Legal ramifications of using reloaded ammunition

[people]

It's your claim, M14MU. If you have nothing to back it up, you have nothing to back it up.

Have a good day!

Wow very lazy! Took me three minutes to find 282 shots, 14 wounded, 8 killed. By any math that is shit shooting.

Because you are lazy.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=nypd+officer+involved+shooting+statistics

 

[Jammer Six]

The plural of "anecdote" is not "data".

The claim was that he had "stats" (statistics) and newspaper articles do not meet any definition of statistics.

(I didn't mean to upset anyone. I didn't realize you guys didn't know the difference.)

 

[people]

We do know the difference. I also know msm cannot be trusted. Still very lazy on tour part to not look it up. Granted I bet you already know that cops are poor shots. Would that make you a hypocrite? ;-)

 

[M14AMU]

Just another example:

A long-awaited Alachua County grand jury report on the March 20 law enforcement shooting of a suicidal teenager says officers caused "needless risk" to neighbors and calls for changes.

While generally supportive of law enforcement's dilemma in the Robert Dentmond case earlier this year, grand jurors found that the 30 shots fired by nine officers to be "of concern."

+That the "large majority" of the shots fired did not strike Dentmond and were never accounted for. Neighbors told the Sun that they found bullet holes in cars and nearby apartments in the Majestic Oaks complex. "The Grand Jury is greatly concerned by the risk of harm that this created."

NOTE:

The FBI has plenty of STATS!!

 

[JRS]

Just another example:

A long-awaited Alachua County grand jury report on the March 20 law enforcement shooting of a suicidal teenager says officers caused "needless risk" to neighbors and calls for changes.

While generally supportive of law enforcement's dilemma in the Robert Dentmond case earlier this year, grand jurors found that the 30 shots fired by nine officers to be "of concern."

+That the "large majority" of the shots fired did not strike Dentmond and were never accounted for. Neighbors told the Sun that they found bullet holes in cars and nearby apartments in the Majestic Oaks complex. "The Grand Jury is greatly concerned by the risk of harm that this created."

NOTE:

The FBI has plenty of STATS!!

How many of those "neighbors" were shot? Do you realize how many rounds per soldier are fired in combat per hit/kill?

 

[Rustystud]

Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

 

[JRS]

Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

Being judged by 12 could cost you for the remainder of your life. Good defense attorneys are very expensive.

 

[Jammer Six]

Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

Only people who are unfamiliar with life in a supermax believe that.

If the sentence is life without parole, I'd rather die.

Keep your cliches.

 

[A Marsh]

www.defensivecarry.com/forum/reference-how-forum/81488-cases-where-handloads-caused-problems-court.html

JRS, this is not directed at you. You just happened to post the link.

Of the four examples given in the link, the last one does not involve reloads. The third example has multiple issues freely admitted by Ayoob. He even says it is not a great example.

So we have example 1 and 2. Both suicide / crazy person shot at near muzzle contact distance with a question of who was in control of the gun. When I read these two examples I can only think that the shooter was going to court in these two cases regardless of the reloaded ammo question. And rightfully so in the Bias example, I feel. In the Bias case it is clear the prosecution believed Bias murdered his wife. Does anyone think the prosecution would have simply given up if they did not have the GSR question?

Example one is a cop, on duty, who could not keep from shooting a drunk after he crashed his car. It does not take much imagination to see why the prosecution went after him.

Ayoob went back almost 50 years and this is the best he can do? Based on this it appears we should not carry handloaded ammo because Ayoob says so.

 

[Jammer Six]

Based on this it appears we should not carry handloaded ammo because Ayoob says so.

And that's a problem.

After reading most of Ayoob's work, I concluded that I don't want his advice. I don't belong to the Ayoob cult.

 

[JRS]

Are you really willing to take that chance with a jury? Is it worth it to save a few pennies for ammo? A well recognized and respected defense Attorney (Gerry Spence) has the same opinion that Mas Ayoob has shown time and again. It's your life. Roll the dice and take your chances. Dominos Pizza doesn't deliver to prisons

 

[Jammer Six]

Ammo doesn't have anything to do with a jury. That's the whole point of this thread.

There are "respected attorneys" who will file a suit over chem trails.

Ayoob (and other like him) have created an industry with no product. There's nothing there.

 

[JRS]

Ammo doesn't have anything to do with a jury. That's the whole point of this thread.

There are "respected attorneys" who will file a suit over chem trails.

Ayoob (and other like him) have created an industry with no product. There's nothing there.

Really? Are you willing to take that chance? The type of ammo used is a major factor in injury/death. Evidently, you are not a combat veteran. In how many court cases have you been asked to testify as an expert witness? No offense intended!

 

[A Marsh]

My point is that I see no evidence that one is better than the other. This makes it very interesting to me why some are absolutely adamant that only one way is correct. It is a point of faith, evidently.

 

[ebb]

Spook it is called the False-consensus effect.

 

[A Marsh]

Looked it up. I have no problems admitting it.

The Wikipedia page referenced pluralistic ignorance. I think that is another possibility.

 

[Jammer Six]

You won't see that evidence unless you reload.

 

[Eddie Harren]

How many of those "neighbors" were shot? Do you realize how many rounds per soldier are fired in combat per hit/kill?

Do you?

 

[Berger.Fan222]

If you shut up and don't remember whether you were using reloads or factory ammo, odds are that the ballistics lab (if they get to it at all) will not determine that you were using reloads by the time the DA decides to file charges or not.

Yes, a good ballistics lab can figure it out if they have the bullet, the casing, and specifically do some work to answer that specific question. But that is not often a question they consider. Usually, they take the manufacturer of the ammo to be the name on the headstamp, and they do not consider very carefully whether the recovered bullet matches one of the bullets factory loaded in the recovered brass. Unfired ammo does not get a very thorough look either.

Ballistics labs are working to match the bullet and brass to the firearm. Much less thought is given to where the ammo came from and whether it was factory or reloads. Crime labs are overworked and have many months of back logs. They don't run down rabbit trails.

 

[Buzz]

JRS, this is not directed at you. You just happened to post the link.

Of the four examples given in the link, the last one does not involve reloads. The third example has multiple issues freely admitted by Ayoob. He even says it is not a great example.

So we have example 1 and 2. Both suicide / crazy person shot at near muzzle contact distance with a question of who was in control of the gun. When I read these two examples I can only think that the shooter was going to court in these two cases regardless of the reloaded ammo question. And rightfully so in the Bias example, I feel. In the Bias case it is clear the prosecution believed Bias murdered his wife. Does anyone think the prosecution would have simply given up if they did not have the GSR question?

Example one is a cop, on duty, who could not keep from shooting a drunk after he crashed his car. It does not take much imagination to see why the prosecution went after him.

Ayoob went back almost 50 years and this is the best he can do? Based on this it appears we should not carry handloaded ammo because Ayoob says so.

I don't follow the guy's work, but coming to the conclusion handloads shouldn't be used based on those 4 cases is complete garbage. The idea that using handloads shows your intent to kill is flat out irrelevant. Most state's laws say shooting someone is deadly force, and deadly force means using force with the intent to kill. Your intent is a given once you pull the trigger. The type of ammo used is a non-issue.

We shoot UNTIL the threat is neutralized, not TO neutralize the threat. There's a huge difference between those two statements, and laws in most states back up the former. Again, if justified, how that threat is neutralized is irrelevant.

I carry handloads because that's all I shoot. They're likely less ballistically effective than factory loads, but I'm confident in their reliability and confident in my ability to place shots on target with them. To each their own.