of meat from a butcher shop and have not been disappointed. Larger bullets expand, penetrate and leave a good-sized hole front and rear, lighter, faster bullets spray me with debris every time.
Finding the right balance of speed, expansion and penetration is key, but training to hit what you aim at can't be stressed enough.
Re: self defense ammo, leaded or unleaded
The data is out there. All the big bullet manufactures have extensive testing with all the numbers available to anyone who is willing to google it.
I can tell you from witnessing about a dozen ballistic seminars that Speer Gold Dot is the best there is in the price range. Now there is some silly stuff out there that will cost an arm and a leg and chances of Joe Citizen getting it is slim; however I don't think it is light years ahead of what is readily available. There is a reason Gold Dot is the most trusted and used ammo for LE, just research the numbers (velocity, energy, penetration, wound cavities etc...) and then look at the consistantcy with barriers. The numbers don't lie.
Though ammo brand, bullet weight and the numbers really are not the main issue. Shot placement (aka: combat accuracy), tactics and weapon handling skills are what kill people, good and bad guys.
The data is out there. All the big bullet manufactures have extensive testing with all the numbers available to anyone who is willing to google it.
I can tell you from witnessing about a dozen ballistic seminars that Speer Gold Dot is the best there is in the price range. Now there is some silly stuff out there that will cost an arm and a leg and chances of Joe Citizen getting it is slim; however I don't think it is light years ahead of what is readily available. There is a reason Gold Dot is the most trusted and used ammo for LE, just research the numbers (velocity, energy, penetration, wound cavities etc...) and then look at the consistantcy with barriers. The numbers don't lie.
Though ammo brand, bullet weight and the numbers really are not the main issue. Shot placement (aka: combat accuracy), tactics and weapon handling skills are what kill people, good and bad guys.
Re: self defense ammo, leaded or unleaded
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Pointblank4445</div><div class="ubbcode-body">SPM,
Can I assume that you are using your Sig 226? Or are you running something else? </div></div>
Pointblank I run conventional hollow points in my automatics, I'm concerned about the 38's I have placed around the house for my wife. Thanks for all the replies guys. SPM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Pointblank4445</div><div class="ubbcode-body">SPM,
Can I assume that you are using your Sig 226? Or are you running something else? </div></div>
Pointblank I run conventional hollow points in my automatics, I'm concerned about the 38's I have placed around the house for my wife. Thanks for all the replies guys. SPM
Re: self defense ammo, leaded or unleaded
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BoomStix</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I've been told that Federal's Hydra-Shok JHP 230gr is one of the best for .45acp. Anyone have any experience with this round? Sorry not trying to hijack the thread or anything. </div></div>
The 230 gr Hydra-shok in .45 ACP is a good bullet. It'll definitely get the job done if you do your part. However, there are better bullets out there such as Speer Gold Dot, Win Ranger T-series, Win Ranger Bonded, Federal Tac HST, Federal Tac Bonded, CORBON DPX, Hornady TAP (red box) and Rem Golden Saber Bonded. For the money, I'd get the Gold Dots. They are readily available to everyone, whereas, the Win Rangers, Fed Tactical HST & Bonded, red box Hornady TAP, and the Rem GS Bonded are getting harder to buy without having signed letterhead. The CORBON DPX is a good round but its extremely expensive and doesn't perform any better than others mentioned. All modern bullets will get the job done if you do your part though. That goes for the older stuff too. If you hit something in the ass, it really doesn't matter what you are using because, chances are pretty good that the threat will still continue to exist. The older bullet designs just tend to plug up more if you have to shoot through barriers. A good modern bonded bullet that functions in your pistol is the way to go, IMHO. Just don't hit the BG in the ass, whatever you choose to use!!
As to the OP's question for revolver loadings, the old 158 gr FBI load is a good one, as are Fed Nyclads and the 110 gr Treasury load in .38 spl in addition to the more modern stuff listed above.
Chad
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BoomStix</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I've been told that Federal's Hydra-Shok JHP 230gr is one of the best for .45acp. Anyone have any experience with this round? Sorry not trying to hijack the thread or anything. </div></div>
The 230 gr Hydra-shok in .45 ACP is a good bullet. It'll definitely get the job done if you do your part. However, there are better bullets out there such as Speer Gold Dot, Win Ranger T-series, Win Ranger Bonded, Federal Tac HST, Federal Tac Bonded, CORBON DPX, Hornady TAP (red box) and Rem Golden Saber Bonded. For the money, I'd get the Gold Dots. They are readily available to everyone, whereas, the Win Rangers, Fed Tactical HST & Bonded, red box Hornady TAP, and the Rem GS Bonded are getting harder to buy without having signed letterhead. The CORBON DPX is a good round but its extremely expensive and doesn't perform any better than others mentioned. All modern bullets will get the job done if you do your part though. That goes for the older stuff too. If you hit something in the ass, it really doesn't matter what you are using because, chances are pretty good that the threat will still continue to exist. The older bullet designs just tend to plug up more if you have to shoot through barriers. A good modern bonded bullet that functions in your pistol is the way to go, IMHO. Just don't hit the BG in the ass, whatever you choose to use!!
As to the OP's question for revolver loadings, the old 158 gr FBI load is a good one, as are Fed Nyclads and the 110 gr Treasury load in .38 spl in addition to the more modern stuff listed above.
Chad
Re: self defense ammo, leaded or unleaded
I like everyone else has asked this question. Over the years I have desided to stay with LSWCs for my defense pistols. I was issued a Model 28 Smith as a service revolver (which by the way, APD let me keep when I retired). When I first hired on (Mar 74) the issue ammo was 158 RN Lead 38s cast and loaded by Prison trustees. I elected to carry my handloaded LSWCs until I got caught. Then I started carrying Winchester 357 LSWCs. Now Anchorage has a hugh Moose problem and moose and cars dont play well together. Often the moose has to be put down. I've personally had to shoot 8-9 moose, one was a large bull who was attacking my partrol car (picture below). The LSWCs do work better on moose then the 125 Winchester HPs the department started issuing.
Later, after retiring I started carrying a 642 pocket gun. Same thing I desided LSWCs work better. I havent shoot any moose, but I have put down deer. Using the Lyman 358477 150 Gn SWC. Here is a picture of it compaired to BHs 125 Grn HP +Ps. Fired in a large wet phone book, besides expansion, I got deeper penetration with the LSWC bullet.
Also a couple years ago I bought a buffalo from Custer State Park. It needed to be shot to cut up. I used the above Model 28 and the Lyman bullet (in 357) to put it down. The first shoot was too high and it bounce off its head. I shot a little bit lower, Half way between the horns and eyes, and the LSWC did the trick.
We all have differant opinions, based on my experience I'll stick to the SWCs in 38/357s for SD.
I like everyone else has asked this question. Over the years I have desided to stay with LSWCs for my defense pistols. I was issued a Model 28 Smith as a service revolver (which by the way, APD let me keep when I retired). When I first hired on (Mar 74) the issue ammo was 158 RN Lead 38s cast and loaded by Prison trustees. I elected to carry my handloaded LSWCs until I got caught. Then I started carrying Winchester 357 LSWCs. Now Anchorage has a hugh Moose problem and moose and cars dont play well together. Often the moose has to be put down. I've personally had to shoot 8-9 moose, one was a large bull who was attacking my partrol car (picture below). The LSWCs do work better on moose then the 125 Winchester HPs the department started issuing.
Later, after retiring I started carrying a 642 pocket gun. Same thing I desided LSWCs work better. I havent shoot any moose, but I have put down deer. Using the Lyman 358477 150 Gn SWC. Here is a picture of it compaired to BHs 125 Grn HP +Ps. Fired in a large wet phone book, besides expansion, I got deeper penetration with the LSWC bullet.
Also a couple years ago I bought a buffalo from Custer State Park. It needed to be shot to cut up. I used the above Model 28 and the Lyman bullet (in 357) to put it down. The first shoot was too high and it bounce off its head. I shot a little bit lower, Half way between the horns and eyes, and the LSWC did the trick.
We all have differant opinions, based on my experience I'll stick to the SWCs in 38/357s for SD.
Re: self defense ammo, leaded or unleaded
Do not choose your tools or your actions because you plan on missing....it makes for bad mindset.
Train and practice until you have the confidence to make hits.
At that point any quality factory self defense ammo will provide what you need.
Do not choose your tools or your actions because you plan on missing....it makes for bad mindset.
Train and practice until you have the confidence to make hits.
At that point any quality factory self defense ammo will provide what you need.
Re: self defense ammo, leaded or unleaded
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: smokshwn</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Do not choose your tools or your actions because you plan on missing....it makes for bad mindset.
Train and practice until you have the confidence to make hits.
At that point any quality factory self defense ammo will provide what you need. </div></div>
Yep.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: smokshwn</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Do not choose your tools or your actions because you plan on missing....it makes for bad mindset.
Train and practice until you have the confidence to make hits.
At that point any quality factory self defense ammo will provide what you need. </div></div>
Yep.
Re: self defense ammo, leaded or unleaded
I'm not questioning the accuracy and reliability of your handloads, but you may want to be concerned with the legal liability aspect of using "non-factory" ammo.
In the event of a shooting (even a justified one) a prosecutor could make the argument that you (or your wife) acted with malicious intent by loading your gun with "home made" or "extra deadly" bullets. Sad, but similar arguments have been made before. I have always been told it's a good idea to load with the same ammo as your local or state police.
That way no one can question your selection of a defense round. If the police are using it, then it must have already been deemed "appropriate".
As far as penetration goes, it is possible for a traditional hollow point to become "clogged", especially shooting through heavy clothing. If that happens, will not expand the way it was designed to. For that reason, I personally load my defense guns with Hornady TAP ammo, which seems to provide very consistent and controlled expansion.
Also, I agree that you should not plan to miss. With ammo prices as high as they are, it would be a shame to waste any of the good stuff.
I'm not questioning the accuracy and reliability of your handloads, but you may want to be concerned with the legal liability aspect of using "non-factory" ammo.
In the event of a shooting (even a justified one) a prosecutor could make the argument that you (or your wife) acted with malicious intent by loading your gun with "home made" or "extra deadly" bullets. Sad, but similar arguments have been made before. I have always been told it's a good idea to load with the same ammo as your local or state police.
That way no one can question your selection of a defense round. If the police are using it, then it must have already been deemed "appropriate".
As far as penetration goes, it is possible for a traditional hollow point to become "clogged", especially shooting through heavy clothing. If that happens, will not expand the way it was designed to. For that reason, I personally load my defense guns with Hornady TAP ammo, which seems to provide very consistent and controlled expansion.
Also, I agree that you should not plan to miss. With ammo prices as high as they are, it would be a shame to waste any of the good stuff.
Re: self defense ammo, leaded or unleaded
get yourself some gold dot and stop thinking so hard about it.
get yourself some gold dot and stop thinking so hard about it.
Re: self defense ammo, leaded or unleaded
Beware of the possible "through and through" wound. You might just shoot a secondary (innocent) person. Then your troubles would begin for sure.
Through and through penetration might not be desirable in a self defense situation.
Store bought PD ammo, proven through your handgun, is what you want.
Longshooter
Beware of the possible "through and through" wound. You might just shoot a secondary (innocent) person. Then your troubles would begin for sure.
Through and through penetration might not be desirable in a self defense situation.
Store bought PD ammo, proven through your handgun, is what you want.
Longshooter
Re: self defense ammo, leaded or unleaded
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Semour Gunz</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sad, but similar arguments have been made before. </div></div>
I have heard this internet legend many times, but never found any real evidence of it. If you have a case, a transcript, or even a newspaper article substantiating it, I'd <span style="font-style: italic">love </span>to see it/read it.
I carry Gold Dots as well. Usually I've loaded them myself from components.
If you're involved in a "good" shoot, you should never see trial anyway. If you do see trial, you're likely screwed no matter what bullet you use.
I fail to see how similar arguments couldn't be made for choosing a .45 over a 9mm, or a 9mm over a .25 Auto for that matter. If a prosecutor wants to make you out to be a gun-toting madman who uses magic bullets, I'm not sure it matters who stuffed the powder, primer, and bullet in the case.
If I ever see any real evidence that carrying handloaded ammunition could result in some sort of negative trial consequences, I probably will never do so again. Until then, I really think this is just internet hogwash. A 147 grain Gold Dot is not a good thing to get hit with, whether in front of non-canister grade powder or not.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Semour Gunz</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sad, but similar arguments have been made before. </div></div>
I have heard this internet legend many times, but never found any real evidence of it. If you have a case, a transcript, or even a newspaper article substantiating it, I'd <span style="font-style: italic">love </span>to see it/read it.
I carry Gold Dots as well. Usually I've loaded them myself from components.
If you're involved in a "good" shoot, you should never see trial anyway. If you do see trial, you're likely screwed no matter what bullet you use.
I fail to see how similar arguments couldn't be made for choosing a .45 over a 9mm, or a 9mm over a .25 Auto for that matter. If a prosecutor wants to make you out to be a gun-toting madman who uses magic bullets, I'm not sure it matters who stuffed the powder, primer, and bullet in the case.
If I ever see any real evidence that carrying handloaded ammunition could result in some sort of negative trial consequences, I probably will never do so again. Until then, I really think this is just internet hogwash. A 147 grain Gold Dot is not a good thing to get hit with, whether in front of non-canister grade powder or not.
Re: self defense ammo, leaded or unleaded
Im relatively new to the internet so I didnt see it there. It might have been an article in Guns & Ammo about legal aspects of self defense. It was a case study of situations where several(perhaps 7 or 8) good guys were made out to be bad guys for various reasons; ammo selection, use of a class 3 firearm, one defendant chose to defend his home and family with a gandgun he used for competition, and even though he was otherwise justified in using deadly force, the prosecutor claimed that he discharged the weapon accidentally due to a "hair" (competition) trigger, and that his training and participation in practical shooting competition was was "learning and practicing how to kill more effectively.
It was a few years back that I read this, but I believe the title was something like "Surviving a Shooting:the aftermath" and I'm pretty sure it was in G&A. I'll go back through my archive and see if I can find the article. The basic jist of it was that anything you do can be called into question, and it would be up to a jury to believe it or not. So cover your ass!
If I can find the mag, I'll be sure to share it with you.
Im relatively new to the internet so I didnt see it there. It might have been an article in Guns & Ammo about legal aspects of self defense. It was a case study of situations where several(perhaps 7 or 8) good guys were made out to be bad guys for various reasons; ammo selection, use of a class 3 firearm, one defendant chose to defend his home and family with a gandgun he used for competition, and even though he was otherwise justified in using deadly force, the prosecutor claimed that he discharged the weapon accidentally due to a "hair" (competition) trigger, and that his training and participation in practical shooting competition was was "learning and practicing how to kill more effectively.
It was a few years back that I read this, but I believe the title was something like "Surviving a Shooting:the aftermath" and I'm pretty sure it was in G&A. I'll go back through my archive and see if I can find the article. The basic jist of it was that anything you do can be called into question, and it would be up to a jury to believe it or not. So cover your ass!
If I can find the mag, I'll be sure to share it with you.
G
Guest
Guest
Re: self defense ammo, leaded or unleaded
Mr. Gunz,
While, I am pretty much on your side of this debate, but I'm going to teach you a real quick lesson since you are "new to the internet". G&A (Surefire magazine) and other gunrags hold little to no weight in a discussion. Their integrity was sold off years ago.
And while Downzero is correct that despite this debate, little actual legal documentation and precedence can be found. Although this is not the reasoning behind my support for factory vs. reload ammo; one can not deny that an attorney is capable of conjuring evil from darn near anything. If you have ever had one pitted against you, it's a marvelous thing to watch their ability to magically conjurw bullshit and the way they manipulate every single word to their whim. And a "good shoot" does not mean that an individual is immune from a civil suit either.
Mr. Gunz,
While, I am pretty much on your side of this debate, but I'm going to teach you a real quick lesson since you are "new to the internet". G&A (Surefire magazine) and other gunrags hold little to no weight in a discussion. Their integrity was sold off years ago.
And while Downzero is correct that despite this debate, little actual legal documentation and precedence can be found. Although this is not the reasoning behind my support for factory vs. reload ammo; one can not deny that an attorney is capable of conjuring evil from darn near anything. If you have ever had one pitted against you, it's a marvelous thing to watch their ability to magically conjurw bullshit and the way they manipulate every single word to their whim. And a "good shoot" does not mean that an individual is immune from a civil suit either.
Re: self defense ammo, leaded or unleaded
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Semour Gunz</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Im relatively new to the internet so I didnt see it there. It might have been an article in Guns & Ammo about legal aspects of self defense. It was a case study of situations where several(perhaps 7 or 8) good guys were made out to be bad guys for various reasons; ammo selection, use of a class 3 firearm, one defendant chose to defend his home and family with a gandgun he used for competition, and even though he was otherwise justified in using deadly force, the prosecutor claimed that he discharged the weapon accidentally due to a "hair" (competition) trigger, and that his training and participation in practical shooting competition was was "learning and practicing how to kill more effectively.
It was a few years back that I read this, but I believe the title was something like "Surviving a Shooting:the aftermath" and I'm pretty sure it was in G&A. I'll go back through my archive and see if I can find the article. The basic jist of it was that anything you do can be called into question, and it would be up to a jury to believe it or not. So cover your ass!
If I can find the mag, I'll be sure to share it with you. </div></div>
Those sound like Mas Ayoob talking points. And although he's been a pretty impressive expert witness for a lot of guys in "good" shoots, I've never seen any factual basis for those things.
It is possible that some prosecutor could claim all these things. I have never seen any factual basis for anyone making these claims. If you go to trial in a "good shoot" you're fucked anyway.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Semour Gunz</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Im relatively new to the internet so I didnt see it there. It might have been an article in Guns & Ammo about legal aspects of self defense. It was a case study of situations where several(perhaps 7 or 8) good guys were made out to be bad guys for various reasons; ammo selection, use of a class 3 firearm, one defendant chose to defend his home and family with a gandgun he used for competition, and even though he was otherwise justified in using deadly force, the prosecutor claimed that he discharged the weapon accidentally due to a "hair" (competition) trigger, and that his training and participation in practical shooting competition was was "learning and practicing how to kill more effectively.
It was a few years back that I read this, but I believe the title was something like "Surviving a Shooting:the aftermath" and I'm pretty sure it was in G&A. I'll go back through my archive and see if I can find the article. The basic jist of it was that anything you do can be called into question, and it would be up to a jury to believe it or not. So cover your ass!
If I can find the mag, I'll be sure to share it with you. </div></div>
Those sound like Mas Ayoob talking points. And although he's been a pretty impressive expert witness for a lot of guys in "good" shoots, I've never seen any factual basis for those things.
It is possible that some prosecutor could claim all these things. I have never seen any factual basis for anyone making these claims. If you go to trial in a "good shoot" you're fucked anyway.
Re: self defense ammo, leaded or unleaded
DZ has a point.
My take is that you cant change the past or what an attorney will dig up. If he wants to try and spin some training you took to be a responsible gun owner as "training to kill" then so be it. The first order of business is surviving the threat by making good decisions and then applying good tactics/fundamentals to stop the threat. You aren't killing the bad guy you're stopping the threat.
As for ammo, for most people factory will be more reliable. I have been through thousands and thousands of factory rounds from the big name makers in both shotgun and pistol and have seen one shotgun dud and 2 in .40, that is pretty good.
All that being said, I dont know DZ'z reloading attention to detail and his ammo may be better - so that is a personal choice only the individual can make.
DZ has a point.
My take is that you cant change the past or what an attorney will dig up. If he wants to try and spin some training you took to be a responsible gun owner as "training to kill" then so be it. The first order of business is surviving the threat by making good decisions and then applying good tactics/fundamentals to stop the threat. You aren't killing the bad guy you're stopping the threat.
As for ammo, for most people factory will be more reliable. I have been through thousands and thousands of factory rounds from the big name makers in both shotgun and pistol and have seen one shotgun dud and 2 in .40, that is pretty good.
All that being said, I dont know DZ'z reloading attention to detail and his ammo may be better - so that is a personal choice only the individual can make.
Re: self defense ammo, leaded or unleaded
I ran some SD ammo at the range this weekend. Shot HydraShock and Gold Dot +P through my HK USP45C. The HS had significantly more muzzle flash than the GD, enough to be distracting. If no other reason, the GD is a better round for my due to that.
I ran some SD ammo at the range this weekend. Shot HydraShock and Gold Dot +P through my HK USP45C. The HS had significantly more muzzle flash than the GD, enough to be distracting. If no other reason, the GD is a better round for my due to that.
Re: self defense ammo, leaded or unleaded
so you know hydrashock is outdated. Federal's HST has more or less replaced it.
so you know hydrashock is outdated. Federal's HST has more or less replaced it.
Re: self defense ammo, leaded or unleaded
This is a winchester ranger T shot through 3 inches of water and recovered 10 inches deep in wet muddy sand.
45 acp 230grn out of a sig 220 carry, 3.9 barrel.
This is a winchester ranger T shot through 3 inches of water and recovered 10 inches deep in wet muddy sand.
45 acp 230grn out of a sig 220 carry, 3.9 barrel.
