TexasCHLforum.com

mr surveyor wrote:if there are no confirmed, documented cases of a self defense shooter being on the losing side of a legal battle for using handloads, then where is this percieved liability?

I would seriously doubt that the "liability" insurance carried by the major ammunition manufacturers is over the issue of their bullets being too deadly.

just my nickle's worth

surv

Liabilty would for the manufacturer would more likely involve the ammo not doing its job, more than doing its job too effectively.

dac1842 wrote:Liberty, I agree with what you say. I used to reload my own ammo as well. But the one thing you cant predict is the ability of a silver tongue devil (lawyer) to twist it in front of jury. I get deposed frequently as an expert witness in my job. It amazes me to this day how a plantiffs attorney can twist the simplest and most innocent of details.

I agree it is more economical to reload yourself. I agree for the responsible reloader who gives his the better quality and accuracy. But, not using common over the counter preloaded ammo could and I emphasize could, be a great liablity.

Liberty you have a distrust of LE, I have one of lawyers and the courts. Both are due to personal experiences in each. I really have a major dislike of Plaintiff Personal Injury lawyers, I would not bother to urinate on one of them if they were on fire.

My distrust isn't of LEOs in particular but of the agencys themselves and government in general.. I can't say I have ever had a very bad experiaece with an LEO and I have met quite a few that I truly liked. I also known a few lawyers and judges ,they are all very fine people. Its the system which reward deceipt and dishonesty which is corrupt. I don't know how to fix it, just know it should be done.

On the lawyers, I believe in weighing the risks. Keeping in mind that this has never ben in an issue in a Texas Court before. and the fact that its very unlikely a justified shooting would ever go to a civil court. Against the benefits of being able to afford practicing with the very same rounds that one uses for defence, One must honestly wieg in their skills as a reloader.. Will their reloads be as reliable as the store bought.

BTW: I don't reload.

dac1842 wrote:The law does state if in layman's terms that if you shoot and you were right, then no one can sue you. However while everyon agrees that the shooting itself was good, the point of having self defense loads is a different matter. IMNAL, thank God, but you can bet there is one out there who would make a case that you having rounds you loaded yourself. that were loaded above and beyond manufacture specs, you had intent, and you were negligent. The law wont mean squat if he can effectively sell that to a jury. While in some areas of our state that would be a hard sell, in others it would not.

The idea of most reloaders isn't to load above and beyond maufacturers specs but to exceded them in consistantly and quality all the while hoping to save money. Reloaders hope to use the higher quality materials that give more consistant results. Manufactured loads can be boought that are far hotter than what most reloaders would ever consider. Moist defensive bullets that one would reload with are the same bullets that the police and everyone else are using.. Unless the ammo happens to blow up and injures a bystander I can't understand how any arguement how good reliable reloads would be a liability issue. There is a reason we can't find any Texas case law, and its because it would be a loser in court.

Prosecuting lawyer. Could you explain why you reload your own ammunition?
Defendant. Its an economical way for me to practice using the exact same ammunition that I carry, I believe its safer to practice a lot so that I won't miss when I need to defend myself from crimminal scum.

Prosecuting Lawyer: but aren't these bullets meaner and deadlier than what the police or other citizens carry?
Defendant, The police may be carrying more powerful ammunition but mine is more accurate and tunned to work best with my chosen gun, I feel That I am more accurate than most officers are with their own guns and ammo. Because of my choices of training ammo and weaponry, I would be less likely to to injure or hurt innocent people.

F_L wrote:I have read the same controversy and had the same questions. I decided that if I needed my weapon and it was a good shoot, I would be fine. If I can legally use my firearm, I am pretty sure I can legally use any projectile it is designed to fire.

I haven't loaded any SD ammo yet but intend to do so. My one concession to the lawyer types is I will get a chrony and document my loads. No +P+ loads for me. My only intention is to develope an accurate SD load and shoot it a lot. My experience in loading target ammo is I can produce more accurate ammo than factory until you get to the top tier ($$$$) ammo. Why wouldn't I want to carry the best SD ammo I can.

Fred

Might consider using new brass for those babies.